How The NSA Built Its Own Secret Google

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
It is absolutely astounding that our government can't get anything else right but they have no problem running a “Google-like” search engine for spying. :rolleyes:

The National Security Agency is secretly providing data to nearly two dozen U.S. government agencies with a “Google-like” search engine built to share more than 850 billion records about phone calls, emails, cellphone locations, and internet chats, according to classified documents obtained by The Intercept.
 

Zepher

[H]ipster Replacement
Joined
Sep 29, 2001
Messages
19,040
Maybe the NSA should have created and run the Healthcare website, that would be a hoot.
 

GaryJohnson

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
1,053
Maybe the NSA should have created and run the Healthcare website, that would be a hoot.

Who says they didn't? Healthcare.gov wants your name and some other basic personal information for you to use it. It could be pairing that info with your IP address and sticking it in some secret searchable government database somewhere.
 

gman

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 24, 2001
Messages
1,887
Does not surprise me at all. They'll probably store this comment in it.:p:p
 

BladeVenom

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 29, 2005
Messages
7,707
That must have taken a lot of search warrants.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
 

Spidey329

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 15, 2003
Messages
8,683
I thought they claimed that all of the data they captured in mass was simply stored and only called upon when needed .. Now they're providing an easy search interface for all of that for other agencies?

The fu...
 

JeffDC

Gawd
Joined
Jul 19, 2006
Messages
775
Here's a glimpse of current decay levels in our federal government: our NSA now claims the American people do not have legal standing to sue when the agency decides to trample all over our Constitution. We've created own very own pathetic version of the Gestapo.
 

Freebo

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 26, 2012
Messages
252
I believe that they made it easy so that different agencies could have access to all the info with ease. As much as it is a privacy issues they dont care if you download a movie or watch some porn or go about your daily lives. The fact of the matter its here now and its not going to change, there is really nothing that can be done about it now. If your not doing some crazy dumb ass shit then your fine so why worry. Thats the why i look at it now.
 

JaiWebb

Gawd
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
601
As much as it is a privacy issues they don't care if you download a movie or watch some porn or go about your daily lives.

That's completely irrelevant and besides the point. I don't care if they don't care about certain activities. I do care that they're spying on every single thing every single person does in their personal life, to begin with. It's morally wrong and should be completely illegal if common good ran the system instead of the power hungry & rich people. They're absolutely begging for a revolution at this point and militarizing the police force for when it does happen. Sooner or later it will happen, too. Seems inevitable to me at least. Now or anytime in the not so distant future of this nation. Yes, I know, it sounds so completely crazy today, I'm sure! "This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it." - Abraham Lincoln

The fact of the matter its here now and its not going to change, there is really nothing that can be done about it now.

Not with a passive attitude like that. There is clearly things to be done. Like standing the fuck up for your rights/privacy before it gets even worse. Slippery slope you want to ride on out of lazy comfortability.

If your not doing some crazy dumb ass shit then your fine so why worry. That's the why i look at it now.

You have a shitty way of looking at it. The government hides all the corrupt (ruthless) shit it does under 'National Security' (I take it you don't you remember what JFK said about such secrets/these kinds of people) but yet everyday, now, normal citizens are being monitored 24/7/365 for the most part until there is no privacy for anyone but the elite. The fact you're content with this is scarey. You're a good wage slave on this farm but a shitty human being, at least from where I stand. “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” - Edmund Burke

we_must_keep_up_the_fight.jpg
 

CreepyUncleGoogle

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 10, 2013
Messages
6,871
I read on a blog I pretend to write that there are also classified documents that prove there are microscopic sensors placed in every single box of corn flakes and those sensors monitor what your stomach is doing and then transmit it to a super seekrit spy satellite on Jupiter so the NSA field base there knows what people are digesting.
 

Lith1um

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 3, 2004
Messages
2,906
I believe that they made it easy so that different agencies could have access to all the info with ease. As much as it is a privacy issues they dont care if you download a movie or watch some porn or go about your daily lives. The fact of the matter its here now and its not going to change, there is really nothing that can be done about it now. If your not doing some crazy dumb ass shit then your fine so why worry. Thats the why i look at it now.

Sometimes the internet makes me want to slap people, not that I'm a violent man........
 

Lith1um

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 3, 2004
Messages
2,906
What makes anyone think that ANY nsa system works any better than healthcare.gov? What makes anyone think than any system, any government system, is secure?

When you build a mechanism that allows fucked up people to do fucked up things, don't be surprised when it places good or innocent people at the mercy of fucked up people, often for personal gain or prejudice. The forefathers knew this, and so they thought they had drafted Constitutional protections that prevented the existence of such mechanisms.
 

CreepyUncleGoogle

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 10, 2013
Messages
6,871
When you build a mechanism that allows fucked up people to do fucked up things, don't be surprised when it places good or innocent people at the mercy of fucked up people, often for personal gain or prejudice.

Like when people who don't like how things are act selfishly and ramble about how bad things are when they lead perfectly comfortable lives and would never actually change anything, but rant incessantly because they're behind a keyboard? Yeah, I agree that mechanisms like the misinterpreted idea people have about the freedom of speech are broken and we need to work on some of the basics to get rid of the unreasonable sense of entitlement our couch-dwelling population has gotten itself into thinking it's owed by the government at no personal expense to them.
 

Lith1um

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 3, 2004
Messages
2,906
Like when people who don't like how things are act selfishly and ramble about how bad things are when they lead perfectly comfortable lives and would never actually change anything, but rant incessantly because they're behind a keyboard? Yeah, I agree that mechanisms like the misinterpreted idea people have about the freedom of speech are broken and we need to work on some of the basics to get rid of the unreasonable sense of entitlement our couch-dwelling population has gotten itself into thinking it's owed by the government at no personal expense to them.

Your crystal ball is defective.
 

Json23

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
1,380
They don't get anything else right by design. They're not your friend, they don't want to help you, and they'll never truly act in the interest of the individual.
 

Wierdo

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 2, 2011
Messages
1,817
and they are willing to use this info against you if you oppose them

Yep. The "nothing to hide crowd" not only lack critical thinking on what's at stake with that attitude, but also don't see what this means in terms of democracy as a whole.

This kind of power can make sure a ruling party is entrenched and almost impossible to oppose, if they can keep tabs on everyone then they can easily act against opposition before it even gets public exposure.

And they get to completely control public awareness on issues or even shape them for their own benefit, many many things can happen when you are an all-knowing god. It's the ultimate evolution of the "firewall of China" on our own soil.

Not very hard to see where this is going comrads.
 

FiveFig

Gawd
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
517
I thought they claimed that all of the data they captured in mass was simply stored and only called upon when needed .. Now they're providing an easy search interface for all of that for other agencies?

The fu...

Did they say how hard, or extremely fucking easy, it was going to be to 'call upon when needed'; let alone define 'need'?

Come on, you should be better at learning to read double speak by now :(
 

FiveFig

Gawd
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
517
Yep. The "nothing to hide crowd" not only lack critical thinking on what's at stake with that attitude, but also don't see what this means in terms of democracy as a whole.

This kind of power can make sure a ruling party is entrenched and almost impossible to oppose, if they can keep tabs on everyone then they can easily act against opposition before it even gets public exposure.

And they get to completely control public awareness on issues or even shape them for their own benefit, many many things can happen when you are an all-knowing god. It's the ultimate evolution of the "firewall of China" on our own soil.

Not very hard to see where this is going comrads.
good afternoon comrades, peppers?
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
The document is a fake, oops.

Someone is going to ask how I know.

Look at the Classification Markings, see the part REL TO USA. That stands for "Releasable to the USA", US Intelligence Products are not marked "Releasable to the USA", of course it's Releasable to the USA, it was created by the USA, meaning the marking is fake because someone thought it would look good. A Forgery. Only something like a British classified document would be marked Releasable to the USA, never a US document.

Now I'll take some time to read the rest and what you guys have to say about it.
 

Romale23

Gawd
Joined
Dec 12, 2006
Messages
866
The document is a fake, oops.

Someone is going to ask how I know.

Look at the Classification Markings, see the part REL TO USA. That stands for "Releasable to the USA", US Intelligence Products are not marked "Releasable to the USA", of course it's Releasable to the USA, it was created by the USA, meaning the marking is fake because someone thought it would look good. A Forgery. Only something like a British classified document would be marked Releasable to the USA, never a US document.

Now I'll take some time to read the rest and what you guys have to say about it.

While your are technically correct i have seen plenty of documents mislabeled with that so it doesn't necessarily mean its incorrect. Specially documents that are actually handed over to partners. Never account to conspiracy what you can account to stupidity
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
Halbig noted that this practice of data sharing is governed by Executive Order 12333 (EO 12333), the 1981 document instituted by President Ronald Reagan as a way to strengthen the power of US intelligence agencies. Executive orders are rarely overturned unless subsequent presidents take action.

This is a complete misrepresentation of the truth by the author. EO 12333 was written and signed by the President to place legal limits on who can do SIGINT and who SIGINT can't be performed on. It is a restrictive document, not one that adds or strengthens powers, it governs and limits them. It isn't that large or complex a document, easy to find it on the web so read it yourself if you want, it's worth your time.

I will however direct your attention to the final Statement in the document to provide illumination to my statement.

3.5Purpose and Effect. This Order is intended to control and provide direction and guidance to the Intelligence Community. Nothing contained herein or in any procedures promulgated hereunder is intended to confer any substantive or procedural right or privilege on any person or organization.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
While your are technically correct i have seen plenty of documents mislabeled with that so it doesn't necessarily mean its incorrect. Specially documents that are actually handed over to partners. Never account to conspiracy what you can account to stupidity

Noo, I am not only technically correct I am substantively correct. There is no way a US Produced Document would be allowed to bear that releasablity marking as it is not an approved releasability control, it's not in our "dictionary" and that shit isn't just made up however someone feels like making them up. There is a list of what is allowed and each term is specifically defined. No US Produced document would ever bear that marking, ever.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
If you have seen it before it's either fake like this or it is a foreign document, one of the other "Five Eyes" Nations.
.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
Still, looking at this document let's examine it a little.

PSTN. (Standard old fashion land-line telephone networks)
The public switched telephone network (PSTN) is the aggregate of the world's circuit-switched telephone networks that are operated by national, regional, or local telephony operators, providing infrastructure and services for public telecommunication.

INMARSAT (Satcom networks)
Inmarsat is the leading provider of global mobile satellite communications services, delivering reliable voice and high-speed data communications on land, at sea and in the air.

PCS (Mobile Phone Networks)
Described in more commercial terms, PCS is a generation of wireless-phone technology that combines a range of features and services surpassing those available in analog- and digital-cellular phone systems, providing a user with an all-in-one wireless phone, paging, messaging, and data service.

DNI (Internet Based Communications)
Digital Network Intelligence or DNI is a term used in the United States Intelligence Community that refers to "intelligence from intercepted digital data communications transmitted between, or resident on, networked computers."

So this is a database used to "fuse" meta data collected via the four primary methods of communications. Each method is different and has a different set of meta data elements. Nothing here suggests that the "targets" of the collection are anything other then legitimate foreign intelligence targets. At least not on that slide.

The name ICREACH strongly suggests that authorized and trained members of other IC, (Intelligence Community) members are allowed access to this database when justified. But these are Intelligence Community members, not Law Enforcement although to a degree the FBI has some grey area latitude as they work both sides of the street when it comes to terrorism and counter intelligence.

The EO 12333 lists the different Intelligence Community Departments and Agencies.
 

westrock2000

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
9,313
What makes anyone think that ANY nsa system works any better than healthcare.gov? What makes anyone think than any system, any government system, is secure?

Because was benefit does healthcare serve the government? They make more money if you DONT have it due to the fines.

A database that allows them to directly prosecute and fine (aka tax) you? Now that's something worth having.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_12333
On December 4, 1981 President Ronald Reagan signed Executive Order 12333 ....

I joint the Army that same year, 1981. EO 12333 was written when there was no Internet or Cell Phone systems, all that existed were land line telephone systems, a fledgling beginning of INMARSAT, and radio based communications like Shortwave Radios, RadioTeletype, and Morse Code communications all in the RF spectrum. But nothing here says any of this is going to Law Enforcement or anyone outside of the IC.


Something that bothers me though is statements like this;

Nadia Kayyali, an activist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, agreed.

“The more that NSA data is getting filtered to domestic law enforcement, it makes the abuses exponential,” Kayyali said. “We know how important metadata is and we know how revealing it is. If this information is going to DEA and FBI, it means that NSA metadata is significantly affecting actions of domestic law enforcement.”

This activist says a lot, and it would bother me as well, it would, except one thing, the two letters I underlined, "if". If is a big word, nothing says this is happening at all, it just supposition, a guess, a fear with no basis. It's nothing but a fear. It's like someone saying "if they used the military on us, what chance would we have?" and that is legitimate right, but the military hasn't been used on us with the exception of State national Guard being called up in emergencies and civil defense events. The worst was what? Kent State and that was bad, the National Guard was not well trained to react well to that situation and they didn't. But Kent State didn't herald a slide into iron fisted rule, instead it prefaced changes to try and make sure something like that doesn't happen again.

Anyway, that's where I am with this so far. More stirring the pot, no real substance.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
Originally Posted by Lith1um View Post
What makes anyone think that ANY nsa system works any better than healthcare.gov? What makes anyone think than any system, any government system, is secure?

Ummmm Lith1um, because first, they don't even use the same physical networks, nothing. You can't hack something you can't talk to. The classified systems are physically issolated form the unclassified systems. You would have to actually get in and get physical access to a classified computer on the network to even get started and the physical security is decent, not perfect, not 007 proof, but pretty good. Then you would need access, access like even Snowden needed in the end to be able to get to the tier 3 stuff he stole. He had to use someone else's account and password to get it, not impossible as we have seen, but not just anybody can pull it off. It took a trusted insider to do it. Of course he really wasn't the first, there have been many before him.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
Just don't go thinking that all you have to do is type in a URL or IP and you'll be looking at the home screen of a TOP SECRET website with a login prompt, it's not like that.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
and they are willing to use this info against you if you oppose them

Willing yes, but unable. No one has access to this information other then the Intelligence Community and although this article tries to scare you into believing others do, there is nothing actually showing it.

Therefor, even though there might be someone in the Bureau of Land management who would try to use this meta data against you, some how. They don't have access to it even if this article is trying to scare you into thinking they do.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
I thought they claimed that all of the data they captured in mass was simply stored and only called upon when needed .. Now they're providing an easy search interface for all of that for other agencies?

The fu...

For other agencies in the Intelligence Community. Let's see, who is that anyway, the IC?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Intelligence_Community

Seventeen separate organizations unite to form the Intelligence Community (IC).....

Understand that Organizations like the Department of Energy possess a sub-organization, in this case the (OICI) Office of Intelligence and Counter-Intelligence, that may have access to this database but it doesn't mean that just any smo in the Department of Energy can pull up your data, access is still controlled and that little Intelligence office still has a mission and Law Enforcement isn't it.
 
Top