Beta
×

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!

NSA Director Wants Threat Data Sharing With Private Sector

samzenpus posted about a year ago | from the protect-ya-neck dept.

Security 126

Trailrunner7 writes "While Congress and the technology community are still debating and discussing the intelligence gathering capabilities of NSA revealed in recent months, the agency's director, Gen. Keith Alexander, is not just defending the use of these existing tools, but is pitching the idea of sharing some of the vast amounts of threat and vulnerability data the NSA and other agencies possess with organizations in the private sector. Speaking at a time of great scrutiny of the agency and its activities, Alexander said that the NSA, along with other federal agencies such as the FBI, Department of Homeland Security and CIA, need to find a way to share the attack and vulnerability information they collect in order to help key private organizations react to emerging threats. Though the idea is still in its formative stages, Alexander said that it potentially could include companies in foreign countries, as well. 'We need the authority for us to share with them and them to share with us. But because some of that information is classified, we need a way to protect it,' Alexander said during a keynote speech at the Billington Cybersecurity Summit here Wednesday. 'Right now, we can't see what's happening in real time. We've got to share it with them, and potentially with other countries.'"

cancel ×

126 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

and once they have the vulnerability information (0)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about a year ago | (#44957625)

they'll use it to hack/break into servers, steal all the cool info they find and tell people afterwards "oh, looks like your server is vulnerable to hacking"

Re:and once they have the vulnerability informatio (3, Insightful)

DarkOx (621550) | about a year ago | (#44958063)

Was thinking the same thing. Why should I believe this is anything but some sort of Trojan?

If not in the classical computer sense of a program that appears to do one thing and also does another, but in the more general sense as some way to help get me to let them in the door. If nothing else I am sure they won't be sharing the vulnerabilities they are actively using.

Sorry NSA but you have lost trust; its going to take years proving you can be a good actor before I'd advocate my security team collaborate with them. And so far I have not seen them even really start something like a real reform.

In summary -- Screw you Feds.

Re:and once they have the vulnerability informatio (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44958921)

Wait I don't get it. So the NSA is going to illegally take all of my browsing history and sell it to the highest bidder? What the hell?

Re:and once they have the vulnerability informatio (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44958117)

I think it's far more likely they'll hack into Airbus's servers, steal all the cool info and then share it with Boeing.

You know, like last time. Why anyone trusts the US at all after all these scandals for -decades- is beyond me.

Re:and once they have the vulnerability informatio (1)

chris.alex.thomas (1718644) | about a year ago | (#44958413)

yeah....good point...I'd forgotten about that specific story...

Re:and once they have the vulnerability informatio (2)

Will.Woodhull (1038600) | about a year ago | (#44959113)

Exactly.

NSA so very much wants to be the major Agency of the United Corporations of America. To hell with the citizenry.

Re:and once they have the vulnerability informatio (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | about a year ago | (#44961207)

The problem being that most industrialized nations support, if not outright underwrite industrial espionage. I get that everyone is pissed off at the USA today, but seriously, do you really think that Japan's, China's or Britain's security services aren't passing on foreign commercial tidbits they've picked up to domestic commercial interests? What this looks like to me isn't so much a trojan, but as a way to create a network of necessity. Once companies get used to the NSA "helping" them, they're much more likely to push Congress to maintain the methods and extent of spying the NSA is doing. It's sort of a "join us on the dark side."

company valuation (4, Interesting)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | about a year ago | (#44957627)

So if I'm a company listed on the NASDAQ, do I get bump in my stock price for being in the NSA's "circle of trust"?

And if so, what incentives does that give to the NSA, to companies, and to traders?

Re:company valuation (4, Insightful)

infolation (840436) | about a year ago | (#44957717)

Keep your friends close and enemies closer.

Bring all the companies who've been complaining they can't reveal the NSA's information requests into your privileged enclave - to make them feel special.

And in the process, ensure those companies are even more firmly ensconced in the laws that prevent them from revealing anything.

Re:company valuation (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44958095)

Lets see, Hmmm. The NSA who made sure that the Microcode back door to your CPU was firmly in place and the same NSA who made sure that all your encryption algorithms were busted with back doors and that amazing NSA who made sure that your security software was back doored. Now they want to protect American Business.... Just musing but it sounds like a mafia shakedown racket to get protection money to me!

Re:company valuation (1)

AHuxley (892839) | about a year ago | (#44958427)

The trust an NSA Inside sticker gives.

Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with it. (2, Insightful)

Thanshin (1188877) | about a year ago | (#44957633)

He simply believes he is a higher class of human being than the rest of us.

No wonder it's hard to explain to such people that the cattle doesn't like being fire branded.

Re: Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44957679)

He must be an asshole for all the shit he churns out on a regular basis

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (-1, Troll)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about a year ago | (#44957697)

You voted for them!

When it comes to representative democracy, it's impossible to emphasise enough that this can all be changed by voting differently. The mechanisms are there.

So, ideologues, toadies and milquetoasts - please all go fuck yourselves and regenerate as something better - because it's time to build a society where there's a more equitable balance of power.

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (2)

Dunbal (464142) | about a year ago | (#44957721)

It's also very hard to vote for political appointees.

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (2)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about a year ago | (#44957733)

But it is easier to vote for people who can fire appointees.

And who can pass laws first to make them fireable very quickly, if necessary.

The West has become as ideological as the East, and it's fucking depressing. It's time to use the government to serve not the corporations, not a mythical immutable class - but the people.

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44960845)

But it is easier to vote for people who can fire appointees.

The presence of a plethora of government agencies and large flocks of mostly unaccountable appointees and bureaucrats is the source of the problem. The administrative state is the enemy, not the fact that the "right" people haven't been elected.

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (1)

sjames (1099) | about a year ago | (#44961147)

Alas, our choice is usually unga bunga or death.

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (3, Insightful)

Thanshin (1188877) | about a year ago | (#44957761)

You voted for them!

No. I didn't. And even if I had, I don't believe democratically elected representatives represent their voters regardless of how is democracy implemented.

When it comes to representative democracy, it's impossible to emphasise enough that this can all be changed by voting differently.

That is false and naive.

As a simple proof, I challenge you to change it all by voting differently.

The mechanisms are there.

Nope.

So, ideologues, toadies and milquetoasts - please all go fuck yourselves and regenerate as something better - because it's time to build a society where there's a more equitable balance of power.

Thank you for your useful input.

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (1)

coofercat (719737) | about a year ago | (#44958215)

I believe the 'you' in "you voted for them" is the plural. That is, you and your neighbours and friends voted for them.

I don't like it either, but like you, I can't be arsed to go out and canvass my neighbourhood on the merits of the Pirate Party (or even just to vote for someone other than the incumbent). Hence, like you, I have got exactly the government that I voted for.

As an aside, lots of people here in the UK have been voting for UKIP. As far as I can tell, the majority of UKIPs manifesto is that they want to 'rebalance' immigration so that we have less immigrants. Once UKIP started getting voted into small seats, the 2.5 major parties all started talking about their new plans to tackle immigration, whereas before that they'd just shrugged it all off as nonsense (hell, Labour actively encouraged immigration so that there would be a whole new generation of Labour votets, and even they are now talking about curbs on immigration). The point here is of course that you don't necessarily need to replace the incumbents, but actually just make them alter course a little. It all still means getting off your arse, and that's where my whole argument falls down because none of us can be bothered.

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (1)

sjames (1099) | about a year ago | (#44961169)

people have been voting the bums out for decades now and DC is still full of bums.

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | about a year ago | (#44961263)

Yes, the mainline parties in the UK have started talking about immigration reform (well, there was always a Tory rump that talked about it, and many of those are now UKIP). The problem being that the very inventors of "embrace, extend, extinguish" are politicians. They are very very good and taking an opponent's idea and running it through an election, after which they'll happily toss it in the dumpster and go back to their original plans. Look at how the GOP has for decades adopted the language of Libertarians, and yet every time they achieve power, any Libertarian ideas disappear. People like Ron and Rand Paul have been for years the GOP's useful idiots.

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (1)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | about a year ago | (#44960053)

No. I didn't. And even if I had, I don't believe democratically elected representatives represent their voters regardless of how is democracy implemented.

Democracy never promised that you'd get your wish, nor did representative democracy promise that your representative will follow your exact wishes.

When it comes to representative democracy, it's impossible to emphasise enough that this can all be changed by voting differently.

That is false and naive.
As a simple proof, I challenge you to change it all by voting differently.

You're either a control freak, ignorant, or both. You might be ignorant because you mistake democracy to mean "I control stuff." You're wrong - democracy just means you have input. Along with millions of others. So your share of the control is 1/n, which can be quite small in a country the size of the US. You might be a control freak because you think that everyone should just do what you think is right. There's also the possibility that you're some teenage know-it-all who thinks that his 30 minutes of coverage of the American Revolution taught him everything he needs to know about civics and political theory. But that would be just insulting.

Yes, the mechanisms are actually there. Sorry that democracy doesn't mean that we all just do what you want. Wait, no, I'm not sorry. That'd be just a dictatorship, and we actually moved away from that. For good reasons. Maybe one day you'll learn about them.

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44961303)

democracy just means you have input. Along with millions of others. So your share of the control is 1/n, which can be quite small in a country the size of the US.

That's an oversimplification. If two wolves and a sheep are voting on what to have for dinner, they don't eat two thirds of a sheep - they eat the whole sheep. The sheep's "share of control" is 0% because his views aren't being enacted at all. We're seeing that now, where a terrified Republicrat majority wields almost all the power and third parties are marginalized or give up on voting altogether. I'd bet that if we actually took a vote on every existing policy, it would be faaaaar away from the status quo.

You might be a control freak because you think that everyone should just do what you think is right. There's also the possibility that you're some teenage know-it-all who thinks that his 30 minutes of coverage of the American Revolution taught him everything he needs to know about civics and political theory. But that would be just insulting.

Yes, the mechanisms are actually there. Sorry that democracy doesn't mean that we all just do what you want. Wait, no, I'm not sorry. That'd be just a dictatorship, and we actually moved away from that. For good reasons. Maybe one day you'll learn about them.

Indeed that was insulting; it says a lot about your ability to understand and empathize with others. Can I presume you're an old know-it-all, your expertise proven by virtue of the wonderful government you've left us?

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (3, Interesting)

marcello_dl (667940) | about a year ago | (#44957801)

representative democracy= we make promises, you vote, we enter into office.
Immediate benefit for them, promise of later benefit for you.
Hmmm sounds like the most classical blueprint for a scam.

You should vote PROGRAMS, whose points become law overriding everything else, with the parliament devoted to harmonize it into the existing situation and the government devoted to apply.
And emergency laws should last 3 months.

Or direct democracy. Of course those in powers make sure we as people are not mature enough for direct democracy. We should adopt it as a form of punishment against our lack of spine.

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (4, Insightful)

AlphaWoIf_HK (3042365) | about a year ago | (#44957825)

And emergency laws should last 3 months.

I believe some "emergency laws" shouldn't exist for any period of time; namely ones that violate people's rights (e.g. the USA PATRIOT ACT).

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44958325)

Or direct democracy. Of course those in powers make sure we as people are not mature enough for direct democracy.

I have a dream of a P2P distributed decision making software that would be completely open and let everyone's computer verify the results continually... A public ledger of ideas and votes if you will... It could even let you elect friends as personal representatives when you are unable to vote on something. The part I can't quite figure out a good programatic mechanism for is how to weed or limit the impact of bad nodes or networks.

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44960923)

It could even let you elect friends as personal representatives when you are unable to vote on something.

The Chicago political machine would love to talk to you about your brilliant idea. There are lots of dead people, mentally incompetent shut-ins, made up names on voter registration lists compiled by ACORN and illegally registered non-citizens who desperately need a "friend" to vote on their behalf.

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (2)

BitZtream (692029) | about a year ago | (#44959005)

Or direct democracy.

Show me one instance of direct democracy not being a complete and total failure.

A person may not be stupid, but people are. They'll vote themselves lower taxes and more social services, then you end up with California.

No thank you.

California has highest taxes (1)

raymorris (2726007) | about a year ago | (#44960751)

Even before prop 30, California had the fourth highest tax burden of the 50 states. The average _state_ tax burden was
$4,934 per person. Their tax _revenue_ dropped like stone because businesses and other money moved to Nevada (second lowest taxes) and Texas (6th lowest taxes).

So, I'll FTFY:

A person may not be stupid, but people are. They'll vote higher taxes and more social services, then you end up with California.

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (1)

gmuslera (3436) | about a year ago | (#44960761)

You should vote PROGRAMS, whose points become law overriding everything else, with the parliament devoted to harmonize it into the existing situation and the government devoted to apply.

Remember, In the Obama platform in 2008 [huffingtonpost.com] was a particular point regarding protecting whiteblowers. No matter what they say, they won't follow it if their real bosses tell them to do otherwise after they got elected or the situation arises.

All the big parties in US have the same bosses, electing any of them, no matter how "this time is different" the candidate looks, will keep things getting worse in the same direction, as was with the change from Bush to Obama, different person, different party, different skin color, no matter how much you change, the bosses are the same, the trend keeps in the same direction, and no matter how low we fell so far, they can do a lot of things to make the things much, much worse following the same trend.

You can elect minoritary parties, or choose the appropiate way to express make count your vote for nobody. But in the end, they don't have only control of the government, they control the media, people will buy again their candy thinking that this time, things will change. I just hope that the world can survive the remaining of Obama administration and the 8 years of whoever comes after (a woman? a recent drug addict? someone with a disability? oh, wait, that was Bush, anyway they need to push the boundaries if want to give the illusion of that something will change)

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44957803)

Who should I vote for who has stated categorically that it is their policy that the NSA should stop spying on its own citizens, and disclose security vulnerabilities it has found?

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44957875)

Obama? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAQlsS9diBs

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (1)

canadiannomad (1745008) | about a year ago | (#44958283)

And this is the problem with democracy..
To paraphrase marcello_dl (667940) from above

Representative Democracy: They make promises, we vote, they enter into office.
Immediate benefit for them, promise of later benefit for us.
Sounds like a classic blueprint for a scam.

Re: Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44957915)

How does voting change anything when all party candidates involved are on Wall Streets payroll?

Politicians in Washington do what they are told to do by their corporate handlers. If you think the people have any influence in our current 'democracy' you are woefully uninformed.

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (1)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about a year ago | (#44958721)

You voted for them!

I voted for change in 2008. So did millions of other Americans, and our candidate won. But the U.S. political system makes meaningful change effectively impossible.

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (3, Insightful)

BitZtream (692029) | about a year ago | (#44959057)

...

Then you're ignorant of how the world works. Plain and simple.

You got scammed and you still won't admit to it or recognize it. Thats a problem you need to overcome before you'll do anything productive in a political sense.

You voted for a marketing slogan. WTF does 'CHANGE' even mean? You got change. Not the change you thought he was magically referring to without him ever actually saying what 'change' was. The US political system just lets ignorance like your own win out. Its not the systems fault, its the fact that most people are like you and too lazy to look at what a politicians history has been rather than what their marketing slogan is.

Had you bothered to look at Obama's congressional voting record before you voted, nothing that has happened would be a surprise to you. But instead, you voted for OMFGBBQ CHANGE!

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (1)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about a year ago | (#44959445)

And you would have suggested what? Voting for John Edwards (he'd already dropped out by the time my state had its 2008 primaries)? Wasting a vote on some meaningless third party? Or do you think I should have voted for McCain instead in the general election? You honestly believe his record on drones and surveillance would have been better? This is a guy who never saw a war he didn't like.

In a first-past-the-post system, there is always going to be two parties – political science proves it. So we're stuck with the lesser of two evils. Yes, I overestimated the degree to which Obama was going to be different from the usual neoliberal Third Way Democrat. The point is that people who voted for Obama in the primaries and general election did so because we were specifically promised an end to unnecessary wars, Gitmo, and the incessant violations of civil liberties that followed 9/11. None of that happened. The problems are structural, not limited to one candidate or one party.

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44960291)

Wasting a vote on some meaningless third party?

Why not? It's not like your vote matters either way. Have you ever seen a nationwide election that was decided by one vote?

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44961105)

If you really believed all that about Obama then you were incredibly naive or horribly uninformed. Everything about Obama's background indicates that he is a duplicitous snake who has been steeped in authoritarian ideology and trained in deceitful political tactics his entire life. Obama abuses of power, nearly incessant violations of the law and deliberate efforts to damage the US economy shouldn't have come as a surprise. It sounds as if you bought into the caricature of Bush that the left created as well. Bush was a lousy President, but he was not the ogre that his enemies portrayed him as.

McCain was also a terrible choice so I voted third party as a protest. Unfortunately, once the Bush admin crashed the stock market when TreasSec Hank Paulson gave his press conference warning of the impending doom of the US financial system, it didn't matter who the nominees were. The candidate for the party not in the Presidency, i.e. Obama, was a shoo-in to win in the ensuing voter panic.

There are a lot narratives as to why Obama won, but if one examines the timeline and the tracking polls, it's clear that the stock market crash determined the election outcome, not the candidates themselves.

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | about a year ago | (#44961413)

I agree with you in general, although in the Westminster model, you usually have two parties that swap power and a distant third that on very rare occasions can play a kingmaker role. At the end of the day, it's all the same. Conservatives and liberals, however they are constituted (and sometimes the liberals may cross the line into some degree of socialism, aka Britain in the post-war period up until New Labour's victory in 1997) simply swap places.

What has exacerbated the situation in the United States is the way in which the two major political parties have so thoroughly taken over the voting system itself. I think back to the 2000 election where you had a Republican in Florida (Katherine Harris) actually responsible for certifying election results. When you have a close race like in 2000, whether she's the finest most upstanding person or not, it calls into question the validity of the whole process. While other countries usually have a central non-partisan election authority that manages elections and certifies results, in the US, the constitutional division of powers between states and the federal government basically allow the very voting system itself to be undermined, if in appearance alone, by partisan concerns.

Then there is gerrymandering, which happens in a number of countries besides the United States, which can heavily distort elections. In some ways the US is a century or more behind other industrialized democracies, although a certain amount of gerrymandering does go on elsewhere.

This has been the chief argument for the party list proportional representation system, in that it largely removes the temptation to gerrymander. Parties have to campaign to get representatives elected, and it becomes much more difficult to rig the voting system so that certain districts are created that will tend towards one party or another.

FPTP is just a bloody awful system. It tends to disenfranchise an enormous number of voters, and it basically allows major political parties to game the system to their benefit.

"Hope and change" was a slogan. Millions not inter (1)

raymorris (2726007) | about a year ago | (#44960913)

> I voted for change in 2008. So did millions of other Americans

Millions of Americans voted for "hope and change". My mother-in-law was one of those millions. The problem is, "hope and change" was a _slogan_. She voted for a slogan. That's entirely understandable, most people are not political scientists, and they have several other things in their life that they care more about than economics, foreign affairs, etc. They aren't researching the candidates voting records because they are busy making dinner for their kids, changing a tire, or enjoying some hobby.

When I ask my mother-in-law opinion on any issue, she's most often against the position Senator Obama voted for. She actually disagrees with him on most things. She doesn't know that because she works 50 hours a week and has a life, so she doesn't spend time studying the issues. Instead, she votes a slogan. Completely understandable.

While it's completely understandable, it creates big problems. Ideally, everyone would spend 100 hours every four years studying the candidates, after spending 100 hours in each of the off years studying economics, foreign policy, etc. That's not going to happen. Most people are to busy / not interested enough to make a truly informed choice. If you're willing to study from impartial sources, great. If not, please do waste your vote on a third party, or stay home. Uninformed votes based on slogans are not helpful.

  If you don't know what the capital of Iran is AND you don't know what the two major branches of economics are AND you don't know how many trillion the national debt is, you don't know who to vote for. That's okay. If you know two of the three, great, go vote.

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44960803)

... ideologues,... - please all go fuck yourselves and regenerate as something better

So ideologues who believe in limiting the power of government so as to limit the abuses of government and the people who serve in it should go fuck themselves? That seems to contradict your goals.

Ideologue is not necessarily a dirty word. It just means one who sticks to a set of principles which may be good or bad.

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44960963)

One word
Lesterland
http://www.ted.com/talks/lawrence_lessig_we_the_people_and_the_republic_we_must_reclaim.html

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44961141)

The people already did vote differently. Obama promised change. No?
The main problem with our kind of democracy is that it's impossible to change anything by voting differently.

Re:Bah. Just make it all public and to hell with i (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about a year ago | (#44957723)

He simply believes he is a higher class of human being than the rest of us.

That's very common in hardline Trekkies. ;-)

Oh great (1)

GrahamCox (741991) | about a year ago | (#44957657)

So now they want to become the National Spamming Agency?

Chilling stuff (5, Insightful)

palemantle (1007299) | about a year ago | (#44957661)

Is this guy for real? He's talking about real-time information sharing, obviously with no judicial oversight of any sort, rubber-stamped or otherwise.

FTFA: “Right now, we can’t see what’s happening in real time. We’ve got to share it with them, and potentially with other countries.”

Speaking to a crowd of mainly industry and government workers, Alexander appealed to them to help support the information sharing concept and any legislation that may be required to implement it.

Re:Chilling stuff (5, Insightful)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | about a year ago | (#44957703)

Is this guy for real? He's talking about real-time information sharing, obviously with no judicial oversight of any sort, rubber-stamped or otherwise.

Unfortunately, he is real . . . and seems to be a bit of a megalomaniac to boot . . . totally intoxicated and ripped to his tits with his ever increasing power. Joe McCarthy and Edgar Hoover 2.0 . . . Enterprise Edition.

It doesn't seem like there is anyone in the government or general public who has the courage to stand up to him.

Re:Chilling stuff (1, Informative)

erikkemperman (252014) | about a year ago | (#44957707)

Alexander appealed to [key private organizations] to help support the information sharing concept and any legislation that may be required to implement it.

And of course it has long been true, and even more blatantly so since Citizens United, that large corporations have a significant influence on legislation. The campaign with the largest budget wins, every time. And obviously they expect something in exchange.

So yes, unfortunately, this guy is for real.

Re:Chilling stuff (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44961347)

even more blatantly so since Citizens United

Before CU, corporations could be relentless smeared by political activists and labor unions during political campaigns and were legally prohibited from defending themselves. CU just evened the playing field. I know it is popular to blame CU for the nation's woes, but the real problem is the size of govt. If govt. is small, then it can't dole out as many favors to one faction or another, corporate or otherwise. Instead of complaining about or fighting the CU decision, fight against the size and expansion of the govt.

The campaign with the largest budget wins, every time.

More than 600 tea party backed politicians beat establishment politicians in 2010. In almost every case, those TP were massively outspent, sometimes by an order of magnitude or more especially when they beat incumbent politicians in primaries and were then left to fend for themselves in the general election as punishment. Sorry, your statement is not true.

Furthermore, and I understand you may be reluctant to accept this, but if a dollar value were put on the difference in free media coverage, that is positive stories versus smear stories or stories that presumed the truth of one candidate's narrative and the falsity of the other candidate's narrative, then Republicans can be seen to have been heavily outspent in virtually every national campaign in the last 40-50 years. Yet Republicans still manage to win a few elections.

It really does matter what a politician stands for and whether or not they live up to their campaign promises. Money is important, but it isn't everything.

Re:Chilling stuff (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44957841)

they already started to do this...

so... i guess the real plan is to get their illegal actions legal before all this spying shit hits the fan... same thing they did before with the phone taps.

Re:Chilling stuff (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44960881)

Yes, you ought to share it with China, same as Microsoft did with their source code. (while stating they were unable to share it with the American government for security reasons.)

Alexander appears to be a product of his underlings being either kiss asses, or afraid of their boss. After a while of people telling someone how great they are, they actually believe they are a superior human being, instead of a deluded nutcase who has an impact on a huge population.
      -This message monitored by Alexander's underlings

Look in the mirror (4, Insightful)

TractorBarry (788340) | about a year ago | (#44957691)

If these goons want to see what the worst threat to freedom is they should simply install mirrors throughout all NSA buildings.

Re:Look in the mirror (1)

canadiannomad (1745008) | about a year ago | (#44958301)

I like this idea...
Plaster the walls of all government buildings with framed mirrors with the title "Worst Threat to Freedom" .. Unfortunately right now they seem to be taking that as a challenge instead of a chide.

as a non-American (5, Insightful)

Ubi_NL (313657) | about a year ago | (#44957695)

How the hell is this not industrial espionage? And then you expect me to host my backups in a US-based cloud or use US-based services like Office365? Apparantly these NSA-approved encryption techniques dont work so good when you're trying to shield from the NSA.

How about this cloud-based electronic laboratory-notebook software that is being pitched to pharma companies. These contain all the sensitive data before the patents are filed. Will that data be "shared" with my competition as well?

Re:as a non-American (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44957867)

Only to US-based, NSA-approved competitors.

Re:as a non-American (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44958693)

And Israel. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/11/nsa-americans-personal-data-israel-documents

Re:as a non-American (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | about a year ago | (#44958255)

If you're in the UK, your census data is already processed by Boeing in... Yup, the US.

Great Idea! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44957715)

That way we'll look less guilty if everyone else is "in" on the crime, too!

I bet that Gen. Keith Alexander's (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44957727)

urine would test positive for crack, smack, uppers, downers, outers, inners, horse tranquilizers, cow paralyzers, blue bombers, green goofers, yellow submarines and LSD Mach 3.

Re:I bet that Gen. Keith Alexander's (2)

erikkemperman (252014) | about a year ago | (#44957839)

urine would test positive for crack, smack, uppers, downers, outers, inners, horse tranquilizers, cow paralyzers, blue bombers, green goofers, yellow submarines and LSD Mach 3.

"One of the things you learn from years of dealing with drug people, is that you can turn your back on a person, but never turn your back on a drug. Especially when it's waving a razor-sharp hunting knife in your eye."
Hunter S. Thompson (RIP)

Chilling stuff (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44957789)

Is this guy for real? He's talking about real-time information sharing, obviously with no judicial oversight of any sort, rubber-stamped or otherwise.

FTFA: “Right now, we can’t see what’s happening in real time. We’ve got to share it with them, and potentially with other countries.”

Speaking to a crowd of mainly industry and government workers, Alexander appealed to them to help support the information sharing concept and any legislation that may be required to implement it.

Re:Chilling stuff (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about a year ago | (#44958731)

He's gone mad with power. In fact he's theoretically the most powerful man alive. He can spy on Rupert Murdoch's communications.

ACTA needs access to this 'threat' data! (1)

mcmf (3134063) | about a year ago | (#44957831)

Far sooner than I thought. I believe this means that ACTA and similar orgs have successfully argued for access to this 'threat' data.

Make it fit for dollar! (1)

SpaghettiPattern (609814) | about a year ago | (#44957843)

Make it fit for dollar! And anyone against it will be branded a commie. Do so whatever the issue is.

Unacceptable (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44957975)

European countries really need to stand up and stop this madness! It's bad enough the government is spying on everyone, now they want businesses to use this data aswell? Probably to start lawsuits against everyone who ever downloaded a music file.

It's complete (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44957987)

... help key private organizations ...

And the descent into fascism is complete.

... private organizations react to emerging threats ...

The police have automatic weapons and battle-armour. How exactly, will private organisations, who already give all their customer data to the NSA, control terrorist threats? Thirteen years ago the US government socialized security services to make the country 'safe'. But now the NSA wants to privatize intelligence services! Three months ago they wanted to sack (IT support) contractors in the interests of national 'security'.

In Australia, a major rigged-games scandal has appeared. So sporting clubs are demanding access to intelligence from the federal police (US-ians think FBI).

Re:It's complete (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about a year ago | (#44958761)

That was my first thought, this is full-on fascism. Full two-way power sharing between the corporations and the government.

MPAA & RIAA (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44957993)

And the MPAA and RIAA have nothing to do with this suggestion?

Will someone (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44958023)

Will someone eliminate this K.Alexander cancer guy already.

Re:Will someone (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year ago | (#44958171)

Hi agents!

Don't forget foreign trade secrets, technologies, (1)

HansKloss (665474) | about a year ago | (#44958031)

And who said they are wasting resources. While at, it let's pick up some foreign patents, technologies, trade secrets, contract bids and anything that destroys overseas companies..
Surprise, surprise. That technology you worked for the last 4 years, has been just patented by some start-up in California.

Thank you Mister! You are a true American patriot.

Like the threat that Airbus posed to Boeing? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44958043)

Its not like the NSA doesn't have past form on passing industrial espionage on european companies to American ones...

Re:Like the threat that Airbus posed to Boeing? (1)

ehack (115197) | about a year ago | (#44958373)

The NSA gets the info, then the CIA takes out selected individuals by lobbying, blackmail or if all fails ... - after all cmpetitors are an imminent threat to the american way of life ...

But this is done already... (1)

WOOFYGOOFY (1334993) | about a year ago | (#44958075)

Yeah but this is done already. Banks, utilities, manufacturing, telcoms, ISPs, food processors everyone gets informed of threats or BOLO type situations .. they've always done this, it's absolutely nothing new.

solving the wrong problem (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44958099)

'We need the authority for us to share with them and them to share with us. But because some of that information is classified, we need a way to protect it,'

Why not declassify it then? Why in the hell are newly discovered vulnerabilities in civilian applications classified in the first place?

Re:solving the wrong problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44958407)

Why in the hell are newly discovered vulnerabilities in civilian applications classified in the first place?

Because now the NSA can spy on you so easily, when the back door is wide open. Apple, Microsoft, Google, and Facebook are NSA's butt buddies in this love fest. The corps have no incentive to patch the holes and the NSA makes sure it stays that way. Vote with your feet, that's your only recourse.

Re:solving the wrong problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44958563)

Remember, we are talking about "Threat Intelligence" here.

The reason some of it is classified is because if it was open, then the opposition would know that they have been detected and change their attack vector.

Although many people don't like to assign the monika of "Cyber War" to these activities, the tactics used to combat the opposition are very similar to physical warfare.

While credit card fraud gets a lot of press, there is also the very under reported industrial espionage that goes on. These are the sponsored attackers that are going after large commercial organizations and national governments (all governments, not just the US).

It is a delicate task for a government to balance the need to track the attacker and the need to protect more of your infrastructure and supply chain.

Seems that it wil be a cold day in hell (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44958321)

before any reputable company shares anything with NSA.

And I want... (3, Insightful)

Lumpy (12016) | about a year ago | (#44958391)

Every NSA employees home address, all the records on them published to a PUBLIC website and updated daily with their credit card records and purchasing habits.

They will gladly agree as they have nothing to hide.

No Sale (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | about a year ago | (#44958443)

Sorry, General Alexander. You're backfilling now because you know that the behavior of your agency is an affront to every single one of the principles of a free society. There can be no liberty - social, economic or political - in a surveillance state. They are antithetical.

I think it's sinking in that this can only end one of two ways: Either there is massive reform of the NSA to bring in significant checks and balances (no secret court warrants) or there is an end to the notion that the United States is a free society that values liberty. And I think the second option is going to involve a whole lot of suffering, for both citizens and the surveillance masters like you, before it's done.

People are widely disgusted with you, General Alexander, and every day, more people are starting to realize what you and your agency have really become.

The trick is the NDA (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44958469)

By signing the NDA to view any of the data, they will be bound by contract not to reveal it, reverse engineer it, or even research it themselves lest they step on the contract. It's a common trick by technologies when they reveal non-free licensed software: by relvealing small parts of a technology, parts that others could find with due diligence anyway, they bind the people and companies with contract law.

It can be much more effective than the expensive and revealing possibility of prosecution in court for violating national security, or patent violation, and the court cases can seal the evidence without having to admit so much to the court itself and risk public exposure. It's actually a brilliant move: appear friendly, insert contract law hooks into possible corporate revelations of NSA technology or abuse, and hang them out to dry if they ever go beyond the very limited permissions of the contract.

More opportunities for abuse (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44958479)

Just imagine the opportunities...

Some political protester petitions the rest of the citizens with grievances and starts to make the administration look bad, you can simply forward information straight from the NSA to his boss. He'll then spend most of his time looking for work, food and shelter instead of protesting.

Why is this Criminal not in Prison? (3, Interesting)

Phoenix666 (184391) | about a year ago | (#44958559)

He has violated the Constitution of the United States tens of thousands of times, without repercussions. He has consistently lied to Congress and the American people. He has created a rogue agency that threatens our very democracy and therefore represents a Clear and Present Danger to our freedom. I fear him and his lackies far more than Al Qaeda.

He and his followers are the ones who should be super max for the rest of their lives. Or executed. Either works for me.

Misused of Classification (1)

Shavano (2541114) | about a year ago | (#44958597)

If the information needs to be shared with people who can't be cleared, you're misusing the classification system. The whole point of classifying information is that you have identified it as information that is NOT to be shared outside an identified set of people that you explicitly trust. Bottom line: they're making too much information secret and setting the limits on dissemination tighter than they should be and now they want to make new rules instead of just declassifying the information that should never have been classified in the first place.

Here's what will happen (2)

jbmartin6 (1232050) | about a year ago | (#44958607)

From personal experience, here is how this proposal will work out. Private orgs will share data with the NSA, the NSA will then share nothing with the private orgs because everything of any interest is classified. Anyone who has attended any conference with a presenter from the NSA has seen this in action. Really, the fact that the proposal isn't simply to make the information public shows the contemptuous disregard the NSA has for the public.

And what happens when ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44958711)

A "rogue" Employee at American Express, maybe a Contractor working there, then grabs all the national security data AND the credit card numbers? There will be a LOT of Customers for both. Bad idea all around.

"Need"? (1)

intermodal (534361) | about a year ago | (#44958791)

I'm not sure the General understands the meaning of the word "need".

If we're going to accept surveillance (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44958971)

We should "democratize" all the data and make it publicly available.

Think of it as ultra-transparency.

The benefits (and liabilities) would be shared across the nation by all regardless of income bracket and political affiliation.

Collecting the data and then selecting who can benefit from it (and who can't) is as anti-democratic and anti-competative as it gets.

Of course, that is rather what Alexander is all about isn't it.

Why spy? Business. (2)

lasermike026 (528051) | about a year ago | (#44959781)

This has nothing to do with terrorist. This is about business. The American people are getting ripped off and people want to do something about it. How to prevent change? Spy on everyone and head off any political moment to change market and legal rules. The corps asked for this spying technology. This whole thing stinks of fascism.

The American way (1)

currently_awake (1248758) | about a year ago | (#44960131)

It's about monetizing their assets. They have all this wonderful data, and the advertisers desperately want to buy access- and the NSA wants a secure source of funding that the revolting serfs can't cut off in retaliation over their "minor" spying scandal.

NSA@Home Eclipses SETI@Home (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44960173)

Alexander is admitting a huge failure.

Lets put it this way:

NSA, $51 billion budget, >1 million employees, able to eavesdrop on any network computer and telephone communications world wide and with their Utah data center's database with more than a trillion keystroke entries of CTRL ALT DELETE they ask Business Corporations to tell them what it means.

WOW.

Of course he does in order to move to Fascism (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44960295)

Fascism supports a state-controlled economy that accepts a mix of private and public ownership over the means of production. In Fascism, economic planning is applied to both the public and private sector in a fascist economy, and the prosperity of private enterprise depended on its acceptance of synchronizing itself with the fascist state's economic goals. It supports the profit motive. However Fascism emphasizes that industries must uphold the national interest as superior to private profit.

He Wants CISPA (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about a year ago | (#44960313)

So he's lobbying for it in public.

The House of Representatives has passed it twice. Twice Obama threatened to veto it. Twice it died in the Senate.

It's not dead yet.

Industrial Espionage... (1)

stanlyb (1839382) | about a year ago | (#44961275)

Anyone? Have you seen it coming?

Camel nose, meet tent. (1)

doubledown00 (2767069) | about a year ago | (#44961333)

And of course not long thereafter will come the financial incentives, cajoling, and outright threats necessary to ink a "deal" that the malware companies will not detect CIA and NSA wares.

I would certainly hope that McAfee et al would not be dumb enough to jump into bed with the devil, but sadly that may be more wishful thinking than anything.

"Threat sharing with the private sector"? (1)

whitroth (9367) | about a year ago | (#44961529)

And what else will they share?

Come on, everyone: tell me how this is *not* fascism, outright?

                mark

"Fascism is more properly called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power" - Benito Mussolini

Power Grab (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44961587)

In order to share classified data with a company, it's likely the company will have some sort of NDA/NSL type gag order. Then they'll be able to tell us even less. I'm almost positive that the new requested powers would allow them to install "NSA reporting hardware" which would siphon up even more data.

He sees the writing on the wall with the Patriot Act, and things like NSL, section 215, etc, do not have a rosy future. He's making a backup plan.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>