RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc..

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc..

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc..

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc.. - 6/13/2013 6:46:47 AM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

So, if they are so inefficient what's your worry? Too much data? As they said on the Daily Show: shut off the spigots; we cant handle it all . . . paraphrasing.

what's my worry? My worry is being f'n targeted and them going back thru all communications to use against me in whatever ways they can.. just as what they did with the reporter Rosen (& his family).. They can apparently be quite "efficient" when it suits them, like when going after anyone that questions the govt instead of going after those they get intel on about being a true terrorist.. I simply do not buy the party line that this surveillance is for terrorists, its for anyone the govt decides to go after..

Hold on, they subpoenaed Rosen's email to try and find a leaker of classified material. They didn't use the content of those emails to attack Rosen at all.

(in reply to tj444)

Profile

Post #: 41

RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc.. - 6/13/2013 7:20:24 AM

JeffBC

Posts: 5799
Joined: 2/12/2012
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
No. the rub is intercepting all those packets in those routers and not slowing the internet down beyond usability and not breaking all ecommerce.

Performance issues I might, potentially, give you. "Breaking ecommerce" is simply ridiculous. I find it baffling that you, a network engineer, would not know how to split a packet stream and mirror it two two separate locations... an operation that is frequently done in data centers for various security purposes -- availability usually although occasionally monitoring. What is it about this common place activity that you find undoable? Is it the raw volume of "the whole internet?" Because if so, then you and I both know we are discussing a matter of money not possibility. We also know the government is perfectly willing to spend that sort of money. If you were reading the relevant news you'd know they ARE spending that sort of money.

quote:

You could maybe sniff packets on a local router at a starbucks if you had the right software because that is relatively low traffic and is transmitted over the air so you just would need a wifi receiver.

Maybe? I have to say I am doubting your qualifications as a network engineer. Not only is there no "maybe" about it, but you don't need anything fancy to do it. Easy off the shelf software lets you do all manner of things like sniff all the packets... hijack TCP sessions... and the like. This is all possible, as a network engineer would know... because I have access to the packets themselves and because they are unencrypted.... exactly as the internet is for the most part.

quote:

To intercept all packets sent from computers in the US would require putting super computers

Not "supercomputers" but in laymens terms yes. There'd need to be a lot of hardware no doubt. Again, I refer you to a wide variety of programs in play by the NSA going back some time now but in most recent memory, Stellar Wind.

quote:

it would still break ecommerce.

And tell me again why this would break ecommerce. It doesn't break ecommece when I do such sniffing any other time. In point of fact I used to do it all the time as a routine part of my job and yet all the ecommerce systems in our data centers seemed to ... well ... not notice one tiny little bit. I didn't have "supercomputers" I had a laptop which was a basic, business class laptop provided by my corporation. We could do a little math and compare the bandwidth of the pipes I was tapping (about 100mb/s) to a backbone and then extrapolate the required computer power but really, if you were a network engineer, you'd know these numbers work out pretty easily in "government scales".

I must admit I'm curious why a life-long network engineer who really ought to have sniffed zillions and zillions of network links for one reason or another seems to think this is so difficult. Honestly, it's not the sniffing part that is hard. It's the data storage part. This is not really a network problem It's a legal problem to gain access to the packets to start with and a big data problem to record yolobytes of data for future reference. It'd take one honking big data center. Something like Stellar Wind.

_____________________________

I'm a lover of "what is", not because I'm a spiritual person, but because it hurts when I argue with reality. -- Bryon Katie
"You're humbly arrogant" -- sunshinemiss
officially a member of the K Crowd

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 42

RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc.. - 6/13/2013 7:35:30 AM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

Splitting the entire internet's packet stream would as I've said require massive hardware far beyond anything anyone has ever claimed the NSA or anyone else has. Can you imagine the storage requirements alone? Let's just assume they are only saving the Ipv4 header (20 bytes each). Total packet size varies but must be less than 64k. So simply serving this page once involves hundreds if not thousands of packets (every image is a separate request remember). How many trillions of packets are sent per day? is it even only trillions?

As to ecommerce your claim was that they were actually able to do more than monitor the headers, which requires the ability to actually interpret the data in the packets which is impossible if it has been public key encrypted unless they use a man in the middle attack which as I've said the ecommerce infrastructure is designed to prevent.

Almost forgot, it wouldn't be one very powerful computer with massive storage to split the packet stream and save all that data, it would require one on every isp router. Keep in mind that even every packet of the same request doesn't have to follow the same route so to get them all would require massive hardware right at the isp level which we all know isn't there.

< Message edited by DomKen -- 6/13/2013 7:45:05 AM >

(in reply to JeffBC)

Profile

Post #: 43

RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc.. - 6/13/2013 8:04:54 AM

JeffBC

Posts: 5799
Joined: 2/12/2012
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Splitting the entire internet's packet stream would as I've said require massive hardware far beyond anything anyone has ever claimed the NSA or anyone else has. Can you imagine the storage requirements alone?

I don't need to imagine them. I can read any of the various articles which have looked at this. Let's just go with "yottabytes" as a benchmark.
AT this point I'd like to apologize to everyone for getting a word wrong. Obviously, not simply myself but most of humanity doesn't deal in words like this regularly and my brain remembered it incorrectly. It is not "yolobytes" it's "yottabytes". Nobody has bothered to make a larger word yet which tells you how big it is. Putting that in perspective, 1 yottabyte is just over a billion terabytes.

What I want to know, Ken, is why you... a person with 20 years of network engineering experience needs to imagine any of this. There is no imagination required. This would be normal, commonplace math in your profession excepting for scale.

quote:

Let's just assume they are only saving the Ipv4 header (20 bytes each). Total packet size varies but must be less than 64k. So simply serving this page once involves hundreds if not thousands of packets (every image is a separate request remember). How many trillions of packets are sent per day? is it even only trillions?

Why? Why stop with headers when you can have the whole enchilada? Let's just go with about 250 terabytes per second by 2015 for the total internet traffic size (a recent CISCO estimate). So at 250 terabytes per second you could record every single bit, byte, whistle and squeak going over the internet for about 140 years in a yottabyte of storage. That is exactly what they are expanding out at Stellar Wind. In other words, they either have the capacity as we speak or they are actively building it as we speak. This is not rocket science. Nor is it science fiction. It is simply commonly available data center stuff backed by the deepest pockets going. Why do you insist that this is impossible when it is commonplace stuff... the data center is known (or at least one of them)... the whistle blowers have already blown their whistles and the follow-up investigations have been done. In other words, this particular argument is already a done deal.

For you non-geeks out there here's an article in Wired which actually has a pretty decent rep among security people. No, this is not tinfoil hat stuff as much as DomKen might want to make it so.

quote:

As to ecommerce your claim was that they were actually able to do more than monitor the headers, which requires the ability to actually interpret the data in the packets which is impossible if it has been public key encrypted unless they use a man in the middle attack which as I've said the ecommerce infrastructure is designed to prevent.

Agreed. That would be where the FISA warrants and gag orders come into play. The last I heard, certain forms of cryptography (notably elliptic curve) were still pretty secure if implemented properly and we can assume major players like google have decent security departments. One FISA warrant with a gag order attached and all that security goes right out the window. So now you are basing all your security on a secret court with no [meaningful] oversight that only one party ever gets to visit and who's orders are so secret that they ALL come with attached gag orders. In other words, the ONLY thing watching the hen house is some particularly shifty foxes.

Again, for those not as into it as I am, when you think about that FISA court try to imagine the supreme court. Except for instead of the way it's done now, imagine that only one side of any debate was even allowed to go to the court. If a citizen had a problem you can't go there. When there is a trial only one side presents evidence and only one side is present. The results of that trial are secret and only one side knows them. The only oversight is a handful of folks in the government... a relatively small handful. No citizen will EVER know anything that happened at that court without a leak. Does that sound like "justice" to you?

_____________________________

I'm a lover of "what is", not because I'm a spiritual person, but because it hurts when I argue with reality. -- Bryon Katie
"You're humbly arrogant" -- sunshinemiss
officially a member of the K Crowd

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 44

RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc.. - 6/13/2013 9:33:13 AM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Splitting the entire internet's packet stream would as I've said require massive hardware far beyond anything anyone has ever claimed the NSA or anyone else has. Can you imagine the storage requirements alone?

I don't need to imagine them. I can read any of the various articles which have looked at this. Let's just go with "yottabytes" as a benchmark.
AT this point I'd like to apologize to everyone for getting a word wrong. Obviously, not simply myself but most of humanity doesn't deal in words like this regularly and my brain remembered it incorrectly. It is not "yolobytes" it's "yottabytes". Nobody has bothered to make a larger word yet which tells you how big it is. Putting that in perspective, 1 yottabyte is just over a billion terabytes.

What I want to know, Ken, is why you... a person with 20 years of network engineering experience needs to imagine any of this. There is no imagination required. This would be normal, commonplace math in your profession excepting for scale.

quote:

Let's just assume they are only saving the Ipv4 header (20 bytes each). Total packet size varies but must be less than 64k. So simply serving this page once involves hundreds if not thousands of packets (every image is a separate request remember). How many trillions of packets are sent per day? is it even only trillions?

Why? Why stop with headers when you can have the whole enchilada? Let's just go with about 250 terabytes per second by 2015 for the total internet traffic size (a recent CISCO estimate). So at 250 terabytes per second you could record every single bit, byte, whistle and squeak going over the internet for about 140 years in a yottabyte of storage. That is exactly what they are expanding out at Stellar Wind. In other words, they either have the capacity as we speak or they are actively building it as we speak. This is not rocket science. Nor is it science fiction. It is simply commonly available data center stuff backed by the deepest pockets going. Why do you insist that this is impossible when it is commonplace stuff... the data center is known (or at least one of them)... the whistle blowers have already blown their whistles and the follow-up investigations have been done. In other words, this particular argument is already a done deal.

I know scale and I know math so that is why I don't believe this. At 250 terrabytes a second a yottabyte of storage is not 140 years it is just over 47 days.
(((1,024,000,000/250)/60)/60)/24 = 47.407

So no Stellar Wind cannot simply suck up the entire web traffic for even 2 months.

< Message edited by DomKen -- 6/13/2013 9:35:09 AM >

(in reply to JeffBC)

Profile

Post #: 45

RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc.. - 6/13/2013 2:45:52 PM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I know scale and I know math so that is why I don't believe this. At 250 terrabytes a second a yottabyte of storage is not 140 years it is just over 47 days.
(((1,024,000,000/250)/60)/60)/24 = 47.407

So no Stellar Wind cannot simply suck up the entire web traffic for even 2 months.

I thought you said you were a school teacher a couple years ago?

if you in fact are an IT person how come you do not seem to know how this works? That example you gave is nothing short of laughable.

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 46

RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc.. - 6/13/2013 4:42:05 PM

JeffBC

Posts: 5799
Joined: 2/12/2012
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
I know scale and I know math so that is why I don't believe this. At 250 terrabytes a second a yottabyte of storage is not 140 years it is just over 47 days.
(((1,024,000,000/250)/60)/60)/24 = 47.407

So no Stellar Wind cannot simply suck up the entire web traffic for even 2 months.

OK, let's assume I got my math wrong. I'm the first to admit I built a spreadsheet and I may have gotten it incorrect. Now, let's assume that you are right instead. A single yottabyte is 47 days... so you could record an entire year of the entire internet without dropping a single bit, byte, snap or whistle with about 9 of them. Is there some reason you think this is not possible when everyone else seems to think it is more than possible... including a ton of security researchers and various whistle blowers actually involved in BUILDING THIS STUFF!

Now... checking my math... "A yottabyte is a trillion terrabytes".

A trillion, divided by 250 yields 4,398,046,511 seconds.
That's 73300775.19 minutes
which is 1221679.586 hours
which is 50903.3161 days
which is 139.46114 years.

Again, I readily admit the possibility of math error and lord knows it's stupid to get confrontational over math. Help me out here (and I mean that seriously). Excel still seems to think my 140 year figure was correct.

As near as I can tell, you started with a zettabyte rather than a yottabyte. I refer you to wikipedia (which interestingly enough references Stellar Wind in it's article on Yottabytes

Yottabyte
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"YB" redirects here. For other uses, see Yb (disambiguation).
v t e Multiples of bytes
SI decimal prefixes Binary
usage IEC binary prefixes
Name
(Symbol) Value Name
(Symbol) Value
kilobyte (kB) 103 210 kibibyte (KiB) 210
megabyte (MB) 106 220 mebibyte (MiB) 220
gigabyte (GB) 109 230 gibibyte (GiB) 230
terabyte (TB) 1012 240 tebibyte (TiB) 240
petabyte (PB) 1015 250 pebibyte (PiB) 250
exabyte (EB) 1018 260 exbibyte (EiB) 260
zettabyte (ZB) 1021 270 zebibyte (ZiB) 270
yottabyte (YB) 1024 280 yobibyte (YiB) 280
See also: Multiples of bits · Orders of magnitude of data
The yottabyte is a multiple of the unit byte for digital information. The prefix yotta indicates the eighth power of 1000 and means 1024 in the International System of Units (SI), and therefore one yottabyte is one septillion (one long scale quadrillion) bytes. The unit symbol for the yottabyte is YB.
1 YB = 1000000000000000000000000bytes = 10008bytes = 1024bytes = 1000zettabytes = 1 trillion terabytes.
A related unit, the yobibyte (YiB), using a binary prefix, means 10248bytes.
Examples[edit]

To store a yottabyte on terabyte sized hard drives would require a million city block size data-centers, as big as the states of Delaware and Rhode Island.[1] If 64 GB microSDXC cards (the most compact data storage medium available to public as of early 2013) were used instead, the total volume would be approximately 2500000 cubic meters, or the volume of the Great Pyramid of Giza.
The Utah Data Center, operated by the National Security Agency, is designed to store data on the scale of yottabytes.[2][3][4]

_____________________________

I'm a lover of "what is", not because I'm a spiritual person, but because it hurts when I argue with reality. -- Bryon Katie
"You're humbly arrogant" -- sunshinemiss
officially a member of the K Crowd

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 47

RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc.. - 6/13/2013 7:18:27 PM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

You claimed a yottabyte is a not a trillion terrabytes. Reread your own source.

quote:

1 yottabyte is just over a billion terabytes.

I did my calculation based on your claim. I assumed you were competent enough to make an accurate claim. As to the Utah Data Center if it can store a yottabyte, a claim I have serious doubts about, what would be the point? That much data could not possibly be indexed and searched in any sort of feasible time scale. It is far more likely that the NSA is going after a way to break public key encryption using brute force. The source claiming the center will store a yottabyte is based on a report that the entire DoD Global Information Grid needs to be expanded to handle data on that scale to handle the amount of data produced by drones and "other sensor networks." but the GIG is a distributed network and having all of its storage in one point would defeat the purpose of it being a distributed network.

(in reply to JeffBC)

Profile

Post #: 48

RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc.. - 6/13/2013 8:50:14 PM

JeffBC

Posts: 5799
Joined: 2/12/2012
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
You claimed a yottabyte is a not a trillion terrabytes. Reread your own source.

Excellent. We have resolved the math difference. I was hoping that would happen. Obviously when I typed it all in Excel I got it right and when I wrote it here I didn't. My apologies... it's not like I work with scales like this regularly LOL.

I assumed you were competent enough to make an accurate claim.
Apparently not. But now we have gotten to the bottom of it.

As to the Utah Data Center if it can store a yottabyte, a claim I have serious doubts about,
Well, you'll need to take that up with the DOD or Wired. Lots of credible people DO believe it. Even in just one large scale corporate data center I watched capacity go from gigabytes to petabytes. And that corporation didn't have the need or financial backing of the US government.

That much data could not possibly be indexed and searched in any sort of feasible time scale.
You make a great many claims about things. You have big data experience now? I tend to agree with you today. I also tend to think they don't have a yottabyte of data today. But time marches on you know and there's no need to build everything all at once. They can certainly lay down infrastructure and start collecting data.. perhaps partial... but collecting. Then as they finish more of the data center and as technology marches on they can capture more and more. That's certainly how I'd do it. I see no reason to wait until I can complete storage for 143 years when today all I need is one day and I can pull off miracles of data mining with only 5% of the internet. Really, I don't need to know what your score in bejeweled was (although any good spook would want to know anyway LOL).

It is far more likely that the NSA is going after a way to break public key encryption using brute force.
You've got the wrong address. That'd be in Tennesee (see also, "high productivity computing systems program")

So I assume then then you discredit Binney as some malcontent...

"The whole idea was, how do you manage 20 terabytes of intercept a minute?” he says. “The way we proposed was to distinguish between things you want and things you don’t want.” Instead, he adds, “they’re storing everything they gather.” And the agency is gathering as much as it can."

Have I mentioned that we KNOW FOR AN ABSOLUTE FACT THAT THE ADMINISTRATION HAS LIED DIRECTLY AND INCONVERTIBLY ABOUT THIS several times in very recent memory? We absolutely know the administration is lying to us and we have a whistle blower giving us a much more credible story.

PS: Much as I'm sure they would like to they are almost certainly not trying to capture the entire internet right now. Let's look at this differently. There are a WIDE VARIETY of long known data collection programs and a few more which have leaked recently which have greatly expanded the collection volumes. Where do you think all that data is going? Do you seriously think they'd throw that stuff away... ever? Would you?

_____________________________

I'm a lover of "what is", not because I'm a spiritual person, but because it hurts when I argue with reality. -- Bryon Katie
"You're humbly arrogant" -- sunshinemiss
officially a member of the K Crowd

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 49

RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc.. - 6/13/2013 9:05:31 PM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

20 terabytes a minute is still a huge amount of data but it isn't 250 terabytes a second which is what you claimed upthread.

BTW as to the Utah Data Center and claims about huge data storage, are we in agreement that the NSA does not have some secret chip foundry with unprecedented capabilities? If so the idea that they could store a yottabyte in any sort of near term, less than a decade, is impossible. There is no way to get enough hard rives for that, and the physical size is prohibitive, so they would have to do it with solid state systems which require a number of chips simply beyond the capability of the existing chip foundries.

As to only collecting 5% of net traffic, what 5%? You're still positing huge hardware systems connected to the backbone routers sniffing every packet, now I guess in real time, and making decisions on what to store and what to ignore. Which no one but the true crazies are claiming.

To get back to the original subject nothing in the "revelations" printed the last two weeks makes any sort of claim that the NSA monitors every ip request and therefore could not detct if someone surfed to the AQ magazine website. And you have presented nothing but completely unsupported assertions that such a capability might exist any time in the forseeable future.

In regards to big data a good chunk of my career was in DB coding and DB administration. Simply storing each header with some sort of unique ID for a fairly basic index would be pointless. You'd need it indexed for both source and destination ip at a minimum. Those would get very large and very unwieldy very fast. It remains fairly obvious that they are not indiscriminately gathering data from all internet traffic but have gained access to certain servers for purposes of monitoring very specific people. The letter Google sent to the feds this week seems to support that.

< Message edited by DomKen -- 6/13/2013 9:14:09 PM >

(in reply to JeffBC)

Profile

Post #: 50

RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc.. - 6/13/2013 11:28:28 PM

JeffBC

Posts: 5799
Joined: 2/12/2012
From: Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
The letter Google sent to the feds this week seems to support that.

Honestly, anyone who could say that is simply not in the game at all. You really don't know how this works do you? How many people at Google do you think know what's in those FISA warrants? Do you seriously believe a single person on the executive staff knows? That's not how this works for situations exactly like this. So if they get permission to release something... it pretty certainly isn't going to be a complete anything. Remember... we know for an absolute fact that the administration has lied repeatedly about this and the administration is armed with NASTY gag orders. That's the part that I don't understand Ken. You seem so trusting of them yet by their own lips they have grossly lied to us. Those records, if turned over, will say exactly what they NSA wants them to say.

By the way, as I read the article it wasn't required that they record the whole internet. If you want to know who's hitting a specific web site that's trivially easy. Why did they fail?

One more point. Why do you think it is so hard to intercept and copy every packet on the internet? It's not like we don't have the technology to do such a thing. It's called "the internet". I grant that storage IO and capacity would be a problem today but getting the packets somewhere seems trivially easy. And, obviously, while the storage side catches up, a smart person would prioritize which packet streams they captured.

< Message edited by JeffBC -- 6/13/2013 11:34:47 PM >

_____________________________

I'm a lover of "what is", not because I'm a spiritual person, but because it hurts when I argue with reality. -- Bryon Katie
"You're humbly arrogant" -- sunshinemiss
officially a member of the K Crowd

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 51

RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc.. - 6/13/2013 11:51:29 PM

dcnovice

Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline

quote:

omg, you should read what they said about Abe Lincoln!!!

Well, he did kinda shred the Constitution for a while there.

_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to vincentML)

Profile

Post #: 52

RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc.. - 6/13/2013 11:54:31 PM

dcnovice

Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline

FR

We really need a pissing match emoticon.

_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to dcnovice)

Profile

Post #: 53

RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc.. - 6/14/2013 2:54:10 AM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
The letter Google sent to the feds this week seems to support that.

Honestly, anyone who could say that is simply not in the game at all. You really don't know how this works do you? How many people at Google do you think know what's in those FISA warrants? Do you seriously believe a single person on the executive staff knows? That's not how this works for situations exactly like this. So if they get permission to release something... it pretty certainly isn't going to be a complete anything. Remember... we know for an absolute fact that the administration has lied repeatedly about this and the administration is armed with NASTY gag orders. That's the part that I don't understand Ken. You seem so trusting of them yet by their own lips they have grossly lied to us. Those records, if turned over, will say exactly what they NSA wants them to say.

By the way, as I read the article it wasn't required that they record the whole internet. If you want to know who's hitting a specific web site that's trivially easy. Why did they fail?

One more point. Why do you think it is so hard to intercept and copy every packet on the internet? It's not like we don't have the technology to do such a thing. It's called "the internet". I grant that storage IO and capacity would be a problem today but getting the packets somewhere seems trivially easy. And, obviously, while the storage side catches up, a smart person would prioritize which packet streams they captured.

Someone at Google does know what is in the FISA warrants otherwise they couldn't comply with them. That executive is certainly in a position to write a letter asking to reveal the nature of their cooperation with the NSA. They would be exceptionally foolish to write the letter if it wasn't accurate knowing that Snowden is still out there and might be able to refute the claim.

If you want to know who is hitting a specific website hosted on a server you cannot get physical access to which is also using either no resolvable name or is resolved to a national nameserver to which you do not have access you do need to be monitoring all internet traffic to identify someone accessing it. I just spent a little while trying to find a URL for Inspire and had no luck so I suspect it is available only by knowing the dotted ip addy.

The internet is a distributed system. Every packet does not go through the same piece of hardware. Intercepting every packet would therefore require infrastructure hooked into every single router at the ISP level. And it would require the same level of bandwidth as the internet itself to send all that data to a central storage facility (the Utah facility as you claim). There is no way the NSA could have kept that level of pervasive intrusion secret.

(in reply to JeffBC)

Profile

Post #: 54

RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc.. - 6/15/2013 6:45:10 AM

tj444

Posts: 7574
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

So, if they are so inefficient what's your worry? Too much data? As they said on the Daily Show: shut off the spigots; we cant handle it all . . . paraphrasing.

what's my worry? My worry is being f'n targeted and them going back thru all communications to use against me in whatever ways they can.. just as what they did with the reporter Rosen (& his family).. They can apparently be quite "efficient" when it suits them, like when going after anyone that questions the govt instead of going after those they get intel on about being a true terrorist.. I simply do not buy the party line that this surveillance is for terrorists, its for anyone the govt decides to go after..

Hold on, they subpoenaed Rosen's email to try and find a leaker of classified material. They didn't use the content of those emails to attack Rosen at all.

I dont particularly care if they "got a warrant" or not, that has become meaningless.. warrant = rubber stamp
One tv report said out of tens of thousands of warrants, only 1 has been denied.. basically, they are rubber stamped.. Not to mention the various illegal searches without any warrant.. I also dont care that they wanted to find a third party, that had nothing to do with Rosen or his parents (who were also targeted by the warrant).. Considering that Rosen is a reporter & did nothing wrong, accessing his email & that of AP should never have been allowed. The govt should have other means at their disposal to find the leaker, and it shows how unsecure the govt & its subcontractors info on the public is.. Both Obama's & McCains computers were hacked during the previous election, and sensitive docs were accessed by hackers.. If they can not protect their own freakin' info, how can they protect anyone elses? from leakers, from hackers, from abuses by staff, etc.. Trust in the govt is trust misplaced..

_____________________________

As Anderson Cooper said “If he (Trump) took a dump on his desk, you would defend it”

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 55

RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc.. - 6/15/2013 6:55:14 AM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

So, if they are so inefficient what's your worry? Too much data? As they said on the Daily Show: shut off the spigots; we cant handle it all . . . paraphrasing.

what's my worry? My worry is being f'n targeted and them going back thru all communications to use against me in whatever ways they can.. just as what they did with the reporter Rosen (& his family).. They can apparently be quite "efficient" when it suits them, like when going after anyone that questions the govt instead of going after those they get intel on about being a true terrorist.. I simply do not buy the party line that this surveillance is for terrorists, its for anyone the govt decides to go after..

Hold on, they subpoenaed Rosen's email to try and find a leaker of classified material. They didn't use the content of those emails to attack Rosen at all.

I dont particularly care if they "got a warrant" or not, that has become meaningless.. warrant = rubber stamp
One tv report said out of tens of thousands of warrants, only 1 has been denied.. basically, they are rubber stamped.. Not to mention the various illegal searches without any warrant.. I also dont care that they wanted to find a third party, that had nothing to do with Rosen or his parents (who were also targeted by the warrant).. Considering that Rosen is a reporter & did nothing wrong, accessing his email & that of AP should never have been allowed. The govt should have other means at their disposal to find the leaker, and it shows how unsecure the govt & its subcontractors info on the public is.. Both Obama's & McCains computers were hacked during the previous election, and sensitive docs were accessed by hackers.. If they can not protect their own freakin' info, how can they protect anyone elses? from leakers, from hackers, from abuses by staff, etc.. Trust in the govt is trust misplaced..

I don't like the way they did this but your claim was inaccurate. Specifically you claimed they used Rosen communications against him and his family which is simply not true.

(in reply to tj444)

Profile

Post #: 56

RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc.. - 6/15/2013 12:10:31 PM

tj444

Posts: 7574
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I don't like the way they did this but your claim was inaccurate. Specifically you claimed they used Rosen communications against him and his family which is simply not true.

I never said they used the communication against him or his family, but accessing those communications in a fishing expedition in an attempt to find a third party is wrong, wrong, wrong! and a violation of his & his family's privacy.. It also puts a chill on any other sources of other stories he & other reporters at AP have been working on.. sources wont want to be revealed inadvertantly to the govt.. I feel its also an attempt to intimidate reporters as well as their sources.. Rosen, cuz its his job, likely expects men in dark raincoats following him and hiding in the shadows, but man, going after his family is simply one of the lowest tactics ever.. This country resembles Russia more than it does a free country..

< Message edited by tj444 -- 6/15/2013 12:11:06 PM >

_____________________________

As Anderson Cooper said “If he (Trump) took a dump on his desk, you would defend it”

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 57

RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc.. - 6/15/2013 1:49:14 PM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

I don't like the way they did this but your claim was inaccurate. Specifically you claimed they used Rosen communications against him and his family which is simply not true.

I never said they used the communication against him or his family, but accessing those communications in a fishing expedition in an attempt to find a third party is wrong, wrong, wrong! and a violation of his & his family's privacy.. It also puts a chill on any other sources of other stories he & other reporters at AP have been working on.. sources wont want to be revealed inadvertantly to the govt.. I feel its also an attempt to intimidate reporters as well as their sources.. Rosen, cuz its his job, likely expects men in dark raincoats following him and hiding in the shadows, but man, going after his family is simply one of the lowest tactics ever.. This country resembles Russia more than it does a free country..

Yes, you did

quote:

My worry is being f'n targeted and them going back thru all communications to use against me in whatever ways they can.. just as what they did with the reporter Rosen (& his family)

Also Rosen is not at AP he is at Fox.

The subpoena was secret how was that intimidating anyone?

(in reply to tj444)

Profile

Post #: 58

RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc.. - 6/16/2013 5:55:23 AM

tj444

Posts: 7574
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Yes, you did

quote:

My worry is being f'n targeted and them going back thru all communications to use against me in whatever ways they can.. just as what they did with the reporter Rosen (& his family)

Also Rosen is not at AP he is at Fox.

The subpoena was secret how was that intimidating anyone?

you misundertood.. I meant using something I said (like when I say the US needs a revolution) against me.. by getting a rubber-stamped warrant like they did for Rosen and his family (who were doing nothing wrong to justify a warrant for their communications).. I did not mean they used something against Rosen, they just used him to try to get to someone else..

it isnt secret now, is it? and if they had found this leaker person, then it would have in all probability come out how they got it.. but at least since it sounds like they never found out who the person was (so far).. they took measures to keep it private & were knowledgeable enough on how to do that effectively.. It means people that have info who arent that knowledgeable will think twice about blowing the whistle (and anyone that has been a source of info that the govt now has a record of).. that is how it can be intimidating.. Both AP & Rosen were targeted by secret warrants for their records..

"The organization's president and CEO says the records could compromise confidential sources, and called it a "massive and unprecedented intrusion." "
http://buffalo.ynn.com/content/all_news/664394/associated-press-alleges-phone-records-secretly-gathered-by-justice-department/

_____________________________

As Anderson Cooper said “If he (Trump) took a dump on his desk, you would defend it”

(in reply to DomKen)

Profile

Post #: 59

RE: lawsuits against the govt/NSA, Obama, Holder, etc.. - 6/16/2013 6:43:30 AM

DomKen

Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Yes, you did

quote:

My worry is being f'n targeted and them going back thru all communications to use against me in whatever ways they can.. just as what they did with the reporter Rosen (& his family)

Also Rosen is not at AP he is at Fox.

The subpoena was secret how was that intimidating anyone?

you misundertood.. I meant using something I said (like when I say the US needs a revolution) against me.. by getting a rubber-stamped warrant like they did for Rosen and his family (who were doing nothing wrong to justify a warrant for their communications).. I did not mean they used something against Rosen, they just used him to try to get to someone else..

it isnt secret now, is it? and if they had found this leaker person, then it would have in all probability come out how they got it.. but at least since it sounds like they never found out who the person was (so far).. they took measures to keep it private & were knowledgeable enough on how to do that effectively.. It means people that have info who arent that knowledgeable will think twice about blowing the whistle (and anyone that has been a source of info that the govt now has a record of).. that is how it can be intimidating.. Both AP & Rosen were targeted by secret warrants for their records..

"The organization's president and CEO says the records could compromise confidential sources, and called it a "massive and unprecedented intrusion." "
http://buffalo.ynn.com/content/all_news/664394/associated-press-alleges-phone-records-secretly-gathered-by-justice-department/

They did find the leaker, Stephen Jin-Woo Kim, and have charged him with a violation of the espionage act, he likely got an asset inside North Korea killed. Rosen could have written the same story but just left off the part about us having a source inside North Korea.

(in reply to tj444)

Profile

Post #: 60