28 ms·
NSA tracking cellphone locations worldwide, Snowden documents show
- Zigurd 13y agoWP ddoes not appear to have released the source documents. That makes it hard to trust that these reports are complete w.r.t. what the documents reveal.
- pkinsky 13y agoIf we're very lucky the NSA will call the Post's bluff, and we'll get to see the source docs.
- VladRussian2 13y agoit is called doctrine of Total/Global (like in the Globe of the planet Earth) Awareness. Started somewhen 20+ years ago in Pentagon and now has been adapted from military into anti-terrorism [which incidentally covers _everything_]
- angersock 13y agoFrom the article: NSA Director Keith Alexander disclosed in Senate testimony in October that the NSA had run a pilot project in 2010 and 2011 to collect “samples” of U.S. cellphone location data. The data collected were never available for intelligence analysis purposes, and the project was discontinued because it had no “operational value,” he said. Alexander allowed that a broader collection of such data “may be something that is a future requirement for the country, but it is not right now.” And for all this, I'm not going to lie--that'd be a fun dataset to hack on. And that, folks, is why we as engineers and hackers have a moral duty to be very selective in the types of work we take on and for whom.
- contingencies 13y agoDid anyone else read that and think of that scene in Enemy of the State? It's eerily equivalent. "Treadstone! Ahh yes, Treadstone. Treadstone was a pilot project to <blah blah blah>. It's all but decomissioned at this point."
- theg2 13y agoTreadstone is from The Bourne Identity isn't it?
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- easy_rider 13y agoYeah. Enemy of the state is the one where one of the Gov. hackers wears computer/shooting glasses and looks like Dexter Holland from The Offspring. http://images.fanpop.com/images/image_uploads/Enemy-of-the-State-seth-green-292152_720_430.jpg http://images.fanpop.com/images/image_uploads/Enemy-of-the-S...
- dmunoz 13y agoDo those glasses have no benefit? They're marketed to gamers as reducing eye strain [0]. I step away from the monitor often enough that I don't get overly bothered by it, even if I'm programming for an extended period of time. I do also run f.lux as well, though. [0] http://www.gunnars.com/ http://www.gunnars.com/
- easy_rider 13y agoI can say I own two of those gunnars, but you're better off looking for a cheaper alternative. What they provide is an f.lux experience, with a +1 magnification. their optics are quite clear, but no where near the marketing hype they claim. When I compared a $10 pair of sunglasses to a pair of +$100 Oakley's I was like wowzered by the optics. It actually provided me with better contrast across the range, in all but rainy weather. Always wanted to try one out after i saw that movie. So one day I got a tax benefit and could get them for free. They shipped out the wrong model first time, so I got two. They seemed really overpriced to me, but do help. Keep them on long enough and you'll see blue. I had clear benefits when for a year long I was doing online poker zombie shifts. But on one without a frame, the legs came of fairly easily. They were plastic and glued into the glasses. I still have to re-glue them, but never bothered. I might fix them and give them another go. But for $100+ I'm getting a solid yet lightweight frame from Oakley, and a crappy plastic frame holding not-so-impressive optics together.
- judk 13y agoGoogle Maps does this. The only difference is that Google informs you before you turn on location services.
- rallison 13y agoAnd therein lies the the big difference. I can opt out of Google's tracking in a number of ways. Secret tracking from the NSA? I will likely not even know it is happening, and if I do, opting out is likely to be slightly more difficult. This, of course, does not even touch upon what that tracking data may then be used for.
- privong 13y ago> I can opt out of Google's tracking in a number of ways. At face value, yes. But with the news that companies are tracking web users via browser fingerprints and other methods (even when users have "do not track" enabled), it seems that it is difficult to avoid being secretly tracked by corporations.
- MrZongle2 13y agoAnd that Google isn't limited by the Constitution in the ways that the Federal government supposedly is.
- ParkerK 13y ago>And that Google isn't limited by the Constitution I'm pretty sure it is...
- lowkeykiwi 13y agoIn what way? The Constitution creates the federal government and restricts it's actions.
- wiredfool 13y agoGoogle is (modulo the corporation/person thingy) granted rights under the Constitution. The Constitution only limits Google to the extent that it's the basis for the system of laws that do the limiting.
- res0nat0r 13y agoFTA: The NSA does not target Americans’ location data by design, but the agency acquires a substantial amount of information on the whereabouts of domestic cellphones “incidentally,” a legal term that connotes a foreseeable but not deliberate result. So the US focused program was cancelled, but the overseas program is still in play, exactly within their mandate.
- marvin 13y ago> And that, folks, is why we as engineers and hackers have a moral duty to be very selective in the types of work we take on and for whom. Computer yechnology work is still a wild west. Other fields which have similar ethical considerations - medicine, chemistry, engineering - have ethics courses which make it clear to the graduates that their professional decisions have consequences. There is no such standard for computer people. It still baffles me that people would voluntarily work at implementing something like PRISM - I would literally quit my job over something like this; similar considerations have popped up in the research I do for my Masters thesis - but ethics is definitely something we would talk more about.
- agwa 13y agoYet there is no shortage of doctors willing to assist in torture of prisoners at Guantanamo, assist in executions of prisoners, or conduct non-consensual and medically unnecessary procedures (inserting catheters, rectal examinations, etc.) upon demand of the police. The problem isn't lack of ethics courses but a fundamental flaw in human nature, which is that people easily forget all their personal ethics when someone in authority (whether their boss or the police) tells them to do something.
- onosendai 13y ago> people easily forget all their personal ethics when someone in authority (whether their boss or the police) tells them to do something. I don't know whether you're aware of this or not, but you just described a famous experiment which essentially arrived at the same conclusion. It's worth a read for those not familiar with it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment
- Crito 13y agoI haven't looked into it myself, but I did hear that there is an alternative interpretation of that experiment. Apparently the test subjects did as they were asked, up until the very last prompt used, which was the strongest. Less a request and more a demand. As soon as the prompts stopped appealing to the test subjects desire to further science or not fuck up the experiment, but began making demands, the test subjects almost universally balked. This interpretation isn't really any less disturbing, since it suggests that people will commit atrocities and simultaneously believe that they are doing the right thing. Perhaps it also says something about the general public's trust of, not necessarily authority figures, but rather scientists. Reading up on this has been on my back-burner for a while, this interpretation might be well considered and discarded, but I thought I'd throw it out there. I believe this is related: http://www.is.wayne.edu/MNISSANI/PAGEPUB/Milgram.htm http://www.is.wayne.edu/MNISSANI/PAGEPUB/Milgram.htm
- dredmorbius 13y agoAnd that, folks, is why we as engineers and hackers have a moral duty to be very selective in the types of work we take on and for whom. Thank you. I was going to make the same point, you've done it well. Moreover: this is why the Snowden, PRISM, NSA/FBI, surveillance, privacy, and other stories matter on HN. Many of those working for startups are contributing directly (and occasionally indirectly) to the datastreams which are being harvested. I've never felt comfortable with Facebook and the ethics of its leadership, and I've been increasingly concerned about Google (I consider it to have lost rather than sold its soul). Both are far too actively carrying the NSA's water (as I've pointedly told Google multiple times). How to answer the challenge ... I really don't know, I'm at a loss here.
- neuralk 13y agoI'm not sure how much you can really blame Facebook or Google here. My understanding is that a corporation is legally compelled to comply with a National Security Letter if it receives one, which is far from voluntary collusion. Maybe I am missing something, but I don't see where your dissatisfaction is coming from.
- dredmorbius 13y agoI'm not sure how much you can really blame Facebook or Google By creating an infrastructure in which the data are collected, centralized, individually identified, unencrypted, and specifically associated with vast trails of other nominally unassociated online information (search history, logins to other sites, analytics on other sites, etc.). This is in the sense of Lawrence Lessig's Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace. The architectures of Facebook, Google, and other social networks, advertising networks, mobile phone systems, phone apps, PC-based snooping (inclusive of Microsoft Windows, OS X, Linux, Android, and other systems), etc., etc. These systems are designed in ways which maximize their utility to a national surveillance network, despite alternative architectures being available. As an example of alternatives, Twitter and Reddit, at the very least, don't demand / promote "real names", or (mostly) track information across third-party sites, at least not to the extent Facebook and Google are doing.
- swalsh 13y agoMeta topic, but it seems kind of rude to link to the print page. The washington post is already a very readable site, If i don't want ads, i'll use adblock.
- angersock 13y agohttp://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ http://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ perhaps?
- btbuildem 13y agoor Readability
- drcube 13y agoIf you don't want people to view something on the public web, don't post it there. This page design is infinitely better than the other one, also linked on the HN front page. Seems like you get a choice. Hooray for freedom!
- stdbrouw 13y agoHe's saying it's rude (not despicable or forbidden) to link to this page when putting it in front of a big crowd (not e.g. when viewing it on your own). Your comment is therefore entirely beside the point.
- DanielBMarkham 13y agoSo the deal modern man was presented with was this: we'll give you instant global communication for pennies, but in return governments and corporations will closely monitor everyone on the planet: where they are, who they call, how long the call is, their texts, messages, and other communications -- basically their thoughts. We'll record this forever to use as we choose. Trust us. As a global population, we seem to have made this deal, but I'm not aware of ever being consciously offered the choice. Can I change my mind now?
- tokipin 13y agoi think if this kind of thing is inevitable, then it should be the case that this kind of information should be completely public to all, not just to governments. similar to what David Brin argues (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Transparent_Society http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Transparent_Society)
- daveid 13y agoI understand that if this information is available solely to government agents, a rouge one can potentially do anything they want with it; but if it is available to all, does that not make me even more vulnerable because now anyone who doesn't like me can get a clear overview of my daily routes, or my address, etc?
- Amadou 13y agoI completely agree. I am really tired of that Brin story being constantly cited by people without thinking through the consequences - of which there are many. One of the biggest is the destruction of creativity. When people know that their actions are under constant surveillance it creates an enormous cognitive load. They have to constantly evaluate everything they do as to how it might appear to a critical observer. The end result is that people will simply stop doing anything that might have a social risk associated with it. A panopticon society will be a dull, stagnant and repressed society. Think of every little backwards town where everybody knows everybody's business and anyone who steps out of line is ostracized. That is what our entire society will turn into with total surveillance.
- NatW 13y agoDiscovery of non-explicit co-traveler networks is interesting. I'd read an article about co-traveler networks here: Inferring High Quality Co-Travel Networks, 20 May, 2013: http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.4429 http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.4429 pdf here: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1305.4429.pdf http://arxiv.org/pdf/1305.4429.pdf
- contingencies 13y agothe NSA’s FASCIA repository Fascists gonna fash.
- na85 13y agoPlease keep this sort of comment on reddit where it belongs.
- forgotAgain 13y agoI wonder what the codename is for the program that enforces martial law?
- swalkergibson 13y agoI am now numb to these revelations, as I suspect are most of the technology community. The only thing that will make the rest of the general populace wake up is if someone on TV says they are vehemently opposed to it. Someone who has trotted out the, "I have nothing to hide, so I am not worried." I believe the only way this will happen is if Edward Snowden specifically targeted one of those people and created a file of some seriously embarrassing (or, better yet, incriminating) private business that will be released. I seriously hope that he has verifiable proof that Glenn Beck is having cocaine-fueled sex parties with Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Joe Liebermann, Diane Feinstein and the corpse of Strom Thurmond. That, or something to keep football from being televised on Sunday. Please, Edward. Tell me there is something up your sleeve that will get people to realize that this is actually a really fucking big thing and that it needs to stop right away.
- eliasmacpherson 13y agoI think it's up to you to get people within your own sphere of influence to care, rather than shift that duty to someone else.
- swalkergibson 13y agoI agree, and my sphere of influence is most certainly incensed already, but there is so much inertia in the population that it needs a jump start. For instance, this should be front-page news everywhere. Full stop. Instead, the front page of www.cnn.com is currently populated by yet another Paul Walker death story, www.msnbc.com does not have any reference to it on its home page, and www.foxnews.com is devoid of this bombshell as well. It really looks like the American populace at large is perfectly okay with being spied on and tracked everywhere. For all of the talk there is about wanting a smaller government, there sure ain't a hell of a lot of action. I cannot think of a government that is bigger than one that tracks your every move, forever.
- slg 13y agoAre you saying that you actually support this level of spying when the person being spied on has a different political opinion than you?
- salient 13y agoMetadata surveillance is the backbone of drone assassinations. Without it, they wouldn't be possible. They first find out when the person to be assassinated is located, and then send the drone.
- l0stb0y 13y agoAnytime something bad happens I'm going to ask why the NSA didn't stop it. Paul Walkers death... why didn't the NSA stop it? PS4 DOA orders...why didn't the NSA stop it? Psychboo finding Prezi's source code... why didn't the NSA stop it?
- swalkergibson 13y agoYou say this in jest, but they may have opened a can of worms here. Some defendant in a criminal case in Florida subpoenaed his NSA file in his defense. It would sure be interesting to see if this location data can be used as exculpatory evidence to acquit somebody, or if it would even be available. It would be very hard to stomach if that type of information is only available to convict, not exonerate.
- l0stb0y 13y agoThe authorities regularly withhold information that could assist defendants so it would be business as usual I'm sure. But yeah, that's one giant can of worms!
- swalkergibson 13y agoTheoretically, they are not allowed to do that. If it is evidence that would affect the outcome of the case, they are obligated to disclose it. While it seems like due process and the rule of law is being eroded daily, I really hope that the below case still applies... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brady_v._Maryland http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brady_v._Maryland
- ChrisBland 13y agoThe defendant was Terrance Brown, the gvt responded and said they did not have location data for him. Filed two different responses, one public with a ton of [REDACTED] and a private one.
- cryoshon 13y agoIsn't this one of the big reveals that we've been waiting for-- that they are attempting to track our physical movement? With this geographical information history, their ability to smash dissent without physical force is unparalleled, given that nearly everyone has visited a sketchy location at one time or another. Doesn't this revelation prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the USA is even worse than the imagined world of 1984?
- CWuestefeld 13y agoBut they're quite clear that they were not ATTEMPTING to track us. It's just a side effect of something else, a benefit they may be profoundly happy about, but can claim that is was not the goal of the program.
- anonymouz 13y ago> But they're quite clear that they were not ATTEMPTING to track us. Speak for yourself. As a European I'm apparently a "foreign target".
- wickedlogic 13y agoDear rest of the world, we (our US gov) are tracking as much of everything that we (our US gov) find relevant. When we don't, we encourage fund companies who do. Dear US citizens, can we also stop being surprised that we are doing such things? We have a long history of doing this.
- lignuist 13y agoI know a guy who does not have a mobile phone. Sometimes I am a bit envious of him.
- mjolk 13y agoWhy? Why are you envious of him? You can choose to only sometimes carry a phone or turn it on.
- lignuist 13y ago> You can choose to only sometimes carry a phone or turn it on. Easier said than done. Unfortunately.
- middleclick 13y agoMost modern phones take a long time to start up. Reminds of the time I had one of those Nokia phones. 2-3 seconds bootup time. I think putting in Airplane Mode should be a good idea.
- lignuist 13y ago> I think putting in Airplane Mode should be a good idea. And then you still would have to trust this Airplane Mode. Honestly, I have absolutely no idea what is happening in my phone. Is it maybe still collecting data while it is in Airplane Mode and sending it somewhere once it is set back to regular mode? Or is it even sending data all the time, because the NSA knows that never a single plane has crashed because of active cellphones? Probably some smart people out there are checking their phone's internals and activities more than I do...
- jonknee 13y agoYou have to do more than turning it off (unless you can pop the battery). The FBI can bug a phone and have it send audio even while turned off, I'm guessing go the NSA can pretty much so what it wants. http://news.cnet.com/2100-1029-6140191.html http://news.cnet.com/2100-1029-6140191.html
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- timbro 13y ago> The NSA does not target Americans’ location data and > ...location data are obtained by methods “tuned to be looking outside the United States,” Whew, I was getting worried, but now I'm sure we're safe and it's just for foreigners.
- foobarqux 13y agoAnyone know the details of accuracy and penetration of network-side positioning? Client-side could in principle be detected but network-side would be undetectable.
- sjtgraham 13y ago> The NSA does not target Americans’ location data by design, but the agency acquires a substantial amount of information on the whereabouts of domestic cellphones “incidentally,” a legal term that connotes a foreseeable but not deliberate result. The implication that Americans being "incidentally" caught in the dragnet is the only aspect that makes this egregious is absolutely fucking disgusting. This is a habit endemic in the American media that persistently differentiates between Americans and mere humans, as if the former is sacred and the latter mere fodder. I try to avoid swearing in comments, but damn it that's how angry this attitude makes me (and pretty much every non-American, I'm sure).
- pavpanchekha 13y agoI understand your contempt but this distinction is important in this specific discussion, because the NSA charter specifically restricts its actions against Americans. Thus, if the NSA is spying on Americans often enough for it not to be a "mistake", then the NSA is flagrantly violating the scope it has been given. If this is not occurring, the NSA is operating within its (ridiculously loose) legal bounds.
- Zigurd 13y agoDon't the instances of "parallel construction" already uncovered mean that the whole "restricts actions against Americans" thing has been blown wide open? I suspect the answer to whether this was been written into law lies in secret interpretations of secret passages of the PATRIOT Acts, and that our rights have been, in secret, broadly abridged if not suspended.
- ewoodrich 13y agoSimply put, no. Parallel construction is a process by which otherwise inadmissible evidence can be used in court by obtaining it through an alternative lawful method. i.e. DEA trailing a specific car until it leads to a drug dealer based on a tip from the NSA. The NSA charter restricts directly targeting Americans unless related to an international threat. i.e. FISA warrants ("Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act"). Instances of parallel construction emerge when evidence potentially useful for a domestic investigation is incidentally uncovered. Were it to be directly targeted when the individual has had no foreign communication, it would exceed the (very broad) scope of the NSA. So it hasn't been "blown wide open". It is just that many people don't seem to particularly care about the nuances of either the NSA's charter or "Parallel construction" and throw terms around.
- ajju 13y agoWas this not obvious from the various news stories of drone strikes targeted at cell phone locations of suspected terrorists?
- crystaln 13y agoNSA responses generally imply that any sort of surveillance is ok, as long as it's of non-Americans. While it may largely be legally true, I think the presumption that that is a valid defense needs to be challenged more often. Phrases like "intended strictly to develop intelligence about foreign targets" seems to be regularly used by reporters in such a way as to imply that, if true, the surveillance would be a-ok. The difference between the rights of Americans vs non-Americans, with regard to US intelligence services, is an interesting one. Certainly non-Americans are deserving of at least some protections. I would hope that we could provide most of the world with the same level of respect as we do each other.
- wcummings 13y agoThe distinction between ordinary spycraft and mass surveillance of a foreign civilian populace at an unprecedented scale needs to be drawn
- varjag 13y agoWorse yet, this sort of programs provides both justification and technology (which inevitably trickles down from NSA-sponsored R&D) for other governments to spy on their citizens.
- nitrogen 13y ago...it collects locations in bulk because its most powerful analytic tools — known collectively as CO-TRAVELER — allow it to look for unknown associates of known intelligence targets by tracking people whose movements intersect. Better change your bus route if you notice the same terrorist rides the same bus as you every day.
- lasermike026 13y agoI have no desire to carry a mobile phone if these are the terms. No thanks. I pass.
- mixmastamyk 13y agoPosts with NSA in the title are heavily penalized here. Keep that in mind when submitting an important story. 2. Have I been pwned? Check if your email has been... 213 points by mountaineer 4 hours ago 3. NSA tracking cellphone locations worldwide, ... 266 points by 001sky 2 hours ago
- Brakenshire 13y agoIt's one of the problems of these algorithmic measures of editorial importance, that these sorts of rules can be operating in the background.
- Zoomla 13y agoCan one record include many rows? I would assume so.
- sebkomianos 13y agoI shouldn’t be writing this. Every time I read something NSA/FBI/CIA/KGB/Interpol/MI5/Stasi related I get this instinctive feeling of angriness and sadness at the same time. We were given the “internet”, pretty much for free, and we believed it would be a fair deal? That there would be nothing in for them? When was the last time you were give something for free, can you even remember? They are breaking encryption? Really?! Didn’t we learn that it’s not feasible to break encryption? Ah, but they are using quantum computers, right. Should we even believe Snowden and Assange and Schneier, or anyone really? My father even thinks they are watching him through the cable set. Am I supposed to argue with him about the opposite? Worldwide, governments and agencies and individuals control whatever they want, however they want, whenever they want. And we are just siting and watching them. Individuals are profiting from illegal activities? Who cares? NSA is breaking an amendment? Who cares? Governments are saying A and doing B? Who cares?All these are breaking the law? They are the law. We let them become the law. Because we don’t care. Damon Albarn (songwriter of the virtual music group Gorillaz) was once asked about X-Factor (a music reality show) and his answer applies not only to it but to a lot of things in our lives too: Every time you do even a little thing that harms your privacy or your freedom or even your dignity, it might not do a lot of harm because it is little but what’s actually happening is that you are moving the privacy/freedom/dignity barrier away from where it should be. And all these times, all these “littles”, they sum up and next time you do something very bad it looks little again but it’s very very big. Because you don’t realise how much the barrier has moved. We didn’t care when we had to pay unreasonable taxes last year. We don’t care when politicians lie to us in front of our sad faces, time after time, election after election. We don’t care about other any other person’s rights. We don’t care about unfairness all over around us. We don’t care about any kind of oppression, anywhere in the world. So we won’t care when we find out that someone is scrapping this page and is adding data to our profiles on a database. Of course we won’t. We don’t care that in 2014 we can send rockets to the space but haven’t evolved our culture to to the point where it would be our collective duty as the human race to make sure that everybody on this planet can have all the water and the food they need and access to an amazing education and an incredible health system for their whole life. We have lost the war, and we don’t even care. We should expect the worst, really. Now, please, save the “if you really cared you would actually do something” comments. Because the truth is, I can’t do anything. Not alone. I can’t make anyone care. Most of us can’t. We don’t have access to them, we don’t have the mediums to stimulate them, we don’t have nothing. I didn’t want to become a politician or a media baron or a general or anything that involves that sort of authority over other people anyway. I wanted to become a sports writer, then a columnist, then an academic and then a software developer. And I am not even a talented software developer that can hack for good or build software that will help liberate the world. And I believe that protests and occupying and rioting and any sort of such action is just expansion and nothing else, so I don’t do it. But this fact, that I haven’t found a way to “fight”, doesn’t mean I can not be heartedly disappointed by our collective indifference. Maybe that’s what I can offer, these typed words. I shouldn’t be writing this. I should be working on my personal project that will help me get a job and make money instead. I shouldn’t even care as much to talk about it. But all that is left is our ideas and voices, really, and I just can’t give up without even saying a few things — even to an online community where I know nobody. Not to change anything, probably, but at least to say I tried. I shouldn’t be writing this. But I care. And I hope you start caring too. (I have also published this comment on medium: https://medium.com/p/ebcea7330613 https://medium.com/p/ebcea7330613)
- rl3 13y ago"The National Security Agency is gathering nearly 5 billion records a day on the whereabouts of cellphones around the world, ..." "The records feed a vast database that stores information about the locations of at least hundreds of millions of devices, ..." Why are there only 5 billion geolocation records ingested daily? Using a conservative estimate of 200 million devices, that yields an average daily ingestion rate of 25 records for each device. This seems really low. It sounds like NSA may be culling the data aggressively, or the definition of a record may constitute more than just a single polling event. Perhaps both. Keep in mind that the Bluffdale, Utah facility was not operational at the time the documents referenced in the article were created. It's possible ingestion of gelocation data has since ramped up.
- giardini 13y agoAFAIK no one ever asked Clapper (or any other NSA representative) to give a precise operational definition of the term "metadata". I don't want to hear what someone else thinks "metadata" is, I want to know how NSA operationally defines "metadata" internally and precisely when and where the usage(s) are made. Voice: I am on the telephone with you. My actual voice is the data. Is the digitization of my voice not metadata? After all, natural voice =/= digitized voice. So it seems that digitized voice could be, to the NSA, metadata and therefore subject to capture. I know the NSA has software/hardware to translate digitized voice to text. Suppose all phone conversations are converted to text. Then is that text therefore not data but metadata? Once again, it seems that the text of all phone conversations could be, to the NSA, metadata and therefore subject to capture. Fax: I send a fax to you. What's on the sheet of paper is data. But is the digitized and compressed sequence of bits sent to you not metadata? It certainly is not the same as the original data. So it seems that the digitized fax could be, to the NSA, metadata and therefore subject to capture. Still, were that not so, the NSA has OCR that can read handwritten or typed text from a fax and convert it to text. Is the converted text not metadata? It is certainly different from the original data. So it seems that the converted text from the fax could be, to the NSA, metadata and therefore subject to capture. E-mail: I e-mail you. The text I see before me is data. Once I press the send key, it is compressed through various software/hardware for rapid transmission as it passes over the TCP/IP/phone network. Is not that compressed text also metadata? Therefore it seems that e-mail content could be, to the NSA, metadata and therefore subject to capture. IOW once data is processed through any transformation whatsoever then it could be defined as "metadata". Again I don't know NSA's exact definition (used internally) of what metadata is. There may be many different definitions. But since NSA's representatives raised the use of the term w/o defining it (and then used the metaphor of a library to draw questioners off track) I believe that they should be questioned again about precisely what "metadata" means when and where. Furthermore the question of what precisely the NSA captures should be driven to ground thoroughly. Personal belief: NSA considers the product of any transformation of data to be metadata. The NSA captures all voice, fax, e-mail, chat, sms, etc. and maintains it in digitized form. Regardless of origin, all communications end up in text format (with pointers back to the original digitized form) which is then subjected to semantic/content analysis (scanning for naughty words), and optionally (under control of an analyst) to social network analysis and AI software that analyzes events, objects, actors, their intentions, and possible variations in interpretation of the text.
- dariopy 13y agoOnce again RMS is proven right, in all his paranoid delirium. Pretty sad is you ask me.
- P3KLb82AhB 13y agoif north korea would do that to usa, it would be considered an act of war...
- wilsonbooster 13y agoFor boosting the signals of your cell phone, please visit: http://cellphoneboosterstore.com/ http://cellphoneboosterstore.com/
- wilsonbooster 13y agoFor boosting the signals of your cell phone, please visit: http://cellphoneboosterstore.com/ http://cellphoneboosterstore.com/