9 ms·
"Natanson said her work had led to 1,169 new sources, “all current or former federal employees who decided to trust me with their stories”. She said she learned
by edot 9mo ago
"Natanson said her work had led to 1,169 new sources, “all current or former federal employees who decided to trust me with their stories”. She said she learned information “people inside government agencies weren’t supposed to tell me”, saying that the intensity of the work nearly “broke” her."
Wow. So they're going to plug her phone in to whatever cracking tech they have and pull down the names of everyone who has been helping her tell the story of the destruction of our government. The following question is "what will they do with the names of the people they pull?". I can only imagine. Horrible. Hopefully she had good OPSEC but she's a reporter, not a technologist. I bet enough mistakes were made (or enough vulnerabilities exist) that they'll be able to pull down the list.
- stevenwoo 9mo agoThere’s a subreddit dedicated to fed employee opinions so I assume they already identified all active posters by now and the direct contacts are being correlated.
- Traubenfuchs 9mo agoYou must accept that 3 letter agencies have full root access to any Tim Apple or Google device and will use it if they already went far enough to do an FBI raid on a reporter.
- snowwrestler 9mo agoI don’t have to accept any assertion in the absence of evidence directly supporting it.
- weberer 9mo agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM
- SpicyLemonZest 9mo agoI don't think that PRISM involved root access to any devices and this link does not claim that it did.
- dkdcio 9mo agoI was expecting this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple%E2%80%93FBI_encryption_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple%E2%80%93FBI_encryption_d... still doesn’t really prove much
- parineum 9mo agoIt actually proves that they _don't_ (or didn't) have that kind of access because they first publicly asked for the access and then rescinded that request when they, not officially but widely accepted, acquired access through some kind of hack/bug/exploit given to them by, probably, the IDF or an Israeli private company.
- HumblyTossed 9mo agoThis isn't hyperbole. They literally went to the king with gold in hands. There's no WAY they didn't open up their platforms to him.
- Traubenfuchs 9mo ago> They literally went to the king with gold in hands. Exactly what I was thinking about when I was writing my comment. I can understand that big corpos are not our friends and are purely money driven, but publicly bribing the president with gold is on a level no one ever expected. Right in line with the Fifa peace price.
- derektank 9mo agoIDK, the FIFA world peace prize was completely unsurprising to me. It’s a massively corrupt institution and has been for decades. It’s out of the norm in a US context, for sure, but that kind of thing is penny ante for an organization whose Wikipedia article has multiple subsections on corruption https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA?wprov=sfti1#Corruption https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA?wprov=sfti1#Corruption
- fhdkweig 9mo agoAnd don't forget the $400 million airplane that is probably filled with listening devices that will feed info to all of our enemies.
- DetectDefect 9mo agoWhat is especially insane is people STILL praise Apple for championing "privacy" - after Snowden, after China, after Trump ... the well-engineered sunk-cost fallacy is just too potent to resist, I guess.
- Traubenfuchs 9mo agoMagical end to end protection in Meta and Apple (chat) software to protect you from… whom exactly? MAYBE non US governments? They probably have deals with all the big governments allowing them to spy on their own people at least.
- embedding-shape 9mo agoI'm afraid Snowden was so long time ago, that the most vocal people don't even seemingly know about it, so yet again, we're in a period of time where assuming Apple/Google has full access to anything you do on your device, is seen as conspiracy theories. People seem to forget the past so damn quick, it's a wonder we humans manage to accomplish anything at all at this point.
- fwip 9mo agoCounterpoint - if they have full root access to any phone, why did they need to do the raid?
- iAMkenough 9mo agoThe same reason federal agents wear GoPros. Security theater, and to send the message that journalists should not pursue stories like this that put the federal government in a less-than-favorable light.
- kuerbel 9mo agoTo intimidate other reporters
- beeflet 9mo agoSo they don't burn their 0day
- iamtheworstdev 9mo ago> The following question is "what will they do with the names of the people they pull?". I'll take a shot at the answer -> Charge them with treason. Because that's the country we live in now, and most of us are just sitting by passively watching it happen.
- immibis 9mo agoCharging with a crime is so last decade. Nowadays they just shoot people they don't like.
- lawn 9mo agoOr they'll have ICE take them and they'll be deported or made to disappear. Some might even end up dying. That's how the US is right now.
- mikeweiss 9mo agoThat only works if they aren't U.S citizens... Which if they're working for the gov means they are. This administration is creative they will find other more 'legal' ways for retribution so the punishment sticks.
- joering2 9mo agoWhat difference does it make whether they are US citizens or not? At least DHS is not interested in finding out. And there has been plenty US citizens deported under DHS. https://www.congress.gov/119/meeting/house/118180/documents/HMKP-119-JU00-20250430-SD003.pdf https://www.congress.gov/119/meeting/house/118180/documents/... https://www.propublica.org/article/immigration-dhs-american-citizens-arrested-detained-against-will https://www.propublica.org/article/immigration-dhs-american-...
- andsoitis 9mo ago> And there has been plenty US citizens deported under DHS. Are you sure? Do you mind linking to information / reporting about that? I have not seen any.
- naravara 9mo agoI hope Washington Post does a better job of training their reporters than my friend’s former employer did. They sent her off to a certain country with highly repressive speech laws and secret police to interview and survey various civil rights activist groups. They gave her little to no guidance about how to protect herself aside from “Use a VPN to send any documents to us.” They didn’t even instruct her to use an encrypted email provider or to use a VPN for any online work that didn’t get sent to the employer. It’s very fortunate she knew me and I could at least give her some basic guidance to use an encrypted email service, avoid doing any work on anything sensitive that syncs to a cloud server, make sure she has FileVault enabled, get her using a password manager, verify that her VPN provider is trustworthy, etc.
- gruez 9mo ago>They sent her off to a certain country with highly repressive speech laws and secret police to interview and survey various civil rights activist groups. They gave her little to no guidance about how to protect herself aside from “Use a VPN to send any documents to us.” They didn’t even instruct her to use an encrypted email provider or to use a VPN for any online work that didn’t get sent to the employer. How would those advice have helped? >an encrypted email provider Unless this was in the early 2010s the email provider was probably using TLS, which means to the domestic security service at least, is as safe as a "encrypted email provider" (protonmail?) >FileVault enabled That might work in a country with due process, but in a place with secret police they can just torture you until you give up the keys. >password manager Does the chance of credential stuffing attacks increase when you're in a repressive state? None of the advice is bad, but they're also not really specific to traveling to a repressive country. Phishing training is also good, but I won't lambast a company for not doing phishing training prior to sending a employee to a repressive country.
- naravara 9mo ago> Unless this was in the early 2010s the email provider was probably using TLS It was the mid 2010s yes. And they’re not going to abduct and torture and American citizen out of the blue. The more “intensive” methods are higher cost, the intention is just to increase the friction involved with engaging in the routine and scalable, ordinary forms of snooping.
- srean 9mo agoIn India we have been going through this the last 14 years or so. Look up Stanswamy [0], an octagenarian jailed on the basis of trumped up charges and planted evidence (most likely with the help of Israeli companies). Journalists held in jail for five years without any charges pressed. Same fate for those who criticize the government too vocally. Now pretty much all of the press is but a government press release with a few holding out here and there. [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/12/13/stan-swamy-hacked-bhima-koregaon/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/12/13/stan-swamy-h...
- arresin 9mo agoOne country that produces so much misery and suffering in the world.
- everdrive 9mo agoIt's important to note, that the law is not written such that it's only illegal to share classified information when you have a good president. I think a lot of us are very sympathetic when classified information is released to the public due to public interest, concern regarding government action, etc. But it's still illegal. I'm not making a moral claim here. Rather, people who release classified information without authorization are breaking the law. If I rob a bank to feed my family vs. robbing a bank because it's fun, it's still illegal. A jury might be more or less sympathetic to my cause, but I will still be arrested and charged if the police can manage it.
- kasey_junk 9mo agoBut also note the government is punishing people for legal acts as well. It’s perfectly legal to tell a soldier they do not have to obey unlawful orders, in fact in many cases it’s a requirement. But the us military started court martial proceedings against a sitting congressman person for doing it.
- everdrive 9mo agoWell yes, but you can't tell a judge "yes, I broke the law, but it's OK because the government broke the law first."
- kasey_junk 9mo agoIt’s frequently not illegal to talk to a reporter. Let’s not kid ourselves, this isn’t about classified material it’s about loyalty, so watch what happens to sources that didn’t do anything illegal. This government brought sham charges against the Fed president, what are they going to do to a run of the mill federal employee?
- irishcoffee 9mo ago> It’s frequently not illegal to talk to a reporter. Let’s not kid ourselves, this isn’t about classified material it’s about loyalty, so watch what happens to sources that didn’t do anything illegal. It is not illegal to talk to a reporter, it is illegal to share classified intel with someone who doesn't have a clearance and a need-to-know. Do I think they should have raided this persons house? Absolutely not. Is it illegal to share classified information, absolutely. "For my friends everything, for everyone else, the law" or whatever the saying is, applies here. In this case, the reporter did nothing wrong, but the raid on the home of the reporter can be justified according to the law, so it isn't illegal. Should it be? Probably. Legislation is good, rules are good, the classified rules seems to make sense if you subscribe to Hanlons Razor at the least. Sometimes though, laws just don't make sense and shouldn't be codified. For example: MCL 750.335 - "Any man or woman, not being married to each other, who lewdly and lasciviously associates and cohabits together, and any man or woman, married or unmarried, who is guilty of open and gross lewdness and lascivious behavior, is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 1 year, or a fine of not more than $1,000.00." This shouldn't be a law.
- kuerbel 9mo agoUsually you would only communicate through secure drop. Looks like the Washington post uses it: https://www.washingtonpost.com/securedrop/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/securedrop/