4 ms·

UK bulk surveillance review is ‘fiction’, claims former NSA technical director

49 points by jackgavigan 10y ago

M_Grey 10y ago
I think a lot of people expect that bulk gathering and storage is the current game, with analysis waiting on better ways to filter noise and increase signal. As long as everything is stored for later, more advanced analysis, we have a problem. That assumes of course that you could believe a single word out of the mouth of anyone involved in national security at this point.
zeveb 10y ago
s/former NSA technical director/former NSA technical director, turned crank because his pet project wasn't adopted/ Wikipedia has the details[1]: when the government decided to use another tool than the one he was developing, he resigned in fury and has spent the years since castigating his former employer for anything he can come up with. Yes, this is an ad hominem, but I think it's fair to attack Binney's credibility as a source. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Binney_%28U.S._intelligence_official%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Binney_%28U.S._intelli...
- intherdfield 10y ago
  I don't see anything about "with fury" in the wikipedia article you mentioned, but it does say he was with the agency for 30 years. Not that we'll ever know what really happens over there (nor do I claim to know anything about these things), but in interviews, his argument was that his project was more sensitive to the privacy of American citizens, but the agency instead instead went with an approach that violated the constitution. Leading him to resign. And aren't there other sources from the British government that essentially agree that the UK "review" doesn't exist?
- idm 10y ago
  Binney's project, ThinThread, seems to have been an effort to achieve the NSA mission without the need for bulk data collection ... And he was right to push for that, to the extent that any mass surveillance is justified. A whistleblower is not necessarily a crank. I also believe your characterization of Binney's project is unfair. If we are to discuss the individual in the manner of ad hominem, then the simple fact that Binney correctly assessed the NSA in the past is a good reason to suspect his current analysis is also correct.
throw2016 10y ago
The emperor has no clothes. So this is what freedom looks like? Naked despotism couched in legalese and wanton abuse of the english language with propaganda. I don't see what case can be made against stasi or surveillance regimes when leading lights of the free world are more than neck deep in it. This crass duplicity makes Russia, China, Putin and all the favoured demons look tame. The western world have fed off these crimes against humanity to create a halo around ourselves. We can't deny this has benefitted us. Now we undeniably look like the biggest bunch of hypocrities who have only tainted human rights, liberty and freedom forever with our greed. At least Russia, China and other regimes own up to their their actions. This is important as it gives people an opportunity to clearly identify and rally against repression. Running a sly dupliticious propaganda filled operation on the other hand will catch people by surprise when its too late. To all apologists who think they can ride this out in feigned denial, diminish the implications of surveillance or argue legalese simply having a 'reason' does not justify anything. It only makes you look like an opportunist with values of convenience. Murdering millions of people in the middle east, funding despotic regimes, decimating entire countries, funding extremism and then building surveillance states at home in response. This is a macabre and sickening degradation of humanity. If this does not compel a revolt from the people what will? Periodic elections with rulers consistently acting against the people's interests does not make a democracy, only perpetuates the illusion of one.
- carc 10y ago
  >> At least Russia, China and other regimes own up to their their actions. This is important as it gives people an opportunity to clearly identify and rally against repression. Running a sly dupliticious propaganda filled operation on the other hand will catch people by surprise when its too late. Are you serious? Russia's go to response to things that they've blatantly done (think Crimea) is to just say they didn't do anything. It's laughable how much evidence there is to things they often deny...
mSparks 10y ago
->“So this bill and study are to review and then authorise something that they have been doing for 15 years and, yes, we are joining the Russians and Chinese in monitoring our populations.” 15 years is only 2001. Bulk surveillance started in 1998. The only reason they stick to "bulk meta data" is everything else is to much data to store. As soon as they pick up something interesting (illegal or not) it definitely doesn't stop there. On the plus side. At least the development community can now start taking communications security seriously. Rather than sticking their head in the sand and pretending https: is the be all and end all to that particular problem. Or just not caring at all.

49 points by jackgavigan 10y ago

I think a lot of people expect that bulk gathering and storage is the current game, with analysis waiting on better ways to filter noise and increase signal. As long as everything is stored for later, more advanced analysis, we have a problem. That assumes of course that you could believe a single word out of the mouth of anyone involved in national security at this point.

zeveb 10y ago

s/former NSA technical director/former NSA technical director, turned crank because his pet project wasn't adopted/ Wikipedia has the details[1]: when the government decided to use another tool than the one he was developing, he resigned in fury and has spent the years since castigating his former employer for anything he can come up with. Yes, this is an ad hominem, but I think it's fair to attack Binney's credibility as a source. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Binney_%28U.S._intelligence_official%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Binney_%28U.S._intelli...

intherdfield 10y ago
I don't see anything about "with fury" in the wikipedia article you mentioned, but it does say he was with the agency for 30 years. Not that we'll ever know what really happens over there (nor do I claim to know anything about these things), but in interviews, his argument was that his project was more sensitive to the privacy of American citizens, but the agency instead instead went with an approach that violated the constitution. Leading him to resign. And aren't there other sources from the British government that essentially agree that the UK "review" doesn't exist?
idm 10y ago
Binney's project, ThinThread, seems to have been an effort to achieve the NSA mission without the need for bulk data collection ... And he was right to push for that, to the extent that any mass surveillance is justified. A whistleblower is not necessarily a crank. I also believe your characterization of Binney's project is unfair. If we are to discuss the individual in the manner of ad hominem, then the simple fact that Binney correctly assessed the NSA in the past is a good reason to suspect his current analysis is also correct.

throw2016 10y ago

The emperor has no clothes. So this is what freedom looks like? Naked despotism couched in legalese and wanton abuse of the english language with propaganda. I don't see what case can be made against stasi or surveillance regimes when leading lights of the free world are more than neck deep in it. This crass duplicity makes Russia, China, Putin and all the favoured demons look tame. The western world have fed off these crimes against humanity to create a halo around ourselves. We can't deny this has benefitted us. Now we undeniably look like the biggest bunch of hypocrities who have only tainted human rights, liberty and freedom forever with our greed. At least Russia, China and other regimes own up to their their actions. This is important as it gives people an opportunity to clearly identify and rally against repression. Running a sly dupliticious propaganda filled operation on the other hand will catch people by surprise when its too late. To all apologists who think they can ride this out in feigned denial, diminish the implications of surveillance or argue legalese simply having a 'reason' does not justify anything. It only makes you look like an opportunist with values of convenience. Murdering millions of people in the middle east, funding despotic regimes, decimating entire countries, funding extremism and then building surveillance states at home in response. This is a macabre and sickening degradation of humanity. If this does not compel a revolt from the people what will? Periodic elections with rulers consistently acting against the people's interests does not make a democracy, only perpetuates the illusion of one.

carc 10y ago
>> At least Russia, China and other regimes own up to their their actions. This is important as it gives people an opportunity to clearly identify and rally against repression. Running a sly dupliticious propaganda filled operation on the other hand will catch people by surprise when its too late. Are you serious? Russia's go to response to things that they've blatantly done (think Crimea) is to just say they didn't do anything. It's laughable how much evidence there is to things they often deny...

mSparks 10y ago

->“So this bill and study are to review and then authorise something that they have been doing for 15 years and, yes, we are joining the Russians and Chinese in monitoring our populations.” 15 years is only 2001. Bulk surveillance started in 1998. The only reason they stick to "bulk meta data" is everything else is to much data to store. As soon as they pick up something interesting (illegal or not) it definitely doesn't stop there. On the plus side. At least the development community can now start taking communications security seriously. Rather than sticking their head in the sand and pretending https: is the be all and end all to that particular problem. Or just not caring at all.