• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

All your encryptions belong to the NSA

Deacon923

Scooter Banks
Joined
Mar 28, 2011
Messages
11,136
Reaction score
1,052
Location
Greensboro, NC
If you haven't read this NY Times article yet, you really should.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/us/nsa-foils-much-internet-encryption.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

"The 2013 N.S.A. budget request highlights “partnerships with major telecommunications carriers to shape the global network to benefit other collection accesses” — that is, to allow more eavesdropping.

At Microsoft, as The Guardian has reported, the N.S.A. worked with company officials to get pre-encryption access to Microsoft’s most popular services, including Outlook e-mail, Skype Internet phone calls and chats, and SkyDrive, the company’s cloud storage service.

Microsoft asserted that it had merely complied with “lawful demands” of the government, and in some cases, the collaboration was clearly coerced. Some companies have been asked to hand the government the encryption keys to all customer communications, according to people familiar with the government’s requests.

N.S.A. documents show that the agency maintains an internal database of encryption keys for specific commercial products, called a Key Provisioning Service, which can automatically decode many messages. If the necessary key is not in the collection, a request goes to the separate Key Recovery Service, which tries to obtain it.

How keys are acquired is shrouded in secrecy, but independent cryptographers say many are probably collected by hacking into companies’ computer servers, where they are stored. To keep such methods secret, the N.S.A. shares decrypted messages with other agencies only if the keys could have been acquired through legal means. “Approval to release to non-Sigint agencies,” a GCHQ document says, “will depend on there being a proven non-Sigint method of acquiring keys.”
 
You wouldn't be encrypting stuff if you didn't have something to hide, and if you have something to hide we've got a problem. #NSAlogic
 
“the most transparent administration in history”?
Keep in mind, the documents released today only concern Section 215
The approximately 1,800 pages of court documents released Tuesday were disclosed in connection with a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit brought by the Electronic Frontier Foundation. The Obama administration long resisted calls to release the documents even in redacted form
National Security Agency personnel regularly searched call tracking data using thousands of numbers that had not been vetted in accordance with court-ordered procedures, according to previously secret legal filings and court opinions released by the Obama administration Tuesday.

The agency also falsely certified to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that analysts and technicians were complying with the court’s insistence that searches only be done with numbers that had a “reasonable, articulable suspicion” of terrorism, according to a senior intelligence official who briefed reporters prior to release of the documents .
An internal inquiry into the misstatements also found that no one at the NSA understood how the entire call-tracking program worked. “There was nobody at NSA who really had a full idea of how the program was operating at the time,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
The program — sometimes referred to as “business records FISA” or “Section 215” — collected information on the time, duration and numbers connected in virtually every call made to, from or within the United States. It did not authorize or involve listening to calls, which required a separate court order when involving people in the U.S. or U.S. residents overseas.

Despite the regular assurances offered to the court, NSA personnel were querying every day’s new batch of telephone company calling data using an “alert list” that at times included about 17,000 numbers, the documents show. Most of the numbers on that list — about 15,000 — had not been established to meet the “reasonable, articulable suspicion, officials said.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/nsa-broke-rules-call-tracking-96571.html
 
"no one at the NSA understood how the entire call-tracking program worked"

Let that sink in. And they want us to feel secure with their "robust" oversight.
 
The improper activity went on from May 2006 to January 2009, according to a scathing March 2009 opinion by Judge Reggie B. Walton, a judge on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
Walton said NSA’s explanation for its violation of the court order — that some NSA personnel thought the querying rules applied only to archived data — “strains credulity.” He also expressed consternation at NSA’s inaccurate description of the process it was using to query the database.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/declassified-court-documents-highlight-nsa-violations/2013/09/10/60b5822c-1a4b-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html?Post+generic=%3Ftid%3Dsm_twitter_washingtonpost
 
Walton issued his blistering opinion after discovering government officials had been accessing domestic phone records for nearly three years without "reasonable, articulate suspicion" that they were connected to terrorism. For instance, he noted that only 1,935 phone numbers out of 17,835 on a list investigators were working with in early 2009 met that standard.

Walton said the government's excuse that analysis believed his order applied only to archived phone records "strained credulity," and he ordered the National Security Agency to conduct an "end-to-end" review of its processes and policies while also ordering closer monitoring of its activities.

Later in 2009, a Justice Department lawyer reported to the spy court a "likely violation" of NSA surveillance rules. The lawyer said that in some cases, it appeared the NSA was distributing sensitive phone records by email to as many as 189 analysts, but only 53 were approved by the court to see them.

Walton wrote that he was "deeply troubled by the incidents," which he said occurred just weeks after the NSA had performed a major review of its internal practices because of the initial problems reported earlier in the year.

The judge said in November 2009 that on the same day that the NSA counterterrorism office reminded employees they were not allowed to indiscriminately share phone records with co-workers — and one day after a similar reminder from the agency's lawyers — an NSA analyst improperly shared information with colleagues who were not approved to see it.

Walton also noted that sometimes a U.S. phone number would be reassigned by phone companies, and in such cases the NSA would scrutinize the records of an innocent customer. Walton called such cases "a source of concern by the court." He noted that, months earlier, the court ordered the NSA to explain more fully how it chooses which phone numbers to search and to delete any information that was improperly collected.
Complexity has been a theme since the NSA leaks began this summer. Though Obama said Congress was briefed on the programs, members of Congress said they were surprised to learn how vast and intrusive the surveillance was. Even Rep. James Sensenbrenner, who sponsored the Patriot Act, said he never knew it would be used to sweep up phone records of every American.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=220923845
 
"The most transparent administration in history" but not by choice.

Thank you, Edward Snowden.
 
Did the USSR have an official Constitution? Because that had to be the one Pres. Obama was teaching back in the day.

Dude's never heard of a civil liberty.
 
One of the court documents has a note that mentions 2 employees conducted 280 illegal searches over a 40 day period, roughly during the last month of the Bush administration. No mention of who or what they were looking up.
 
But the latest allegations are worrying for three reasons. First, the NSA’s actions may have weakened overall internet security, on which billions of people rely for banking and payments, with backdoors that can be exploited by criminals, not just intelligence agencies. Second, this undermines confidence in American technology companies, none of which can now be trusted when they say their products are secure, and makes it very difficult for America to criticise authoritarian regimes for interfering with the internet, or to claim (as it does) that it is the best guardian of the internet’s addressing system. Third, the NSA seems to have done by stealth what it could not do openly. During the 1990s the agency unsuccessfully lobbied for backdoors to be added to all communications systems. Having lost the argument, it has apparently gone ahead and implemented them on the sly.
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21586345-covertly-weakening-security-entire-internet-make-snooping-easier-bad
 
One of the court documents has a note that mentions 2 employees conducted 280 illegal searches over a 40 day period, roughly during the last month of the Bush administration. No mention of who or what they were looking up.

The NSA has all our secrets, but who is watching the watchmen? They can't even secure themselves, keep guys like Snowden from going rogue, or prevent employees from running 280 illegal searches on God knows what. And today we find out that a guy with repeated misconduct while in the military and known psych issues got a "secret" clearance as a contractor with the Navy before he shot 12 people. http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/17/us/navy-yard-shooting-military-contractors/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

How anybody can have faith that the US government's legion of contractors can be trusted with all our personal communications data is beyond me.
 
Back
Top