7 ms·

The Secretive Surveillance Wizards Helping ICE Wiretap Facebook and Google Users

109 points by wahnfrieden 3y ago

FollowingTheDao 3y ago
Many of you here are deep in Tech. Probably many with Apple, Google, and Facebook. Just wondering how do you feel about this? I was a network engineer and one of the reasons I left was seeing the reality of packet inspection and what that could mean.
- mikece 3y ago
  How much does using Graphene OS instead of an iPhone or stock Android help insulate from this pervasive monitoring?
  - asynchronous 3y ago
    Depends who your ISP is. The NSA has shown past ability and willingness to just wiretap all packets they care about coming through the ISP layer.
  - FollowingTheDao 3y ago
    Graphene OS? 100% if you do not use any Google apps.
    - deelowe 3y ago
      I don't get this. How does one believe Android is compromised and yet, the hardware is not. I'm not aware of Google intentionally placing backdoors in Android. However, I am very much aware of hardware makers compromising shipping products, be it the ASIC itself or FW being loaded by ODMs/system integrators.
      - leon_theremin 3y ago
        [flagged]
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- deelowe 3y ago
  I sleep well at night. I can't speak for all of high tech, but my experience was that we encrypted everything on the phy itself. All data was encrypted via hardware before it left the host and was never decrypted until it reached its endpoint. If the endpoint was one of our devices, it was again decrypted in hardware. Outside of this, I don't expect Google, fb, etc to ignore court subpoenas. That is not a tech issue, it's a government one (if there is really any issue at all).
  - EA-3167 3y ago
    Plus for all of the MANY years of hand-wringing and doomsaying, the slippery slope never seems to appear.
    - FollowingTheDao 3y ago
      It is here, right now. They are actively collecting this data as using it extra judicially to convict people of crimes. You feel fine about all this because it does not affect you. Yet. And the person who you are responding to is encrypting everything, which google, facebook ,et all are not doing.
      - EA-3167 3y ago
        I'd love some examples of these "extra judicial" convictions, and as I said I'm tired of the "yet" argument. I've been hearing this my whole life, as though the government never monitored pre-internet communications. And as far as active collection, how does that compare to people happily and eagerly sharing every aspect of their lives on FB?
      - gretch 3y ago
        Disclosure: work in big tech. > It is here, right now. You should know that this type of argument is likely to hurt your own position when delivered to a moderate middle. You're basically telling people to ignore what they see and hear around them, and to believe that not only is the end coming - it has already come and we are living in a dystopia. The reality I see when I go outside is that me and my neighbors and my community is doing fine. Is there problems? Sure there are, as there always was and always will be. But no my friend, we are not at the bottom of a slippery slope. From what I see there's way more problematic extra-judicial action that has zero to do with big tech - cops just shooting people in the streets over minor infractions... that's where I spend my activist hours.
- lern_too_spel 3y ago
  If the government presents a company with a warrant to wiretap an account, as happens in these cases, they should sleep well at night. Due process is followed, and we as society have decided that warrants are a reasonable trade-off between privacy and successful criminal prosecution.
mikece 3y ago
Don't forget that the FBI has an office AT Facebook HQ, as mentioned in the writeup of Zuckerberg when he was named Time's person of the year: "The door opened, and a distinguished-looking gray-haired man burst in — it's the only way to describe his entrance — trailed by a couple of deputies. He was both the oldest person in the room by 20 years and the only one wearing a suit. He was in the building, he explained with the delighted air of a man about to secure ironclad bragging rights forever, and he just had to stop in and introduce himself to Zuckerberg: Robert Mueller, director of the FBI, pleased to meet you." Yeah.. he just happened to be in the building... and I suspect FB isn't the only tech giant with an "interesting" relationship with law enforcement and intelligence. https://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2036683_2037183_2037185,00.html https://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28...
- meepmorp 3y ago
  > Don't forget that the FBI has an office AT Facebook HQ, as mentioned in the writeup of Zuckerberg when he was named Time's person of the year: I read the article you linked, and it doesn't say that there was an FBI office at Facebook. It only mentions the FBI in reference to a single event where Mueller is at their HQ and visits. How are you getting that they have an office there? Or are you suggesting that Mueller was working out of Facebook HQ?
  - vuln 3y ago
    It’s not hard when telcos often had “rooms” for the alphabet agencies. Not much of a leap to assume Facebook has at least a room also. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A
    - nyc_data_geek1 3y ago
      I worked at a mid-size MSP some years back, and their datacenter had a room only the three letter agency folks could access. While it was never explicitly articulated, the belief was that the room was filled with the gear they were using to suck up whatever communications they deemed interesting and worthy of snooping. As far as I know, no warrant, subpoena or other formal request for such was ever issued. At some point, the Internet becomes a tool for surveillance above all, and only by building from the ground up for privacy, can we hope to use it as a tool for anything other than propaganda, advertising and oppression.
A4ET8a8uTh0 3y ago
Money quote. << If people are carrying their phones and have Gmail accounts, he said, law enforcement “can get really lucky. Very aggravating given how much a necessity a phone has become in US.
- CalRobert 3y ago
  Pretty annoying having to frequently do two factor auth on a phone to buy stuff with a credit card.
  - dylan604 3y ago
    oh, gawd, why have i never put 2+2 together like that? to be fair, i have not once ever made an online purchase with that kind of challenge, so i just have no real world experience. so i never thought about it, but not only are they able to confirm you are making the purchase, but depending on what the app is doing, they could get your exact location at the time of the authorization. man, my tinfoil hat is getting thicker
BSEdlMMldESB 3y ago
ah, the new SS W (secret surveillance wizards; any similarities to other famous SS is intended) helping the government break the laws of the government to keep me safe from bad things happening to the government.
scrum-treats 3y ago
Are these the "Wizards"[1][2]? [1]https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11562433/Facebook-riddled-ex-CIA-agents-ex-FBI-agents-work-Twitter.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11562433/Facebook-r... [2]https://defiantamerica.com/after-learning-that-twitter-employs-at-least-15-former-fbi-agents-we-searched-facebook-what-we-found-is-alarming/ https://defiantamerica.com/after-learning-that-twitter-emplo... Not sure why this is being downvoted, as there is clear link between the influx of CIA/NSA/FBI/DHS agents in private sector and an increase in turning over of sensitive data to government, at-will. We have laws and constitutional rights for a reason.
- tantalor 3y ago
  You're probably being down voted because those sources are not credible
  - scrum-treats 3y ago
    Sources that identify persons who worked at government intelligence agencies that now work in private sector, that are verified? That's quite credible, as it can be quickly and independently verified. Brains... use them.
    - tantalor 3y ago
      No, the sources which are not credible are "defiantamerica.com" and "dailymail.co.uk". There's an old saying: you can't believe everything you read online.
      - scrum-treats 3y ago
        Like... your submissions and comments on HN? Should we also believe you are capable of managing the responsibility of software engineering when you proudly advertise your website in encryption-free HTTP?
- sobkas 3y ago
  > Not sure why this is being downvoted, as there is clear link between the influx of CIA/NSA/FBI/DHS agents in private sector and an increase in turning over of sensitive data to government, at-will. We have laws and constitutional rights for a reason. Well corporations have more laws and their rights are more numerous and potent than yours.

109 points by wahnfrieden 3y ago

Many of you here are deep in Tech. Probably many with Apple, Google, and Facebook. Just wondering how do you feel about this? I was a network engineer and one of the reasons I left was seeing the reality of packet inspection and what that could mean.

mikece 3y ago
How much does using Graphene OS instead of an iPhone or stock Android help insulate from this pervasive monitoring?
- asynchronous 3y ago
  Depends who your ISP is. The NSA has shown past ability and willingness to just wiretap all packets they care about coming through the ISP layer.
- FollowingTheDao 3y ago
  Graphene OS? 100% if you do not use any Google apps.
  - deelowe 3y ago
    I don't get this. How does one believe Android is compromised and yet, the hardware is not. I'm not aware of Google intentionally placing backdoors in Android. However, I am very much aware of hardware makers compromising shipping products, be it the ASIC itself or FW being loaded by ODMs/system integrators.
    - leon_theremin 3y ago
      [flagged]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
deelowe 3y ago
I sleep well at night. I can't speak for all of high tech, but my experience was that we encrypted everything on the phy itself. All data was encrypted via hardware before it left the host and was never decrypted until it reached its endpoint. If the endpoint was one of our devices, it was again decrypted in hardware. Outside of this, I don't expect Google, fb, etc to ignore court subpoenas. That is not a tech issue, it's a government one (if there is really any issue at all).
- EA-3167 3y ago
  Plus for all of the MANY years of hand-wringing and doomsaying, the slippery slope never seems to appear.
  - FollowingTheDao 3y ago
    It is here, right now. They are actively collecting this data as using it extra judicially to convict people of crimes. You feel fine about all this because it does not affect you. Yet. And the person who you are responding to is encrypting everything, which google, facebook ,et all are not doing.
    - EA-3167 3y ago
      I'd love some examples of these "extra judicial" convictions, and as I said I'm tired of the "yet" argument. I've been hearing this my whole life, as though the government never monitored pre-internet communications. And as far as active collection, how does that compare to people happily and eagerly sharing every aspect of their lives on FB?
    - gretch 3y ago
      Disclosure: work in big tech. > It is here, right now. You should know that this type of argument is likely to hurt your own position when delivered to a moderate middle. You're basically telling people to ignore what they see and hear around them, and to believe that not only is the end coming - it has already come and we are living in a dystopia. The reality I see when I go outside is that me and my neighbors and my community is doing fine. Is there problems? Sure there are, as there always was and always will be. But no my friend, we are not at the bottom of a slippery slope. From what I see there's way more problematic extra-judicial action that has zero to do with big tech - cops just shooting people in the streets over minor infractions... that's where I spend my activist hours.
lern_too_spel 3y ago
If the government presents a company with a warrant to wiretap an account, as happens in these cases, they should sleep well at night. Due process is followed, and we as society have decided that warrants are a reasonable trade-off between privacy and successful criminal prosecution.

mikece 3y ago

Don't forget that the FBI has an office AT Facebook HQ, as mentioned in the writeup of Zuckerberg when he was named Time's person of the year: "The door opened, and a distinguished-looking gray-haired man burst in — it's the only way to describe his entrance — trailed by a couple of deputies. He was both the oldest person in the room by 20 years and the only one wearing a suit. He was in the building, he explained with the delighted air of a man about to secure ironclad bragging rights forever, and he just had to stop in and introduce himself to Zuckerberg: Robert Mueller, director of the FBI, pleased to meet you." Yeah.. he just happened to be in the building... and I suspect FB isn't the only tech giant with an "interesting" relationship with law enforcement and intelligence. https://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2036683_2037183_2037185,00.html https://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28...

meepmorp 3y ago
> Don't forget that the FBI has an office AT Facebook HQ, as mentioned in the writeup of Zuckerberg when he was named Time's person of the year: I read the article you linked, and it doesn't say that there was an FBI office at Facebook. It only mentions the FBI in reference to a single event where Mueller is at their HQ and visits. How are you getting that they have an office there? Or are you suggesting that Mueller was working out of Facebook HQ?
- vuln 3y ago
  It’s not hard when telcos often had “rooms” for the alphabet agencies. Not much of a leap to assume Facebook has at least a room also. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A
  - nyc_data_geek1 3y ago
    I worked at a mid-size MSP some years back, and their datacenter had a room only the three letter agency folks could access. While it was never explicitly articulated, the belief was that the room was filled with the gear they were using to suck up whatever communications they deemed interesting and worthy of snooping. As far as I know, no warrant, subpoena or other formal request for such was ever issued. At some point, the Internet becomes a tool for surveillance above all, and only by building from the ground up for privacy, can we hope to use it as a tool for anything other than propaganda, advertising and oppression.

A4ET8a8uTh0 3y ago

Money quote. << If people are carrying their phones and have Gmail accounts, he said, law enforcement “can get really lucky. Very aggravating given how much a necessity a phone has become in US.

CalRobert 3y ago
Pretty annoying having to frequently do two factor auth on a phone to buy stuff with a credit card.
- dylan604 3y ago
  oh, gawd, why have i never put 2+2 together like that? to be fair, i have not once ever made an online purchase with that kind of challenge, so i just have no real world experience. so i never thought about it, but not only are they able to confirm you are making the purchase, but depending on what the app is doing, they could get your exact location at the time of the authorization. man, my tinfoil hat is getting thicker

BSEdlMMldESB 3y ago

ah, the new SS W (secret surveillance wizards; any similarities to other famous SS is intended) helping the government break the laws of the government to keep me safe from bad things happening to the government.

scrum-treats 3y ago

Are these the "Wizards"[1][2]? [1]https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11562433/Facebook-riddled-ex-CIA-agents-ex-FBI-agents-work-Twitter.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11562433/Facebook-r... [2]https://defiantamerica.com/after-learning-that-twitter-employs-at-least-15-former-fbi-agents-we-searched-facebook-what-we-found-is-alarming/ https://defiantamerica.com/after-learning-that-twitter-emplo... Not sure why this is being downvoted, as there is clear link between the influx of CIA/NSA/FBI/DHS agents in private sector and an increase in turning over of sensitive data to government, at-will. We have laws and constitutional rights for a reason.

tantalor 3y ago
You're probably being down voted because those sources are not credible
- scrum-treats 3y ago
  Sources that identify persons who worked at government intelligence agencies that now work in private sector, that are verified? That's quite credible, as it can be quickly and independently verified. Brains... use them.
  - tantalor 3y ago
    No, the sources which are not credible are "defiantamerica.com" and "dailymail.co.uk". There's an old saying: you can't believe everything you read online.
    - scrum-treats 3y ago
      Like... your submissions and comments on HN? Should we also believe you are capable of managing the responsibility of software engineering when you proudly advertise your website in encryption-free HTTP?
sobkas 3y ago
> Not sure why this is being downvoted, as there is clear link between the influx of CIA/NSA/FBI/DHS agents in private sector and an increase in turning over of sensitive data to government, at-will. We have laws and constitutional rights for a reason. Well corporations have more laws and their rights are more numerous and potent than yours.