Personally, the skeptic in me believes if the NSA is losing interest in a major data collection program like this, then they are deflecting the narrative from focusing on an even more impressive and accurate data collection program that they have developed and are ready to deploy out into the world. I’m putting on my tinfoil hat at this point, but every day I read HN I’m surprised at what is capable, given the right technology, money, and time.
I think it's more likely that most everyone the NSA would be interested in snooping on is aware they're snooping and has changed how they communicate and moved to encryption.
The signal to noise ratio has to be completely ridiculous, to the point that it's no longer a justifiable effort.
This damned-if-they-do sentiment risks dismissing positive policy moves. If this headline read "NSA is expanding surveillance programs" people would be up in arms over the privacy implications. Instead they announce that they believe it should be dismantled and the response is... the same?
I understand the hesitation. Outright dismissing positive change feels like a counter-productive stance to adopt.
In the absence of public pressure, i can't see why a government agency would give up any power at all like this. Maybe so they can say "see, look how much better than China we are?" is one reason i can think of. I would imagine if they give something up, they have something equivalent or better to replace it. I don't trust them one bit, i hate them.
I am not sure, how many lies have been spotted? NSA typically lies by omission but so far, every secret surveillance program they have had was totally expected to anyone who read the laws that enabled them.
I often say that the only revelation Snowden gave us was the name of the different programs, but a lot of what was there was already guessable from the Patriot Act
I wonder if recruitment was also a factor in making this decision. Recently they released ghidra which they admitted was mainly for recruitment purposes.
If it's because of this, then it makes sense it's not worth it. Collecting massive amounts of (mostly useless) data versus attracting talented people. I know it's not a black or white situation and they can still attract talented people, but if there's a negative perception of the NSA then the pool of people will be a lot less.
The rumor is that recruitment absolutely was affected after Snowden. More damage done to our country by him.
I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that he did put the full cache of files online before fleeing, to be able to sell them to Russia. He certainly had the capability to do so. Also, I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that he was involved with Vault 7 somehow; it’s another conspiracy theory floating around.
In other words, the NSA found a better way of snooping. If they are asking to drop phone surveillance, then they found a superior method of data collection.
The only conclusion is that the NSA simply cannot be trusted in the future. I'm sure our illogical lawmakers will not draw it, but this is clearly another case of being told this program was crucial and people's rights needed to be trampled on that was simply untrue. The NSA just wanted the power for powers sake. Lawmakers should stop giving this agency what it asks for as it clearly has no bounds or idea of what it's doing with the incredible power it has.
Not necessarily; it may have been a very important source that has dried up or has been superseded by alternatives.
The phone program was launched prior to the iPhone and Facebook (even though we only found out about it after both). It may well have been very important up to at least 2012 (6 years into Facebook, 3 into the iPhone/ android boom) when we learned about the program and the NSA defended it.
Since the revelation seven years ago, it could well be that targets of the NSA are no longer using communication channels where phone metadata is useful.
From a purely technical perspective, the bespoke equipment needed to buffer and search through the traffic flow of a single 100Gbps transatlantic DWDM circuit (of which there might be 40 or 80 possible circuits in a single cable, from Porthcurnow to NY/NJ) would be incredibly complicated and costly. Just the amount of RAM you would need is nuts.
Or to do the same as a passive intercept on a 100Gbps PNI between two ISPs at Telehouse Docklands.
All they really need is metadata, IP-addresses, then they can use network theory to build graphs that shows who is communicating with who. If you for example visit a "terrorist" web site you are now linked to everyone else who also visited that site. Using network mesh graphs they can discover new "terrorist" cells. They can even figure out who the leader of this "terrorist" cell is and effectively destroy the cell. I can imagine they are also tracking location data to see who meets physically.
Are the budgets for these programs public knowledge? How much money have we (taxpayers) spent (or wasted?) on these "tools"? And for historians, will we ever get to see the source code and details of how they worked (other than powerpoint documents leaked by Snowden..)?
We can't trust what they say but either way, most phone traffic is probably VOIP nowadays (not traditional phone, so that program is probably obsolete?)...
We changed the URL from https://www.wsj.com/articles/nsa-recommends-dropping-phone-s... because WSJ seems no longer to have a paywall workaround. If someone can suggest a better URL, we can change it again. I just did a Google and picked the first link I found that wasn't illegibly crammed with ads.
I guess what I'm saying is that HN should not penalize the company doing the journalism. People can buy a subscription, those that won't still have a technical solution, and for the rest they can google like you did and find an article to read among the blogspam.
I wonder if they realized this back when they lied to congress and tried to take credit for FBI work when they couldn't come up with "a single instance in which analysis of the NSA’s bulk collection metadata collection actually stopped an imminent attack, or otherwise aided the Government in achieving any objective that was time-sensitive in nature". It's always interesting when something crazy is going on and you would think the NSA would have relevant information to help, but they don't.
I suppose six years is enough time to save some face from the 2013 fiasco?
The intelligence agencies used to try to find out a persons skills and experience. Now they jest check their LinkedIn profile. They used to try to find who their friends and associates were. Now they check their Facebook friends. They used to try to figure out where the person travels on their day to day routine. Now they can check your Google Maps location history. Instead of going through great expenses to try to do surveillance on individual phones, they should just focus on how to get that data from these American companies that already have them.
For the life of me, I cannot figure out why this comment by "holyend" is being silently ghosted (censored) / flagged. Can a moderator explain the reasoning for it being flagged? Are curse words disallowed?
Surprise: The NSA was lying. Not only in the details of what they were saying but also in taking what looked like a most definitive stance on a topic they couldn't know enough about.
[+] [-] ddelt|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fooey|7 years ago|reply
The signal to noise ratio has to be completely ridiculous, to the point that it's no longer a justifiable effort.
[+] [-] nestorD|7 years ago|reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)
[+] [-] DarkCrusader2|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] devoply|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pdimitar|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] liquidise|7 years ago|reply
I understand the hesitation. Outright dismissing positive change feels like a counter-productive stance to adopt.
[+] [-] mrobot|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Iv|7 years ago|reply
I often say that the only revelation Snowden gave us was the name of the different programs, but a lot of what was there was already guessable from the Patriot Act
[+] [-] nocturnial|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] holyend|7 years ago|reply
I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that he did put the full cache of files online before fleeing, to be able to sell them to Russia. He certainly had the capability to do so. Also, I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that he was involved with Vault 7 somehow; it’s another conspiracy theory floating around.
Unclear why this is being downvoted.
[+] [-] basetop|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] killjoywashere|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nocturnial|7 years ago|reply
This sounds more like a public relations move instead of a technically inspired one.
[+] [-] mr_overalls|7 years ago|reply
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/11/even-bu...
https://now.northropgrumman.com/mems-and-smart-dust-the-big-...
[+] [-] 908087|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mnm1|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] archgoon|7 years ago|reply
The phone program was launched prior to the iPhone and Facebook (even though we only found out about it after both). It may well have been very important up to at least 2012 (6 years into Facebook, 3 into the iPhone/ android boom) when we learned about the program and the NSA defended it.
Since the revelation seven years ago, it could well be that targets of the NSA are no longer using communication channels where phone metadata is useful.
[+] [-] ma2rten|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] clubm8|7 years ago|reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tempora
And Utah:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Data_Center#Purpose
[+] [-] walrus01|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] walrus01|7 years ago|reply
Or to do the same as a passive intercept on a 100Gbps PNI between two ISPs at Telehouse Docklands.
[+] [-] z3t4|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] danboarder|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tlrobinson|7 years ago|reply
It looks like the NSA got about $11B of the "Black Budget" in 2013 https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/national/black... It's further broken down on that page.
[+] [-] OrgNet|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dang|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mzs|7 years ago|reply
https://m.facebook.com/flx/warn/?u=https://www.wsj.com/artic...
I guess what I'm saying is that HN should not penalize the company doing the journalism. People can buy a subscription, those that won't still have a technical solution, and for the rest they can google like you did and find an article to read among the blogspam.
[+] [-] maxheadroom|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Rapzid|7 years ago|reply
I suppose six years is enough time to save some face from the 2013 fiasco?
[+] [-] RcouF1uZ4gsC|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] maxheadroom|7 years ago|reply
...but they were already in their bases, killing their doodz[0], yeah? Why would they focus on something they already had on-hand?
[0] - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants...
[+] [-] kerng|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thestartup|7 years ago|reply
https://ibb.co/f9gVV3Q
I'm assuming this comment will also be ghosted/flagged; if so, requesting a reason please.
[+] [-] jgalt212|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|7 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] tempodox|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] metters|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] deytempo|7 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tracker1|7 years ago|reply