I don't understand why everyone thinks it's terrible if a government surveils its own citizens but it's totally a-ok if it does foreigners. Because if you think about the reflexivity of it all, that means that it's a-ok if China surveils all American citizens and America all Chinese citizens. The only way that makes sense is if you think one government (America or China, depending on who you are) is privileged to violate the privacy rights of citizens of the other.
I would hope that Hacker News would be more cosmopolitan. So much of our work, especially, involves interacting with foreigners. If our government thinks that their communications with us deserve no protections because they're some suspicious other, and their government thinks that our communications with them deserve no protections because we're some suspicious other... then no one ends up with anything.
ETA: And when you think about it, that principle creates a giant loophole: country X surveils country Y's populace, country Y surveils country X's populace, and they have a mutual agreement to share data about each other's dissidents. Just goes to show that if you undermine a universal right for even one person, that right disappears.
All nationalists have the power of not seeing resemblances between similar sets of facts. A British Tory will defend self-determination in Europe and oppose it in India with no feeling of inconsistency. Actions are held to be good or bad, not on their own merits, but according to who does them, and there is almost no kind of outrage — torture, the use of hostages, forced labour, mass deportations, imprisonment without trial, forgery, assassination, the bombing of civilians — which does not change its moral colour when it is committed by 'our' side.
The reason people consider it different is that they realise the world is a complex place with complex actors. In an ideal world, no country would spy on another. But they do. How could we stop China from doing so? We can't. So we spy back.
However, what our democratically elected government does to us is very much within our own power to change, and we have the ability to hold them to account.
What you describe in your edit has been happening between the US and UK for decades.
They spy on each other (using the more permissive "foreigner" spying privileges) and then share the data.
Well, I say no to all mass slurping of data, foreign or domestic, but yes to targeted spying with the full weight of government and technology, foreign or domestic.
The problem is not spying, the problem the industrialised mass spying of literally everybody as though we are all the target.
I'm happy for any of us to be targeted as long as there is good reason to do so.
However the problem with public opinion is that a lot of it is either patriotic or of fear, rational or irrational. This is where we get those double standards, which are understandable, but should be resisted, even plain ignored. I say that we are all human beings first and foremost, citizens of arbitrary borders and religions second, right?
> I don't understand why everyone thinks it's terrible if a government surveils its own citizens but it's totally a-ok if it does foreigners.
I think a lot of people are in the "right is might" way of thinking. Consider this quote from the Peloponnisian War.
"...since you know as well as we do that right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must."
Your point from the edit is the most important point. I actually disagree with your views (that countries should not spy on a potential enemy's citizens), but I agree that the collusion of friendlies can have a catastrophic result for individual liberties. That needs to be clarified to be unlawful, if it is not intrinsically so due to the nature of the constitution of wherever you are living.
If China wants the US to stop spying on its citizens, it can negotiate, throw up technological barriers, or declare war. Vice versa.
We need a privacy equivalent of mutually assured destruction. All politicians submit documentation of their most hideous perversions to a central register. If the country is caught spying on another the information is released. It would also encourage people who are not bad to go into politics.
Supposedly it's about ability to punish. If someone can spy on you but can't do something horrendous to you and get away with it, then it's harm is far less. Loopholes such as you describe would be the same, since it still will be indirect surveillance.
Snowden's choice of Hong Kong as a hiding spot becomes more and more interesting. I suspect the timing of this particular revelation is timed deliberately just after the US files charges against him seeking his arrest by Hong Kong authorities.
A recent article suggested that China was already inclined to "solve" this problem (from a diplomatic and political standpoint) by doing what it does best: simply dragging its feet. This seems incredibly easy to do when the Hong Kong legal system is inclined to move slowly anyway, any extradition will go through a number of appeals and the process for applying for asylum is being revamped putting all such cases on hold (not that Snowden has applied for asylum yet).
It is an somewhere between widely suspected and an open secret that China engages in concerted intelligence efforts against the US government and US corporations. Many cyberattacks originate in China (and there is strong evidence that at least some are state-sponsored). And China is widely believed to have stolen nuclear secrets [1].
But this revelation goes the other way. I really can't predict how China will take this. I suspect they'll be more disinclined to hand Snowden over (or at least do it in any kind of timely fashion). To paraphrase Ned Flanders "We've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas!"
Who knew in 2008 that during the Obama administration it may get to the point of people wishing for the good ol' days of George W. Bush? Well maybe not that far but it's really not that far off. The war for intellectual property, Federal prosecutorial overreach (eg the Y12 "terrorists", Aaron Swartz), the relentless pursuit of whistleblowers and the end-run around the Fourth Amendment are simply stunning, particularly from an allegedly Democratic administration.
>Who knew in 2008 that during the Obama administration it may get to the point of people wishing for the good ol' days of George W. Bush?
I only wish that Snowden would have been in a position to leak this stuff about a week before Obama was reelected. At least then voters would have been able to make an informed decision. Romney may have been equally as evil as Obama in terms of surveillance ambitions and disregard for the constitution, but the difference is that part of Obama's election pitch was that he was going to get rid of these types of programs, while Romney never said anything of the sort. I don't like the fact that a man who clearly lied about his fundamental political views just to get elected is sitting in the Oval Office right now. Bush, and all Presidents before him, may have lied about many things, but at least you knew where most of them stood politically.
"Who knew in 2008 that during the Obama administration it may get to the point of people wishing for the good ol' days of George W. Bush?"
C'mon man, why does everything have to be partisan? Can't you just admit that both of your major parties are douches and do something about it, instead of arguing about who's worse? It ends up hijacking the entire thread.
The whole republican v.s. democrat thing is just a tired facade... Kind of obvious by now isn't it?
Wait, do you really think that the USG only started hacking Chinese communications, or collecting intel on foreign governments and countries, on or after Jan 20, 2009?
>But this revelation goes the other way. I really can't predict how China will take this.
Super pissed and not at all inclined to play ball with the US. They probably knew/suspected anyway, but this just plays into their hand so they won't let such minor details interfere.
I sure hope China refuses to hand him over. The US intelligence has overplay its hand & they could do with a trashing or two.
That's not what this is saying. China hacks US and other foreign corporations for specific and exclusive economic gains. They steal intellectual property and pass that IP onto Chinese competing companies.
The US hacking into China is state run spycraft. Maybe it's not good, but it's not "the other way", because that implies the US government is taking intellectual property from Chinese companies and passing it on to US companies. There is NO evidence that such a thing is happening at a scale anywhere approaching Chinese activities.
Not saying China is innocent, but this is why stuff like this needs to be transparent and the public needs to know about it, and if the government isn't willing to make it public, then whistleblowers like Manning and Snowden need to make the public aware of it, no matter what "laws" they have to break to do it. But then it's the public's responsibility to protect them against the government, for doing them that service.
Because you have no idea what the government is doing in your name, and what kind of conflicts they are creating, and then "all of the sudden" you end up with another war on your hands, and the US government propaganda machine tells you it's their fault and they are the aggressor against US, when in fact it could be the opposite, and the attack may simply be retaliation for USA's own actions.
I agree. Even if this sort of thing happens behind the scenes, there are repercussions that will come back to affect people and businesses, even those without direct ties to China.
As someone who, five years ago, tried to get commercial bulk SMS connectivity out of these same main Chinese mobile carriers (China Mobile and China Unicom), and watched them largely quash spammy SMS broadcasting with automatic SMSC service suspension after a certain threshold outbound rate, this is interesting. The guys I talked to inside of these carriers led me to believe their SMSCs were just a Linux box.
Also, SMSCs appear to be provincial entities rather than national ones, so these compromises are likely only in a subset of cities. (Further evidenced online, eg. http://www.smsclist.com/downloads/default.txt)
Note also that this article is poorly concluded: US President Barack Obama says the NSA is not listening in on phone calls or reading emails unless legal requirements have been satisfied. That's apparently only for US citizens inside the US, IIRC.
And the NSA's explicit mission is the surveillance of foreign powers to the benefit of the US.
This is where Snowden is sinking his message because literally nothing they do in this arena is illegal in the US, and confirming it or giving out details definitely is undermining US interests by the trust placed in him by the NSA to start with.
This story was published in HK only 5 minutes before this posting onto HN, by the only other journalist in direct contact with Snowden himself - Lana Lam.
SCMP is a top HK newspaper, and along with the Guardian, the primary publishing source for direct news from Snowden himself.
The only mention of SCMP being a "top newspaper" that I could find is in reference to it being the most profitable newspaper (per reader) in the world.
However, according to Wikipedia, its independence from the Chinese government influence is suspect.
If your evidence is weak, I think it's better to leak a potentially controversial allegation well in advance of the evidence. Maybe it's conjecture from a bullet point in a PowerPoint slide?
This is all a bit reminiscent of Frederick Forsyth's "Fourth Protocol". A few words about the plot: the book is set in the early years of Margaret Thatcher's tenure as Prime Minister, in the time of the Reagan Rearmament. Elements in the Politburo devise a secret plan to explode an atomic bomb near RAF Bentwaters, blame this on a malfunction of American nuclear ordnance and cause a leftist government to be elected and Britain to fall into the USSR's sphere of influence. This plan was to be kept secret even from the KGB.
Both MI5 and KGB get wind of this, and they work in concert to stop it while they remain enemies, because either side feels that if it succeeded they would open Pandora's box and have no institutional knowledge to deal with this new world.
It is my sincere hope that the world's intelligence agencies have the institutional knowledge to deal with the widespread knowledge on spying on its own citizens.
The great firewall of China is seeming less totalitarian and more pragmatic. The US at least has to hack to get chinese SMS messages; allowing its users visit Facebook/Gmail/etc is like giving data away.
Excuse me if I am a little dubious of the South China Morning Post. According to the article, he gave them an exclusive interview 10 days ago that they are finally publishing now. Interesting that Snowden chose to completely ignore his contacts at the Guardian etc. for this.
Are there any other sources to back this up? Or evidence?
[+] [-] scarmig|12 years ago|reply
I would hope that Hacker News would be more cosmopolitan. So much of our work, especially, involves interacting with foreigners. If our government thinks that their communications with us deserve no protections because they're some suspicious other, and their government thinks that our communications with them deserve no protections because we're some suspicious other... then no one ends up with anything.
ETA: And when you think about it, that principle creates a giant loophole: country X surveils country Y's populace, country Y surveils country X's populace, and they have a mutual agreement to share data about each other's dissidents. Just goes to show that if you undermine a universal right for even one person, that right disappears.
[+] [-] PavlovsCat|12 years ago|reply
-- George Orwell ( http://orwell.ru/library/essays/nationalism/english/e_nat )
[+] [-] untog|12 years ago|reply
However, what our democratically elected government does to us is very much within our own power to change, and we have the ability to hold them to account.
[+] [-] macspoofing|12 years ago|reply
What did you think the CIA and NSA was for?
Are we now going to have a debate about whether militaries and intelligence services need to exist?
[+] [-] psutor|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] alan_cx|12 years ago|reply
The problem is not spying, the problem the industrialised mass spying of literally everybody as though we are all the target.
I'm happy for any of us to be targeted as long as there is good reason to do so.
However the problem with public opinion is that a lot of it is either patriotic or of fear, rational or irrational. This is where we get those double standards, which are understandable, but should be resisted, even plain ignored. I say that we are all human beings first and foremost, citizens of arbitrary borders and religions second, right?
[+] [-] sown|12 years ago|reply
I think a lot of people are in the "right is might" way of thinking. Consider this quote from the Peloponnisian War.
"...since you know as well as we do that right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must."
--The Athenians to the Melosians
[+] [-] carbocation|12 years ago|reply
If China wants the US to stop spying on its citizens, it can negotiate, throw up technological barriers, or declare war. Vice versa.
[+] [-] pmorici|12 years ago|reply
Because a foreign government doesn't have much if any power over a citizen of a foreign country?
[+] [-] 7952|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mahyarm|12 years ago|reply
Of course in practice it's not.
[+] [-] cletus|12 years ago|reply
A recent article suggested that China was already inclined to "solve" this problem (from a diplomatic and political standpoint) by doing what it does best: simply dragging its feet. This seems incredibly easy to do when the Hong Kong legal system is inclined to move slowly anyway, any extradition will go through a number of appeals and the process for applying for asylum is being revamped putting all such cases on hold (not that Snowden has applied for asylum yet).
It is an somewhere between widely suspected and an open secret that China engages in concerted intelligence efforts against the US government and US corporations. Many cyberattacks originate in China (and there is strong evidence that at least some are state-sponsored). And China is widely believed to have stolen nuclear secrets [1].
But this revelation goes the other way. I really can't predict how China will take this. I suspect they'll be more disinclined to hand Snowden over (or at least do it in any kind of timely fashion). To paraphrase Ned Flanders "We've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas!"
Who knew in 2008 that during the Obama administration it may get to the point of people wishing for the good ol' days of George W. Bush? Well maybe not that far but it's really not that far off. The war for intellectual property, Federal prosecutorial overreach (eg the Y12 "terrorists", Aaron Swartz), the relentless pursuit of whistleblowers and the end-run around the Fourth Amendment are simply stunning, particularly from an allegedly Democratic administration.
[1]: http://www.nytimes.com/1999/03/06/world/breach-los-alamos-sp...
[+] [-] downandout|12 years ago|reply
I only wish that Snowden would have been in a position to leak this stuff about a week before Obama was reelected. At least then voters would have been able to make an informed decision. Romney may have been equally as evil as Obama in terms of surveillance ambitions and disregard for the constitution, but the difference is that part of Obama's election pitch was that he was going to get rid of these types of programs, while Romney never said anything of the sort. I don't like the fact that a man who clearly lied about his fundamental political views just to get elected is sitting in the Oval Office right now. Bush, and all Presidents before him, may have lied about many things, but at least you knew where most of them stood politically.
[+] [-] rapind|12 years ago|reply
C'mon man, why does everything have to be partisan? Can't you just admit that both of your major parties are douches and do something about it, instead of arguing about who's worse? It ends up hijacking the entire thread.
The whole republican v.s. democrat thing is just a tired facade... Kind of obvious by now isn't it?
[+] [-] brown9-2|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Havoc|12 years ago|reply
Super pissed and not at all inclined to play ball with the US. They probably knew/suspected anyway, but this just plays into their hand so they won't let such minor details interfere.
I sure hope China refuses to hand him over. The US intelligence has overplay its hand & they could do with a trashing or two.
[+] [-] diminoten|12 years ago|reply
That's not what this is saying. China hacks US and other foreign corporations for specific and exclusive economic gains. They steal intellectual property and pass that IP onto Chinese competing companies.
The US hacking into China is state run spycraft. Maybe it's not good, but it's not "the other way", because that implies the US government is taking intellectual property from Chinese companies and passing it on to US companies. There is NO evidence that such a thing is happening at a scale anywhere approaching Chinese activities.
[+] [-] SmokyBorbon|12 years ago|reply
Republicans.
[+] [-] mtgx|12 years ago|reply
Because you have no idea what the government is doing in your name, and what kind of conflicts they are creating, and then "all of the sudden" you end up with another war on your hands, and the US government propaganda machine tells you it's their fault and they are the aggressor against US, when in fact it could be the opposite, and the attack may simply be retaliation for USA's own actions.
[+] [-] CatMtKing|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] contingencies|12 years ago|reply
Also, SMSCs appear to be provincial entities rather than national ones, so these compromises are likely only in a subset of cities. (Further evidenced online, eg. http://www.smsclist.com/downloads/default.txt)
Note also that this article is poorly concluded: US President Barack Obama says the NSA is not listening in on phone calls or reading emails unless legal requirements have been satisfied. That's apparently only for US citizens inside the US, IIRC.
[+] [-] XorNot|12 years ago|reply
This is where Snowden is sinking his message because literally nothing they do in this arena is illegal in the US, and confirming it or giving out details definitely is undermining US interests by the trust placed in him by the NSA to start with.
[+] [-] teawithcarl|12 years ago|reply
SCMP is a top HK newspaper, and along with the Guardian, the primary publishing source for direct news from Snowden himself.
[+] [-] ryanhuff|12 years ago|reply
However, according to Wikipedia, its independence from the Chinese government influence is suspect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_China_Morning_Post#Editor...
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] skwirl|12 years ago|reply
Well... where is it?
[+] [-] mortehu|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] marcamillion|12 years ago|reply
All he is doing is muddying the waters.
How can I claim to defend what he has done, if he is giving sensitive intelligence data to the CHINESE!!!!
He shouldn't muddy the waters. Just keep it focused on how the USGov't is taking away US civil liberties and privacy.
I mean...I understand why he is doing this - self preservation - but now he is looking more like a "spy" than a "whistleblower".
[+] [-] Aloisius|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] HarryHirsch|12 years ago|reply
Both MI5 and KGB get wind of this, and they work in concert to stop it while they remain enemies, because either side feels that if it succeeded they would open Pandora's box and have no institutional knowledge to deal with this new world.
It is my sincere hope that the world's intelligence agencies have the institutional knowledge to deal with the widespread knowledge on spying on its own citizens.
[+] [-] johnrob|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] untog|12 years ago|reply
Are there any other sources to back this up? Or evidence?
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] thezach|12 years ago|reply
Seriously, countries spy on countries and China sure is not innocent in hacking foreign countries.
[+] [-] microb|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] general_failure|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bayesianhorse|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] babesh|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] jusben1369|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] trumpcard|12 years ago|reply