6 ms·

Filmmaker from NSA Leaks Case Emerges from Behind the Camera

72 points by teawithcarl 13y ago

e3pi 13y ago
More isolated heroes surfacing, coalescing, and encouraging popular outrage and opposition.
omonra 13y ago
Can someone elaborate on the 'encrypted online conversation' they mention in the article?
- LoganCale 13y ago
  Other sources have mentioned it's just that she had a GPG public key she could give him as a result of her previous communication with people involved in Wikileaks. It's a real shame that even most investigative journalists—people especially likely to be targeted by the government and others—aren't properly encrypting their emails.
- e3pi 13y ago
  "....Software like that exists. One of the oldest is PGP, e-mail encryption software released in 1991. Others include OTR (for “off the record”), which enables secure instant messaging, and the Internet telephony apps Silent Circle and Redphone. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5880596 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5880596 http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/14/nsa-proof-encryption-exists-why-doesnt-anyone-use-it/?wprss=rss_ezra-klein http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/14/n...
- weinzierl 13y ago
  I find this question highly fascinating. On the one hand we have a lot of discussion (here on HN and elsewhere) about how to communicate secretly and anonymously with no clear conclusion. On the other hand we have a guy who managed to communicate about a highly sensitive topic with a film maker who we know was under surveillance and a journalist who most probably was as well. If anyone knows how to fly under the radar it's Snowden, Poitras and Greenwald.
- revelation 13y ago
  This article (1) says PGP. It also tells us that apparently professional journalists are incapable of using PGP or learning how to and that newspapers will hold confidential information for the most opportunistic moment, be that running it or selling their soul to the government. 1: https://secure.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/10/edward-snowden-glenn-greenwald_n_3416978.html https://secure.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/10/edward-snowden-...
Amadou 13y ago
I know the article touches on this point, but I thought it worth saying directly. The fact that this journalist had long been publicly singled out for extra scrutiny under the current programs is a damning indictment of them. Whether she was targeted for political reasons or simply because the dragnet was too wide - neither explanation is compatible with the basic requirements for a functioning democracy. If the people whose job it is to speak truth to power are being persecuted by the system then we are no better today than we were 50 years ago when the FBI used their surveillance of Martin Luther King to try to intimidate him into silence.
- jivatmanx 13y ago
  Remember, too, that Glenn Greenwald has long been extensively targeted, as revealed in the HBGary leak. There was even a plan to set him up with false information to discredit him.
- rossjudson 13y ago
  Big +1 to this. Airline security is there for...airline security, right? Exactly what is the justification for placing this woman on a watch list? Do they suspect that she is a terrorist?
- spikels 13y ago
  There is a not so subtle carrot and stick. A reporter who goes along with those in power can expect access, leaks and perhaps lucrative jobs for their family [1]. But a reporter who embarrasses our leaders will lose the access they need to do their jobs and may be harassed by airport security or even investigated by FBI [2],[3] or have their computer hacked [4]. Powerful incentives to go along with their views. [1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/media-administration-deal-with-conflicts/2013/06/12/e6f98314-ca2e-11e2-8da7-d274bc611a47_story.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/media-administ... [2] http://bigstory.ap.org/article/govt-obtains-wide-ap-phone-records-probe http://bigstory.ap.org/article/govt-obtains-wide-ap-phone-re... [3] http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/21/us/politics/white-house-defends-tracking-fox-reporter.html http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/21/us/politics/white-house-de... [4] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2013/06/14/cbs-news-confirms-multiple-breaches-of-sharyl-attkissons-computer/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2013/06/1...
ajtaylor 13y ago
I remember reading about this filmmaker in a previous NYT article. It bothers me immeasurably that this sort of harassment (is there any other way to describe it?) happens to people simply because they are trying to shed light on things the government would rather keep in the shadows.

72 points by teawithcarl 13y ago

e3pi 13y ago

More isolated heroes surfacing, coalescing, and encouraging popular outrage and opposition.

omonra 13y ago

Can someone elaborate on the 'encrypted online conversation' they mention in the article?

LoganCale 13y ago
Other sources have mentioned it's just that she had a GPG public key she could give him as a result of her previous communication with people involved in Wikileaks. It's a real shame that even most investigative journalists—people especially likely to be targeted by the government and others—aren't properly encrypting their emails.
e3pi 13y ago
"....Software like that exists. One of the oldest is PGP, e-mail encryption software released in 1991. Others include OTR (for “off the record”), which enables secure instant messaging, and the Internet telephony apps Silent Circle and Redphone. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5880596 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5880596 http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/14/nsa-proof-encryption-exists-why-doesnt-anyone-use-it/?wprss=rss_ezra-klein http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/14/n...
weinzierl 13y ago
I find this question highly fascinating. On the one hand we have a lot of discussion (here on HN and elsewhere) about how to communicate secretly and anonymously with no clear conclusion. On the other hand we have a guy who managed to communicate about a highly sensitive topic with a film maker who we know was under surveillance and a journalist who most probably was as well. If anyone knows how to fly under the radar it's Snowden, Poitras and Greenwald.
revelation 13y ago
This article (1) says PGP. It also tells us that apparently professional journalists are incapable of using PGP or learning how to and that newspapers will hold confidential information for the most opportunistic moment, be that running it or selling their soul to the government. 1: https://secure.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/10/edward-snowden-glenn-greenwald_n_3416978.html https://secure.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/10/edward-snowden-...

Amadou 13y ago

I know the article touches on this point, but I thought it worth saying directly. The fact that this journalist had long been publicly singled out for extra scrutiny under the current programs is a damning indictment of them. Whether she was targeted for political reasons or simply because the dragnet was too wide - neither explanation is compatible with the basic requirements for a functioning democracy. If the people whose job it is to speak truth to power are being persecuted by the system then we are no better today than we were 50 years ago when the FBI used their surveillance of Martin Luther King to try to intimidate him into silence.

jivatmanx 13y ago
Remember, too, that Glenn Greenwald has long been extensively targeted, as revealed in the HBGary leak. There was even a plan to set him up with false information to discredit him.
rossjudson 13y ago
Big +1 to this. Airline security is there for...airline security, right? Exactly what is the justification for placing this woman on a watch list? Do they suspect that she is a terrorist?
spikels 13y ago
There is a not so subtle carrot and stick. A reporter who goes along with those in power can expect access, leaks and perhaps lucrative jobs for their family [1]. But a reporter who embarrasses our leaders will lose the access they need to do their jobs and may be harassed by airport security or even investigated by FBI [2],[3] or have their computer hacked [4]. Powerful incentives to go along with their views. [1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/media-administration-deal-with-conflicts/2013/06/12/e6f98314-ca2e-11e2-8da7-d274bc611a47_story.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/media-administ... [2] http://bigstory.ap.org/article/govt-obtains-wide-ap-phone-records-probe http://bigstory.ap.org/article/govt-obtains-wide-ap-phone-re... [3] http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/21/us/politics/white-house-defends-tracking-fox-reporter.html http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/21/us/politics/white-house-de... [4] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2013/06/14/cbs-news-confirms-multiple-breaches-of-sharyl-attkissons-computer/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2013/06/1...

ajtaylor 13y ago

I remember reading about this filmmaker in a previous NYT article. It bothers me immeasurably that this sort of harassment (is there any other way to describe it?) happens to people simply because they are trying to shed light on things the government would rather keep in the shadows.