4 ms·

So with all the attention (advertisement/panic) the NSA has generated, the CIA wants a cut of the cake for themselves? That whole agency disco in the US is so

by aluhut 12y ago

So with all the attention (advertisement/panic) the NSA has generated, the CIA wants a cut of the cake for themselves? That whole agency disco in the US is so confusing that I have the feeling this has to be the plan all the way or it's some kind of old cold war virus spawning divisions and agencies. Don't they all overlap? Is there enough reality for all of them to spy on?

eatbuckyballs 12y ago
The NSA is primarily charged with Signals Intelligence, Where as the CIA is Human Intelligence. So it's actually a pretty clear line. They also have their own security clearance process (though they tend to recognize each others in join work). The Department of Homeland security is a bit different, they're charged with domestic operations and support (TSA). The FBI is a Domestic Detective agency for lack of a better description. They're charged with being the Federal investigative force vs relying on varying state and city groups. So yes, theres plenty for all of them to spy on / work on. Each have their own laws and limitations. That's why they're incestuous and work together on many projects.
- kabdib 12y ago
  Add to this list the Secret Service for financial fraud related things (as well as protecting government officials), including credit card fraud, phone fraud (at least in the 80s), and the odd whatever-the-hell-we-feel-like-doing fear-based thing (e.g., Steve Jackson Games). Rule of thumb: If something contains the word 'Cyber' in it, it's gonna be clueless, bureaucratic and political, and utterly incompetently done.
  - drzaiusapelord 12y ago
    >Rule of thumb: If something contains the word 'Cyber' in it, it's gonna be clueless, bureaucratic and political, and utterly incompetently done. Yet somehow Chinese and Russian cyberwar programs are pretty effective. Sounds like the US needs to catch up.
    - bediger4000 12y ago
      Yet somehow Chinese and Russian cyberwar programs are pretty effective. 1. That vaunted "effectiveness" may be Just Another Missile Gap, i.e. a realistically non-existent threat used to drum up fear in the USA, to get greater funding from a terrorized public. 2. Lots of analysts say that both China and Russia tolerate unofficial hacking/cyberwar groups, as long as the targets are outside of China and Russia respectively. With some small amount of guidance done surreptitiously, the governments take advantage of a huge number of semi-criminals to serve "national security" needs without attribution. 3. Because of (2), ISO-9001, CMM level N don't apply. Faster coding. Similarly, Script Kiddies, Honkers and Nationalist Hackers don't do clearances, much less compartmentalized projects (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_clearance#Compartmented http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_clearance#Compartmente...) - this means that more people are available, from very diverse backgrounds, and they can collaborate and communicate as necessary. Unless the USA is willing to quit being bureaucratic to the point of paralysis, it will never catch up.
- pdkl95 12y ago
  > The FBI is a Domestic Detective agency The FBI changed their task to "national security" recently, and are now part of the "intelligence community" club. http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/fbis-main-mission-now-not-law-enforcement http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/fbis-main-mission-now-not...
- snowwrestler 12y ago
  It doesn't seem like a clear-cut line to me; aren't Internet communications "signals"? Isn't that why the NSA has taken the lead on Internet intelligence operations up to this point? So how will what the CIA is planning to do be qualitatively different from what the NSA is already doing? I agree with the parent; there is substantial overlap in capabilities and responsibilities among the agencies that do intelligence work for the U.S. government. These overlaps led directly to the mistaken Iraq invasion. DOD and CIA reported very different things about the Iraq WMD program, and the U.S. leadership could choose which one they wanted to believe. Cheney and Rumsfeld convinced Bush to listen to DOD, and we all know how that worked out.
wahsd 12y ago
It's partially intentional and partially a holdover from Cold War strategies. Our own military and government barely know what the hell is going on within its own circles, there is absolutely no chance someone will be able to make sense of what is important and relevant. It's essentially a strategy of overwhelming with force and noise signal. As the economic and global power we had been over the American Century we were able to play fast and loose and wild, whether our strategy will still work in this new century is a different story though. It may very well still work, it may very well lead to our demise. The only thing going for us is that there does not seem to be any alternative power and authority that is any less shitty than ours; whether that is due to natural factors of by CIA sabotage is a different story. Are we really all going to support China's or Russia's supplanting of American power in the world? It's not a good choice, but as horrible as we are, I'll go with the less bad over the worst any time.
higherpurpose 12y ago
I'm guessing that's exactly what it is. I think some of the Snowden leaks showed NSA already has a bigger budget than CIA and is also growing that budget at a much faster rate. Their budgets probably increase by $10 million for every "cyber" word they say in their presentations to Congress. The CIA wants in on that action.
- drzaiusapelord 12y ago
  It also might make sense that the NSA is a corrupt juggernaut and expecting them to do your heavy lifting isn't appropriate, especially when its clear that Clapper runs a security theater-like organization. The CIA and other agencies having its own smaller team probably means better outcomes. This kind of thing probably works best with smaller and more nimble teams than big data gathering focused organizations like the NSA. From a budget perspective, this is good cause to cut from the NSA and give to the CIA.
task_queue 12y ago
The US has built a narrative to justify their surveillance apparatus after getting caught with their pants down spying on the American people and the world. It's an extension of the national security narrative. Agencies recognize the massive amount of funding and legislature on the horizon and want to see it diverted to them like it was to the DHS in the last decade.

by aluhut 12y ago

eatbuckyballs 12y ago

The NSA is primarily charged with Signals Intelligence, Where as the CIA is Human Intelligence. So it's actually a pretty clear line. They also have their own security clearance process (though they tend to recognize each others in join work). The Department of Homeland security is a bit different, they're charged with domestic operations and support (TSA). The FBI is a Domestic Detective agency for lack of a better description. They're charged with being the Federal investigative force vs relying on varying state and city groups. So yes, theres plenty for all of them to spy on / work on. Each have their own laws and limitations. That's why they're incestuous and work together on many projects.

kabdib 12y ago
Add to this list the Secret Service for financial fraud related things (as well as protecting government officials), including credit card fraud, phone fraud (at least in the 80s), and the odd whatever-the-hell-we-feel-like-doing fear-based thing (e.g., Steve Jackson Games). Rule of thumb: If something contains the word 'Cyber' in it, it's gonna be clueless, bureaucratic and political, and utterly incompetently done.
- drzaiusapelord 12y ago
  >Rule of thumb: If something contains the word 'Cyber' in it, it's gonna be clueless, bureaucratic and political, and utterly incompetently done. Yet somehow Chinese and Russian cyberwar programs are pretty effective. Sounds like the US needs to catch up.
  - bediger4000 12y ago
    Yet somehow Chinese and Russian cyberwar programs are pretty effective. 1. That vaunted "effectiveness" may be Just Another Missile Gap, i.e. a realistically non-existent threat used to drum up fear in the USA, to get greater funding from a terrorized public. 2. Lots of analysts say that both China and Russia tolerate unofficial hacking/cyberwar groups, as long as the targets are outside of China and Russia respectively. With some small amount of guidance done surreptitiously, the governments take advantage of a huge number of semi-criminals to serve "national security" needs without attribution. 3. Because of (2), ISO-9001, CMM level N don't apply. Faster coding. Similarly, Script Kiddies, Honkers and Nationalist Hackers don't do clearances, much less compartmentalized projects (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_clearance#Compartmented http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_clearance#Compartmente...) - this means that more people are available, from very diverse backgrounds, and they can collaborate and communicate as necessary. Unless the USA is willing to quit being bureaucratic to the point of paralysis, it will never catch up.
pdkl95 12y ago
> The FBI is a Domestic Detective agency The FBI changed their task to "national security" recently, and are now part of the "intelligence community" club. http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/fbis-main-mission-now-not-law-enforcement http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/fbis-main-mission-now-not...
snowwrestler 12y ago
It doesn't seem like a clear-cut line to me; aren't Internet communications "signals"? Isn't that why the NSA has taken the lead on Internet intelligence operations up to this point? So how will what the CIA is planning to do be qualitatively different from what the NSA is already doing? I agree with the parent; there is substantial overlap in capabilities and responsibilities among the agencies that do intelligence work for the U.S. government. These overlaps led directly to the mistaken Iraq invasion. DOD and CIA reported very different things about the Iraq WMD program, and the U.S. leadership could choose which one they wanted to believe. Cheney and Rumsfeld convinced Bush to listen to DOD, and we all know how that worked out.

wahsd 12y ago

It's partially intentional and partially a holdover from Cold War strategies. Our own military and government barely know what the hell is going on within its own circles, there is absolutely no chance someone will be able to make sense of what is important and relevant. It's essentially a strategy of overwhelming with force and noise signal. As the economic and global power we had been over the American Century we were able to play fast and loose and wild, whether our strategy will still work in this new century is a different story though. It may very well still work, it may very well lead to our demise. The only thing going for us is that there does not seem to be any alternative power and authority that is any less shitty than ours; whether that is due to natural factors of by CIA sabotage is a different story. Are we really all going to support China's or Russia's supplanting of American power in the world? It's not a good choice, but as horrible as we are, I'll go with the less bad over the worst any time.

higherpurpose 12y ago

I'm guessing that's exactly what it is. I think some of the Snowden leaks showed NSA already has a bigger budget than CIA and is also growing that budget at a much faster rate. Their budgets probably increase by $10 million for every "cyber" word they say in their presentations to Congress. The CIA wants in on that action.

drzaiusapelord 12y ago
It also might make sense that the NSA is a corrupt juggernaut and expecting them to do your heavy lifting isn't appropriate, especially when its clear that Clapper runs a security theater-like organization. The CIA and other agencies having its own smaller team probably means better outcomes. This kind of thing probably works best with smaller and more nimble teams than big data gathering focused organizations like the NSA. From a budget perspective, this is good cause to cut from the NSA and give to the CIA.

task_queue 12y ago

The US has built a narrative to justify their surveillance apparatus after getting caught with their pants down spying on the American people and the world. It's an extension of the national security narrative. Agencies recognize the massive amount of funding and legislature on the horizon and want to see it diverted to them like it was to the DHS in the last decade.