Prism Program ( Big Brother gone too far?)

[WDeranged]

Chinese dissident talks about Prism.

[BruceVC]

 

So if a program has been going on for 50 years, it doesn't matter that that it's changed over those 50 years, either you should have been outraging for the last 50 years or you should just accept it and whatever forms into which it develops in the future? Seems like that's an attitude lacking in both idealism and pragmatism, useful for laughing at others but not for constructing a useful approach to anything.

 

Yes, Echelon has been around and it is in many ways just as invasive. Yes, not everyone may be aware of this and it's useful to bring it up. I'm generally supportive of strong governments and know fully well someone like me could not survive very well in an anarchistic environment, and that 'free speech no matter what' is a terribly silly ideology to live by. That doesn't mean I think it's a very good attitude to just say "hey this has been going on forever so meh".

Youre entitled to your opinion and I respect that. To me its a meh because its something that's been going on since before my birth and Im totally unaffected by it. I also understand that its not for everybody. I actually support programs like this and have no problem with ECHELON, or the natural evolution (to include cellular, internet) PRISM.

 

I don't have a problem with the whistleblower either (because I thought these programs were common knowledge anyway). Its good for people to keep their governments honest even if it involves falling on your own sword. That poor bastard is screwed.

 

 

 

You have raised an interesting perspective around ECHELON but there are some fundamental differences I can see between it and Prism. These include

 

• ECHELON existence is not confirmed but I'm sure its real. We really don't know how much it is used nowadays
• ECHELON was created during the Cold War  through an alliance of countries opposed to the USSR, Prism was created by the USA for there own purposes of monitoring information
• ECHELON was used primarily to monitor Satellite communication, its ability to monitor Internet traffic wouldn't be as effective as Prism and you would have to have actual surveillance equipment installed at the various nexus TCP/IP routing points throughout the world. Prism is much more powerful in its ability to monitor Internet traffic that uses Fibre Optic as a transport medium

In summary even though ECHELON may appear to be the same as Prism its not as effective as Prism and was designed for a different type of data monitoring

Edited June 12, 2013 by BruceVC

[Zoraptor]

 

Honestly, I don't have the interest to get into a circle jerk over terminology. ECHELON is "capable of interception and content inspection of telephone calls, fax, e-mail and other data traffic globally through the interception of communication bearers including satellite transmission, public switched telephone networks (which once carried most Internet traffic) and microwave links. If you think that this tool is kept offline until they have a REALLY good reason or that it has not been used on its own citizens then I don't know what to tell you.

 

Personally I've known about Echelon for ages, there's a nice big satellite dish outside Nelson which was part of it. I mentioned it fairly recently too with respect to it being used for industrial espionage (Airbus v Boeing) when the subject of chinese hacking came up previous. There are very important- absolutely fundamental- differences between it and Prism though, as much as between a Brown Bess musket and an M2 machine gun.

 

Echelon was a self limiting system- you had to target it specifically. Why? Storage and computer power. You simply cannot archive every phone call via analogue means, and you cannot sort them in any practical way. Stick them on hard disk? In the 80s or 90s, or even early noughties? Won't happen, cannot physically happen as there simply ain't the storage medium available to store everything. Even if there were and you need to do a search on whatever you've got digitally? Hope you've got a lot of time while that Cray with 8MB RAM and less CPU power than a current era cell phone chugs away at it, or your DEC Alpha array with 32MB RAM from the 90s. In those circumstances intelligence has to be gathered, well, intelligently as a drag net approach is fundamentally impossible.

 

That is not a problem now, mass storage is cheap, processing power is cheap and you can feasibly store all communications, index and search it. And that is why Prism is far more dangerous than Echelon ever was, there's no longer the technical limitations providing intrinsic safeguards that there were with Echelon and the system can be used as a general purpose drag net to suck up everything, not just relevant stuff.

[Tagaziel]

OK, so what is an appropriate response to the Prism leak? Sagely nod and say "oh, this is pretty much Echelon v2.0", on the assumption that everybody else will understand we're to wait until something really terrible (wherever the line may be) happens, and then we will all rise up?

React, but in moderation and with the proper research. Shrieking and flailing is hardly the best answer. I'm a proud EU citizen and I see that Chancellor Merkel and other European leaders are reacting, so I'm not sure why I should flail about and shriek.

 

I'm also willing to give the intelligence directors benefit of the doubt. But maybe that's just the lawyer in me speaking, you know, presuming people to be innocent until they're proven guilty and all the other outmoded foundations of the modern world.

 

Personally I've known about Echelon for ages, there's a nice big satellite dish outside Nelson which was part of it. I mentioned it fairly recently too with respect to it being used for industrial espionage (Airbus v Boeing) when the subject of chinese hacking came up previous. There are very important- absolutely fundamental- differences between it and Prism though, as much as between a Brown Bess musket and an M2 machine gun.

 

Echelon was a self limiting system- you had to target it specifically. Why? Storage and computer power. You simply cannot archive every phone call via analogue means, and you cannot sort them in any practical way. Stick them on hard disk? In the 80s or 90s, or even early noughties? Won't happen, cannot physically happen as there simply ain't the storage medium available to store everything. Even if there were and you need to do a search on whatever you've got digitally? Hope you've got a lot of time while that Cray with 8MB RAM and less CPU power than a current era cell phone chugs away at it, or your DEC Alpha array with 32MB RAM from the 90s. In those circumstances intelligence has to be gathered, well, intelligently as a drag net approach is fundamentally impossible.

 

That is not a problem now, mass storage is cheap, processing power is cheap and you can feasibly store all communications, index and search it. And that is why Prism is far more dangerous than Echelon ever was, there's no longer the technical limitations providing intrinsic safeguards that there were with Echelon and the system can be used as a general purpose drag net to suck up everything, not just relevant stuff.

You do realize that with exabytes of data exchanged each day on the Internet storing all of it would be impractical, right? You claim that ECHELON was intrinsically limited, but ignore the fact that PRISM is intrinsically limited in the exact same way. You need to have criteria and a granularity policy to effectively wade through the millions of gigabytes exchanged on the Internet every single day.

 

That's what amuses me the most about the claims that all of this data is analysed and stored. I'm not sure, but I doubt the NSA is employing a million employees who are going through 2.5 GBs of intercepted data each day just to seek out DISSIDENT THOUGHT to INTERN people in FEMA CAMPS.

[Gorth]

Entirely speculation on my part, but I suspect they have algorithms in place that triggers on key words and key sequences, like a heuristic analysis of whether or not a particular stream is of interest to monitor closer. It's probably also more targeted than just a shotgun shot in the dark (i.e. see above comments about industrial espionage and groupings/geographical areas of special interest).

 

If homegrown terrorists are an anomaly, you can already start cutting down your target group to people who have either migrated the last 20 years or visited/traveled to "certain" areas/countries in the time.

 

Still humongous amounts of data, but not necessarily a log of all the communications in the world.

 

Interesting would be (if such was the case) to see the criteria for what would make it on such lists.

[BruceVC]

 

OK, so what is an appropriate response to the Prism leak? Sagely nod and say "oh, this is pretty much Echelon v2.0", on the assumption that everybody else will understand we're to wait until something really terrible (wherever the line may be) happens, and then we will all rise up?

React, but in moderation and with the proper research. Shrieking and flailing is hardly the best answer. I'm a proud EU citizen and I see that Chancellor Merkel and other European leaders are reacting, so I'm not sure why I should flail about and shriek.

 

I'm also willing to give the intelligence directors benefit of the doubt. But maybe that's just the lawyer in me speaking, you know, presuming people to be innocent until they're proven guilty and all the other outmoded foundations of the modern world.

 

Personally I've known about Echelon for ages, there's a nice big satellite dish outside Nelson which was part of it. I mentioned it fairly recently too with respect to it being used for industrial espionage (Airbus v Boeing) when the subject of chinese hacking came up previous. There are very important- absolutely fundamental- differences between it and Prism though, as much as between a Brown Bess musket and an M2 machine gun.

 

Echelon was a self limiting system- you had to target it specifically. Why? Storage and computer power. You simply cannot archive every phone call via analogue means, and you cannot sort them in any practical way. Stick them on hard disk? In the 80s or 90s, or even early noughties? Won't happen, cannot physically happen as there simply ain't the storage medium available to store everything. Even if there were and you need to do a search on whatever you've got digitally? Hope you've got a lot of time while that Cray with 8MB RAM and less CPU power than a current era cell phone chugs away at it, or your DEC Alpha array with 32MB RAM from the 90s. In those circumstances intelligence has to be gathered, well, intelligently as a drag net approach is fundamentally impossible.

 

That is not a problem now, mass storage is cheap, processing power is cheap and you can feasibly store all communications, index and search it. And that is why Prism is far more dangerous than Echelon ever was, there's no longer the technical limitations providing intrinsic safeguards that there were with Echelon and the system can be used as a general purpose drag net to suck up everything, not just relevant stuff.

You do realize that with exabytes of data exchanged each day on the Internet storing all of it would be impractical, right? You claim that ECHELON was intrinsically limited, but ignore the fact that PRISM is intrinsically limited in the exact same way. You need to have criteria and a granularity policy to effectively wade through the millions of gigabytes exchanged on the Internet every single day.

 

That's what amuses me the most about the claims that all of this data is analysed and stored. I'm not sure, but I doubt the NSA is employing a million employees who are going through 2.5 GBs of intercepted data each day just to seek out DISSIDENT THOUGHT to INTERN people in FEMA CAMPS.

 

 

To be specific Prism allows the monitoring of data, I doubt it stores everything. Logically it would be able to check log files and confirm patterns of internet interest in respect to websites you visit. It would only  be able to actively monitor social media conversations once someone is added as a person of interest. But no Social Media provider keeps the conversations of people as there would be too much data. You do get software that can do this but this is only used by certain financial institutions who use tools like Bloomberg chat to make deals. As I mentioned its very feasible once Prism is used to monitor you then your live chats, emails and most other forms of communication can be monitored and analysed

Edited June 12, 2013 by BruceVC

[pmp10]

To be specific Prism allows the monitoring of data, I doubt it stores everything.

Why would it need to store everything?

Part of the program is direct access to data of services like google/youtube/facebook.

[Zoraptor]

Yep, that cuts out a lot of data.

 

And, of course, along with greater computing power comes better compression technology. So it's coming together from both ends, you can compress the data better, smaller, faster, and store more and more on the bigger and bigger disks. I wouldn't be in the least bit surprised if all emails and txts were being archived already- voice and stuff which requires more space, probably not yet. But I've little doubt it will come and I'd strongly suspect that over a more limited time period (ie not eternal storage with no roll over) it is feasible already.

[Drowsy Emperor]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/10/whistleblowers-snowden-truth-sets-free

 

Ex MI5 officer

 

Often people who blow the whistle try to deal with the issue in-house. We certainly did. You go to your boss and say: "This is wrong." You say: "We should learn from mistakes made." And they tell you just to shut up, not rock the boat and follow orders.

 

 

For those that need proof of something so evident.

[BruceVC]

 

To be specific Prism allows the monitoring of data, I doubt it stores everything.

Why would it need to store everything?

Part of the program is direct access to data of services like google/youtube/facebook.

 

 

You have asked a good question. In order do a proper data audit of someone suspected of being involved in illegal activities Prism would need to look at all primary data sources of a suspect. This would allow the NSA to build a definitive case against someone. These would include

 

• emails
• websites they visited
• Social Media communication
• Social media footprint

As you know emails and social media communications can be deleted or just doesn't get stored in a typical social media setup, this data is transitory. But once a program like Prism targets you it would keep  a record of this data irrespective if you delete it. But this has to be done on a per user basis, no program would have the capacity to capture all this information all the time for every person in the world. But don't think they can't and will do for selective users

[Humanoid]

Apparently sales of Orwell's 1984 have jumped 9,538% since this scandal broke. Heh.

[Guard Dog]

I'd post what I really think of all this but I don't know who might be reading it. 

[BruceVC]

I'd post what I really think of all this but I don't know who might be reading it. 

 

Hi GD

 

Where you been?

[Guard Dog]

Busy saving the world from not enough wi-fi! Gotta keep those government a******s busy by giving them lots of traffic to spy on! 

[Malcador]

I'd post what I really think of all this but I don't know who might be reading it. 

They already know man. Government telepaths.

[exodiark]

 

Such pessimistic view, only Sith deal in absolutes.

 

Well, if people don't like it, but doesn't want to go back to wild west, there are also alternatives like:

- banning immigrations, especially people from China, Middle East, or other unfriendly countries.

- Don't pick fight with the rest of the world. Invading Iraq with fake WMD is pure **** move.

- Don't pay tax and move out America if you don't like the current administration.

 

Nobody has a perfect solution for globalization.

Apparently PRISM and other large surveillance systems are quite effective in maintaining order in very large, multicultural territory like USA and China.

Edited June 12, 2013 by exodiark

[Walsingham]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/10/whistleblowers-snowden-truth-sets-free

 

Ex MI5 officer

 

Often people who blow the whistle try to deal with the issue in-house. We certainly did. You go to your boss and say: "This is wrong." You say: "We should learn from mistakes made." And they tell you just to shut up, not rock the boat and follow orders.

 

 

For those that need proof of something so evident.

 

So what you do is you speak to the boss two layers up, or you speak to another government department, or you speak to a member of Parliament from an opposition party in a relevant area. What you don't know is skip off to the nearest internet portal and datadump everything you know into the laps of every man and his dog.

 

This isn't the wise musings of Walsingham. We got told this in the _first week_ of my military training. At some length. With examples. Go up the chain, unless you think it's broken, then jump the broken links.

 

I have to say that I think your suspicion of modern democratic government say more about your own poorly veiled agendas and hatreds than it does about government.

[Malcador]

Pretty idealistic though and if the people are this disgusted with what they're seeing going on as a matter of course they might be worried that trying to go up the chain will lead to nasty things happening to them, being in an intelligence industry.

[Gfted1]

Pretty idealistic though and if the people are this disgusted with what they're seeing going on as a matter of course they might be worried that trying to go up the chain will lead to nasty things happening to them, being in an intelligence industry.

As opposed to the nasty things that will definitely happen to them if they leak secret information?

[Malcador]

But at least they've got the word out, rather than just ending up silenced, if that's their worry. If you have absolutely no faith in the system actually functioning to correct itself rather than a giant CYA scheme, seems sensible to go outside it.

 

Lighter example here in Canada, soldier went before Parliament to bring to light issues with getting health care. And now he was dismissed from the military for completely unrelated reasons

[Walsingham]

Case link?

[Meshugger]

Oooops.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wsX2dtOgPAs

 

Oooops again.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=r2jT-hB6aDI

[Malcador]

Case link?

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/injured-soldier-who-testified-about-struggles-given-discharge-notice-1.1319952

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/06/10/pol-military-kirkland-pension.html

 

Might be coincidental, and naturally this was a military decision not a government one.

[Drowsy Emperor]

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/10/whistleblowers-snowden-truth-sets-free

 

Ex MI5 officer

 

Often people who blow the whistle try to deal with the issue in-house. We certainly did. You go to your boss and say: "This is wrong." You say: "We should learn from mistakes made." And they tell you just to shut up, not rock the boat and follow orders.

 

 

For those that need proof of something so evident.

 

So what you do is you speak to the boss two layers up, or you speak to another government department, or you speak to a member of Parliament from an opposition party in a relevant area. What you don't know is skip off to the nearest internet portal and datadump everything you know into the laps of every man and his dog.

 

This isn't the wise musings of Walsingham. We got told this in the _first week_ of my military training. At some length. With examples. Go up the chain, unless you think it's broken, then jump the broken links.

 

I have to say that I think your suspicion of modern democratic government say more about your own poorly veiled agendas and hatreds than it does about government.

 

 

And I have to say that your lack of suspicion is utterly unsurprising coming from someone who constantly stresses his military experience, admiration for armed forces and advises obedience to authority and "proper procedure" at every turn. 

Just because you have been drilled to think in a particular way doesn't make everyone else fools, "goddamn hippies", extremists and haters. 

 

I seriously doubt Manning and Snowden are either after fame and personal exposure, or so stupid as to not be aware of political circles they could have brought their story to. Yet they chose not to. Do tell me why?

[Gfted1]

I seriously doubt Manning and Snowden are either after fame and personal exposure, or so stupid as to not be aware of political circles they could have brought their story to. Yet they chose not to. Do tell me why?

I don't follow. They released it to the press, so effectively, everyone in the world. Can you expand your thoughts on this?