×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Info Leak Wars To Get Messier

Soulskill posted about 8 months ago | from the somebody-schedule-e-woodstock dept.

Government 350

jfruh writes "As we discussed this weekend, David Miranda, the partner of the Guardian's Glenn Greenwald, was detained while transporting encrypted data on the Snowden affair from Berlin; all his electronics were seized. Over at the Guardian offices, British police destroyed more of the newspaper's hard drives. Privacy blogger Dan Tynan sees where this one is going: reporters like Greenwald are going to stop even bothering to be circumspect with their revelations. Sorting through the contents of such infocaches to redact sensitive information just gives the government time to track you down. Eventually, the information will just be dumped online, warts and all, as soon as someone who wants the information public gets ahold of it."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

350 comments

Idiots (3, Informative)

scarboni888 (1122993) | about 8 months ago | (#44625481)

'Nuff said.

Re:Idiots (4, Interesting)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 8 months ago | (#44625547)

No, why? They're desperate to know what's out there, so it's best to provoke a dump.. You know, adding a little laxative to the mix.

Re:Idiots (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44625589)

Regardless of which side you fall on, I just can't imagine the scene where the decision was made for the Met to detain David Miranda was made without "send in the clowns" playing as the backing track. They must have thought Christmas had come early - he was foreign, gay *and* a being labelled as a potential terrorist.

Re:Idiots (4, Interesting)

Fluffeh (1273756) | about 8 months ago | (#44625677)

They must have thought Christmas had come early - he was foreign, gay *and* a being labelled as a potential terrorist.

That's not going to help the feds/governments in the long term though. The more they rough up the journalists, treat them like enemies and make their lives generally more difficult - the more they are likely to be treated in the same manner. Why go to all the trouble of being polite, redacting sensetive bits and playing by the book when you know that the next time you go through an airport, your pants are coming down and you better hope you got some lube in...

When one team starts playing hardball, the other team often starts doing the same - and the journalists will probably see these sorts of infractions nothing short of a badge of honour - but on the flipside, the potential trouble/egg-on-face for the governments just went up and up.

Re:Idiots (1)

BrokenHalo (565198) | about 8 months ago | (#44625801)

The more they rough up the journalists, treat them like enemies...

In this case, the guy wasn't even a journalist.

Re:Idiots (1)

cheater512 (783349) | about 8 months ago | (#44626187)

A journalist's partner who was helping the journalist with the story.
That's pretty damn close to being a journalist.

Or to put it another way, if he wasn't a journalist then wtf did they detain him for 9 hours for?
There would be no point unless he was acting in the capacity as a journalist.

Re:Idiots (-1, Troll)

Jerzy Kaltenberg (2975611) | about 8 months ago | (#44626393)

acting in capacity of a data mule? a big so what. The cops were in their rights to do this, and frankly anyone seeking to distribute or help in acquisition of stolen data is a criminal. The press as a 3rd estate is a horrible idea - might as well trust the paparazzi with your kids' colonoscopy video.

Re:Idiots (4, Insightful)

TheGavster (774657) | about 8 months ago | (#44626417)

They detained him for exactly the reason you kidnap the action hero's wife/girlfriend/mother: people are a lot more likely to break if you threaten someone they care about than if you threaten them directly. Added bonus: not technically a journalist, not technically protected by whatever media shields are available in the UK.

Re:Idiots (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44626149)

If push comes to shove, the victors will eventually be Western governments closing the door on journalists. For example, China, and the mention of how many/few prisoners they have for execution is a state secret (as per a previous /. article on them stopping organ harvesting). However, if the US had prisoners slated for execution for organs and hid the numbers as a state secret, the world would be stating it was a Holocast in the making.

Journalists have been allowed free reign, but if governments start actually losing balances of power because of leaks, the journalist is not going to win the battle against a government enforcer (police officer, army soldier, Taliban morals officer) with a high powered firearm. A journalist might win if they get their data to the world, but a government has a lot of opportunity to put a bullet through that person's brainpan from the time they witnessed an event until they get the event uploaded. To boot, a potential "journalist" can be isolated and potentially imprisoned just by the trail they leave on the Internet.

Don't forget the biggest reason why the press is even permitted -- the press lobby is very strong, so as of now, any government official going against it will be voted out of office. However, the military lobby is a lot stronger, and when it comes to a conflict between the two, it will be the guys with guns who win politically.

[1]: It wouldn't take much to pass a law or an ACTA-like treaty to demand that any Internet connected computer to have a DRM stack and pass a healthcheck before it is allowed to connect upstream. Couple to that transparent SSL proxies, and a firewall smart enough to detect attempts at tunneling and stop them. This is common on LANs, and having the tech move to WANs is trivial. ISPs may complain, but ultimately, they would have to comply or else be shut down. This will go a lot to identify would-be leakers, and have them (and their families) arrested for "terrorism".

Re:Idiots (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44625707)

The guy was Brazilian. Lucky for him they didn't try to arrest him in a Tube station.

Re:Idiots (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44626263)

They shaved his balls?!!?!?!

Re:Idiots (5, Funny)

Culture20 (968837) | about 8 months ago | (#44625961)

Regardless of which side you fall on, I just can't imagine the scene where the decision was made for the Met to detain David Miranda was made without "send in the clowns" playing as the backing track.

Don't you mean Yakety Sax?

Re:Idiots (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44626193)

The action the MPS was asked to carry out appears foolish in light of the apparent goal of whoever was pulling their strings, but certainly in no way comical. Trying for some actual nuance there if you recognise what clown means in context.

The whole state of affairs is tragic; seeing the corrosion to the relative freedom of western society that has been caused by fear.

On the other hand, a really awful law may be reigned in or repealed because of it, so ultimately some good may come of this particular event.

Re:Idiots (1)

buchner.johannes (1139593) | about 8 months ago | (#44625767)

I don't understand why they don't take legal action. They should be able to find a pro-bono lawyer; the Guardian is probably happy to assist with its legal department. There must be some laws left in the UK, or at least embarrass the higher courts by forcing them to make a official ruling. For example, if the law is ultimately ruled unconstitutional, it's evidence of incapacity of the parliament to make constitutional laws.

Re:Idiots (4, Interesting)

BrokenHalo (565198) | about 8 months ago | (#44625871)

I don't understand why they don't take legal action.

Because unfortunately there's no law to say you can't behave like an asswipe. The detention was legal enough within the letter of the law (the less said about the spirit of it, the better), and he was released after the stipulated maximum amount of time. As for destruction of equipment, I'm sure there is some precedent making that legal.

There's only one way to get around a government's thuggery and intimidation, and that is to blow them wide open.

Re:Idiots (2)

uniquename72 (1169497) | about 8 months ago | (#44626027)

Because unfortunately there's no law to say you can't behave like an asswipe.

As you noted, just the opposite is true. The law explicitly *encourages* cops to act like asswipes -- as long as TERRORISM!

That (1)

memnock (466995) | about 8 months ago | (#44625497)

means that it will be harder to decipher what is going on. I realize all reporters have a bias, but they at least go through most of the material and point out the notable items. Now whomever is interested will need to go through the data dumps for the interesting stuff. That will make the "reporting" less effective.

Re:That (2)

ATMAvatar (648864) | about 8 months ago | (#44625563)

Not necessarily. A new group of reporters/bloggers would probably pop up to mull through the raw data and produce easily-digestible material from it. Think something like Groklaw but for general news rather than legal cases.

Re:That (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44625701)

On a very related note Groklaw is not more unfortunately,
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130820/02152224249/more-nsa-spying-fallout-groklaw-shutting-down.shtml

Re:That (5, Insightful)

icebike (68054) | about 8 months ago | (#44625795)

But even Groklaw has shut down [groklaw.net] due to the mere fact it is impossible to communicate in private, and Groklaw never did a single illegal thing as far as I can tell.

We think that making multiple copies cached around the world will keep the information public, but that is probably not correct. Look at the "practice run" the authorities are carrying out with Child Porn and a training exercise of how to combat access to any information, even when you don't control where that information is stored.

Having Snowden's windfall on a million drives all decrypted and open for all to see wouldn't help, because anyone accessing it at any time from any computer on the net could and would be instantly tracked, and forced to have a computer bashing party in their own basement.

We are on the tipping point of losing ALL freedoms. Anyone who sees this as anything but the beginning of end of freedom is an utter fool. The frog in the water and the heat is on.

Re:That (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about 8 months ago | (#44625995)

> Having Snowden's windfall on a million drives all decrypted and open for all to see wouldn't help, because anyone accessing it at any time from any computer on the net could and would be instantly tracked, and forced to have a computer bashing party in their own basement.

Perhaps the solution is to overwhelm the system. Label the download as, I dunno, The Avengers Director's Cut. Get it on as many computers as possible.

Re:That (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44626385)

Anyone who sees this as anything but the beginning of end of freedom is an utter fool. The frog in the water and the heat is on.

Some of us see things differently than your cowardly view.

The tree of liberty must from time to time be refreshed with the
blood of tyrants.

And the time is fast approaching to refresh that tree.

Re:That (5, Interesting)

cpghost (719344) | about 8 months ago | (#44625665)

That will make the "reporting" less effective.

Au contraire, my dear Watson. Providing raw material is exactly the service news providers should be doing in the first place. Let other reporters and bloggers sift through this publicly available raw data to point out interesting stuff. There's no reason reporters should be entitled to exclusive access to raw material, and the rest of the world would have to accept what reporters say without a way of controlling that.

That was exactly the problem with Wikileak's initial redacted release of Cablegate. It was only after they've released the whole data unredacted that real reporting could begin (and can still take place).

Re:That (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about 8 months ago | (#44625903)

Or there will be more people going through the data because it is freely available, so fewer notable items get missed.

It's never going to be a case of "the raw data is available online, no point writing an article about it now!"

Do it now! (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44625505)

Do it and do it now. The news doesn't need censorship.

Re:Do it now! (1)

gmuslera (3436) | about 8 months ago | (#44625729)

More important than that. Delaying it will only mean even more damage done by the authorities, risk not being able to disclose it at all, or by the time it gets disclosed, nothing could be done. That they are so desperate trying to hide it (in both sides of the atlantic) means both that still they can stopped, and that whatever could be disclosed, is far worse than what they are doing now that is already known. If they were killers, delaying what could put them in jail only will give them more chances to kill even more people (and not sure about what is inside there, could be actual killing being done, even if disclosing put in danger lives could save a lot more).

Re:Do it now! (1)

MobSwatter (2884921) | about 8 months ago | (#44625861)

While I agree on the censorship point, there is also the question of why DHS bought over two billion rounds of ammunition here in the US. Provoking the general public mayhem may just be exactly what they want.

Re:Do it now! (2)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 8 months ago | (#44626257)

Thinking this through, I wonder if the NRA knows which side
they should be on...

I've been highly non-sympathetic to the NRA for years, but
lately I'm beginning to wonder if one of it reasons-to-be might
not present itself a fortiori, what with Total Surveillance and
the Totalitarian State oligarchian style being upon us.

All the info online? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44625531)

When you say all the info will be dumped online, do you mean the shocking articles leaked by Snowden, or my porn browsing history?

Re:All the info online? (0)

Ziest (143204) | about 8 months ago | (#44625703)

Hate to break it to ya pal, but no one except your boss and your SO has any interest in your porn browsing. 95% of all porn is run of the mill stuff.

Re:All the info online? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44626307)

NSA employee here. Seriously, he's into some fucked up shit. And I say that as a fan of scat, piss, incest, and fisting.

My Heavens... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44625539)

They are going to be cataloged by French astronomers?

SOMEBODY BETTER TELL THIS GUY MESSIER !! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44625549)

That they are after him !!

Small Correction (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44625553)

The British police did not destroy the newspaper's hard drives. They just watched and took notes and photos while the paper's people destroyed the hard drives. This in no way justifies the actions of the British government, which are completely reprehensible.

I agree with Dan Tynan. Future leaks will be dumped without regard for how much they might hurt individuals or groups only peripherally involved. In a surveillance culture, that may be the only way whistleblowers can continue to do what is right.

Re:Small Correction (4, Interesting)

hawguy (1600213) | about 8 months ago | (#44625611)

The British police did not destroy the newspaper's hard drives. They just watched and took notes and photos while the paper's people destroyed the hard drives. This in no way justifies the actions of the British government, which are completely reprehensible.

I agree with Dan Tynan. Future leaks will be dumped without regard for how much they might hurt individuals or groups only peripherally involved. In a surveillance culture, that may be the only way whistleblowers can continue to do what is right.

What is the point of that distinction? Does it matter at *all* whether the government agents destroyed the drives themselves, or coerced the owners of the drives to do it?

Re:Small Correction (1)

cpghost (719344) | about 8 months ago | (#44625763)

Does it matter at *all* whether the government agents destroyed the drives themselves, or coerced the owners of the drives to do it?

Not to be cynical, but Government could still say that the Guardian destroyed the drives, and it was all a big misunderstanding. It's like in the bad movies where the corrupt police officer orders you at point blank to injure yourself and later claims that it was you who did it to yourself and he couldn't prevent it.

If you have nothing to hide... (5, Insightful)

MrEricSir (398214) | about 8 months ago | (#44625557)

Eventually, the information will just be dumped online, warts and all, as soon as someone who wants the information public gets ahold of it.

And? If the government has nothing to hide, as they've repeatedly claimed, then what's the problem?

Re:If you have nothing to hide... (5, Informative)

Ziest (143204) | about 8 months ago | (#44625673)

Yes, the government says they have nothing to hide BUT their actions scream "We have metric shit loads of things to hide". Things are going to get "interesting" in the next few years. It would be best if people started being more paranoid and start learning how to drop off the grid. We here in the west spent 40 years in a cold war with the Soviet Union. Some of the lessons that were learned on how to conduct activities while dealing with those guys, eg. Moscow Rules, would be instructive to those peoples and groups the government is and will be going after. Google the phrase, "Green in the new Red"

Re:If you have nothing to hide... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44625757)

"If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place." Eric Schmidt, 2009.

The question is: who was he talking about?

Re:If you have nothing to hide... (2)

icebike (68054) | about 8 months ago | (#44625821)

Eventually, the information will just be dumped online, warts and all, as soon as someone who wants the information public gets ahold of it.

And? If the government has nothing to hide, as they've repeatedly claimed, then what's the problem?

Ah, well played sir!

For some frikin reason, I haven't had mod points in over two years.
My Kingdom for a mod point!!

Re:If you have nothing to hide... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44625873)

To a degree I see what you're saying but I really worry about leaks that expose good-willed freedom fighters or resistance members in hostile lands. Imagine if the family hiding Anne Franke had their information leaked. Would you still be chanting the same thing?
 
That's why I don't see this as whistleblowing. A whistleblower has to be damn sure that the information he's handing over is what he thinks it is. There's no way Manning could have been sure. There's no way WikiLeaks could have been sure.
 
I'm all for uncovering corruption, lies and murder but it needs to be done without any harm to innocent parties.

Re:If you have nothing to hide... (0)

MrEricSir (398214) | about 8 months ago | (#44625919)

Imagine if the family hiding Anne Franke had their information leaked.

The family hiding Anne Franke was a government? Please explain.

Re:If you have nothing to hide... (2)

Goaway (82658) | about 8 months ago | (#44626033)

The point was that such a family could be known of by a friendly government, who then has their information leaked. The effort to redact information from leaks before publishing them is to prevent that kind of thing from happening, because nobody wants that.

Re:If you have nothing to hide... (1)

MrEricSir (398214) | about 8 months ago | (#44626105)

Okaaaay... now you're talking about redactions, which seems to contradict your earlier point about WikiLeaks and Manning. If WikiLeaks "can't be sure" that it's safe to release a given document, then why do they always go to the trouble of roping in journalists, governments, etc. who can perform the required redactions?

Re:If you have nothing to hide... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44626021)

Wow, you're really gonna make me quote Dexter's Lab here...

"You are stupid! You are stupid! And don't forget, you are stupid!"

Re:If you have nothing to hide... (2)

cavreader (1903280) | about 8 months ago | (#44625999)

All the fuss about the data monitoring programs have revolved around what the government COULD or MAY do with the information. There has been corroborated evidence of the government actually misusing this information to inflict harm on someone. In a perfect world the government should have no secrets but we don't live in a perfect world. Not even close. But governments do have secrets that when exposed can cause a lot of unexpected problems. Leaking some PRISM documents may be OK but releasing details of foreign intelligence operations is another matter. The information released by Manning and Snowden have caused some serious problems in international diplomacy. Snowden will probably go down as the person responsible for starting up the cold war again. Of course he is certainly not solely responsible but he has definitely contributed another issue into international relations that eventually will harm someone down the line. The real kicker in this entire mess is that the people pushing out the information will get the opposite of what they are seeking. Instead of introducing transparency to government affairs the government will double down and put policies and procedures in place to get rid of any existing transparency.

Re:If you have nothing to hide... (2)

Error27 (100234) | about 8 months ago | (#44626189)

Some secrets are not yours to release.

The NSA doesn't do stuff, it just sits there listening and writing down the information. It knows you have contacted an STD from your nieghbor's wife. It knows the password to your facebook account.

It knows the secret things because it sent men in dark suits around to collect the SSL keys. Those men in dark suits answer to a secret court which meets in a dark place. And how are you going to say no to them?

And now Snowden has the keys and the passwords and the secret information about your STD.

Morons in government don't get it (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44625569)

They must not understand the concept of a digital backup copy. You can take digital files of even gigantic sizes and copy them within minutes. They'd need to destroy every single copy at the same time before someone made another copy. No intimidation tactic is going to work at this point. There are copies around the world of what Snowden took with him.

You take all of the files and dump them on ThePirateBay, Wikileaks, or wherever, and the government can't stop it. No amount of threats or harassment can prevent people from getting the information once it is out in the open. It would be like trying to return used paint to the bucket or gluing together a smashed window pane. A useless exercise.

The government lost the information war. They are going to need to refocus on something else to win. Martial law. Election stealing. Murdering people. Extortion. At that point you're no longer looking at democracy and civilization but totalitarianism and military rule. We already lock up every marijuana user. Why not start locking up "terror violators" or some other nonsense 'crime'?

This is the breaking point. Will people vote in politicians who will stop the wars (terror, drugs, guns, privacy)? Or are we going to get another Bush/Obama clone?

Re:Morons in government don't get it (1)

icebike (68054) | about 8 months ago | (#44625839)

They must not understand the concept of a digital backup copy.

Its merely a power game. The government thinks it has won this round, and the
jackboots are chuckling over their brandy.

Lets have their names, lets get them before cameras.

Re:Morons in government don't get it (-1, Troll)

kesuki (321456) | about 8 months ago | (#44626009)

"The government lost the information war. They are going to need to refocus on something else to win. Martial law. Election stealing. Murdering people. Extortion. At that point you're no longer looking at democracy and civilization but totalitarianism and military rule. We already lock up every marijuana user. Why not start locking up "terror violators" or some other nonsense 'crime'?

This is the breaking point. Will people vote in politicians who will stop the wars (terror, drugs, guns, privacy)? Or are we going to get another Bush/Obama clone?"

you must live in lala land where everything fox news churns out from marketing any news that they invent in their own heads. obama did almost nothing because whenever the democrats compromized the republicans called for more. they only got obamacare by compromising democrat ideal of single payer heathcare to the 'compromize' of the affordable care act. until the supreme court called it a 'tax' and then this guy called grover went against ACAhttp://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57327816/the-pledge-grover-norquists-hold-on-the-gop/ [cbsnews.com]

They have not made any mistakes (1)

Marrow (195242) | about 8 months ago | (#44626199)

Its more likely that their recent moves have been carefully considered. They move. They watch how the opposition moves. Then they go for the kill.
They dont have to understand differential equations to be cunning. And they practice cunning every day. Even on each other. Its foolish to call
them stupid or ignorant.

Re:Morons in government don't get it (4, Insightful)

Roogna (9643) | about 8 months ago | (#44626325)

... Or are we going to get another Bush/Obama clone?

This, this right here, is a huge part of the problem. The office of President is NOT the only office that matters here. I've watched election after election where people fuss and fume over the president, but literally seem to pick at random for every Senator and Congressman. People have GOT to start paying attention to the people who are supposed to represent them, not just the President.

His electronics were *destroyed*? Says who? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44625579)

Who says his electronics were destroyed? Do you have a source for that assertion?

Seized does not mean destroyed.

Re:His electronics were *destroyed*? Says who? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44625781)

They watched at least one laptop be smashed.

Motivation (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44625591)

Depends on who's doing the publishing, and why.

Most journalists, contrary to current propaganda, are averagely patriotic people who don't act purely out of malice against their country, or even its government. They do what they do because they think it's right. To maintain that belief, they need to satisfy themselves that what they're publishing won't seriously damage their country's legitimate interests, or harm innocent people.

I'd say a more likely outcome is that less of the leaking will be done by established news organisations - the kind that have a longstanding reputation and permanent physical presence in any country - and more will be done by people like Wikileaks, who are more secretive, more spread out, and altogether a harder target for this kind of retaliation.

No, they won't (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44625633)

Because the whole, unvarnished truth is boring. Note the backpedal by The Guardian in "back doors in Facebook and google". Knowing that there really are rules and good people trying to do their best for the world doesn't sell papers.

Please read the original article (4, Informative)

Virtucon (127420) | about 8 months ago | (#44625649)

Geebus, the factual errors on these summaries are becoming eye-watering!

The Guardian destroyed the laptop and the hard drive rather than turn them over. Shit, the title of the article has that in it:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/20/nsa-snowden-files-drives-destroyed-london [theguardian.com]

I consider it a brave act of defiance on the part of the Guardian, good for them. It won't affect the fact that there's probably stashed copies of this stuff everywhere but the British Authorities wanted the actual hardware, so rather than give it to them they used an angle grinder themselves.

Re:Please read the original article (1)

almechist (1366403) | about 8 months ago | (#44626399)

The Guardian destroyed the laptop and the hard drive rather than turn them over. Shit, the title of the article has that in it

Well, sort of. From the article you link to:

The editor of the Guardian, Alan Rusbridger, had earlier informed government officials that other copies of the files existed outside the country and that the Guardian was neither the sole recipient nor steward of the files leaked by Snowden, a former National Security Agency (NSA) contractor. But the government insisted that the material be either destroyed or surrendered.

So basically they were asked to turn the machines over to government thugs, and when they refused to do that the thugs ordered them to destroy the equipment. It's not like they trashed stuff in a brave last-minute attempt to keep it out of government hands, they were told to do it by the cops, who no doubt watched gleefully as the order was being carried out.

They should dump the data (3, Insightful)

DarkOx (621550) | about 8 months ago | (#44625669)

Put it out there, let some people get outed and killed, they are collaborator scum anyway. Sure it sounds harsh and it is, but until the security apparatus suffers some major political damage and loses some people they think of as friends they will never appreciate the harm all there secrets are doing. They have proven this over and over again.

Re:They should dump the data (4, Insightful)

cpghost (719344) | about 8 months ago | (#44625709)

The "security apparatus" isn't the real problem here. They're just the symptom, the manifestation of a deep fear that permeates societies... and may I add, irrational fears at that. Why irrational? Because the number of casualties from traffic accidents is of many orders of magnitude higher than those of terror attacks. But nobody seriously intends to forbid cars and people from driving. Yet when it comes to "terrism", regular people just kind of shut off their rational thinking and go into total obedience mode (to the almighty State). This tells more about human nature than we ever wanted to know, doesn't it?

Re:They should dump the data (1, Troll)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about 8 months ago | (#44625973)

Traffic fatalities also vastly outnumber murders. Better just let murderers off with a fine and some community service.

Re:They should dump the data (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | about 8 months ago | (#44625997)

Traffic fatalities also vastly outnumber murders. Better just let murderers off with a fine and some community service.

We do that in America.

But only in regards to the Second Amendment.

Re:They should dump the data (2)

roc97007 (608802) | about 8 months ago | (#44626041)

Traffic fatalities also vastly outnumber murders. Better just let murderers off with a fine and some community service.

Hang on, I don't think anyone said give terrorists a free pass; rather, we still go after them, but we don't compromise the rights of the entire population in the process.

So to continue the simile, you still prosecute murderers to the fullest extent of the law, but you don't make everyone take off their front doors in case the police needs to go in to their houses looking for a murderer.

Re:They should dump the data (1)

Arker (91948) | about 8 months ago | (#44626269)

The difference between terrorism versus accidents is of course intention. We all know or should know that we will die at some point, that we can die at any time. But terrorism implies something more than just dying. It implies being hated. And being social creatures that we are, being hated can be more difficult to deal with than being mortal. It starts an uncomfortable thought process that threatens the placid complacency of the population in a way that no amount of accidental violence can ever do.

Re:They should dump the data (1)

Type44Q (1233630) | about 8 months ago | (#44625739)

until the security apparatus suffers some major political damage and loses some people they think of as assets

FTFY.

Siezed not destroyed (3, Interesting)

accessbob (962147) | about 8 months ago | (#44625693)

Miranda's property was seized not destroyed. And he wants it back.

Re:Siezed not destroyed (5, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 8 months ago | (#44626219)

Seized or destroyed makes little difference when your livelihood depends on it. You need replacement equipment now. Not in a week. Not in a month. Today. Or you can't make money. And with so many professions needing a computer... whether it's seized or destroyed you're still at the computer shop the next day buying a new one. And when you get your old one back... it's useless.

The difference between the two is pretty minor. This is also why you, like me and many others, should keep multiple off-site backups, not in banks, not at a friend's house, but buried under a tree in a public park or something... so you can always quickly recover.

Because whether it's the government that steals your shit, or a burglar... you're just as fucked.

Guardian did this under no specific duress, IMO. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44625761)

.."threat" of legal action? I get these every other day.

and if you are proposing The Guardian (or similar) simply offer up the dump for "crowdsourcing"-type journalism, I would suggest they then would be:

(a:) failing in their jobs as journalists
(b:) refer you to their "Sara Palin Email" fiasco.

Dont get me wrong, I praise them (Graun) otherwise, mainly for being the only reliable media source to both care and push the story. However, I fail to see exactly why they bowed down to (IMO) entirely resistible pressure here; merely stating that the act of destroying was "symbolic" remains BS - symbolic works *both ways*, chaps.

no more secrets (1)

vm146j2 (233075) | about 8 months ago | (#44625797)

this is the way of the electronic revolution, where once again (like in the village), whatever you do is "public", and you better behave the way you are "supposed" to. the only fun part of the story is watching the watchers spazz out as they look through their panopticon and discover a big eyeball blinking at them.

Re:no more secrets (5, Insightful)

meta-monkey (321000) | about 8 months ago | (#44626071)

Ever read David Brin's "Earth?"

That happens, but getting there is ugly.

Imagine the vault of secrets burst open. Every dirty deal, every evil plot, every political murder and wicked deed done in the name of power and wealth.

Now imagine the lengths to which the perpetrators of those deeds would go to hold on to the kind of wealth and power that rests atop the United States.

If your blood didn't just freeze, you have no imagination.

Snowden followers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44625807)

Are the new "Moon landing Hoaxers," 9/11 "Truthers" and Holocaust deniers all rolled up into one. Your cognitive bias requires you to believe in some monolithic evil government conspiracy, from the same government that couldn't dry clean Monica Lewinski's dress. Lame. If Greenwald and Snowden have what they claim, lay it the duck out or shut the fuck up. My bet is they can't and they're laying out only the worst sounding bits and withholding the rest to mislead everyone.

The Inevitable Escalation (4, Insightful)

twmcneil (942300) | about 8 months ago | (#44625857)

Could be that's what they really want. Escalation, more power, more budget, more relevance at least in their own eyes. Why else would they target reporters and their partners?

Re:The Inevitable Escalation (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44626135)

They will face the exploding wrath of non submissive people.

Every limits and norms have been stepped over.

It is them or us.

They better start eliminating everyone on earth because as long as there is one free mind standing they'll have to fear for their lives, everywhere, all the time.

Politicians are scum that must be purged.

The internet as a whole is ready to step up to the next level: worldwide, direct, realtime, untempered democracy.

Re:The Inevitable Escalation (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44626359)

Could be that's what they really want. Escalation, more power, more budget, more relevance at least in their own eyes. Why else would they target reporters and their partners?

One word: Panic.

Miranda (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44625881)

These are just a few of the images we've recorded. And you can see, it wasn't what we thought. There's been no war here and no terraforming event. The environment is stable. It's the Pax. The G-23 Paxilon Hydrochlorate that we added to the air processors. It was supposed to calm the population, weed out aggression. Well, it works. The people here stopped fighting. And then they stopped everything else. They stopped going to work, they stopped breeding, talking, eating. There's 30 million people here, and they all just let themselves die.

Can anyone identify those motherboards? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44625883)

I call bovine excrement on the picture.

'The remains of a computer that held files leaked by Edward Snowden to the Guardian and destroyed at the behest of the UK government. Photograph: Roger Tooth"

These parts obviously have nothing to do with each other. I see a destroyed PCI-e Videocard, and somthing that may be a small all-in-one desktop motherboard? Two destroyed laptop motherboards that look like they MIGHT be Apple parts but do NOT appear to be Macbook Air motherboards. And then a Macbook Air (?)

Is there any repair tech here that can identify these boards?

But no matter what.. WHERE IS THE STORAGE PEOPLE? There is othing in the picture that holds data... like flash memory or harddrives.

Except for the laptop which seems to be unharmed....

Re:Can anyone identify those motherboards? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44626015)

..if it was PC hardware? - be the first time ever the Guardian staff have seen such.

Charles Arthur ("Tech" Editor) probably destroyed it on principle, the Apple logo will be faintly visible as condition of use on every stock computer photo they use.

The motherboards to either size are MacBook Pros (1)

tlambert (566799) | about 8 months ago | (#44626275)

The motherboards to either size are MacBook Pros; here's a picture showing the same board in a MacBook Pro teardown.

http://9to5mac.com/2012/06/13/ifixit-tears-down-the-new-retina-macbook-pro-calls-it-least-repairable-laptop-ever/macbook-pro-teardown/ [9to5mac.com]

The U-shaped divot is a cutout for one of the two fan assemblies.

The green board isn't an Apple board. The red one is only an Apple board if someone stole a prototype, which is unlikley.

BTW: The article makes it pretty clear that the tech doing the destruction was a guardian employee, and that the act was done as a symbolic gesture.

We will go from WO to WME (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | about 8 months ago | (#44625987)

Basically, escalation such as this will move from Write Once (with backup) to Write Many with Encryption.

Many encrypted copies on many devices, many burner phones, copied with many public devices by many people.

Information just wants to be free - it's how we designed the Internet in the first place.

It's impossible to get Messier (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44625991)

Info Leak Wars cannot get Messier because Charles Messier [wikipedia.org] had been dead for a couple centuries by now.

Press shouldn't have those informations. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44626099)

It belongs to everyone.

We are at war.

Casualties don't matter, only the outcome.

Post it in a big torrent at every tracker on the planet.

Unleash the fucking fury.

Terrorism doesn't exist.

Sever heads.

Warts = ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44626127)

The real culprits of 9/11? (We all KNOW this isn't over, yet.)

Justify the fear! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44626323)

Seriously wondering why I don't hear anyone insisting the governments to justify themselves.. i.e. if we're going to need all this surveillance to 'catch the terrorists' show us how much terrorism really is going on, how many you caught, etc. But at the same time, show us your policy that mitigates the harboring of hatred towards 'us' that creates extremist/terrorist ideals.

Show me how to catch these guys is almost impossible with warrants, adversarial courts and due process.

Make the case.

So far, I am far from convinced that any of this is necessary.

FUCK THEM (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#44626377)

Fuck the NSA. Fuck the USA. Fuck the UK. Fuck all these fascist pigs.

Fuck them. Fuck their families. Fuck their dogs.

Blow them up in their cars. Blow them up on the street. Blow up their datacenters.

Fuck this human waste.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...