NSA's backdoors to the internet, and GCHQ's beyond-top-secret spy base - Polidicks

I've decided to post two articles at the same time, given how closely they're related. I've copied a fair bit of the originals, but there's still more in the original articles. [url]http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/06/05/how_the_interenet_was_broken/?page=1[/url] [quote]Since the days of Watergate in the 1970s, and the subsequent US Congressional investigations, AT&T - the world's 23rd largest company - has been identified as providing US government access to all its customers' communications passing in and out of the US. The intercepted communications passed on long ago included communications of 1960s US antiwar dissidents. AT&T's secret role intercepting Americans' communications in a programme dubbed SHAMROCK was flushed out by Congressional enquiries in 1975, and largely stopped as illegal - for a few years. But it all began again in 1978 when a new US Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was passed. SHAMROCK was reborn, the Snowden archive reveals, as BLARNEY. The roll call of names and logos on the slide include most of the US's IT industry giants: Microsoft, HP, Cisco, IBM, Qualcomm, Intel, Motorola, Qwest, AT&T, Verizon, Oracle and EDS.[/quote] [quote]The damage created to IT security is deliberate, sustained and protected even inside the agencies' compartmented planning cells by arcane contrivances of language. Breaking the safety and value of crypto systems, in SIGINT speak, is "enabling". Deliberately sabotaging security, in the inverted Orwellian world of the SIGINT agencies is said to be "improving security". According to the leaked, detailed current US intelligence budget provided by Snowden, NSA's "Sigint Enabling Project ... actively engages the US and Foreign IT industries to covertly influence and/or overtly leverage their commercial products' designs. These design changes make the systems in question exploitable through SIGINT collection ... with foreknowledge of the modification. To the consumer and other adversaries, however, the systems' security remains intact." Tricking a company like RSA Security into promoting backdoored and sabotaged algorithms for default use in security products is "enabling". Physically sabotaging Cisco routers while they are being shipped out of the US to commercial customers - a serious crime when committed by anyone but the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the NSA - is "enabling". Ensuring that communications security encryption chips "used in Virtual Private Networks and Web encryption devices" secretly ship with their security broken open, as specified in the current US "cryptologic capabilities plan", is "enabling". In the coming year, NSA's budget for such Sigint "enabling" is $255m. This document and many more like it shine a spotlight on the invidious position in which major US corporations have found themselves. Their trust has been compromised, with share valuations now tumbling to follow. Cisco, despite being reported as "supporting missions" in the classified slides, was reportedly devastated when last month Greenwald published photographs taken by NSA's hacking department of "interdicted" Cisco equipment, stolen in transit and then put back in the delivery system after being tampered with to open the kit up for NSA remote control. It is also "aggressively involved in shaping traffic to run signals of interest past our monitors". For these and other services, according to the classified US Intelligence budget leaked by Snowden to the Washington Post, FAIRVIEW will receive $95m from NSA in the current year.[/quote] [quote]FAIRVIEW and STORMBREW are the covernames for the US's communications giants, AT&T and Verizon. In the UK, BT (GCHQ covername "REMEDY") and Verizon/Vodafone (GCHQ covername "GERONTIC") are described as actively intercepting their own and other companies' fibre networks, and linking them to GCHQ's processing sites at Cheltenham and Bude, Cornwall. BT and Verizon are also lavishly remunerated by GCHQ for their work in providing access to communications links in the UK, receiving payments of tens of millions of pounds annually, according to documents copied by Snowden. In one of the most alarming slideshows, NSA's successes in smashing basic general internet cryptography security is described in classic style as "improving security". NSA's project BULLRUN was described thus: [quote]For the past decade, NSA has led an aggressive, multipronged effort to break widely used Internet encryption technologies ... Cryptanalytic capabilities are now coming online. Vast amounts of encrypted Internet data which have up till now been discarded are now exploitable. Major new processing systems ... must be put in place to capitalise on this opportunity.[/quote] [/quote] [quote]The published Snowden documents have not yet described NSA's special activities to get into cables even their overseas and corporate partners cannot access. For more than ten years, an adapted nuclear submarine - the USS Jimmy Carter - has installed underwater taps on marine cables, "lifting them up", installing taps and then laying out "backhaul" fibres to interception sites, according to a former Sigint employee. Cable companies have speculated that the submarine tapping activity may be connected to a rash of unexplained cable cuts in recent times affecting fibre cables in the Middle East and South Asia; the cable breaks could serve to prevent operators noticing as taps were installed elsewhere on the same cable.[/quote] [url]http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/06/03/revealed_beyond_top_secret_british_intelligence_middleeast_internet_spy_base/?page=1[/url] [quote]The secret British spy base is part of a programme codenamed “CIRCUIT” and also referred to as Overseas Processing Centre 1 (OPC-1). It is located at Seeb, on the northern coast of Oman, where it taps in to various undersea cables passing through the Strait of Hormuz into the Persian/Arabian Gulf. Seeb is one of a three site GCHQ network in Oman, at locations codenamed “TIMPANI”, “GUITAR” and “CLARINET”. TIMPANI, near the Strait of Hormuz, can monitor Iraqi communications. CLARINET, in the south of Oman, is strategically close to Yemen. British national telco BT, referred to within GCHQ and the American NSA under the ultra-classified codename “REMEDY”, and Vodafone Cable (which owns the former Cable & Wireless company, aka “GERONTIC”) are the two top earners of secret GCHQ payments running into tens of millions of pounds annually.[/quote] [quote]The secret overseas internet monitoring centre, codenamed CIRCUIT, is at Seeb in the state of Oman. It is the latest of a series of secret collaborations with the autocratic Middle Eastern state, which has been ruled for 44 years by Sultan Qaboos bin Said, installed as head of state in a British-led and SAS-supported coup against his father. The Seeb centre was originally built in collaboration with the Omani government to monitor civil communications satellites orbiting above the Middle East. It has six large satellite dishes, forming part of the well-known and long running “ECHELON” intercept system run by the “Five Eyes” English-speaking (US/UK/Australia/Canada/New Zealand) intelligence agencies.[/quote] [quote]The majority of large cables come ashore in Cornwall, and have been connected directly to Bude. These include major connections such as FLAG (Fibre optic Link Around the Globe), two of whose cables have been intercepted. Because the FLAG interceptions had to be kept secret from the cables’ owners, one report states, the tapping connections were installed in an undisclosed UK location and “backhauled” to Bude, in the technical language of the communications industry.[/quote]

snip

[QUOTE]For more than ten years, an adapted nuclear submarine - the USS Jimmy Carter - has installed underwater taps on marine cables, "lifting them up", installing taps and then laying out "backhaul" fibres to interception sites, according to a former Sigint employee. Cable companies have speculated that the submarine tapping activity may be connected to a rash of unexplained cable cuts in recent times affecting fibre cables in the Middle East and South Asia; the cable breaks could serve to prevent operators noticing as taps were installed elsewhere on the same cable.[/QUOTE] welp I guess I can't trust [I]any[/I] part of the whole Internet anymore. Americans, you better do something about this. Please start bitching out your Congressional representatives until this stops.

And still nothing is happening. The government don't give a shit because they know that a citizen uprising isn't going to happen in countries such as the USA and the UK. I'm just hoping that in the future we'll be looked down upon as a terrible generation of people rather than shit like this continuing and becoming the norm.

[QUOTE=Noss;45027557]And still nothing is happening. The government don't give a shit because they know that a citizen uprising isn't going to happen in countries such as the USA and the UK. I'm just hoping that in the future we'll be looked down upon as a terrible generation of people rather than shit like this continuing and becoming the norm.[/QUOTE] Personally, I'd like to do something about it, but I'm a pretty paranoid person. See, I get this feeling that if I were to somehow manage to stage a massive protest or even a large movement of some kind, these jackholes would sic their media hounds on me with any intel they might have on me from using their surveillance. They would attempt to decredit me and make me look more like just some nutjob, or a terrorist or something. They can use what they have and spin the story any way they would need to to make me look unfitting as a leader. Suddenly, bam. That protest or movement or whatever dissolves because people don't want to follow someone who now looks psychotic to them thanks to the efforts of mass media. Somehow, I also get the feeling that a lot of other people might have similar feelings, and likewise don't want to do anything to draw attention to themselves like that. But I don't know, maybe I'm just overly paranoid about that kind of thing.

I really don't understand why they think this is necessary or reasonable. Depending on what they find on someone they could be ruining someone's life and making a criminal out of an otherwise innocent person at their own discretion. Seems to me like they just want dirt on everyone and anyone to make it easier to remove anyone that may dare question their regime. Fucking democracy my ass.

So we're just going to let this happen? Game over, freedom is dead.

Personally, if I was ultra rich I would buy up the undersea cables one at a time and scan every inch and remove these taps, and continue doing it when they readd them.

[QUOTE=Noss;45027557]And still nothing is happening. The government don't give a shit because they know that a citizen uprising isn't going to happen in countries such as the USA and the UK. I'm just hoping that in the future we'll be looked down upon as a terrible generation of people rather than shit like this continuing and becoming the norm.[/QUOTE] I hate to say it, but I don't really see the problem with the US tapping my internet connection. What are they gonna do, jerk off to my porn? Arrest me for piracy?

[QUOTE=Rubs10;45029269]I hate to say it, but I don't really see the problem with the US tapping my internet connection. What are they gonna do, jerk off to my porn? Arrest me for piracy?[/QUOTE] This argument pisses me the fuck off. I don't give a damn if such blatant disregard toward your privacy bothers you. It infringes on the rights of a [I]lot[/I] of people, many of whom actually [I]do[/I] care that they completely lack privacy.

[QUOTE=Rubs10;45029269]I hate to say it, but I don't really see the problem with the US tapping my internet connection. What are they gonna do, jerk off to my porn? Arrest me for piracy?[/QUOTE] Well yeah. It really comes down to that if they want something on you, they literally have everything you have ever searched and every webpage you have been on. I think everyone has searched or gone to a website they would regret if the public found out.

[QUOTE=Skarr;45029323]This argument pisses me the fuck off. I don't give a damn if such blatant disregard toward your privacy bothers you. It infringes on the rights of a [I]lot[/I] of people, many of whom actually [I]do[/I] care that they completely lack privacy.[/QUOTE] But he's not saying "no one should care about the government tapping them," he's saying "I don't care about them tapping me."

[QUOTE=supersnail11;45029367]But he's not saying "no one should care about the government tapping them," he's saying "I don't care about them tapping me."[/QUOTE] He doesn't live in an isolated bubble where the government only fucks with him. By allowing it, he also allows it to happen to others. This kind of apathy is dangerous and is part of the reason we are having this discussion in the first place.

[QUOTE=supersnail11;45029367]But he's not saying "no one should care about the government tapping them," he's saying "I don't care about them tapping me."[/QUOTE] most of my friends that say things like this: "I hate to say it, but I don't really see the problem with the US tapping my internet connection. What are they gonna do, jerk off to my porn? Arrest me for piracy?" They generally say it within the context of 'justifying' what the gov is doing. But really they mean that they are not really on any side here, they are basically saying [B]I[/B] don't care what the gov sees [B]ME[/B] doing. But even if they aren't on a side, it really doesn't help people that actually care about their internet privacy, you are just one less person the gov needs to debate with, like, there is no difference between not caring about what the government is doing and supporting what the government is doing. And it gets to those moments where its "with me or against me", no middle ground. That's my issue when hearing responses like that, I get you don't care and its your opinion, but there is a larger picture than that. U.S. is stepping out of line, that's the real problem.

Everyone sounds so surprised. The states has been trying to achieve global domination for over 30 years. Conspiracy theories or not, they've always wanted a larger slice of the pie. I'm sure an uprising in the next 150 years or so will deal with it though.

[QUOTE=Skarr;45029545]He doesn't live in an isolated bubble where the government only fucks with him. By allowing it, he also allows it to happen to others. This kind of apathy is dangerous and is part of the reason we are having this discussion in the first place.[/QUOTE] Because by not liking it, he magically makes it impossible for them to do it? It's not like anyone in this thread is out in the streets protesting. Just hating it doesn't make it go away.

[QUOTE=Marcolade;45028846]Personally, I'd like to do something about it, but I'm a pretty paranoid person. See, I get this feeling that if I were to somehow manage to stage a massive protest or even a large movement of some kind, these jackholes would sic their media hounds on me with any intel they might have on me from using their surveillance. They would attempt to decredit me and make me look more like just some nutjob, or a terrorist or something. They can use what they have and spin the story any way they would need to to make me look unfitting as a leader. Suddenly, bam. That protest or movement or whatever dissolves because people don't want to follow someone who now looks psychotic to them thanks to the efforts of mass media. Somehow, I also get the feeling that a lot of other people might have similar feelings, and likewise don't want to do anything to draw attention to themselves like that. But I don't know, maybe I'm just overly paranoid about that kind of thing.[/QUOTE] No, you're just being intelligent. Anyone that has [I]seriously[/I] considered doing something about this has thought the same. With the mountain of historical (now factual) evidence to support the paranoia, it comes as no surprise that there isn't some kind of rebellion. [I]"The tale of the historical revolutionizer eternally ends on the same note: Death"[/I].

[QUOTE=Skarr;45029323]This argument pisses me the fuck off. I don't give a damn if such blatant disregard toward your privacy bothers you. It infringes on the rights of a [I]lot[/I] of people, many of whom actually [I]do[/I] care that they completely lack privacy.[/QUOTE] I'm sorry, what I meant is that there isn't enough abuse of their power for me to complain. Yes, they do abuse their power, and it seems most of our government doesn't know the full extent. That should be fixed. And my problem is, what's the threat to the general public? Will they target some poor random innocent to blackmail and coerce into doing their bidding? Based on the leaks, the only people they target are Muslims that they've dubbed "extreme", and people that they want to fuck. Because surprise surprise, our Orwellian benefactors are humans too. I just don't see enough cause to take up arms.

[QUOTE=Marcolade;45028846]Personally, I'd like to do something about it, but I'm a pretty paranoid person. See, I get this feeling that if I were to somehow manage to stage a massive protest or even a large movement of some kind, these jackholes would sic their media hounds on me with any intel they might have on me from using their surveillance. They would attempt to decredit me and make me look more like just some nutjob, or a terrorist or something. They can use what they have and spin the story any way they would need to to make me look unfitting as a leader. Suddenly, bam. That protest or movement or whatever dissolves because people don't want to follow someone who now looks psychotic to them thanks to the efforts of mass media. Somehow, I also get the feeling that a lot of other people might have similar feelings, and likewise don't want to do anything to draw attention to themselves like that. But I don't know, maybe I'm just overly paranoid about that kind of thing.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=orcywoo6;45028978]I really don't understand why they think this is necessary or reasonable. Depending on what they find on someone they could be ruining someone's life and making a criminal out of an otherwise innocent person at their own discretion.[/QUOTE][QUOTE=Boilrig;45029336]Well yeah. It really comes down to that if they want something on you, they literally have everything you have ever searched and every webpage you have been on. I think everyone has searched or gone to a website they would regret if the public found out.[/QUOTE] Has this kind of thing actually happened? Can you give any examples of the leaders of popular movements suddenly getting discredited by an unnamed source with very personal information? I think it's a bit silly to think that the government cares or has the resources to do anything about you, random human #2,349,153,564 out of seven billion and rising, let alone has a dossier on all your most private, embarrassing details. There are just too many people for that kind of conspiracy to be going on. Governments want to intercept communications going to Al-Qaeda/Taliban/Al-Shabaab/etc terrorist groups, and from agents to their contacts back home, so that's probably who they're targeting- people of interest, not everybody. It's still a privacy concern that that power could easily be abused, but the Big Brother sort of fears that the government is watching everything you do (via a telecom line that is only used for intercontinental traffic) are a little excessive.

[QUOTE=Marcolade;45028846]Personally, I'd like to do something about it, but I'm a pretty paranoid person. See, I get this feeling that if I were to somehow manage to stage a massive protest or even a large movement of some kind, these jackholes would sic their media hounds on me with any intel they might have on me from using their surveillance. They would attempt to decredit me and make me look more like just some nutjob, or a terrorist or something. They can use what they have and spin the story any way they would need to to make me look unfitting as a leader. Suddenly, bam. That protest or movement or whatever dissolves because people don't want to follow someone who now looks psychotic to them thanks to the efforts of mass media. Somehow, I also get the feeling that a lot of other people might have similar feelings, and likewise don't want to do anything to draw attention to themselves like that. But I don't know, maybe I'm just overly paranoid about that kind of thing.[/QUOTE] Then it's simple, we don't need a man to lead, but a figure. Someone with no information about them, or even someone who they won't know where to look for.

[QUOTE=Axznma;45029883]No, you're just being intelligent. Anyone that has [I]seriously[/I] considered doing something about this has thought the same. With the mountain of historical (now factual) evidence to support the paranoia, it comes as no surprise that there isn't some kind of rebellion. [I]"The tale of the historical revolutionizer eternally ends on the same note: Death"[/I].[/QUOTE] Pretty much that, you'd more or less be demonized by the media if you tried to break the status quo. Though, I mused the thought that if the technological singularity happened, (if we survived) privacy would be extinct most likely. So in the end, privacy may be moot anyways to our eventual AI overlords. :v:

[QUOTE=Boilrig;45029201]Personally, if I was ultra rich I would buy up the undersea cables one at a time and scan every inch and remove these taps, and continue doing it when they readd them.[/QUOTE] I don't think they'd take too nicely to you constantly spending millions of dollars constantly sending down submersibles to fuck with under-water cable systems, that the person operating the submersible probably has no idea how to remove without fucking up the rest of the cable system. I wonder if eventually they'd start patrolling the underwater cables with USS Jimmy Carter and then like intentionally ram the submersible(s) or something (Shooting it with a torpedo would be a bit too obvious, I think). Hell, they'd probably label it as an anti-terrorist action if it ever came to light and drop you in Guantanamo bay. TL:DR I doubt fucking with expensive top secret NSA equipment under the ocean would end well for you.

[QUOTE=catbarf;45030958]Has this kind of thing actually happened? Can you give any examples of the leaders of popular movements suddenly getting discredited by an unnamed source with very personal information? I think it's a bit silly to think that the government cares or has the resources to do anything about you, random human #2,349,153,564 out of seven billion and rising, let alone has a dossier on all your most private, embarrassing details. There are just too many people for that kind of conspiracy to be going on. Governments want to intercept communications going to Al-Qaeda/Taliban/Al-Shabaab/etc terrorist groups, and from agents to their contacts back home, so that's probably who they're targeting- people of interest, not everybody. It's still a privacy concern that that power could easily be abused, but the Big Brother sort of fears that the government is watching everything you do (via a telecom line that is only used for intercontinental traffic) are a little excessive.[/QUOTE] I wouldn't say its excessive. With a few tragedies and public outcry it's not unheard of someone turning a country into a totalitarian state. Remember folks, Hitler was voted into power through the enabling act which was justified through the burning of the Reichstag

I'm happy that I'm going to college in Baltimore, Maryland. It's pretty close to Washington D.C. so I'll be able to protest a lot.

[QUOTE=catbarf;45030958]Has this kind of thing actually happened? Can you give any examples of the leaders of popular movements suddenly getting discredited by an unnamed source with very personal information? I think it's a bit silly to think that the government cares or has the resources to do anything about you, random human #2,349,153,564 out of seven billion and rising, let alone has a dossier on all your most private, embarrassing details. There are just too many people for that kind of conspiracy to be going on. Governments want to intercept communications going to Al-Qaeda/Taliban/Al-Shabaab/etc terrorist groups, and from agents to their contacts back home, so that's probably who they're targeting- people of interest, not everybody. It's still a privacy concern that that power could easily be abused, but the Big Brother sort of fears that the government is watching everything you do (via a telecom line that is only used for intercontinental traffic) are a little excessive.[/QUOTE] Hi, I'm not too knowledgeable about this sort of stuff but I came across this article about burglars breaking into the FBI building and finding documents dealing with surveillance of black people and anti-war activists. Apparently FBI were trying to get MLK to commit suicide. More details in the link below. I just learned about this now, unfortunately. [url]http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/review-the-burglary-the-discovery-of-j-edgar-hoovers-secret-fbi-by-betty-medsger/2014/01/23/92221976-7c55-11e3-93c1-0e888170b723_story.html[/url] [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/07/us/burglars-who-took-on-fbi-abandon-shadows.html?_r=0[/url]

[QUOTE=Rubs10;45029269]I hate to say it, but I don't really see the problem with the US tapping my internet connection. What are they gonna do, jerk off to my porn? Arrest me for piracy?[/QUOTE] So do you have issue with me installing big brother like surveilance in your home? Without your knowledge?

[QUOTE=Rubs10;45030529]I'm sorry, what I meant is that there isn't enough abuse of their power for me to complain. Yes, they do abuse their power, and it seems most of our government doesn't know the full extent. That should be fixed. And my problem is, what's the threat to the general public? Will they target some poor random innocent to blackmail and coerce into doing their bidding? Based on the leaks, the only people they target are Muslims that they've dubbed "extreme", and people that they want to fuck. Because surprise surprise, our Orwellian benefactors are humans too. I just don't see enough cause to take up arms.[/QUOTE] You want the disease you know you have to show even more serious symptoms before curing it? That's a horrible way of looking at things.

[QUOTE=wraithcat;45034210]So do you have issue with me installing big brother like surveilance in your home? Without your knowledge?[/QUOTE] That's not a realistic comparison. The NSA can't personally review all the data that they get, and they don't bother because there's no reason to. There might be copies of my personal information sitting somewhere in government storage, but it doesn't matter because no one will see it, and if they do, they won't care.

[QUOTE=Marcolade;45028846]Personally, I'd like to do something about it, but I'm a pretty paranoid person. See, I get this feeling that if I were to somehow manage to stage a massive protest or even a large movement of some kind, these jackholes would sic their media hounds on me with any intel they might have on me from using their surveillance. They would attempt to decredit me and make me look more like just some nutjob, or a terrorist or something. They can use what they have and spin the story any way they would need to to make me look unfitting as a leader. Suddenly, bam. That protest or movement or whatever dissolves because people don't want to follow someone who now looks psychotic to them thanks to the efforts of mass media. Somehow, I also get the feeling that a lot of other people might have similar feelings, and likewise don't want to do anything to draw attention to themselves like that. But I don't know, maybe I'm just overly paranoid about that kind of thing.[/QUOTE] Think long term. Right now there's some 13 year looking at some material, we'll call it 'porn'. This 13 year old doesn't realize it but a profile of him(or her) has been created from birth. This accessing of porn is now included in the file. Years pass and what do you know, that 13 year has grown up to get into politics. In fact, that kid is now the would be leader of an anti-establishment movement. Except somehow information from the past has leaked out, embarrassing information. His or her political career dies right there. The same could happen for business leaders, religious leaders, you name it. No one would ever know it either. How could you know it? You'd never be able to prove it. Look at how many political campaigns in the past have hinged on the winner digging up 'dirt' on his or her opponent. Until now, that tactic has been limited by the relatively small amount of public information from the past that they can access. Now imagine how much more powerful a weapon they'll have when they have all your electronic history in storage to dig through.

[QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;45036561]This 13 year old doesn't realize it but a profile of him(or her) has been created from birth. This accessing of porn is now included in the file.[/QUOTE] This is where there should be a great big [citation needed]. It's a huge jump from monitoring groups and persons of interest to creating files on every single person using the Internet, then identifying and storing 'dirt' on every person from birth. It would be an absolutely impossible task even for the most motivated of shadowy government agencies. I remain convinced that anyone who thinks such a scheme is even feasible for any government, let alone is actually happening, has never worked a day in public sector. Spy agencies pull off cool (and scary) tricks but they're just as budget-limited and dysfunctionally bureaucratic as any other part of government.