4 ms·
Fascinating. The Independent doesn't seem to say they got the documents from Snowden. They appear instead to be accepting UK intelligence agencies claiming th
by einhverfr 13y ago
Fascinating. The Independent doesn't seem to say they got the documents from Snowden. They appear instead to be accepting UK intelligence agencies claiming that Snowden had certain information.
Maybe these were documents that the NSA has identified as likely compromised? Or maybe they were found on someone else (Miranda?) but it seems like this is an interesting development.
I am not even sure the Independent is being dishonest about it. However, something pretty odd is going on and the UK government is starting to look pretty incompetent.
- espeed 13y agoYesterday Schneier was trying to make sense out of the British authorities' play to detain Miranda... "Schneier: The Real, Terrifying Reason Why British Authorities Detained David Miranda" (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/08/the-real-terrifying-reason-why-british-authorities-detained-david-miranda/278952/ http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/08/the...)
- einhverfr 13y agoWhere I differ from Schneier here is that I think it is quite plausible that the NSA doesn't know what Snowden actually took. One can more easily audit what he had access to and what he could have taken than one can audit what he did and given his long period of service, what he could have taken is likely to be very large. You have to remember that even mandatory access control systems aren't really designed to keep sysadmins out, and logging has its limits both in the sorts of information you can extrapolate from a log entry and what you can log. My point is that it is quite possible that the NSA has a list of documents that Snowden could have taken and has no idea which of those he did.