11 ms·

It is really damaging, but that's from a perspective that, as a superpower, they were benefiting from control and domination. The same perspective implies that

It is really damaging, but that's from a perspective that, as a superpower, they were benefiting from control and domination. The same perspective implies that the target was being damaged by these actions. Targets that are not always adversaries. Targets that could contribute if not being controlled, dominated, and damaged. It's not easy to see, but damaging others denies them the contributions they could bring, ultimately damaging themselves.

xnull2guest 12y ago
Are you saying it's retribution for participating in the global cyber intelligence war? Everybody is hacking everybody. Every major country has a cyberintelligence arm. The NSA is just one actor of dozens.
- meowface 12y ago
  I actually condone a lot of the NSA's activities, but I take serious issue with: -Warantless surveillance of US citizens (this is bad whether it's by law enforcement, intelligence agencies, or anyone). -Infiltration of foreign companies in allied or neutral nations purely for economic or geopolitical insight, not for military purposes (Brazil's Petrobras oil company, all sorts of spying in Germany and Norway and other places). Personally I'm all for the kind of operations they're conducting in Iran and China, as these countries have been doing the same to us and to others for a long time. But they've become far too greedy in their desire for information domination and power, to the point where there is clearly no line that shouldn't be crossed. To them, if anything anywhere in the world is open for exploitation or surveillance, then they feel like they have a right to use it.
  - xnull2guest 12y ago
    > Warantless surveillance of US citizens (this is bad whether it's by law enforcement, intelligence agencies, or anyone). Agreed very strongly. > Infiltration of foreign companies in allied or neutral nations purely for economic or geopolitical insight, not for military purposes (Brazil's Petrobras oil company, all sorts of spying in Germany and Norway and other places). See this is where the NSA really shines. We (The US) delayed Iran's nuclear program by THREE YEARS with Stuxnet! Three! And after they finally figured out it was sabotage the US and Israel had the director assassinated for further delays. Having Merkle's cell phone? During the Eurozone crisis? It would have been awful (financially) for the United States not to have that information. It's fun to look back and read the confused reports during the time "European Union suffering considerably from Eurozone crisis; America sees only limited effects." PETROBRAS? We won offshore oil drilling locations because we had that information. Energy security for the country going forward decades. Unfortunately geopolitics are important and you can't just not participate. Hacking is (one important way) that modern espionage, surveillance and sabotage are done.
    - grey-area 12y ago
      Having Merkle's cell phone? During the Eurozone crisis? It would have been awful (financially) for the United States not to have that information. The cost of this sort of machiavellian policy is of course the opprobrium of former allies and friends, and a loss of moral standing. The US loses a lot of soft power if it chooses this route, and the consequences will be felt for decades in mistrust and distance from her allies. A dangerous course both for the US and for the world.
      - xnull2guest 12y ago
        I fluxuate with how I feel about it (it = 'machiavellian policy'). I'm not going to defend US policy in this case, nor claim to understand all of the nuances required to make global strategic geopolitical decisions. But I will say that the NSA's perspective is that: it is only because of the Snowden leaks if we have lost face with allies. To the NSA, the secrets were kept well enough until Snowden and friends disclosed them. This is my basic issue with this article. America and the NSA ate mud pie for the actions disclosed in the leaks. This article has the very real possibility of doing a lot more damage. One could say it is good because justice has been served, but one could also suggest that it is bad because similar disclosures of German surveillance programs (a touchy subject given the history), Chinese capabilities, Russian objectives etc haven't been disclosed by a Snowden-like actor. Really the whole situation is bad. I don't like being at war, cyber or otherwise.
        grey-area 12y ago
        This is my basic issue with this article. America and the NSA ate mud pie for the actions disclosed in the leaks. This article has the very real possibility of doing a lot more damage. Not because of the leaks, but because of their actions. That's an important distinction. If you take actions like this, you should be prepared for them to be exposed, and if you use the argument the NSA and you yourself have made here (it would be ok if we were evil and no-one knew about it), you should expect no one to trust you. You've just declared yourself untrustworthy and a bad ally in perpetuity, because you think this is ok as long as no-one knew about it.
- ChrisAntaki 12y ago
  Right, and I hope nobody thinks Russia or China are saints, because they use their technical abilities to suppress dissent in frightening ways. While there's definitely a cyber war going on, you have to ask, why isn't the NSA actively disseminating knowledge to Americans on how to secure themselves? Why are they instead actively weakening encryption standards? America companies have the most to lose from weak encryption. It just doesn't add up, and the American people have enough confidence to call their government out, unlike countries who have allowed themselves to become pretty enslaved by their government, like China and Russia. In summary, the NSA should participate in the global cyber intelligence war by educating the American public, instead of weakening them.
  - xnull2guest 12y ago
    Oh nobody thinks they are saints. I hope not. > they use their technical abilities to suppress dissent in frightening ways I'm just going to mention so called "Fusion Centers", which have been used to investigate and disrupt the organization of The Tea Party movement and Occupy Wall Street but spare my usual rant. No it does not compare to Russia or China. Oh and I'm also going to link this: https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/07/14/manipulating-online-polls-ways-british-spies-seek-control-internet/ https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/07/14/manipulating-o... And this: http://minerva.dtic.mil/ http://minerva.dtic.mil/ > NSA threatening domestic jobs, companies, individuals, and most of all innocents, that leads to an upset. The NSA's view, and in fact several of the last presidential offices, is that these programs and capabilities are important for the country because they give American companies and domestic jobs a leg up. "The National Security Agency/Central Security Service (NSA/CSS) leads the U.S. Government in cryptology that encompasses both Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) and Information Assurance (IA) products and services, and enables Computer Network Operations (CNO) in order to gain a decision advantage for the Nation and our allies under all circumstances." - NSA Mission Statement A good example is the hacking of Brazilian PETROBOL (PETROBRAS?). Or actually, here's a firstlook link: https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/09/05/us-governments-plans-use-economic-espionage-benefit-american-corporations/ https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/09/05/us-governments... > While there's definitely a cyber war going on, you have to ask, why isn't the NSA actively disseminating knowledge to Americans on how to secure themselves? Because it is essentially impossible to secure yourself on the internet. This isn't a fine point. It's a blanket fact. > Why are they instead actively weakening encryption standards? They have a concept called "NOBUS" which means that the weaknesses they introduce should only be exploitable by them. DUAL_EC_DRBG, the goto example of an NSA backdoor, is a perfect example of NOBUS. > In summary, the NSA should participate in the global cyber intelligence war by educating the American public, instead of weakening them. Oh I agree. Actually if you look back Clinton and first term Bush era they kept proclaiming that there was a cyber intelligence war but it never really caught on. So they made it about 'cyber terrorists'. Nobody caught on. They made it about actual terrorists. Now we listen. I do hope that investments are made in defensive capabilities rather than offensive. The Obama administration released a series of strategic documents funding longer term research into the protection of domestic computer networks, programs and technologies. But right now you can't play the game of cyber intelligence war without attacking. When it comes to hacking, the attacker always wins. Just playing defense is a losing game. > The NSA's actions since 9/11 have been more consistent with a power grab than any authentic desire to empower & protect Americans. This has been going on much longer than since 9/11. PREDATOR and MAINWAY are examples of programs that existed years before the 9/11 attacks.
- rainwolf 12y ago
  I'm not saying it's retribution, I'm saying it's shortsighted to consider it damaging to themselves and be okay with the damage that was detailed in the leaks. I'm not okay with either, but being blind to others' "suffering" doesn't get my sympathy. In this order of events, your sympathy gets mine. In this case, you pointing the finger at others hacking innocents as a justification for hacking innocents makes me entirely unsympathetic to your "damage". See how that works?
  - xnull2guest 12y ago
    Oh yeah, I get that. And I agree - I really do wish we could all 'just get along'. Two wrongs don't make a right. Would be awesome if we could just have secure and private computing and communication machines for the masses.
- Zigurd 12y ago
  No, "everybody" doesn't do it. It is on the face of it ridiculous to say "everybody has a blue-water navy." It is equally ridiculous to say "everybody runs surveillance comparable to the NSA."
  - xnull2guest 12y ago
    Page 123 of the documents released in Glenn Greenwald's "No Place To Hide" lists at least 37 countries (that the United States has cyber partnerships with). http://cryptome.org/2014/05/npth-docs-compare.pdf http://cryptome.org/2014/05/npth-docs-compare.pdf (on page 16 of the link)
    - Zigurd 12y ago
      Of those 37 countries, only a minor fraction have the budget to operate the way NSA does. That leaves approximately 160 other sovereign entities. Let's say half of them are despotic and don't count. That leaves 80. Out of those I'd wager that more than half are have governments too under-resourced to have the ability to put their people in the kind of panopticon Americans live in. In other words there may be hundreds of milllions of people who are more free than Americans. Who are not fearful Hobbeseans suckling at NSA'a teat. Somehow, those people have not yet succumbed to "terrorism" of whatever the scare du jour is.
      - xnull2guest 12y ago
        >Of those 37 countries, only a minor fraction have the budget to operate the way NSA does. There will be differences in cost and budget for each nation. The United States has 25% of the world GDP (compared to 4%) of the population. That we can afford to fund the Lamborghini of intelligence operations isn't to discount other states that have less well funded capabilities. You'll see plenty of parallels with traditional warfare: like that countries with smaller budgets ally themselves with countries that have more capabilities. > Let's say half of them are despotic and don't count Let's not. Those are some awfully large numbers for one. But more fundamentally why don't the armies and intelligence capabilities of tyrannies count? > Out of those I'd wager that more than half are have governments too under-resourced to have the ability to put their people in the kind of panopticon Americans live The nice thing is that surveillance, if done right, is reasonably cheap. Many other countries, especially in the ones you 'don't count' have laws preventing citizen use of any reasonable encryption whatsoever.

xnull2guest 12y ago

Are you saying it's retribution for participating in the global cyber intelligence war? Everybody is hacking everybody. Every major country has a cyberintelligence arm. The NSA is just one actor of dozens.

meowface 12y ago
I actually condone a lot of the NSA's activities, but I take serious issue with: -Warantless surveillance of US citizens (this is bad whether it's by law enforcement, intelligence agencies, or anyone). -Infiltration of foreign companies in allied or neutral nations purely for economic or geopolitical insight, not for military purposes (Brazil's Petrobras oil company, all sorts of spying in Germany and Norway and other places). Personally I'm all for the kind of operations they're conducting in Iran and China, as these countries have been doing the same to us and to others for a long time. But they've become far too greedy in their desire for information domination and power, to the point where there is clearly no line that shouldn't be crossed. To them, if anything anywhere in the world is open for exploitation or surveillance, then they feel like they have a right to use it.
- xnull2guest 12y ago
  > Warantless surveillance of US citizens (this is bad whether it's by law enforcement, intelligence agencies, or anyone). Agreed very strongly. > Infiltration of foreign companies in allied or neutral nations purely for economic or geopolitical insight, not for military purposes (Brazil's Petrobras oil company, all sorts of spying in Germany and Norway and other places). See this is where the NSA really shines. We (The US) delayed Iran's nuclear program by THREE YEARS with Stuxnet! Three! And after they finally figured out it was sabotage the US and Israel had the director assassinated for further delays. Having Merkle's cell phone? During the Eurozone crisis? It would have been awful (financially) for the United States not to have that information. It's fun to look back and read the confused reports during the time "European Union suffering considerably from Eurozone crisis; America sees only limited effects." PETROBRAS? We won offshore oil drilling locations because we had that information. Energy security for the country going forward decades. Unfortunately geopolitics are important and you can't just not participate. Hacking is (one important way) that modern espionage, surveillance and sabotage are done.
  - grey-area 12y ago
    Having Merkle's cell phone? During the Eurozone crisis? It would have been awful (financially) for the United States not to have that information. The cost of this sort of machiavellian policy is of course the opprobrium of former allies and friends, and a loss of moral standing. The US loses a lot of soft power if it chooses this route, and the consequences will be felt for decades in mistrust and distance from her allies. A dangerous course both for the US and for the world.
    - xnull2guest 12y ago
      I fluxuate with how I feel about it (it = 'machiavellian policy'). I'm not going to defend US policy in this case, nor claim to understand all of the nuances required to make global strategic geopolitical decisions. But I will say that the NSA's perspective is that: it is only because of the Snowden leaks if we have lost face with allies. To the NSA, the secrets were kept well enough until Snowden and friends disclosed them. This is my basic issue with this article. America and the NSA ate mud pie for the actions disclosed in the leaks. This article has the very real possibility of doing a lot more damage. One could say it is good because justice has been served, but one could also suggest that it is bad because similar disclosures of German surveillance programs (a touchy subject given the history), Chinese capabilities, Russian objectives etc haven't been disclosed by a Snowden-like actor. Really the whole situation is bad. I don't like being at war, cyber or otherwise.
      - grey-area 12y ago
        This is my basic issue with this article. America and the NSA ate mud pie for the actions disclosed in the leaks. This article has the very real possibility of doing a lot more damage. Not because of the leaks, but because of their actions. That's an important distinction. If you take actions like this, you should be prepared for them to be exposed, and if you use the argument the NSA and you yourself have made here (it would be ok if we were evil and no-one knew about it), you should expect no one to trust you. You've just declared yourself untrustworthy and a bad ally in perpetuity, because you think this is ok as long as no-one knew about it.
ChrisAntaki 12y ago
Right, and I hope nobody thinks Russia or China are saints, because they use their technical abilities to suppress dissent in frightening ways. While there's definitely a cyber war going on, you have to ask, why isn't the NSA actively disseminating knowledge to Americans on how to secure themselves? Why are they instead actively weakening encryption standards? America companies have the most to lose from weak encryption. It just doesn't add up, and the American people have enough confidence to call their government out, unlike countries who have allowed themselves to become pretty enslaved by their government, like China and Russia. In summary, the NSA should participate in the global cyber intelligence war by educating the American public, instead of weakening them.
- xnull2guest 12y ago
  Oh nobody thinks they are saints. I hope not. > they use their technical abilities to suppress dissent in frightening ways I'm just going to mention so called "Fusion Centers", which have been used to investigate and disrupt the organization of The Tea Party movement and Occupy Wall Street but spare my usual rant. No it does not compare to Russia or China. Oh and I'm also going to link this: https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/07/14/manipulating-online-polls-ways-british-spies-seek-control-internet/ https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/07/14/manipulating-o... And this: http://minerva.dtic.mil/ http://minerva.dtic.mil/ > NSA threatening domestic jobs, companies, individuals, and most of all innocents, that leads to an upset. The NSA's view, and in fact several of the last presidential offices, is that these programs and capabilities are important for the country because they give American companies and domestic jobs a leg up. "The National Security Agency/Central Security Service (NSA/CSS) leads the U.S. Government in cryptology that encompasses both Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) and Information Assurance (IA) products and services, and enables Computer Network Operations (CNO) in order to gain a decision advantage for the Nation and our allies under all circumstances." - NSA Mission Statement A good example is the hacking of Brazilian PETROBOL (PETROBRAS?). Or actually, here's a firstlook link: https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/09/05/us-governments-plans-use-economic-espionage-benefit-american-corporations/ https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/09/05/us-governments... > While there's definitely a cyber war going on, you have to ask, why isn't the NSA actively disseminating knowledge to Americans on how to secure themselves? Because it is essentially impossible to secure yourself on the internet. This isn't a fine point. It's a blanket fact. > Why are they instead actively weakening encryption standards? They have a concept called "NOBUS" which means that the weaknesses they introduce should only be exploitable by them. DUAL_EC_DRBG, the goto example of an NSA backdoor, is a perfect example of NOBUS. > In summary, the NSA should participate in the global cyber intelligence war by educating the American public, instead of weakening them. Oh I agree. Actually if you look back Clinton and first term Bush era they kept proclaiming that there was a cyber intelligence war but it never really caught on. So they made it about 'cyber terrorists'. Nobody caught on. They made it about actual terrorists. Now we listen. I do hope that investments are made in defensive capabilities rather than offensive. The Obama administration released a series of strategic documents funding longer term research into the protection of domestic computer networks, programs and technologies. But right now you can't play the game of cyber intelligence war without attacking. When it comes to hacking, the attacker always wins. Just playing defense is a losing game. > The NSA's actions since 9/11 have been more consistent with a power grab than any authentic desire to empower & protect Americans. This has been going on much longer than since 9/11. PREDATOR and MAINWAY are examples of programs that existed years before the 9/11 attacks.
rainwolf 12y ago
I'm not saying it's retribution, I'm saying it's shortsighted to consider it damaging to themselves and be okay with the damage that was detailed in the leaks. I'm not okay with either, but being blind to others' "suffering" doesn't get my sympathy. In this order of events, your sympathy gets mine. In this case, you pointing the finger at others hacking innocents as a justification for hacking innocents makes me entirely unsympathetic to your "damage". See how that works?
- xnull2guest 12y ago
  Oh yeah, I get that. And I agree - I really do wish we could all 'just get along'. Two wrongs don't make a right. Would be awesome if we could just have secure and private computing and communication machines for the masses.
Zigurd 12y ago
No, "everybody" doesn't do it. It is on the face of it ridiculous to say "everybody has a blue-water navy." It is equally ridiculous to say "everybody runs surveillance comparable to the NSA."
- xnull2guest 12y ago
  Page 123 of the documents released in Glenn Greenwald's "No Place To Hide" lists at least 37 countries (that the United States has cyber partnerships with). http://cryptome.org/2014/05/npth-docs-compare.pdf http://cryptome.org/2014/05/npth-docs-compare.pdf (on page 16 of the link)
  - Zigurd 12y ago
    Of those 37 countries, only a minor fraction have the budget to operate the way NSA does. That leaves approximately 160 other sovereign entities. Let's say half of them are despotic and don't count. That leaves 80. Out of those I'd wager that more than half are have governments too under-resourced to have the ability to put their people in the kind of panopticon Americans live in. In other words there may be hundreds of milllions of people who are more free than Americans. Who are not fearful Hobbeseans suckling at NSA'a teat. Somehow, those people have not yet succumbed to "terrorism" of whatever the scare du jour is.
    - xnull2guest 12y ago
      >Of those 37 countries, only a minor fraction have the budget to operate the way NSA does. There will be differences in cost and budget for each nation. The United States has 25% of the world GDP (compared to 4%) of the population. That we can afford to fund the Lamborghini of intelligence operations isn't to discount other states that have less well funded capabilities. You'll see plenty of parallels with traditional warfare: like that countries with smaller budgets ally themselves with countries that have more capabilities. > Let's say half of them are despotic and don't count Let's not. Those are some awfully large numbers for one. But more fundamentally why don't the armies and intelligence capabilities of tyrannies count? > Out of those I'd wager that more than half are have governments too under-resourced to have the ability to put their people in the kind of panopticon Americans live The nice thing is that surveillance, if done right, is reasonably cheap. Many other countries, especially in the ones you 'don't count' have laws preventing citizen use of any reasonable encryption whatsoever.