Re: [Cryptography] An NSA mathematician shares his from-the-trenches view of the agency's surveillance activities

2013-09-18 Thread Pat Farrell
On 9/18/13 10:44 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
The enterprise bridge control center certainly does not seem to be Hayden's 
style either. Hayden is not the type to build a showboat like that.
Moving abit OT:

On the PBS Newshour coverage of this story, the showed the website of DBI 
Architects who designed the facility and it listed the other design firms. One 
of them was "KTA Group" my brother John was the signing engineer at KTA at that 
time. He says the design and construction was done at least ten years ago. It 
was not a secret facility, but access was restricted. Even though he signed and 
stamped all the design drawings for the HVAC, plumbing and electrical work, he 
was never allowed on site. So if you could find the design drawings for that 
facility (which is about 5 stories and all underground at Ft Belvoir (just 
across the river from Washington DC0)) you would see John Farrell's signature 
and stamp.

The usual point of a "showboat" facility like that is to impress the 
Congressmen who visit so the budget can get bigger.

___
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography


Re: [Cryptography] An NSA mathematician shares his from-the-trenches view of the agency's surveillance activities

2013-09-18 Thread Phillip Hallam-Baker
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 8:01 PM, John Gilmore  wrote:

> Techdirt takes apart his statement here:
>
>
> https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130917/02391824549/nsa-needs-to-give-its-rank-and-file-new-talking-points-defending-surveillance-old-ones-are-stale.shtml
>
>   NSA Needs To Give Its Rank-and-File New Talking Points Defending
>   Surveillance; The Old Ones Are Stale
>   from the that's-not-really-going-to-cut-it dept
>   by Mike Masnick, Tue, Sep 17th 2013
>
>   It would appear that the NSA's latest PR trick is to get out beyond
>   the top brass -- James Clapper, Keith Alexander, Michael Hayden and
>   Robert Litt haven't exactly been doing the NSA any favors on the PR
>   front lately -- and get some commentary from "the rank and file."
>   ZDNet apparently agreed to publish a piece from NSA mathemetician/
>   cryptanalyst Roger Barkan in which he defends the NSA using a bunch
>   of already debunked talking points. What's funny is that many of
>   these were the talking points that the NSA first tried out back in
>   June and were quickly shown to be untrue. However, let's take a
>   look. It's not that Barkan is directly lying... it's just that he's
>   setting up strawmen to knock down at a record pace.


As someone who has met Hayden, I do not think his words are necessarily
untrue, they may be out of date. It appears that there was a major change
at the NSA after his departure. In particular the number of external
contractors seems to have increased markedly (based on the number and type
of job adverts from SAIC, Booz-Allen, Van Dyke, etc.)

The enterprise bridge control center certainly does not seem to be Hayden's
style either. Hayden is not the type to build a showboat like that.


After 9/11 we discovered that our view of the cryptowars was completely
false in one respect. Louis Freeh wasn't building a panopticon, he simply
had no comprehension of the power of the information he was demanding the
ability to collect. The FBI computer systems were antiquated, lacking the
ability to do keyword search on two terms.

I rather suspect that Alexander is similarly blind to the value of the
information the system is collecting. They might well be telling the truth
when they told the court that the system was so compartmentalized and
segregated nobody knew what it was doing.

For example, did the NSA people who thought it a good wheeze to trade raw
SIGINT on US citizens to the Israelis understand what they were passing on?
They certainly don't seem to know the past history of US-Israeli
'cooperation' only last year an Israeli firm was trying to sell intercept
equipment to Iran through an intermediary and the story of how the Chinese
got an example of the Stinger missile to copy is well known. My country has
had an arms embargo on Israel for quite a while due to breach of Israeli
undertakings not to use military weapons against civilians.


That does not make the situation any less dangerous, it makes it more so.

What Barkan does not mention is that we know that the NSA internal controls
have collapsed completely, Snowdens disclosure proves that. Snowden should
never have had access to the information he has disclosed.

As with gwbush53.com, the intelligence gathered through PRISM-class
intercepts will undoubtedly be spread far and wide. Anything Snowden knows,
China and Russia will know.


The fact that nothing has been said on that publicly by the NSA
spokespeople is something of a concern. They have a big big problem and
heads should be rolling. I can't see how Clapper and Alexander can remain
given the biggest security breach in NSA history on their watch.
-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/
___
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography

Re: [Cryptography] An NSA mathematician shares his from-the-trenches view of the agency's surveillance activities

2013-09-18 Thread Lodewijk andré de la porte
"Everybody has to write a statement. The statement that most convinces the
public that we're okay gets published and a big-o-bonus. You guys have 3
days."
___
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography

Re: [Cryptography] An NSA mathematician shares his from-the-trenches view of the agency's surveillance activities

2013-09-18 Thread ianG

On 18/09/13 00:56 AM, John Gilmore wrote:

Forwarded-By: David Farber 
Forwarded-By: "Annie I. Anton Ph.D." 

http://www.zdnet.com/nsa-cryptanalyst-we-too-are-americans-720689/

NSA cryptanalyst: We, too, are Americans



Speaking as a non-American, you guys have big problems concerning the 
nexus of cryptography and politics.


...

The rest of this article contains Roger's words only, edited simply for 
formatting.


I really, really doubt that.  I don't really wish to attack the author, 
but the style and phraseology is pure PR.  Ordinary people do not write 
PR.  Nor do they lay out political strategies and refer to their 
commander-in-chief as the supreme leader.  Nor indeed are employees of 
military and intelligence *permitted to talk to the press* unless 
sanctioned at high level.



...  Do I, as an American, have any concerns about whether the NSA is 
illegally or surreptitiously targeting or tracking the communications of 
other Americans?


The answer is emphatically, "No."


Of course, Americans talking to Americans might be one debate.  But then 
there are Americans talking to the world, and people talking to people.


It should be remembered that espionage is illegal, and the activities of 
the NSA are more or less illegal *outside their borders*.  I give them 
no permission to monitor me or mine, and nor does any of the laws of my 
land(s).


The fact that we cannot stop them doesn't make it any less legal.  The 
fact that there is a gentleman's agreement between countries to look the 
other way doesn't make it any less palatable to us non-gentlepersons 
excluded from the corridors of powers.


And all that doesn't make NSA mathematicians any less a partner to the 
activity.  Any intelligence agent is typically controlled and often 
banned from overseas travel, because of the ramifications of this activity.



...


A myth that truly bewilders me is the notion that the NSA could or would spend 
time looking into the communications of ordinary Americans

There's no doubt about it: We all live in a new world of Big Data.



In two paras above, and the next two paras below, this 'mathematician' 
lays the political trap for Americans.  The collection by the federal 
government of data is almost certainly unconstitutional.  Yet, everyone 
acts as if that's ok because ... we live in the new world of Big Data?




Much of the focus of the public debate thus far has been on the amount of data 
that NSA has access to, which I feel misses the critical point.


Unless one subscribes to the plain wording of your (American) 
constitution...




In today's digital society, the Big Data genie is out of the bottle. Every day, 
more personal data become available to individuals, corporations, and the 
government. What matters are the rules that govern how NSA uses this data, and 
the multiple oversight and compliance efforts that keep us consistent with 
those rules. I have not only seen but also experienced firsthand, on a daily 
basis, that these rules and the oversight and compliance practices are 
stringent. And they work to protect the privacy rights of all Americans.


ditto, repeat.

Although, to be honest, we-the-world don't care about it;  the USG's 
temptation to rewrite the constitution in the minds of its subjects is 
strictly a domestic political affair.  For most other countries, the Big 
Data genie is truly out of the bottle, and there's precious little we 
can do about it.


...

As this national dialogue continues, I look to the American people to reach a 
consensus on the desired scope of U.S. intelligence activities


Good luck!


 The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not 
necessarily reflect those of the National Security Agency/Central Security 
Service.



I seriously doubt that.



iang

___
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography


Re: [Cryptography] An NSA mathematician shares his from-the-trenches view of the agency's surveillance activities

2013-09-17 Thread John Gilmore
Techdirt takes apart his statement here:

  
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130917/02391824549/nsa-needs-to-give-its-rank-and-file-new-talking-points-defending-surveillance-old-ones-are-stale.shtml

  NSA Needs To Give Its Rank-and-File New Talking Points Defending
  Surveillance; The Old Ones Are Stale
  from the that's-not-really-going-to-cut-it dept
  by Mike Masnick, Tue, Sep 17th 2013

  It would appear that the NSA's latest PR trick is to get out beyond
  the top brass -- James Clapper, Keith Alexander, Michael Hayden and
  Robert Litt haven't exactly been doing the NSA any favors on the PR
  front lately -- and get some commentary from "the rank and file."
  ZDNet apparently agreed to publish a piece from NSA mathemetician/
  cryptanalyst Roger Barkan in which he defends the NSA using a bunch
  of already debunked talking points. What's funny is that many of
  these were the talking points that the NSA first tried out back in
  June and were quickly shown to be untrue. However, let's take a
  look. It's not that Barkan is directly lying... it's just that he's
  setting up strawmen to knock down at a record pace.

John
___
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography


[Cryptography] An NSA mathematician shares his from-the-trenches view of the agency's surveillance activities

2013-09-17 Thread John Gilmore
Forwarded-By: David Farber 
Forwarded-By: "Annie I. Anton Ph.D." 

http://www.zdnet.com/nsa-cryptanalyst-we-too-are-americans-720689/

NSA cryptanalyst: We, too, are Americans

Summary: ZDNet Exclusive: An NSA mathematician shares his from-the-trenches 
view of the agency's surveillance activities.

By David Gewirtz for ZDNet Government | September 16, 2013 -- 12:07 GMT (05:07 
PDT)

An NSA mathematician, seeking to help shape the ongoing debate about the 
agency's foreign surveillance activities, has contributed this column to ZDNet 
Government. The author, Roger Barkan, also appeared in last year's National 
Geographic Channel special about the National Security Agency.

The rest of this article contains Roger's words only, edited simply for 
formatting.

Many voices -- from those in the White House to others at my local coffee shop 
-- have weighed in on NSA's surveillance programs, which have recently been 
disclosed by the media.

As someone deep in the trenches of NSA, where I work on a daily basis with data 
acquired from these programs, I, too, feel compelled to raise my voice. Do I, 
as an American, have any concerns about whether the NSA is illegally or 
surreptitiously targeting or tracking the communications of other Americans?

The answer is emphatically, "No."

NSA produces foreign intelligence for the benefit and defense of our nation. 
Analysts are not free to wander through all of NSA's collected data 
willy-nilly, snooping into any communication they please. Rather, analysts' 
activity is carefully monitored, recorded, and reviewed to ensure that every 
use of data serves a legitimate foreign intelligence purpose.

We're not watching you. We're the ones being watched.

Further, NSA's systems are built with several layers of checks and redundancy 
to ensure that data are not accessed by analysts outside of approved and 
monitored channels. When even the tiniest analyst error is detected, it is 
immediately and forthrightly addressed and reported internally and then to 
NSA's external overseers. Given the mountains of paperwork that the incident 
reporting process entails, you can be assured that those of us who design and 
operate these systems are extremely motivated to make sure that mistakes happen 
as rarely as possible!

A myth that truly bewilders me is the notion that the NSA could or would spend 
time looking into the communications of ordinary Americans. Even if such 
looking were not illegal or very dangerous to execute within our systems, given 
the monitoring of our activities, it would not in any way advance our mission. 
We have more than enough to keep track of -- people who are actively planning 
to do harm to American citizens and interests -- than to even consider spending 
time reading recipes that your mother emails you.

There's no doubt about it: We all live in a new world of Big Data.

Much of the focus of the public debate thus far has been on the amount of data 
that NSA has access to, which I feel misses the critical point. In today's 
digital society, the Big Data genie is out of the bottle. Every day, more 
personal data become available to individuals, corporations, and the 
government. What matters are the rules that govern how NSA uses this data, and 
the multiple oversight and compliance efforts that keep us consistent with 
those rules. I have not only seen but also experienced firsthand, on a daily 
basis, that these rules and the oversight and compliance practices are 
stringent. And they work to protect the privacy rights of all Americans.

Like President Obama, my Commander-in-Chief, I welcome increased public 
scrutiny of NSA's intelligence-gathering activities. The President has said 
that we can and will go further to publicize more information about NSA's 
operating principles and oversight methodologies. I have every confidence that 
when this is done, the American people will see what I have seen: that the NSA 
conducts its work with an uncompromising respect for the rules -- the laws, 
executive orders, and judicial orders under which we operate.

As this national dialogue continues, I look to the American people to reach a 
consensus on the desired scope of U.S. intelligence activities. If it is 
determined that the rules should be changed or updated, we at NSA would 
faithfully and effectively adapt. My NSA colleagues and I stand ready to 
continue to defend this nation using only the tools that we are authorized to 
use and in the specific ways that we are authorized to use them. We wouldn't 
want it any other way.

We never forget that we, too, are Americans.

Roger Barkan, a Harvard-trained mathematician, has worked as an NSA 
cryptanalyst since 2002. The views and opinions expressed herein are those of 
the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the National Security 
Agency/Central Security Service.
___
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography@metzdowd.com
http://www.metzdowd.com/ma