NSA works with Microsoft, Google, Facebook, etc. to collect all your data

[Xajii]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_J...Secret_Service

Game company writes cyberpunk RPG sourcebook, Secret Service raids "hackers", ends up paying $300k in damages and attorney's fees. No, the government is NOT always that competent.

I have stated numerous times that mistakes in this field always will and always have happened. I do like that you cite one where the process of law resolved the issue, though.

And the secret service isn't the nsa. And I never said government as a whole is competent. I work in the contracting industry. Most of the government is woefully incompetent. I'm saying nsa's rigorous standards make them an exception to most of that.

[Blubbartron]

ARE YOU SERIOUS? LOL

Done with you. Keep on keepin' on, dude. This is the most unbelievably naive comment I have seen in this subforum

Click on the links to the suspects' wikis. I read about a dozen before I got bored. Every single one was arrested based on an informant, or a captured terrorist rolling over on other terrorists. If you can find one that states (and is sourced) that the person was caught due to some kind of anti-terrorism government program, please point it out.

Honestly though, this is the only question that need be answered to understand your perspective of reality: which of these had a measurable effect on decreasing airplane-related terrorism post-9/11 - the TSA or required upgrades to cockpit doors?

[Niiro]

Not quite. First, the NSA isn't going to do the investigation - they're just creating a subset of the population for investigation. Second, their methods for identifying people can't be super complex, due to the problem of Big Data.

No doors are getting kicked in, no buildings are getting droned up, etc. without a someone looking at the information.

This is a retarded argument and you need to stop trying to make it sound like the NSA has some automated system to conduct investigations and prosecutions completely independent of analysis and verification by a person.

To me this is the key. I have no problems with the idea that the government can go ask for data if there is probable cause for national security reasons, etc. But right now from what I've read, that since it's a backdoor to all these databases that there's really nothing that prevents someone to abuse the system. Also, what prevents foreign hackers from hacking these backdoors to get whatever they want?

It's too much power to the government without proper checks and balances. Like someone already said, if it requires a warrant to do this, I'd be more okay about this.

The hell are you talking about? The government isn't collecting this information, the companies are, the government has limited access to data logs and records. If they want access to the actual content of an email or listen to someone's phone conversations they need cause and more importantly they need to get it from the service provider in question.

Have you ever read a TOS? Of course not but I guarantee you "if the government asks for your info we can give it to them" is in every fucking one.

[Xajii]

Click on the links to the suspects' wikis. I read about a dozen before I got bored. Every single one was arrested based on an informant, or a captured terrorist rolling over on other terrorists. If you can find one that states (and is sourced) that the person was caught due to some kind of anti-terrorism government program, please point it out.

Honestly though, this is the only question that need be answered to understand your perspective of reality: which of these had a measurable effect on decreasing airplane-related terrorism post-9/11 - the TSA or required upgrades to cockpit doors?

Pretty much neither? But probably the cockpit doors. Really just increased awareness overall probably helps. The TSA scanners did p.much nothing new and violated privacy. No I don't support those.

But you've got to be incredibly stupid if you don't think MSA thwarts foreign and internal threats on the daily, often using collected data from communications.

[Kyreth]

I have stated numerous times that mistakes in this field always will and always have happened. I do like that you cite one where the process of law resolved the issue, though.

And the secret service isn't the nsa. And I never said government as a whole is competent. I work in the contracting industry. Most of the government is woefully incompetent. I'm saying nsa's rigorous standards make them an exception to most of that.

Dad was a Dep. Sect. (non-political appointment, he was one of the original crop of DoE) for the Energy Dept, before that ERDA.

If there's anything I learned from Dad, it's that no branch of gov't, no matter how elite is free from people who are class-A fucktards, and that the only real way to prevent "friendly fire" is not letting some people handle what can cause the damage to begin with- and that once it's clear that SOMEBODY gets to play with the toys, everyone and their grandma will try their best to play with them too.

And this is a REALLY good toy as far as such things go, now that it's out from under much of it's shroud of secrecy. Yeah, NSA has it's share of human nature, but I'm more worried about how many MORE agencies are going to try and get in on this and the inevitable fuckups that will occur, likewise non-agency. And folks filing FOIA briefs, etc. etc.

[shaggnix]

To me this is the key. I have no problems with the idea that the government can go ask for data if there is probable cause for national security reasons, etc. But right now from what I've read, that since it's a backdoor to all these databases that there's really nothing that prevents someone to abuse the system. Also, what prevents foreign hackers from hacking these backdoors to get whatever they want?

abuse how? find out your poor and your grandma is dying, then try to sell you no-physical-required life insurance on her? or maybe, even though people march in the streets with giant placards criticizing the government, they'll see your text and secret police will come whisk you away in the night? as far as cyber security goes, they waited too long to take this seriously imo, but theres been a huge push in light of the recent cyber attacks to catch up to and outpace the rest of the world in this area. even still, i really don't care if some hackers, foreign or domestic, want to waste their time scrolling through the mundane details of my life in an effort to (fill in the blank) if it means keeping terrorists unsuccessful.

[Xajii]

Fucking lol at that link. Thwarted plots are rarely rarely advertised to the public and for good reason. Is this not common knowledge

[Niiro]

Also like a hacker would care whether they steal this info from the government or just get it from Google (where the government got it from).

The info has always been there to be stolen, the government getting access to it doesn't change anything in that respect unless you think the NSA doesn't know how to internet.

[octopus]

abuse how? find out your poor and your grandma is dying, then try to sell you no-physical-required life insurance on her? or maybe, even though people march in the streets with giant placards criticizing the government, they'll see your text and secret police will come whisk you away in the night? as far as cyber security goes, they waited too long to take this seriously imo, but theres been a huge push in light of the recent cyber attacks to catch up to and outpace the rest of the world in this area. even still, i really don't care if some hackers, foreign or domestic, want to waste their time scrolling through the mundane details of my life in an effort to (fill in the blank) if it means keeping terrorists unsuccessful.

It's really the principle. Yes I agree that the government or the hackers don't really have anything to gain if they got my information, but I don't agree with it. It sounds like you don't really care about your privacy at all, if it means keeping terrorists from being successful.

Let's say the NSA extends this data collection agreement with the new Xbox One. Would you have a problem with the government having 24/7 access to your Kinect camera of your living room, because maybe the terrorists would use the console to perform skype calls over the internet?

[Niiro]

Your issue shouldn't be with the government then, it should be with all the tech and communications companies willing to hand over your information.

[octopus]

Your issue shouldn't be with the government then, it should be with all the tech and communications companies willing to hand over your information.

It takes two to Tango, so I do have an issue with both the government and the corporations.

[shaggnix]

It's really the principle. Yes I agree that the government or the hackers don't really have anything to gain if they got my information, but I don't agree with it. It sounds like you don't really care about your privacy at all, if it means keeping terrorists from being successful.

Let's say the NSA extends this data collection agreement with the new Xbox One. Would you have a problem with the government having 24/7 access to your Kinect camera of your living room, because maybe the terrorists would use the console to perform skype calls over the internet?

accessing a live video feed into my home =/= access to my email/text/phone calls, not even close. i do value my privacy. i'm simply saying what they have is available anyway with a little leg work, and isn't really very invasive. Its like you think they'll find out you cyber-ed with some dude pretending to be a woman and they're going to go to your home/work/school to announce it and troll the shit out of you. they. don't. care. randomly accessing this info for fishing expeditions is not legal as things stand. as far as not liking it, i agree, all else being equal i would rather they didn't have this info, but all else is not equal here. i'm trading a tiny bit of freedom/privacy in exchange for enhanced protection by the society of which i am a part. i don't like paying taxes either, but thats social contract for you.

[Necronus]

AOL still exists?

I have a cousin that I found out that is still paying AOL for his internet for all these years because he thinks that's how it works. Even though he was on a Verizon DSL connection that I set him up with (and that he wasn't the one being billed). So I explained that he's literally paying for nothing and that he should just put that money in with the other person in the house to get a better internet plan than what they were already sharing. He said he'd look into it, but when I asked a few weeks later he said "nah, I didn't do it, I want my internet to be separate" ...... and I proceeded to look for the nearest drywall to put my head through, hoping I'd hit a stud.

[octopus]

@shaggnix I understand your point, but I'm going to disagree still.

[Blubbartron]

Pretty much neither? But probably the cockpit doors. Really just increased awareness overall probably helps. The TSA scanners did p.much nothing new and violated privacy. No I don't support those.

But you've got to be incredibly stupid if you don't think MSA thwarts foreign and internal threats on the daily, often using collected data from communications.

The upgraded cockpit doors are solely responsible for not having terrorists take control of planes, if you were curious. For it to happen now, it would require the pilots to either be in on the plot, or they would have to willingly open the door under duress.

Also, did you typo NSA or is that some other agency/program I'm unfamiliar with? As far as the stupidity claim goes, see below.

Fucking lol at that link. Thwarted plots are rarely rarely advertised to the public and for good reason. Is this not common knowledge

So you're saying you have secret (or even top secret) clearance and personal knowledge of plots that were directly thwarted by anti-terrorism programs and not good old-fashioned detective/investigation work? Because otherwise you should stop drinking the fucking koolaid. Until the government proves they're actually doing something, they're not doing shit. The evidence of an absence (or minimal amount) of terrorist attacks is not proof that they have stopped any or decreased the frequency in any indirect manner.

[Xajii]

MSA was typo sorry

I thought it was pretty obvious that the US receives high volumes of threats and moderate amounts of attempted attacks on a regular basis. What do you think NSA guys just sit around laughing at our texts and forum posts all day?

The only koolaid is imagining a country with the power, aggressiveness, and resources that the US has *isn't* a daily target.

I'm sure there are some good resources on discussion of frequency but as I'm at work I can't really pull that up now

[quannum]

Binney explains how the program works

[Blubbartron]

MSA was typo sorry

While I wont disclose any knowledge I do or don't have I thought it was pretty obvious that the US receives high volumes of threats and moderate amounts of attempted attacks on a regular basis. What do you think NSA guys just sit around laughing at our texts and forum posts all day?

The only koolaid is imagining a country with the power, aggressiveness, and resources that the US has *isn't* a daily target.

I'm sure there are some good resources on discussion of frequency but as I'm at work I can't really pull that up now

I think I mentioned previously that smart people know there are dangerous people out there who hate us, but they're an extreme minority. I also find your claim that we're a daily target to be laughable, unless you mean there are people out there that hate us and are actively plotting against us. Yes, they're plotting every single day, but they're not even remotely close to executing (successfully or not) a plot on US soil every single day. They don't have the resources or the numbers to do it. If you want to count attacks/mines/bombs against our soldiers on foreign soil, that may get it closer, but those attacks are also very difficult to distinguish terrorist from pissed off person whose country is under military occupation.

That said, please do post any good resources you find.

[Xajii]

A daily target of espionage. Counterespionage is the large part of handling potential attacks. I don't mean that large-scale plots are trying to go off daily; I mean that action is taking place regarding them daily.

[Blubbartron]

A daily target of espionage. Counterespionage is the large part of handling potential attacks. I don't mean that large-scale plots are trying to go off daily; I mean that action is taking place regarding them daily.

Ignoring the fact that espionage and terrorism are radically different animals with completely different motivations and methodologies, yes, I'm quite sure people are working on preventing stuff on a daily basis. The question is whether or not they actually do anything useful before someone comes along and says "this guy is a terrorist, you should check him out." That's the only scenario I've seen any evidence for preventing imminent attacks. The rest of their work is in tracking down and capturing/executing people that have already executed their plot and taken credit for it. Not much good for prevention purposes.