3 ms·
I am taking issue with this. This was not conspiracy wing nut theory. As far back as 2004 cybersecurity (for lack of a better term) experts were reporting repea
by no_wizard 10y ago
I am taking issue with this. This was not conspiracy wing nut theory. As far back as 2004 cybersecurity (for lack of a better term) experts were reporting repeatedly that governments (not just the USA) were exponentially using exploits, as were other unknown or non-govt actors, and other techniques for malicious reasons, from spying on citizens to hacking infrastructure. Here's just a nice litmus of that:
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04321.pdf http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04321.pdf
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB424/docs/Cyber-027.pdf http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB424/docs/Cyber-027.pdf
https://www.forbes.com/forbes/2004/0920/070.html https://www.forbes.com/forbes/2004/0920/070.html
here is even a hertiage foundation report talking about sharing privacy keeping technologies with the government in the name of 'fighting terrorism'
http://www.heritage.org/homeland-security/report/technologies-can-protect-privacy-information-shared-combat-terrorism http://www.heritage.org/homeland-security/report/technologie...
http://www.heritage.org/defense/report/information-oversight-practical-lessons-foreign-intelligence http://www.heritage.org/defense/report/information-oversight...
and here is the ACLU sounding the alarm in August of 2004:
https://www.aclu.org/files/FilesPDFs/surveillance_report.pdf https://www.aclu.org/files/FilesPDFs/surveillance_report.pdf
Ironically, its around the same time the NSA purported to have their own 'rules' in how they gather, which were obtained here:
https://epic.org/privacy/nsa/foia/EPIC-NSA-USSID-18-and-Domestic-Procedures.pdf https://epic.org/privacy/nsa/foia/EPIC-NSA-USSID-18-and-Dome...
and of course, not more than a few years later we have these reports:
https://www.eff.org/pages/calea-faq https://www.eff.org/pages/calea-faq
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2008/12/behind-the-legal-fight-over-nsas-stellar-wind-surveillance/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2008/12/behind-the-legal...
It was never a wing nut conspiracy theory. Its just nobody was looking close enough to care.
- ionised 10y agoIt was the scale of this kind of thing that was considered conspiracy theory.
- no_wizard 10y agoIt's not even that. Reading through the ample material I have cited it's clear that the scale was well defined. The ACLU even cited it as one of their primary concerns and even in the PBS doc they mention that it's a atrial evolution and that was in 2001. I'm not convinced in any way this couldn't be foreseen if people would've paid more attention