Skip to main content

From Spencer Ackerman at the Guardian, late on Tuesday…

NSA review panel casts doubt on bulk data collection claims
Spencer Ackerman
Guardian
January 14th, 2014

…Michael Morell, a former deputy CIA director, told the [Senate Judiciary] committee that so-called “metadata” about a phone conversation inherently entailed information about the substance of the communication. “There is quite a bit of content in metadata,” Morrell said. “There’s not a sharp distinction between metadata and content...”
...

...Morrell added that the bulk collection of domestic phone data “has not played a significant role in preventing any terrorist attacks to this point,” further undercutting a major rationale offered by the NSA since the Guardian first revealed the bulk phone-data collection in June, thanks to leaks by Edward Snowden…

(Bold type is diarist's emphasis.)

Here’s Marcy Wheeler’s take…

Radical Idea: the Legislature Ends Smith v. Maryland
Posted on January 14, 2014 by emptywheel

The Senate Judiciary Committee hearing with the NSA Review Group just finished. There was no earth-shattering news. Perhaps the best one-liner from the hearing came when former CIA Deputy Director Mike Morell said that metadata is content (and I’m grateful he said it early in the hearing so it will make the evening news). Bizarrely, he claimed he just learned that while working on this report which is rather … unconvincing.

At the very end of the hearing, however, Senator Richard Blumenthal said something equally as important, which went something like,

Smith v. Maryland is about as outdated as any Supreme Court [sic] can be. Congress has an equal responsibility to protect the Constitution as the Supreme Court. There is no need to wait for the Supreme Court.
It’s a great idea, for the legislature to end Smith v. Maryland’s encroachment on the Constitution, and he’s right, Congress does have the authority to act.
(Bold type is diarist's emphasis.)

#            #            #

Elsewhere, on the front page of Wednesday’s NY Times, we’re now learning that the NSA has pretty much tapped most of the fiber optic cables on the planet. You know? Those telecom lines via which most Internet, cellular and landline (once the telcos have converted copper cable data to fiber optic cable data at most switching stations) “metadata” is transmitted.

Not only that, but for quite a few years, we’re now being informed that the NSA has been able to pickup data via radio transmissions from computers that do not even have links to the Internet, nor any other networks for that matter…

N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers
By DAVID E. SANGER and THOM SHANKER
New York Times
January 15th, 2014 (Page A1)

WASHINGTON — The National Security Agency has implanted software in nearly 100,000 computers around the world that allows the United States to conduct surveillance on those machines and can also create a digital highway for launching cyberattacks.

While most of the software is inserted by gaining access to computer networks, the N.S.A. has increasingly made use of a secret technology that enables it to enter and alter data in computers even if they are not connected to the Internet, according to N.S.A. documents, computer experts and American officials.

The technology, which the agency has used since at least 2008, relies on a covert channel of radio waves that can be transmitted from tiny circuit boards and USB cards inserted surreptitiously into the computers. In some cases, they are sent to a briefcase-size relay station that intelligence agencies can set up miles away from the target.

The radio frequency technology has helped solve one of the biggest problems facing American intelligence agencies for years: getting into computers that adversaries, and some American partners, have tried to make impervious to spying or cyberattack. In most cases, the radio frequency hardware must be physically inserted by a spy, a manufacturer or an unwitting user…

Unless I missed the story in my quick perusal of Wednesday’s NYT, online (or, the story had not appeared online as of the time of my publishing of this post), it must’ve been just an oversight on the part of the editorial staff of the paper, in terms of how they missed the “little” story reported by the Guardian and Marcy Wheeler, above. (Either that, or the Times' Washington Bureau just took the day off.) You know? The story where it’s now confirmed (for the umpteenth time, but in this instance by a former/recent top CIA employee) that our government’s been lying through their teeth inasmuch as their use and definition of the term, “metadata,” is concerned.

Funny how that works.


#            #            #
EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Infiltrating computers disconnected... (45+ / 0-)

    ...from the internet.

    Apparently nothing is safe from the reach of a determined, OUT OF CONTROL spy agency.

    Jesus.

    What next?

    Are we gonna discover those fillings we got at the dentist office last week actually contain embedded nanocircuitry that sends out a GPS signal or some shit?

    Nothing would surprise me at this point.

    ........

    Thanks for the diary, Bob.




    Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ J. Garcia

    by DeadHead on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 01:08:46 AM PST

  •  Tin Foil hats... (11+ / 0-)

    are not so crazy after all.

    They're what the NSA uses to shield their Quantum computers (any kitty that's been in a box since 1935 is pretty surely dead Jim, Dead Jim, DEAD!)

  •  At this point, we not only need a commission... (28+ / 0-)

    to rein in the NSA's surveillance activities, we also need a full investigation into the mindset of the people behind them.

    We need to know what the end game is. We already know it's not fighting terrorism.

    I want them to tell us.

    'Cuz freedom can't protect itself ~~ EFF ~ EPIC ~ ACLU

    by markthshark on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 02:43:09 AM PST

  •  okay, okay, okay (18+ / 0-)

    it's content, too. but not personal content. nothing anyone would consider private. except for terrists. but not anyone else. because they just wouldn't do that. now eat your vegetables and respect your betters.

    The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

    by Laurence Lewis on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 02:51:00 AM PST

  •  Bobswern (17+ / 0-)

    I haven't had time to write about this so I am glad you are. One important aspect of the capability to attack machines that are off the grid so to speak, relates to the Stuxnet attacks on Iran and the now seemingly 'rogue' attacks on Russian reactors. These people are trying to get us into WW3 and trying to get out astronauts killed at the same time:

    http://www.wnd.com/...

    Russian nuclear power plant was reportedly “badly infected” by the rogue Stuxnet virus, the same malware that reportedly disrupted Iran’s nuclear program several years ago. The virus then spread to the International Space Station via a Stuxnet-infected USB stick transported by Russian cosmonauts.

    ...
    According to the head of one of the world’s largest vendors of IT security products, the fact that the Russian facility wasn’t connected to the Internet didn’t stop the infection.

    "These are established professionals that have a liberal bent, but ultimately most of them if pushed will choose professional preservation over cause, such is the mentality of most business professionals" -BoA/HBGary/CoC

    by LieparDestin on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 03:16:53 AM PST

    •  That's more the Russians fault.... RULE #1 ... (4+ / 0-)

      For any computer system in such a situation is... no connection to any network and NO EXTERNAL CONNECTORS OF ANY KIND... and operate it inside a Faraday Cage.

      Allowing your idiot employees to plug USB anythings into critical computers is INSANE.

      Note to NASA ... you had better rethink how your system is setup on the ISS and other equipment. Smart guys are always the dumbest.

  •  And then there's the FBI's agenda: (21+ / 0-)

    http://www.greenisthenewred.com/...

    I'm sure they're having a great time with all this "metadata."

    "If you sing a song a day, you will make a better way" -- Earth, Wind, and Fire

    by Cassiodorus on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 03:33:00 AM PST

    •  great reminder-eco terrorism was on agenda on 9/11 (13+ / 0-)

      the day of the 9/11 attacks the legislative branch had scheduled hearings on eco terrorism

      they didn't have to be held because of the incident at the twin towers

      but as this post reveals, the FBI has been in hot pursuit of eco terrorists for years and they continue

      that means us, guys, those of us who would protest an oil pipeline or a corrupt bank, or even post here on dailykos

      can predict more stories to come out about the link between  FBI, DEA, CIA and NSA, etc. in their infrastructure to squash "anarchy"

      Now this will get me in big trouble, bringing up the long term enemy of the state

      "On Anarchism"

      Noam Chomsky

      About the Program on CSPAN

      Noam Chomsky, professor emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, examines the political ideology of anarchism; from its history and early proponents to the author's thoughts on its current usage and practicality.  Noam Chomsky speaks at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

      link to video on right side of page

      http://www.booktv.org/...

  •  This was known early on... (16+ / 0-)

    From your first link to the Guardian info (bolding mine):

    Richard Clarke, who was the White House's counter-terrorism czar on 9/11, echoed the 9/11 Commission in saying that the biggest obstacle to preventing the terrorist attack was not the NSA collecting an insufficient amount of data, but a failure to share information already collected.

    “If the information that the federal agencies had at the time had been shared among the agencies, then one of them, the FBI, could have gone to the Fisa Court and could have in a very timely manner gotten a warrant to monitor” US-based al-Qaida conspirators, Clarke told the Senate judiciary committee.

    Instead of WASTING all that money to create the horribly-titled white elephant, the "Department of Homeland Security" that allegedly combines a whole lot of info from different agencies, ALL that would have been required of the various law enforcement agencies is to share their data.  That's ALL.  (Even with the addition of illegal wiretapping they still didn't stop the Boston bombing.)

    What we had was a prime example of SNAFUBAR because of a failure to communicate!!!  Oh, and a moron "in charge" who ignored his Aug. 6 PDB.

    This info from Richard Clarke - oh, and Coleen Rowley whose boss in DC ignored her info on Moussaoui - was coming out just before and just after I got my first computer and long before I found DK, but I remember yelling at my TV about the waste of money in creating DHS when the only thing that would have been necessary to accomplish the same thing more efficiently is to have investigators simply picking up the phone or walking over to various offices to share info.  If they had shared info earlier, perhaps 9/11 could have been prevented (altho I'm not convinced 9/11 could have been avoided; Dumbya and Dickie planned the invasion of Iraq before election day 2000 - that was another nugget of info mentioned by Richard Clarke).

    In any case, doing things the difficult way became a hallmark of the Dumbya-Dickie administrations.  They didn't know the definition of efficiency, let alone how to get things done efficiently - or legally or constitutionally or honorably or ethically.

    I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

    by NonnyO on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 03:58:54 AM PST

    •  If public officials do not share information, it's (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CenPhx

      because information is power and some public officials are in it for nothing but the power. If somebody gets hurt, so be it. That's what power does. It hurts. If there is no hurt, there's no way to know someone is powerful.
      Keep that in mind the next time some Con complains about the weak Obama. That's a signal he's doing good.

      Obamacare at your fingertips: 1-800-318-2596; TTY: 1-855-889-4325

      by hannah on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 04:22:11 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No, "public officials" [e.g. politicians]... (8+ / 0-)

        ... do not share info.  Well, they used to when they used to treat voters like adults, but with the new secret government shite, they don't.  That's not what I'm talking about... Nor was Richard Clarke or Coleen Rowley.

        Police officers share info about criminals or suspects with officers from other departments.  The information is NOT shared with the general public until/unless an arrest is made (law enforcement reports are public documents).  Investigative info is shared with other officers on a "need to know" basis so evidence that is not tainted can be gathered, reports written, the info is turned over to a prosecutor so an arrest warrant can be issued.  Sometimes different departments (local PD, county sheriff's office, state police; occasionally even with a regional FBI or ATF office) work together on cases and share info among themselves - but not the general public until after the arrest has been made.

        That's the kind of law enforcement cooperation Clarke was talking about - FBI, CIA, ATF, NSA may all be working on gathering evidence against the same criminals and not know another department was also gathering info - that info could be shared on a need to know basis within the departments), and that's what I was talking about.

        Politicians are ineffective twits in those circumstances.

        Knowledge is power, yes.  Wielded carefully, knowledge is very effective.  Torture carried out in secret is not "knowledge" in the standard definition of the word.  It is NOT effective.

        Our Constitution and the Bill of Rights do NOT provide for a "secret government pulling the strings of our elected politicians, secret courts, secret legal opinions," nor do they allow torture or illegal and unconstitutional war.  That is all illegal and unconstitutional, and the fact that Democrats are engaging in the same kind of idiocy as the Repukes is a matter of very public shame, humiliation, and embarrassment, and needs to be stopped because it makes ALL of those politicians criminals.

        Most of the nonsense our politicians mark classified or secret doesn't need to be except to manipulate people into thinking we are in imminent danger of 10-foot-tall criminals coming after us or hiding under our beds - they call them "terrorists" and the very word is designed to strike fear into people because it makes common criminals seem more dangerous than they are.  Just mentioning "terrorists" or "terror" is designed to elicit a Pavlovian fear response in people.  It's a manipulative tool in the politicians' arsenal.  It worked so well in '01-'02 our politicians took away our rights just when we should have clung to them harder, and we are going to have a helluva time getting our rights and habeas corpus back, not to mention our privacy which were all stripped from us by the Patriot Acts, MCA '06, and FISA fiasco '08.  We have far more to fear from drunk drivers and texting drivers than any common criminal "terrorists."  For that matter, we have far more to fear from our Cretinous Congress Critters who haven't mentioned repealing those illegal and unconstitutional bills that stripped us of our rights.

        They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
        ― Benjamin Franklin, Memoirs of the life & writings of Benjamin Franklin

        I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

        by NonnyO on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 05:15:27 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

          •  :-) Thank you, Don! (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Don midwest, poligirl, quill, cybrestrike

            In the interest of full disclosure, when I was young I was a police dispatcher and then I went to a different location where I was a police officer.  I'm very familiar with exchanging info on a need to know basis with other departments.  When going after criminals, it's much easier to catch them when there's full cooperation and an exchange of knowledge between law enforcement agencies.

            I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

            by NonnyO on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 05:32:41 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  That Franklin quote is an early example of (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AoT

          blame the victim. Which only goes to show that habit is of long standing.
          The Constitution is not self-enforcing. The intent was to rely on we the people as the governing force, overlooking the fact that, from the beginning, citizen involvement and access to information was severely restricted. In addition, while the claim to sovereign immunity was severely constricted in regards to the ability of foreign persons to seek retribution for unjust behavior, via the Alien Tort Claims Act of 1789, those subject to the Constitution's jurisdiction received no such "protection" from self-serving and authoritarian public officials (elected and appointed) until the passage of the Federal Tort Claims Act in 1947, as well as state specific variants. When Richard Nixon first entered public service, "sovereign immunity" was still the "law of the land," so to speak. So, when he claimed that "when the President does it, it's not illegal," he was relying on precedent with which he was familiar as a student of the law. Perhaps the FTCA hadn't registered and the subsequent evolution of court cases was rather slow.
          Anyway, at the present time, there's still a hankering for immunity of some kind. The agents of law enforcement cling tenaciously to their "qualified immunity" which means that, if they follow the directives of superiors, they will not be held personally liable (a posture affirmed just the other day in the jury's finding in the Kelly murder case).  In addition, prosecutors still enjoy absolute immunity for any of their decisions, unless it can be demonstrated that they overstepped their ministerial duties by jiggering the evidence. Their ability to engage in favoritism by withholding prosecution for crime has not been challenged. Which may account for why some former prosecutors (Christie and Ayotte come to mind) consider immunity to be their due.

          Obamacare at your fingertips: 1-800-318-2596; TTY: 1-855-889-4325

          by hannah on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 06:45:53 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  It should be noted that electronic gadgets can (0+ / 0-)

    only be tapped when they are actually on. Turn them off when not in use.

    Obamacare at your fingertips: 1-800-318-2596; TTY: 1-855-889-4325

    by hannah on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 04:18:26 AM PST

    •  That's not true, at least as far as cellphones... (15+ / 0-)

      ...are concerned. As long as the battery's in the phone, it's good to go.

      "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

      by bobswern on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 04:22:12 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Video, audio and everything else n/t (12+ / 0-)

        "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

        by bobswern on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 04:22:44 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  True. Which is why it is good to remember (0+ / 0-)

        that the Amendments to the Constitution are addressed to agents of government and the advice, not to interfere with speech, is good in the sense that when people are talking one can monitor what they are thinking and what actions are in the planning stages. The ostensible purpose, to insure respect for the human rights which grow out of our natural aptitudes and proclivities, was/is wishful thinking. Implications do not provide guarantees.
        We need to keep in mind, as Justice Scalia obviously does, that the "rights" with which man is endowed by the Creator are given lip service in the "original" and continue to be mostly aspirations. It is not inconsistent for the Cons to conclude that "what God hath given, let God deliver and let Him do it on judgement day." In the meantime, the Cons will rule as best they can -- i.e. whatever we let them get away with.

        Obamacare at your fingertips: 1-800-318-2596; TTY: 1-855-889-4325

        by hannah on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 05:31:54 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  No offense, but (0+ / 0-)

          I cannot for the life of me figure out what is relevant in this response, in terms of the original point about electronics and "on/off" vs "removing batteries".  

           

          This all started with "what the Republicans did to language".

          by lunachickie on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:52:27 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  We are outraged that agents of government (0+ / 0-)

            are listening to speech and reading written communications. Why? Because we have interpreted the Constitution as being human rights friendly? That's a mistake.
            If we don't want to be heard or attended, we should not speak and/or write and we should definitely not rely on electronic equipment, whether activated or dead.

            When our representatives are authorizing the purchase of equipment for surveillance and weapons of destruction (singular or mass), it is silly to expect them not to be used, abused or misused. Laws do nothing. They are figments of the imagination, less tangible than the dollar and not nearly as authentic.

            Obamacare at your fingertips: 1-800-318-2596; TTY: 1-855-889-4325

            by hannah on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 10:09:43 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  Removing the battery, sim card etc (12+ / 0-)

      and taping cameraaudio input jacks is the only way to avoid the surveillance capabilities on phones. When turned off phones can still be remotely controlled/monitored.

      "These are established professionals that have a liberal bent, but ultimately most of them if pushed will choose professional preservation over cause, such is the mentality of most business professionals" -BoA/HBGary/CoC

      by LieparDestin on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 04:35:02 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Unless they've been modified (9+ / 0-)

        to still work with all these removed, unbeknownst to the user. But you'd have to be specifically targeted to have one of those, and none of us here are that interesting (I assume!). But even then, with all the connected devices that are coming out, including appliances and cars, it's just a matter of time before it'll be nearly impossible for most people to avoid being spied on.

        "Reagan's dead, and he was a lousy president" -- Keith Olbermann 4/22/09

        by kovie on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 05:04:59 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  There is this article (5+ / 0-)

          I found on Digg.com yesterday (I am at work so will have to dig up the link later when I get home) about an author who had previously written about the NSA who was surprised when he was granted access for a couple hours to its highest leaders for a new book he was working on. One of the stipulations for entry into the building was he had to provide the type of recording device he would use for the interview and its serial number, etc. He just mentioned it casually I think, not really thinking it was a bid deal. Later he mentioned that when he got to the building they did indeed verify the serial number on the recorder. He didn't seem to think anything of it but I would instantly be thinking they had asked ahead for the serial number so they could create a new device and swap them. Or I could just be paranoid.

          "These are established professionals that have a liberal bent, but ultimately most of them if pushed will choose professional preservation over cause, such is the mentality of most business professionals" -BoA/HBGary/CoC

          by LieparDestin on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 05:31:41 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  The electron is an unreliable quantum for (0+ / 0-)

            more reasons than one.

            Obamacare at your fingertips: 1-800-318-2596; TTY: 1-855-889-4325

            by hannah on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 05:34:27 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  I'd just bring a burner phone (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            kharma, cybrestrike

            with voice recording capability and leave my real cell phone at home, then throw it out or give it away to some random person after downloading the recording, to avoid the chance that they'll plant something on it.

            Or, bring my own microSD card and ask to use one of their devices.

            "Reagan's dead, and he was a lousy president" -- Keith Olbermann 4/22/09

            by kovie on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 05:39:07 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  So long as OFF means OFF... (0+ / 0-)

      ... and while on, with you sitting there typing, they just come in under the radar and hack you on the spot.

      It is the computer industry and Microsoft/Apple who are responsible for having such easily hacked crap computers ... esp in the 21st century. They've only had 40 years to perfect security, maybe in another 40 years?

  •  I wonder who came (11+ / 0-)

    Up with this notion that metadata was not really "data" or anything personal. Metadata is data about data and can contain more serious and important info than data that is actually visible - available - on the surface.

    Health insurance is not health care.

    by Jarrayy on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 04:45:38 AM PST

  •  Good news - effort to demonize Snowden failing (14+ / 0-)

    at least so far

    and this is why a disciplined approach to the stories about the spy network are so important

    if documents were dumped then the journalists and the whistle blowers could be ignored, ostracized and even possibly murdered

    Glenn Greenwald ‏@ggreenwald 13h

    Imagine working month after month to demonize Snowden as a traitor only to wake up & see this new polling data  https://twitter.com/...

    here is the tweet that is linked
    Xeni Jardin   ‏@xeni

    New Qunnipiac Poll: Americans consider Snowden more of a whistleblower than traitor by huge margin: 57-34% http://www.pollingreport.com/...

  •  That NYT article lede is misleading (6+ / 0-)

    It implies that implanted software alone can somehow turn a computer that's not connected to a network or the internet or part of its circuitry into a secret radio. I don't see how that's possible in any useful way.

    All computers, like all electronic devices in general, do emit a certain amount of radio frequency energy due to the nature of electricity and electronics, but it's very weak with a very limited useful broadcast range, and would have to be modulated (i.e. manipulated) in ways that would likely interfere with their basic functioning and quickly be detected by their users, to transmit useful signals to intercepting receivers, which would have to be placed very close by, probably no more than a few yards. It's all very Rube Goldbergesque.

    However, the article did ultimately explain that this technology required that an actual radio device be installed in the targeted computer, via USB drive, PC card or circuit board, which required physical access to the computer, or the interception of components intended to be installed in it so they could be suitably altered en route, which would drastically limit its usefulness in real world situations, as I'm guessing that terrorists and criminals are smart enough to buy their electronic devices in cash via unknown third parties.

    "Reagan's dead, and he was a lousy president" -- Keith Olbermann 4/22/09

    by kovie on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 04:59:16 AM PST

  •  is it our right to know budgets of govnt agencies? (12+ / 0-)

    one would think so

    not everyone is into everything that is going on, but the agencies that spy on us should have transparent budgets

    and the president who "promised" to have the most transparent administration ever surely will take the initiative to publish the budgets and make sure that we, the citizens (note, citizens are not the same as consumers in a neo liberal economy), are informed so we can democratically participate in what is the quaint notion of the rule of law

    The actual funding lines for America’s spy agencies have been a matter of secrecy until recently, when the Washington Post obtained a $53 billion “black budget” list for fiscal year 2013 from Edward Snowden. That document, reported the Post, mapped “a bureaucratic and operational landscape that has never been subject to public scrutiny." The Post noted that while the government has released its overall intelligence spending every year since 2007, "it has not divulged how it uses the money or how it performs against the goals set by the president and Congress.” In particular, the black budget showed major increases in funding for the CIA and the NSA.
    Obama Would Have To Unveil 'Black Budget' For Spy Agencies Under New Bipartisan Bill
    •  :-) Heh.... (6+ / 0-)

      Oh, please, ohpleaseohpleaseohplease... for once in the last 15 years, I hope the Cretinous Congress Critters don't quibble about disclosing the "black budget" money.

      It is OUR tax dollars that are funding their illegal and unconstitutional actions, after all (which makes me feel embarrassed and ashamed to call myself an American because of the illegal and unconstitutional actions of our politicians).

      We need full disclosure on all of that information..., or we need to elect new senators and representatives who will give us our rights back and abide by their oaths of office.

      Good catch, and thanks for sharing the info!

      I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

      by NonnyO on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 05:40:13 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  journalists attack Snowden - but black budget (6+ / 0-)

        as noted above the WA Post article used Snowden documents to expose the black budgets

        is this a legitimate story?

        my comment was inspired by some tweets from Glenn you know who

        he now has over 310,000 followers

        by contrast, daily kos has less than 150,00 followers

        that may be an unfair comparison. But when glenn started publishing his stories 7 months ago he has gone from something like 130,000 followers to the current number and it continues to grow. In the same time period, DK has been constant.

        This may be an unfair comparison. The Snowden story is the biggest political story of my lifetime and Glenn is in the middle of it. On the other hand, DK twitter had a several year lead time to get up to the stable number that it has. I don't follow DK twitter, I just go there to check up on its numbers.

        Glenn Greenwald ‏@ggreenwald 20m

        Many journalists attacking specific NSA stories as reckless are too cowardly to attack NYT or WP for publishing them, so they attack Snowden

        Glenn Greenwald ‏@ggreenwald 25m

        .@onekade Look at how some journalists sound like Joe McCarthy now when they discuss newspaper articles & sources https://twitter.com/...

        here is the tweet linked

         

        Dan Murphy ‏@bungdan

        Both Russia and China, those bastions of freedom and respect for the individual, are even more in Mr. Snowden's debt today.

        •  The numbers on the DK Twitter... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          NonnyO

          ...might be also affected by people who follow individual front pagers and certain diarists, like I do. I don't follow the actual DK twitter feed. Anyone else do that?

          The Grand Bargain must be stopped at all costs to protect the 99%.

          by cybrestrike on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 10:55:32 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  a difference without a distinction (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bobswern, poligirl
    …Michael Morell, a former deputy CIA director, told the [Senate Judiciary] committee that so-called “metadata” about a phone conversation inherently entailed information about the substance of the communication. “There is quite a bit of content in metadata,” Morrell said. “There’s not a sharp distinction between metadata and content...”

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013

    by annieli on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 07:22:36 AM PST

  •  There is a much simpler proof (4+ / 0-)

    A simple, logical proof.

    The huge and growing storage capacity of the NSA.

    If only meta data was scrapped from the internet, and if only a small fraction of that filtered by meta data was retained, there would be no need for yottabytes of storage since the logs and filtered contents would reduce that significantly.

    This is why some knowledgeable researchers can sate with near certainty there is far more data retained than stated; the numbers simply do not add up.

  •  I'm about ready to switch to a dumb phone... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    StrayCat, poligirl

    …and leave my computer at the office.

    "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross." -- Sinclair Lewis

    by expatjourno on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 07:56:45 AM PST

  •  a new encrypted internet on the horizon? (4+ / 0-)

    interview of a man targeted with the largest copy write violation in history

    a man spied on by NSA and GCHQ

    an internet innovator

    Kim Dotcom

    http://www.youtube.com/...

    here is an earlier video which shows his estate and other stuff

    http://www.vice.com/...

  •  And went on to say.......... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Loge, Hey338Too
    Morrell added that the bulk collection of domestic phone data “has not played a significant role in preventing any terrorist attacks to this point,” further undercutting a major rationale offered by the NSA since the Guardian first revealed the bulk phone-data collection in June, thanks to leaks by Edward Snowden.

    But, Morell added, “that is a different statement than saying the program has not been important.” Morrell said that bulk collection can provide a reassurance that there is no domestic nexus to foreign terrorist plots detected by other NSA efforts.

    “It is absolutely true that 215 has not by itself disrupted prevented terrorist attacks in the United States, but that doesn’t mean it’s not important going forward, said Morell, using a shorthand for the bulk phone metadata collection. “Many of us have never suffered a fire in our homes but many of us have homeowners insurance.”

    From your link.

    I don't know what Morell meant by saying metadata is content.  But we know that in fact, it isn't content by any definition we've been using, that is, metadata doesn't tell us what is said or written.  If "what is said or written" is what we mean by content, then his statement doesn't make sense.

    Christie: "I'm going to find the real bullies!"

    by Inland on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 08:17:23 AM PST

    •  When I posted this, I asked myself... (11+ / 0-)

      ...what fool--you know, what person among the couple of dozen people in this community that regularly troll my posts--would be obnoxious enough to even attempt to discredit this reality? For real and for the record, your screen name was the first one that came to mind.

      "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

      by bobswern on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 08:33:47 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Oh, bob, you flatterer. (0+ / 1-)
        Recommended by:
        Hidden by:
        ApostleOfCarlin

        Always trying to make me feel special, when you in fact have the same hysterical reaction to anyone who doesn't suck up to your version of "facts" and "reality", even by quoting your own links.  That's the record, in black and white: you're hardly choosy in  your attempts to stifle dissent.      

        Christie: "I'm going to find the real bullies!"

        by Inland on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 08:38:50 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  the only thing obnoxious is this reply. (0+ / 0-)

        structurally, it could have been appended to anyone who didn't accept the inferences Bobby drew from the links, not just Inland.   The sooner people recognize nobody has a monopoly on "reality," the better.

        Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

        by Loge on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 08:59:17 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Who are you kidding? n/t (9+ / 0-)

          "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

          by bobswern on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:05:02 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Inferences? (8+ / 0-)

          You mean the inferences that the guy literally said that there is content in the metadata?

          If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

          by AoT on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:13:11 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  The inference that (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Inland

            Morrell's statement about metadata plus reports of access to fibre optic networks entails that Morrell's really saying that the NSA reads everyone's e-mails and listening to everyone's phone calls, per the last sentence of the diary.  Morrell said nothing of the sort.  If I call a pizza delivery service at 7:30 pm, you can draw a reasonable guess as to why.  If I get a call from an Afghani training camp and then call a student in a flight school, same thing.  But where's the encroachment on legally protected privacy interest in either case?

            Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

            by Loge on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:23:38 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  So you and inland are infering (6+ / 0-)

              that he can't mean that they get access to content in metadata even though he said that. You're literally inferring the exact opposite of what he said.

              If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

              by AoT on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:26:14 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Inland and I are actually different people, (0+ / 0-)

                just to clarify, but Morrell is not saying "get access to content," he's saying metadata is, itself, information, which is linguistically true.  I don't know that he can't have meant it, but it seems extremely unlikely.

                Ok, bored now.

                Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

                by Loge on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:34:35 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  He said that metadata is content (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  TheMomCat, cybrestrike, angel d

                  in many cases. There is content in what the NSA calls metadata, I've bee saying this for a while. I can guarantee they, or some other agency, is also collecting content, they just don't "collect" content. They promise. They gather it up and then swear not to read the stuff from Americans.

                  I realize you are different people, you're much to reasonable to be the same person:) I only grouped the two of you because I thought you were making the same inference. Thanks for the clarification.

                  If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

                  by AoT on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:44:38 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  i just wanted to be extra clear :) (0+ / 0-)

                    I'm supposedly in a "crew" with him or her, despite not being convinced her or she is even real.  You might not be real either :)

                    The trouble with the "nobody follows the law 100% of the time anyway," is it overdetermines the issue.  What should the law be for the 60% of the time (deliberately low number)  the agency does?  Whether or not metadata are "content" doesn't add up to an admission that the NSA is collecting and analyzing all content, including of the type they disavow the legal right to collect sans warrant.

                    Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

                    by Loge on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 10:13:26 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I'm definitely not real! (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      angel d

                      I don't even believe in real, reality is socially constructed;)

                      And my point wasn't that nobody follows the law 100% of the time, it was that the NSA is telling us that no one broke that law, and that's simply unbelievable. Similarly, they are saying they don't collect content, except now they do. It's just a drip drop of new lies.

                      And no, it isn't an admission that they are collecting all content. But they are collecting all content, they just use a different definition of collect so that they can claim they aren't collecting it. But they get the data.

                      If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

                      by AoT on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 10:42:18 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

      •  And he willfully ignores (0+ / 0-)

        what metadata is.

        Let's say on the surface  data you have the name "Jarrayy" and this name is visible for all eyes to see. But beneath that name there is the metadata and this contains loads of other info: Social security, debit card pin number, records of purchases, etc. That is metadata.

        A NYC subway MetroCard contains metadata. As does an E-Z Pass. The same goes for any picture you take with a smart phone.

        Health insurance is not health care.

        by Jarrayy on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:17:20 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Right, he's saying metadata collection (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Don midwest, Hey338Too, Inland

      conveys information, which nobody disputes.  If it doesn't, no sense collecting it.  And if it doesn't, the privacy interest is nil.  It's important to distinguish, however, metadata in electronic communications which may be broader than metadata in phone call logs.  As data about data, metadata are data, writing that was fun, but it's not a concession that there is no legal distinction between learning of the fact of a conversation and what was said in the conversation.  

      As for the other stuff about radio waves and ethernet cables, the key question is whether the NSA believes itself to have authorization to use domestically.  Other than Secs. 215 and 702, the answer is no.  Nobody's gutting the 4th amendment to the extent of putting shit on your computer.

      The reforms proposed seem reasonable, except to the extent people don't want to look at the NSA in the particular but as part of larger fights or conspiracies.

      Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

      by Loge on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 08:55:11 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  That would be what I would guess: (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Hey338Too, Loge

        metadata is information, useful information, but not what was said in the conversation.  

        The distinction is the fourth amendment law as it was articulated in Smith v. Maryland, and I believe it's the difference between a politically acceptable and unacceptable program.  

        As for the reforms, I don't think that they make much difference and might be useful as tweeks, except for the proposal that bulk data collections are saved by a private contractor.  That makes zero sense.  

        Christie: "I'm going to find the real bullies!"

        by Inland on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:03:31 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Whether smith "should" be the law, (0+ / 0-)

          is a tougher question.  I don't think all metadata should be regarded equally or have identical privacy interests associated with them.  I'd rather keep the collection as is but have tighter limits and transparency on when the database may be queried, which is what I think is properly the "search" to begin with.  My focus would be on internal processes within the agency, role of private contractors, and things like that.  

          I am hesitant to draw particularly political inferences from any action or inaction.  What does this tell us about Obama as the standard bearer of the party, that he adopted this program against this legal backdrop and this security situation?  Relief I'm not in his position.  A position I might not share isn't by virtue of that an unreasonable or unconscionable one, and that's what Dear Diarist misses, persistently.

          Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

          by Loge on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:17:29 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  If you refuse to look at issues except (6+ / 0-)

        on their own then you fail to have any sort of complete picture. The dude explicitly said it didn't help stop terrorism. The NSA and the government swore again and again and again that they weren't spying on Americans. None of the reforms stop that. They're still mass collecting information, they just swear they won't look at it and will keep it safe.

        The "other stuff" is a distraction in my eyes. Unless this is much, much worse than we're being told. I wouldn't be terribly surprised if it happened, but I don't see why the government would bother when they have other outfits that can do the same thing. The spying on foreign leader is a distraction too. That's what the NSA is for.

        If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

        by AoT on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:17:59 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  he said it hadn't stopped it, to his knowledge, (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AoT

          but was not prepared to say it wouldn't in the future.  That is the big picture.  

          I agree with the rest, though I don't see anything wrong with collection + more formalization of the current practice of infrequent use of bulk collection.  The main issue, as best as I can tell, is (a) cost, and (b) whether it creates a false sense of complacency.  I'm willing to abide with the recommendations of the board given limits on personal expertise as to running of security agencies, provided their process really did consider a range of views, as seems the case.  

          Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

          by Loge on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:31:37 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  The big picture is that we have a very privatized (4+ / 0-)

            security apparatus where hundreds of thousands of people, if not a million, potentially have access to a metric shit ton of information about everyone in the country, and have for more than a decade. We also know that all organizations have motivation to abuse a program if said abuse will make them more powerful. So big picture is we have absolutely no clue as to what sort of abuse is going on.

            The NSA is telling us that this data has literally never been used for any sort of black mail. That right there is a guaranteed lie. No way there is zero abuse of a data set like this. No way at all. So they're either lying and they know better, or they're so inept that they just haven't caught anyone doing it. Based on the past I'm assuming they're lying. They've been doing it for years now, why stop.

            It's also good to remember the role the NSA played in getting us into the Vietnam war, ginning up false evidence of the Gulf of Tonkin incident. If we want to look t the big picture. Now we've got massive corporations that are closely bound to the organization. That's not reassuring at all.

            If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

            by AoT on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:40:32 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  I assume that he meant that metadata is content (8+ / 0-)

      Since that's what he said.

      We know that text messages are considered metadata, so there's one piece of the puzzle.

      If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

      by AoT on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:12:02 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  He may have meant that, by his definition, but (0+ / 0-)

        not by anyone else's.  By anyone else's, there is a distinction between metadata and content.

        Christie: "I'm going to find the real bullies!"

        by Inland on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:15:42 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Right. He has a special definition of content (5+ / 0-)

          and metadata that no one else has. He uses a different definition than everyone who has been in his line of work. You are seriously twisting to avoid the obvious.

          If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

          by AoT on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:22:03 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  You seem to understand him pretty well, so (0+ / 0-)

            Are you saying he's confessing that the metadata collection program includes what's said and what's written?  Ready...go.

            Christie: "I'm going to find the real bullies!"

            by Inland on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:46:55 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Some of it, yes (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              DeadHead, angel d

              Otherwise what does "content" mean?

              It's pretty clear you're trying to twist definitions to suit your view of the world. The NSA should hire you for this kind of stuff. Maybe you can explain how collecting isn't really collecting like they tried to do.

              If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

              by AoT on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 10:34:26 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  What do you mean, "some of it"? (0+ / 0-)

                Some of what?  Which some?

                Golly, it's almost as if it's not clear what he's saying.

                Huh.  

                Christie: "I'm going to find the real bullies!"

                by Inland on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 11:27:24 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Well lets look at the question you asked (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  bobswern, DeadHead

                  and use basic English skill to decipher my answer.

                  Are you saying he's confessing that the metadata collection program includes what's said and what's written?
                  Now, given that you asked whether the collection program includes "what's said and what's written" what do you think "some of it" might mean in that context? Extra credit for reading my other responses where I point out what content would be included. Like text messages, which are metadata.

                  If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

                  by AoT on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 11:33:57 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I think "some of it" shows (0+ / 0-)

                    that you are far from sure what he meant.  Which is sorta my point all along, and not surprising, given that it's one cherrypicked phrase during congressional testimony.

                    Now watch someone complain that I'm mindreading after you told me to go fish for your opinions.

                     

                    Christie: "I'm going to find the real bullies!"

                    by Inland on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 12:44:02 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  So you have no idea what he meant (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      DeadHead

                      But you're determined to give it the most charitable possible reading. Because that's what I'm reading from you right now. I'm not claiming to know everything that he meant, but I can firmly say that there are instances of content and metadata both being collected. Text messages is one of those. I don't claim to know where else this is the case because it's all secret. I'd imagine subject lines of emails would be another example.

                      The key thing here is that the NSA is lying and they have been shown to have been lying yet again. "Only metadata" is a lie and this is yet another piece of evidence of that fact. You can infer and spin all you want about what he really meant, that doesn't change the facts.

                      If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

                      by AoT on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 02:30:22 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

      •  It is not really the actual (0+ / 0-)

        text message, the contents of, that is the metadata. The time the message was sent, the location it was sent from, and all that -- that is the metadata.

        Health insurance is not health care.

        by Jarrayy on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:19:03 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  No, text messages are sent (4+ / 0-)

          as metadata. Metadata is whatever the people who programmed the system call metadata, and this includes text messages, SMS to be specific.

          If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

          by AoT on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:23:17 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yes but that is not the (0+ / 0-)

            actual "hey, AoT, what are you doing?" part of the message.

            Health insurance is not health care.

            by Jarrayy on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:25:00 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yes, it is that part of the message (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              bobswern, lunachickie, cybrestrike

              Text messages are metadata. That's how they work. If the government has a legal right to metadata then they have access to text messages. It in the same data set as metadata.

              If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

              by AoT on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:27:29 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  Yes, it is. (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              bobswern, AoT, lunachickie, cybrestrike

              Text messages are piggybacked on communications the phone would already be making with the cell phone towers. That's why there's such a profound limit on the number of characters and why phones that allow longer text messages often have them show up at the recipient's phone as multiple texts of traditional length.

              It's approximately the same thing so far as metadata goes as the old commercial where someone calls collect and says their name is "Wehadababy Itzaboy" so the recipient doesn't have to pay for a full phone call to know that the caller has a newborn son, only in a way that isn't actually cheating the phone system.

              •  Ugh (0+ / 0-)

                After I send this message I am going to go get a cup of coffee and come back to my desk and open a Content Management System. I am going to look at a number of records (bot image/text, image only and text only) and then add to these records various types of info, from info such as dates and place names, to "guideposts" that link  to the top level data. Those who use our service never see he metadata, and I doubt the majority even know it exists.

                As someone who has been a metadata analyst since 2007 I think I know what I am talking about. Metadata is data that is not visible on the surface. So the actual content the text message in question is not meta. But all the other stuff beneath it is the metadata.

                BTW in case anyone thinks I am talking about anything nefarious, I am in academics -- which may be nefarious in other ways. Ha.

                Health insurance is not health care.

                by Jarrayy on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 10:05:41 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Text messages are sent as metadata (0+ / 0-)

                  and as such can legally be considered metadata. I realize that a normal definition of metadata would not include them, but this isn't a normal definition, it's a government definition. So yes, text messages shouldn't be considered metadata, but they are.

                  If knowledge is power and power corrupts, does that mean that knowledge corrupts?

                  by AoT on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 10:44:48 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

          •  What part of "metadata IS content" don't... (7+ / 0-)

            ...people understand? It's NOT just the information about the communication (whether it's Internet, text messaging, video, or a phone call). It's the CONTENT of the message, itself.

            Metadata is the spin word that's been used by the government for the past year, to dance around (lie about) the reality that it's the content of the communication, as well.

            This has been self-evident to virtually anyone that has been following this sideshow (and, for over a decade prior to when anyone first heard the name, Edward Snowden, too), except for those in denial. Queue trolls: "He's linking to his own diary!" As opposed to acknowledging the fact that the diary/post maintains roughly a DOZEN, extremely credible sources/links that have been telling us/reporting this very thing for many, many years!

            "I always thought if you worked hard enough and tried hard enough, things would work out. I was wrong." --Katharine Graham

            by bobswern on Wed Jan 15, 2014 at 09:33:59 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  Any "smart" enemy would never fall for it... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bobswern, poligirl

    ... the whole secret radio wave crap. This may be more "psi-ops" than true.

    Though it does kick Dell and HP in the nutz... AGAIN ... as who in their right mind would buy a US made computer at this point.

    I sat US, but since Taiwan is so closely tied to the US, I can see where makers of the motherboards and video cards could be persuaded to include hardware and software (bios) hacks and hooks into component design.

    If the NSA's plan was to undermine confidence in purchasing US-centric electronics, they have succeeded. Probably the only thing they ever really succeeded in accomplishing, bravo.

    Thanks for the details and great diary Bob!!!

  •  Now the re-write of recent history begins... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bobswern, poligirl

    ... as I've said all along, the amount of storage CAPACITY the NSA/Homeland security operations have openly admitted to seeking, is infinitely more than would ever be needed for "Metadata" if that meant ...

    What # called what # when for how long and what was the GPS/Cell triangulated location of each.

    That information, for every phone call in the USA for a year could fit on my cell phone's internal storage, and wouldn't even move the %used needle on the meter on the storage facility they have built. At some point the concept of every phone conversation and email and text exchange you have EVER HAD in the last 10 years, being stored for future "analysis" will start sinking into people's heads.

  •  Obama Plans No Significant Changes to NSA Surv (7+ / 0-)

    This is no surprise. But it's disappointing anyway. The military-surveillance complex has pretty obviously won this round.

    Obama Plans No Significant Changes to NSA Surveillance

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site