Prism and Verizon surveillance discussion thread

[P3nT4gR4m]

Why are they even bothering to hold a review? Surely no one is dumb enough or complacent enough to accept the inevitable "eveything is on the up and up" verdict at face value...

... forget I said anything 

[Telarus]

Oh For Fuck's Sake. 

[Cain]

Why are they even bothering to hold a review? Surely no one is dumb enough or complacent enough to accept the inevitable "eveything is on the up and up" verdict at face value...

... forget I said anything 

Here's the frightening thing: it may convince the people in government themselves that there is nothing wrong.

[P3nT4gR4m]

Why are they even bothering to hold a review? Surely no one is dumb enough or complacent enough to accept the inevitable "eveything is on the up and up" verdict at face value...

... forget I said anything 

Here's the frightening thing: it may convince the people in government themselves that there is nothing wrong.

YOU CAN STOP TYPING STUFF ANYTIME YOU FEEL LIKE IT

[The Good Reverend Roger]

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/08/white-house-picks-panel-to-review-nsa-programs/

So, to recap, the independent panel includes:

James Clapper - Director of National Intelligence
Mike Morrell - former Deputy Director of the CIA
Richard Clarke - former chief advisor on Homeland Security
Peter Swire - former Obama special assistant for economic policy, and
Cass Sunstein - former collegue of Obama at Chicago Law school, who has argued for rethinking the First Amendment and advocated "cognitive infiltration" of what he sees as conspiracy theorist groups.

Well, I'm sure this wide group of independent thinkers with no ideological, professional or personal stakes at hand will come to an informed conclusion about the extent of NSA illegality.

Edit: added links

[Cain]

Richard Clarke has actually, occasionally, shown signs of independent thinking, to be fair to him.  Not much of a sense of humour, but he was willing to buck the party line on the 9/11 Commission and going to war with Iraq.

Still, he's totally outflanked.

[Junkenstein]

Richard Clarke has actually, occasionally, shown signs of independent thinking, to be fair to him.  Not much of a sense of humour, but he was willing to buck the party line on the 9/11 Commission and going to war with Iraq.

Still, he's totally outflanked.

Helps to add a veneer of respectability to it though. I'm guessing that they'll point at this guy much like Fox point at the token tame liberal. "It's fair and balanced because he's in the rooms so shut up."

I'm surprised they didn't just classify the members as secret entirely. I assume the majority of their "findings" will not be allowed to make into the public domain.

This "cognitive infiltration" sounds like all kinds of fucked up too.

They go on to propose that, "the best response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups",[29] where they suggest, among other tactics, "Government agents (and their allies) might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action."

I'm sure this could probably be turned in the other direction and used to create theories and situations. Examples spring to mind but I'm probably getting into crazy territory.

[Cain]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23803189

The Met Police issued a statement after Mr Miranda sought a High Court injunction to stop examination of the material "until the legality of that seizure has been determined".

It said: "We welcome the decision of the court which allows our examination of the material - containing thousands of classified intelligence documents - to continue in order to protect life and national security...

"Initial examination of material seized has identified highly sensitive material, the disclosure of which could put lives at risk. As a result the Counter Terrorism Command has today begun a criminal investigation."

Judges at the High Court ruled the authorities could examine the seized material for the defence of national security and also to investigate whether Mr Miranda is a person who is or has been concerned with the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism.

Later, the government's independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, David Anderson QC, announced he was carrying out an investigation into the detention of Mr Miranda.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23803189

The Met Police issued a statement after Mr Miranda sought a High Court injunction to stop examination of the material "until the legality of that seizure has been determined".

It said: "We welcome the decision of the court which allows our examination of the material - containing thousands of classified intelligence documents - to continue in order to protect life and national security...

"Initial examination of material seized has identified highly sensitive material, the disclosure of which could put lives at risk. As a result the Counter Terrorism Command has today begun a criminal investigation."

Judges at the High Court ruled the authorities could examine the seized material for the defence of national security and also to investigate whether Mr Miranda is a person who is or has been concerned with the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism.

Later, the government's independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, David Anderson QC, announced he was carrying out an investigation into the detention of Mr Miranda.

They're not even pretending anymore.   

It sort of sucks the fun out of it when they just start goose-stepping right in the open.

[Cain]

-

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Wow. Sigh.

Keep on fucking that chicken, NSA.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Damn.  Cain beat me to it.   

[Junkenstein]

Yet more HA HA:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23832492

Anti-terror laws should be strengthened to prevent leaks of official secrets, former Metropolitan Police Commissioner Lord Blair has told the BBC.

He was speaking after police seized what they said were thousands of classified documents from David Miranda - the partner of a Guardian journalist.

Lord Blair said publication of the material could put lives at risk.

He suggested new laws were needed to cover those who obtained secret material without proper authority.

"It just is something that is extremely dangerous for individual citizens to [make] those secrets available to the terrorists."

Lord Blair said the threat from international terrorism was "constantly changing" and there was a need to "review the law".

He said there was a "new threat which is not of somebody personally intending to aid terrorism, but of conduct which is likely to or capable of facilitating terrorism" - citing the examples of information leaks related to Bradley Manning and the Wikileaks website.

"Most of the legislation about state secrets is in the Official Secrets Act and it only concerns an official.

"I think there is going to have to be a look at what happens when somebody possesses material which is secret without having authority."

Last week, Home Secretary Theresa May defended the police's use of anti-terror laws to hold and question Mr Miranda,

She said it "was right" if police thought that Mr Miranda was holding information useful to terrorists.

Note how many times "Terrorist" is used. Note how many times "Whistleblower" is used. Note the increasing narrative that "Terrorist" means "Whistleblower" and vice-versa. The drive to make these things synonyms is quite impressive.

In essence, that's the proposal here. Not authorised to have secret material? Aiding the enemy. Go to jail.

This also allows the state to pretty much do what they want to you once they collar you. Hand over you phone and what's this? A digital copy of "X"? On your (electronic object you happen to be carrying)? That's a shame. Now start naming names.

[Pæs]

Hey TripZip,

Do we have any realistic estimates on or the ability to predict at all the lifespan of encrypted documents?

I'm seeing a number of people react with ENCRYPT ALL THE THINGS but I'm conscious that at some point in the future, there's going to be a breakthrough that unlocks all of those stored encrypted documents. Do we know whether that's a practical distance away for encryption to be useful?

[tyrannosaurus vex]

I think encryption has its place but it would be a mistake to rely on that alone. Courts can compel people to divulge encryption passwords, so it isn't like having an encrypted volume is any kind of legal protection by itself. One technological way to bolster the viability of encryption are features like TrueCrypt's "Hidden Volume," which is basically a second encrypted container inside a primary encrypted container. Forensically, it is impossible to determine whether such a hidden volume does or does not exist, even when the master container has been compromised. So if you're forced to give up the encryption password to the volume they can prove exists, you can still (theoretically) hide additional data without any way for anyone to know for sure that you're doing it.

But I still doubt that there is any encryption scheme that will prove unbreakable forever, and if it is theoretically possible to break an encryption scheme, you must assume that it has already been broken. You'll need other methods of content obfuscation and "plausible deniability" which will vary on what type of data you're trying to hide. For logistical communications it would help to develop something that combines encryption with communication that's inherently disguised as something else (think 'Follow the Drinking Gourd' and the Underground Railroad). Something that can convey important information without setting off any alarms that flag keywords or social network connections. Maybe Internet memes that can stand on their own as jokes but carry additional meaning for people who are looking for it.

ETA: Religions disguised as jokes might be handy here.