20 ms·
NSA slides explain the PRISM data-collection program
- cdooh 13y agoTwo days, two major reveals, wouldn't be suprised if tomorrow I wake up to find out that they've been switching on the microphones and cameras on webcams and cellphones.
- yogo 13y agoNot to mention all of the revelations over the past few weeks. Either the administration is trying to top Nixon or there is some kind of conspiracy playing out.
- mtgx 13y agoAll of this deserves impeachment. Will Congress oblige? That's the real question. Normally, Republicans would be more than happy to do it - but for something like this? I'm more skeptical about that.
- jonknee 13y agoMany of the programs date to the Bush administration so it's probably not something that Republicans are too able to blow back on.
- o0-0o 13y agoI think their is a high placed mole. It might even be that Obama is the source of the leaks, and he's a good guy after all. Jury is still out on that one.
- jessaustin 13y agoIf so, it's great that so many Rs have condemned all this spying: they can't now turn around and impeach him for leaking about it.
- o0-0o 13y agoI doubt it's an R mole. If you think for a minute the GOP isn't in this as well, well...
- cdooh 13y agoI wonder how the Obama administration will repond to this other than the usual "Terrorism is bad and you need to trust us that we do all this for your own safety"
- yogo 13y agoNow everyone will be wishing these guys stayed busy banging interns or their mistresses because all these things are a lot worse.
- gyardley 13y agoDepends on the level of criticism, I suppose. I expect to hear the perennial favorite at some point: "It's all Bush's fault because he did it first!" If things get really bad, perhaps there'll also be a bit of "I was as shocked and angry as you were when I learned about these things for the first time from my morning paper," followed by a few rounds of "Quick, look over there, some right-wing guy said something stupid!"
- edwardunknown 13y agoI hate to be this guy but there are people lighting off bombs out there and as soon as a big one goes off people will demand they do a lot more than this. Would you rather have your Facebook scanned or see a car bomb go off in Times Square during rush hour? That's not hyperbole, that's the decision we have to make.
- rhp 13y agoNobody wants to see a car bomb go off in Times Square, but the problem with this line of reasoning is that it requires an unrealistic amount of trust that the government won't take this power to extremes. It's just human nature that power tends to corrupt, and absolute power will corrupt absolutely -- especially if left unchecked. In the case of these revelations, how can something be kept in check if its mere existence is kept secret by those who abuse it?
- edwardunknown 13y ago
- conover 13y ago"...switching on the microphones and cameras on webcams and cellphones." http://news.cnet.com/2100-1029-6140191.html http://news.cnet.com/2100-1029-6140191.html They've been doing it with cell phone microphones for years apparently.
- brewdad 13y agoAha! Now we know the real reason that most phones sold today have a non-removeable battery.
- mcantelon 13y agoThe CIA has stated that it wants to do this. http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/03/petraeus-tv-remote/ http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/03/petraeus-tv-remote/ Tech like the XBox One will make this pretty easy (as its microphone is always on and the Kinect cam is integrated).
- nemothekid 13y agoI've always wondered how a government agency would reliably set up cameras in everyone's home 1984 style. I find it hilarious that we may just go down to Best Buy and install in our own homes.
- slyn 13y agoThere was of course that one amusing Onion article about some US intelligence agency making its own social network so that everyone would just voluntarily give up all their information.
- mcintyre1994 13y agoPretty sure there was one that Facebook just came out as a government front too.
- rasterizer 13y agoFor what it's worth Apple and Google denie it: http://www.cnbc.com/id/100797046 http://www.cnbc.com/id/100797046
- tyre 13y agoNot exactly. From the article: >Google specifically denied that it has a "back door for the >government to access private user data." >Apple told CNBC, "We have never heard of PRISM. We do not >provide any government agency with direct access to our >servers, and any government agency requesting customer data >must get a court order." They are not providing a back door, but it isn't the _means_ of providing information to the NSA that citizens are upset about, it is the 'providing information to the NSA' part.
- rasterizer 13y agoActually it's the backdoor bit that's more problematic. If they hand data by court order that is acceptable but if the government has direct lines to servers that is much more problematic.
- ceejayoz 13y agoIIRC, they're legally required to deny it. Plus, careful wording allows all sorts of out. Google says they don't provide a "back door", but this sort of thing could be defined as coming in the front door.
- tedivm 13y agoGag orders don't require them to deny it, the require them not to confirm it.
- jonknee 13y agoAt least as far as we know. We're in new territory here--this is a secret court with secret rulings so it's unknown what kind of orders have been issued. There may very well be one that requires denial. Or the NSA could be skipping a step and be making use of its backhaul fiber firehoses and a cache of certificates to decrypt SSL traffic. Hopefully we'll find out...
- quackerhacker 13y agoEagle Eye...my favorite movie! While I understand that this had been uncovered today, is it really that surprising.
- adrinavarro 13y agoNow. Exactly which data is exposed for each provider? I'm thinking mostly about Gmail. Because virtually everyone now is using it… The whole content of any communications? Just origin/dest? This is becoming scary.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- uvdiv 13y agoExactly which data is exposed for each provider? According to slide 2, all of it. You might be confusing this with yesterday's Verizon story, which was "only" metadata -- caller, sender, time, and duration. This one is "actual" data -- email content, chat text, audio/video of VoIP calls. (From the article, there's also a parallel NSA program (BLARNEY) that collects metadata only. I don't know why there's two of them).
- skymt 13y agoBLARNEY is data-mining from IP metadata collected at Internet backbones, which is obviously a far broader net than backdoors at a few specific services.
- adrinavarro 13y agoRather, I'm trying to hold onto the idea that my mail is not directly piped, entirely, into a government tracking and storage system. No questions asked, no filters: just everything. Which is what is probably happening right now.
- chris_mahan 13y agoLet's just say the pipes are there and they have the desire to use them.
- 0003 13y agoHere is hoping that there is zero.zero percent corruption in the FBI, NSA, and CIA. A lot of disruptive start-ups and research institutions use Google business[1] and education[2] apps... [1] https://www.google.com/intx/en/enterprise/apps/business/ https://www.google.com/intx/en/enterprise/apps/business/ [2] http://www.google.com/enterprise/apps/education/customers.html http://www.google.com/enterprise/apps/education/customers.ht...
- FireBeyond 13y agoWhy leave Apple off the list in the title submission? (Because they deny it? Then better leave Google off the list, too - they deny it as well).
- o0-0o 13y agoActually, in my haste to post I only listed the ones that I thought of right away. I was quite disappointed to hear the Apple too, has succomb. Now I really have a reason to install Debian Wheezy on MBPr. ;p This is no way to live. Something must be done.
- eightyone 13y agoDoes Debian (or any Linux distro for that matter) support HDPI displays without looking awful?
- PavlovsCat 13y agoAt least with KDE you can define sizes for a whole lot of things, I guess that should help. (I like OpenSUSE by the way, it gets slicker and slicker all the time)
- jlgreco 13y agoI use Debian on a chromebook pixel. It looks fantastic.
- 13y ago
- o0-0o 13y agoI-M-P-E-A-C-H
- j2d3 13y agooh please. like this has a thing to do with POTUS. I worked at an ISP in 1998 when we were contacted by the FBI and required to install carnivore. This has been going on a very long time.
- nthj 13y agoWhen a junior developer screws something up, I accept responsibility and apologize to the client. It's my fault. There is no authority without responsibility. If you don't like that, don't accept the job. [FWIW I didn't like Bush either]
- MartinCron 13y agoAre you really conflating the challenge and compromises involved with being the leader of the free world to being a mid to senior level developer?
- nthj 13y agoAbsolutely. I think all presidents should be expert programmers.
- refurb 13y agoWould have you said that if this had happened 6 years ago and Bush was still in office?
- d23 13y agoI'll make the middle-ground argument then: Obama is at fault and should have done better, but he's also done a lot of other good things. This is one aspect of his presidency I am not happy with; for a lot of other aspects, I think he has been quite reasonable and progressive.
- 13y ago
- o0-0o 13y agoLink to delete Google Account: https://support.google.com/accounts/answer/32046?hl=en https://support.google.com/accounts/answer/32046?hl=en
- arindone 13y agoI don't think this is helpful or productive -- it's not the companies at fault, but rather the government that is making this compulsory.
- PavlovsCat 13y agoThey lend their face and their bullshit smile to the government towards which many people have a much more healthy distrust. I agree that this doesn't make them the main culprit, but they don't get to completely wash their hands of it either. Big (monstrously huge, actually) corporations make the job of tyrannical governments much easier; how about we chop them into more manageable bits without having personally hard feeling towards them, and deal with the government(s) at the same time?
- flyinRyan 13y agoNo, it's absolutely productive and helpful. We the people have no voice. Companies like Google who makes billions are the ones with a voice. If a million people left Google in protest you could expect action. If a million people signed some bullshit online petition nothing at all would happen.
- CodeFoo 13y agoWhy stop at Google? Here's Facebook too: http://www.facebook.com/help/214376678584711 http://www.facebook.com/help/214376678584711
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- rasterizer 13y agoWhy is Google being singled out? atleast they are among the ones denieing this report: http://marketingland.com/google-apple-facebook-deny-nsa-prism-program-47323 http://marketingland.com/google-apple-facebook-deny-nsa-pris... And why are you omitting Apple from the title while listing Google twice (YouTube)? and what the hell is "msn" and "y"?
- cpeterso 13y agoI'm not sure why this is a big surprise to anyone. I'm a cynic, but if anyone asked me whether I think the NSA, CIA, or FBI are eavesdropping on personal communications, I would say, "of course they are." This is nothing new: ECHELON, Clipper/Skipjack, Carnivore, ...
- burntsushi 13y agoI guess I'm not so surprised that it's happening and I'm more surprised with the transition from "yeah it definitely looks like they're doing it" to "we have hard evidence that they're doing it."
- alan_cx 13y agoHow many times does some one have to say this? I'm sorry, but this sort of comment is getting pretty tiresome. Yes we all "knew". All of us "knew". Some of us have "known" for something like 15 years. (Which, BTW, is why I'm most sure why Obama is getting so much flack. Its a Clinton - Bush - Obama scandal.) But none of us, not one, actually did know anything at all. We suspected, or assumed. But we did not know. Not unless one of us is working for the NSA, etc, etc. (Ironic if I have just picked on the one poster who is) Now we do know. It is absolute. No doubt, no shouting down, we know. There is a huge difference: Before we were written off as conspiracy nuts jobs. Now we have certain knowledge. Im not picking on you personally. Your post is one of many in the past couple of days. As such I have not down voted you, that would be unfair. But please, can people stop with this sort of comment? We all know we "knew".
- danso 13y ago(note/edit: I've made an error of conflation between the recently reported massive phone record sweep-up and PRISM, which according to the WP, simply allows analysts to trace (essentially) the totality of someone's online interactions, though not everyone at once. So really, things don't seem that much different than last week when it was well known that the government has discretion to warrantlessly tap us. Still, $20M a year is a pretty good price for a government contract) Isn't it kind of surprising that the leak for this came from a career intelligence officer and not one of the many tech-utopia idealists who work at these kinds of startups? Not necessarily someone at the executive level, but one of the scores of employees required to assess, review, and implement the alleged backdoor? It's not just a matter of ethics, but just that you'd think someone must be idealistic/reckless enough to leak it from the companies' side Edit: Also, as has been pointed out elsewhere...this program only cost $20M a year? If that's the price of eternal security, I'd say we got a pretty goddamn good deal. The shitstack that is the government's stimulus contracts database alone cost $18M to build (http://www.propublica.org/article/stimulus-transparency-watchdogs-keep-contract-details-a-secret-813 http://www.propublica.org/article/stimulus-transparency-watc...). And what percentage of a fighter jet's paint job does $20M cover? I'd say it's possible that the government is unconstitutionally intruding on our privacy but also doing it in a bumbling way (which also has its downsides).
- arindone 13y agoTo be honest I'm still catching up on a lot of the details with these stories, but it's this comment that made me wonder if there is a bit of hyperbole going around. Companies make leaks all the time on the most mundane things (hell Apple can barely contain the new iPhone that is usually coming out.) I'm hesitant to believe all the conspiracy theories going around that the companies willingly did this, or that it's as easy as it sounds.
- danso 13y agoWhat really makes me suspicious is this passage: > “They quite literally can watch your ideas form as you type,” said the “career intelligence officer” who gave documents describing PRISM to the Washington Post. Think of the engineering needed at multiple endpoints to allow something like this...I can believe the NSA has some of the best cryptoanalysts, but our best front-end hackers as well (do they have their own Meteor.js)? I'm only being slightly pedantic here. If this is "literally" possible, then the amount of work needed for the collaborating companies is non-trivial. It's one thing to pass along uber-authentication credentials allowing an NSA-agent Zuckerberg-like privileges...that could be something implemented with as few as a couple people. But to bake in something right out of a hacker movie? It just makes a few of the claims sound a bit suspect...because what is terribly frightening is the government's ability to aggregate and analyze this information in bulk, not to peep in on you as you're typing in real-time, which would be one of the least efficient ways ever to spy on the general American public's online activity. And no, I'm not being an apologist for federal expansion of powers. I'm pointing out that some of what this source is leaking seems to be beyond reality, not because of technological sophistication, but because of the number of mundane moving parts and actors that would seemingly have to be involved (theoretically, wouldn't they have to have as many datacenters as all the companies they're vacuuming from?). The entire PowerPoint slide set looks like something a get-rich-quick contractor would whip up to win a fat contract that would never actually be scrutinized for viability. But still, even if the government doesn't actually have the capability as described, it is wrong for them to not disavow it...it's not any good if their mindset is: "Oh we're not doing that...yet...but we would love to, some day)
- wyck 13y agoIt's no coincidence this is called PRISM. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beam_splitter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beam_splitter Some parts of this technology are actual prisms (several patents pop-up via google) , this might remove all parties legally speaking. Furthermore these can be installed fairly easily without anyone really knowing, though some physical access is required. The same technique was used in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A and pretty much all over every pipe, including the one this data went throught to show up on Hacker News.
- digitalboss 13y agoWhat really shocks me is why wouldn't a technologist/coder / etc - Whisteblow this sort of information. Why would they sit behind a computer, deploy/design such software, and not have some concern, and go public with this? This is not about the "NSA, CIA, or FBI" - it's about those other companies enabling those gov agencies to gather such information, why doesn't someone from those companies speak up that deploys this software? Is it really about $$$? Is it the same reason programmers create SPAM bots? SOOooooo, which one of you geeks wrote the code to track call data, then wrote a script to export the data to the NSA - THEN you didn't tell the rest of tech community. DISAPPOINTED IN YOU
- jlgreco 13y agoMost programmers are very much unlike you or I. Think about those legions of DoD/DoD contractor engineers that trust government implicitly and totally, and really don't give a shit about more "hacker"/"technologist" subjects.
- ericd 13y agoI wonder if the NSA and the politicians that enabled this realize the amount of economic damage this could do to the US by promoting the balkanization of the world's telecom networks and spreading mistrust for US tech and telecom companies. This seems very short sighted, if they care about that stuff at all.
- o0-0o 13y agoI guarantee free markets care about this, but yeah. You knew that.
- siculars 13y agoSo when do we get to read about The Machine in Person of Interest? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person_of_Interest_(TV_series) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Person_of_Interest_(TV_series)
- rdl 13y agoI'd like the raw/unredacted slides, please (or at least images of them, to protect the source).
- qoo 13y ago$20M a year, what a bargain!
- sfall 13y agoDon't worry it looks like they can barely use powerpoint, massive data analysis is a cinch compared to powerpoint (sarcasm)
- andyl 13y agoGoogle is dismantling XMPP federation, but if these slides are true then their NSA federation is working better than ever.