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!

Intelligence Officials Fear Snowden's 'Doomsday' Cache

Soulskill posted about 9 months ago | from the all-the-juicy-stuff-is-on-the-shelf dept.

Encryption 381

Dega704 writes with news that Edward Snowden is believed to have a collection of highly sensitive classified documents that will be released in the event he is detained, hurt, or killed. According to Reuters, "The data is protected with sophisticated encryption, and multiple passwords are needed to open it, said two of the sources, who like the others spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters. The passwords are in the possession of at least three different people and are valid for only a brief time window each day, they said. The identities of persons who might have the passwords are unknown." These details have caused several security experts to express skepticism, but multiple sources, including Glenn Greenwald, believe Snowden has not released all of the documents he appropriated. "U.S. officials and other sources said only a small proportion of the classified material Snowden downloaded during stints as a contract systems administrator for NSA has been made public. Some Obama Administration officials have said privately that Snowden downloaded enough material to fuel two more years of news stories." Whether or not it's true, U.S. and U.K. officials clearly believe it, which can only serve to protect Snowden.

cancel ×

381 comments

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

The real news (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533663)

There is years' worth of material that makes intelligence analysts nervous. Just how much dirt could the US possibly have that they don't want people to know?

Re:The real news (3, Funny)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about 9 months ago | (#45533755)

Kennedy killed by Sturgis and Hunt in Poppy-managed operation.

That room on the 6th floor of the Book Depository (3, Interesting)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | about 9 months ago | (#45534033)

Regarding the Kennedy, has anyone been into to that particular room on the sixth floor of the Book Depository in Dallas, Tx, USA, where they said Lee Harvey Oswald shot JFK ?

I have.

In normal time they blocked that room up with plexiglass barrier. Visitors could only see that room from the corridor outside.

But I went inside.

I went there during the time Oliver Stone was filming the movie "JFK". They removed the plexiglass barrier.

I was able to stand in THAT VERY WINDOW, looked out of the window and surveyed the scene below, and I tried to assume the position of having carrying a rifle, and tried to aim that "virtual rifle" at the point at Dealey Plaza where JFK was shot.

I couldn't.

You see, if I were Lee Harvey Oswald, and I was doing the shooting BY MYSELF I have to know WHEN the motorcade which JFK was riding arrive.

I have to have the chance to judge the timing so that I can aim my weapon at JFK's head.

The JFK motorcade came, as I was standing on the 6th floor window, from my LEFT SIDE, and proceeded to the RIGHT SIDE.

If I were the shooter, I need to stand UP and look at the left side, waiting for the motorcade to arrive, and then aim my rifle at the right side as the motorcade goes towards the Dealey Plaza.

I couldn't do it ALONE.

In order to hit JFK's head when the motorcade is at Dealey Plaza ---- which is at the EXTREME RIGHT HAND SIDE from the view from the 6th floor window, I need to extend at least 60% of my torso OUT OF THE WINDOW in order to get my shot.

I do not know how long Lee Harvey Oswald torso happened to be, my own torso is about the average size human grown man's torso.

If I were to shoot JFK ALONE in that 6th floor windows, I couldn't.

I watched the documentaries where they had expert shooters trying out shooting at the motorcade below from the same window, and the shooters' in the documentaries were adopting the "half crouch" position, aiming their rifles at the exact point where JFK was killed.

But if I *WERE THE LONE KILLER IN THAT ROOM* and if I *WERE DOING THAT*, I would not be able to know WHEN JFK's MOTORCADE WOULD ARRIVE, as there is no way I could see the LEFT HAND SIDE of the windows when I crouched and lean against the left side of the window holding my weapon aiming towards Dealey Plaza at my extreme right side.

So all of these essentially boils down to my own conclusion that

1. Lee Harvey Oswald, if he was the killer of JFK, was NOT acting alone. He MUST HAVE an accomplice in that same room, to act as a "watcher" for him and to inform him when JFK's motorcade was to arrive.

2. If Lee Harvey Oswald was NOT half crouching on the left side of the windows when he shot JFK from the 6th floor of the Book Depository building, he must have EXTENDED at least 60% of his body OUT of that windows.

And in order to NOT FALL DOWN, he must have SOMEONE ELSE inside that same room to GRAB HIS LEGS as an anchor.

Conclusion from #1 and #2 is that, if Lee Harvey Oswald was really the killer of JFK and he did made those 3 shots from the 6th floor window, he was NOT acting alone.

fffffffffag (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45534107)

fffffffffffag

Re:That room on the 6th floor of the Book Deposito (3, Informative)

safetyinnumbers (1770570) | about 9 months ago | (#45534113)

Don't the trees block a lot more of the road than they did then?

There's a webcam [earthcam.com] mounted inside the box near the window if anyone want's to check out the view (the pile of boxes placed there to represent the one's he's said to have placed there to rest the rifle on).

Mod parent up! (2)

kdawson (3715) (1344097) | about 9 months ago | (#45534151)

Taco Cowboy, I did some analsys on your ideas. They coincide with what I learned when I was researching the core information when I was in gradschool. Seeing that I was a young boy in Dallas when this happened and actually got to shake his hand earlier in the day but did not see the motorcade go through town, I was always awstruck about what happened that day. I made it ONE of my life goals to figure out what really happened. Through FOIA requests and a few Wiki Leaks of my own, I agree with you 110%.

I recommend watching this video. About 50-70% through it is self evident on who did it just through the convayence as shown here.

You Tube Video Of Those Respnosible [youtube.com]

-KD

Re:The real news (4, Insightful)

bob_super (3391281) | about 9 months ago | (#45533767)

"If you don't have anything to hide, why would you worry?"

This Holiday Season on RT! (4, Funny)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about 9 months ago | (#45533895)

Join us in our traditional gathering around the samovar, for a Christmas presentation of what's surely to become an RT classic:

"Snowed In with Snowden". Edward Snowden invites various RT holiday gusts, for the cheer of the season, in the shadow of St. Basil's. The laughs begin, as Max Kaiser drops by with a little flask of "holiday cheer" - and some very special "snow" of his own. Then, we solemnize with George Galloway and Ken Livingston, who join Ed for a haunting rendition (did we just use that word?) of "Rudolph, The Red Nosed Reindeer". But hang tight on the presents! Orthodox Chrismas in't til January, innit?

Well, happy Feast of Epiphany, in any matter. Stay tuned!

Let's see (3, Insightful)

StevenMaurer (115071) | about 9 months ago | (#45533793)

  • The names of informants in foreign governments - especially dictatorships like North Korea.
  • Specific individuals that we know are terrorists, and who the U.S. is tracking right now (hoping to catch bigger fish).
  • Technologies now considered "safe" for foreign spies, terrorists, and criminals to use - but have actually been hacked.
  • Profound vulnerabilities in our embassy/military-base defenses that penetration testing found but are too expensive to fix.
  • Anything that would otherwise cause people to die.

There are a lot of things, actually. None of them have to do with anyone's personal porn stash, or the fever-dreams of people who hate the U.S.

Re:Let's see (1)

hurwak-feg (2955853) | about 9 months ago | (#45533881)

Mod this up. The Snowden leaks have revealed some morally and legally questionable behavior by the US government, but there are some things that would be best to keep secret that actually are in the best interest of everyone in the world. For example, if the NSA knows how to cryptoanalyze AES or PGP, the methods used getting into the hands of criminals would be bad for everyone.

Re:Let's see (5, Interesting)

vux984 (928602) | about 9 months ago | (#45533919)

For example, if the NSA knows how to cryptoanalyze AES or PGP, the methods used getting into the hands of criminals would be bad for everyone.

Unless someone within the NSA realized there was a billion dollar payday if he sold those methods to certain criminals or countries.

In which case the public isn't safe and doesn't know it.

That's even worse.

Some things should be secret from the public, nuclear launch codes, names of spies, etc... but interent security affects all of us, and its not making anybody safer to try and hide a vulnerability there.

The NSA isn't magic. If the NSA can break AES, then anyone else might figure it out too.

Re:Let's see (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45534091)

I agree. And further, I believe that the NSA should be obligated to share that they discovered a vulnerability in any standard and work to fix the vulnerabilities. Instead, they exploit and hide their known vulnerabilities. It's truly shameful.

Re:Let's see (5, Insightful)

Shakrai (717556) | about 9 months ago | (#45534175)

If the NSA can break AES, then anyone else might figure it out too.

One of the NSA's mandates is to secure American communications. They have certified AES as being sufficient for Federal agencies to use to secure classified information, and even Top Secret classified information with large enough (192 or 256 bit) keys. This suggests one of two things:

  1. They're smart enough to break AES, but stupid enough to think nobody else can.
  2. The best cryptographers in the United States of America believe AES to be secure.

Common sense says it's #2. Could the best American cryptographers have it completely wrong, and we'll find out when the next Pearl Harbor happens? Certainly. Is it a conspiracy where they know it's weak and are keeping it so in order to read your e-mail? Not bloody likely.

Re:Let's see (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45534289)

The NSA isn't magic. If the NSA can break AES, then anyone else might figure it out too.

They don't have to be magic. They just have to soak up a large percentage of the people capable of doing these things, and pay them well. There might be other people capable of doing these things, but they have to do other things to eat. It doesn't matter how good a cryptanalyst you are if writing algos for Wall Street fills your day, or if you have to make lattes to pay the rent. Your effective impact in the crypto field is neutralized.

Re:Let's see (5, Insightful)

jonwil (467024) | about 9 months ago | (#45533907)

As a geek, a software developer and a security guy with a library of Schneier books on his bookshelf, I personally think that a list of "Technologies now considered "safe" for foreign spies, terrorists, and criminals to use - but have actually been hacked" is EXACTLY the sort of thing someone like Snowden should be leaking.

Deliberately making widely-used things less secure in order to catch bad guys (including withholding exploit information that could be used to make things more secure) is NOT something the good guys should be engaging in. (and yes I still consider the US, UK and Australia as "good guys")

Re:Let's see (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533949)

There are a lot of things, actually. None of them have to do with anyone's personal porn stash, or the fever-dreams of people who hate the U.S.

So being against a tyrannical government using extrajudicial surveillance is "hating the US"? Sorry, buddy, but you're the traitor of the people not Snowden.

Re:Let's see (2)

z0idberg (888892) | about 9 months ago | (#45534123)

They are good examples of material that the NSA would legitimately not want getting out into the wild. The release of that type of information would indeed be detrimental to the safety and security of the USA as a whole.

But it is not the type of information that Snowden has released so far though. The releases so far have revealed the NSA to be up to some pretty nasty shit so I am not inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt that he only has information that would hurt the USA left. It will almost certainly hurt the NSA, but that is not necessarily a bad thing from what we have seen so far.

You got it *almost* correct (2)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | about 9 months ago | (#45534173)

Specific individuals that we know are terrorists, and who the U.S. is tracking right now...

The real scenario is much more juicier ...

"Specific individuals that are influential in various terrorist organizations that are currently working for the US government and its allies (including Qatar/Saudis/Turkey), and are taking orders from the US government in launching various (minor) Jihadist strikes against the Western / Christian interests in far flung places to keep the FEAR FACTOR alive"

Re:Let's see (3, Insightful)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about 9 months ago | (#45534187)

There are a lot of things, actually. None of them have to do with anyone's personal porn stash, or the fever-dreams of people who hate the U.S.

In which case the NSA is grossly incompetent, or to use plainer language, stupid, for pissing on the 4th Amendment and monitoring every American. Maybe they should stick to the important stuff. If they hadn't been unconstitutionally monitoring every American, would Snowden have done what he did? Personally it doesn't bother me if the NSA looks up Merkel's ass every time she takes a dump. If they don't do that with Kim Jong-un, I'd like to know why. But monitoring every American? That's a whole 'nother story, and a good reason for what Snowden did. If they'd stuck to what's important, useful and Constitutional, they wouldn't have this problem. Snowden is a patriot, not a traitor.

Re:The real news (1)

gmuslera (3436) | about 9 months ago | (#45534305)

Probably could be read as "If you think all that was disclosed so far was bad, it was nothing compared withl the rest". To put it into the doomsday umbrella seem to give the hint that what remains is orders worse, something that could imply people finally doing something against the government in US, breaking of commercial treaties, penalties in international courts, attacks/closing embassies or even war. And if anything of this happens won't be Snowden fault, but US one.

Lovely (3, Funny)

lesincompetent (2836253) | about 9 months ago | (#45533667)

Make them squirm.

Re:Lovely (2, Insightful)

Shakrai (717556) | about 9 months ago | (#45534095)

I have mixed feelings about Mr. Snowden..... his disclosures of NSA's domestic activities may have been legitimate, but I have yet to hear a good justification for his leaks about NSA's foreign operations. I know a lot of people are expressing shock about NSA's overseas SIGINT activities, but they aren't doing anything that every other country isn't trying to do to the United States, and none of their actions came as a surprise to any serious student of geopolitics. Every disclosure that he has made on this subject has inflicted serious blow-back to US foreign policy, and I don't recall him being one of the choices on 6 Nov 2012, when I had my say regarding the selection of the person that was to set American foreign policy for the next four years.

I don't expect many non-Americans to understand this, and even many of my fellow countryman will rush to shout me down, but NSA's overseas activities are legitimate activities that every other nation-state on the blue marble engages in. Some may be poorly targeted (seriously, Germany?), some may be politically obtuse, but the bottom line is Edward Snowden was not in a position to make these sorts of far reaching decisions. Nobody voted for him, nobody sought him out, and nobody entrusted him with this sort of power.

As for what should happen to him now, that's beyond my pay grade. I do think he will come to regret some of his decisions, particularly as he matures, and regardless of what his ultimate fate turns out to be. I wouldn't salute the flag to the point of loading the boxcars, but it would take a lot more than my country spying on other countries to convince me that the only remaining recourse was to betray confidences and seek refuge from quasi-hostile foreign powers.

Re:Lovely (3, Insightful)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about 9 months ago | (#45534261)

"Every disclosure that he has made on this subject has inflicted serious blow-back to US foreign policy, and I don't recall him being one of the choices on 6 Nov 2012, when I had my say regarding the selection of the person that was to set American foreign policy for the next four years. "

This is a disingenuous argument if I ever saw one. These were the policies of George H.W. Bush, and they have been made even more the policies of Barack Obama. You have absolutely no evidence that Romney would have changed these policies.

I might buy this argument if you'd voted for a Libertarian candidate, but Paul was taken off the table, and though it's possible, it's not likely you voted for Johnson.

Re:Lovely (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45534211)

Make them squirm.

Does a possible BS or shear stupidity problem exists? The NSA has a dilemma: It doesn't want the important information known, but killing him activates this knowledge. However, now people against the NSA have an incentive to kill him, to find out what is so important. So, is the NSA's job now to stop these people to keep him alive?

If they believe it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533671)

That means they automatically admitted that they are doing enough things that are worse than what has already been revealed for at least another few dozen scandals... Why can't a criminal spy organization ever catch a break?

This is why I don't trust this guy (0, Flamebait)

BringsApples (3418089) | about 9 months ago | (#45533681)

If he's a whistle-blower, then blow the fucking thing already. I understand that he is on the run, sorta, but why not just come out with it all? All the spy-vs-spy bullshit just makes me think that the whole Snowden thing is bullshit itself. I don't get it.

Re:This is why I don't trust this guy (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533733)

Because doing it all at once is like giving a kid a lifetime's worth of toys all at once. It will not be appreciated nor fully understood.

Re:This is why I don't trust this guy (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533747)

I don't get it.

Don't worry, you don't get it because you're stupid. People that can think about the implications of the possible scenarios get it.

Re:This is why I don't trust this guy (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533751)

Because two years of constant media coverage and new information beats the hell out of a 1-week load-blow that the public immediately forgets about

Re:This is why I don't trust this guy (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533769)

Because there is some stuff in there that legitimately should be kept secret. Snowden's goal is to protect his safety and liberty by hanging this cache of really damaging data over their heads as a way of discouraging any attempts to capture or kill him.

Re:This is why I don't trust this guy (5, Insightful)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about 9 months ago | (#45534217)

In other words, Snowden is neither stupid nor suicidal.

Re:This is why I don't trust this guy (2)

bob_super (3391281) | about 9 months ago | (#45533789)

Because in many cases the journalists have abided by the administrations' requests to censor some of the details.

If you do a bulk release, you're probably putting someone's life/livelihood in danger. Not everyone who is involved is evil.

Re:This is why I don't trust this guy (5, Insightful)

jbolden (176878) | about 9 months ago | (#45533869)

Snowden's slow release has been keeping this story in the news. He's helping to build controversy around the programs. Releasing everything at once would just overwhelm the media and the pubic's ability to address all the issues raised.

Re:This is why I don't trust this guy (1)

BringsApples (3418089) | about 9 months ago | (#45534109)

Shit man, how is the public addressing them now? If you turn the tables, look at it from another "side"... how about if the FEDs did arrest Snowden, not detain him, but arrest him, and told the public that they've got charges on him, and they'll release them at a later date.

When he release the news that the NSA were monitoring everything, do you really think that the public understood it at all? Hell, only 15% of the people that I know, and have talked to about it, have no idea what it's all about. So I don't agree with the theory that the public cannot handle the truth.

This whole "keep the public on a string" strategy is only done when there is a need to control. I'm just sayin.

Re:This is why I don't trust this guy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533945)

Was that a real question, or are you just ignorant?

Re:This is why I don't trust this guy (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533961)

Snowden is a deluded pawn who met up with the wrong people. In return for Bog knows what (perhaps an offer of cash and a promise of a nice life a anonymous place in an un-named country), he was tasked to go get secrets and hand them over.

The real player is Snowden's handler. Who is running him? Just guessing, China is damned good at the computer side, but the Russians have the HUMINT, arguably the best in the world. This handler is the one who is scoring the coup by threatening the US with a lockbox full of assets while feeding news sites dribbles of info to keep the anti-US hatred up.

Damn good propaganda score for the Russians, the Chinese, and perhaps hostile Arab interests. This has helped their interests to an extreme, arguably the best victory since the Cold War began.

Security is a tricky thing (5, Insightful)

mariox19 (632969) | about 9 months ago | (#45533687)

Bruce Schneier commented on this a while back: [schneier.com]

I'm not sure he's thought this through, though. I would be more worried that someone would kill me in order to get the documents released than I would be that someone would kill me to prevent the documents from being released. Any real-world situation involves multiple adversaries, and it's important to keep all of them in mind when designing a security system.

I'm not sure what Snowden's alternative is, but a doomsday switch isn't exactly foolproof.

Re:Security is a tricky thing (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533753)

Of course, the whole point of a Doomsday Machine is lost, if you *keep* it a *secret*! Why didn't you tell the world, EH?

Re:Security is a tricky thing (2)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | about 9 months ago | (#45533855)

It was to be announced at the Party Congress on Monday. As you know, Snowden loves surprises.

Re:Security is a tricky thing (1)

quantaman (517394) | about 9 months ago | (#45533983)

That might actually be a good point.

By having the secrets he's playing a very dangerous game, the safest course of action is to simply stop playing, release or destroy everything you have, tell everyone it's all gone, and now you're safely irrelevant.

Of course this still leaves you vulnerable to an Litvinenko [wikipedia.org] style reprisal assassination.

The other play might be to hint you have a Doomsday Machine, but not actually confirm it. Claim it exists, but then make weird statements like saying the passwords "are valid for only a brief time window each day".

The people who don't want it to go off leave you alive in case you're not bluffing.

And the people who do want it to go off, well you might be bluffing, and no one wants to get caught having assassinated someone over a bluff.

Re:Security is a tricky thing (1)

mysidia (191772) | about 9 months ago | (#45534185)

And the people who do want it to go off, well you might be bluffing, and no one wants to get caught having assassinated someone over a bluff.

There is another approach.... start detaining or "making disappear"; everyone Snowden had contact with; all his potential friends or accomplices / other people he is known to have dealt with --- and interrogate them all deeply, until someone reveals information about this doomesday system.

If indeed the password is only valid during limited times each day ---- that suggests some online computer systems to be taken down in a mysterious outage.

Re:Security is a tricky thing (2)

quantaman (517394) | about 9 months ago | (#45534235)

And the people who do want it to go off, well you might be bluffing, and no one wants to get caught having assassinated someone over a bluff.

There is another approach.... start detaining or "making disappear"; everyone Snowden had contact with;
all his potential friends or accomplices / other people he is known to have dealt with --- and interrogate them all deeply, until someone reveals information about this doomesday system.

If indeed the password is only valid during limited times each day ---- that suggests some online computer systems to be taken down in a mysterious outage.

If it was Soviet Russia sure, but the whole point of this is that governments were being embarrassed by having their dirty secrets exposed. Look at all the uproar over Glenn Greenwald's husband being detained at Heathrow. Can you imagine if Snowden's friends and associates started receiving threatening visits with government agents? If anyone is going to go after Snowden they're either going to be very very quiet, or very very anonymous.

Re:Security is a tricky thing (1)

mysidia (191772) | about 9 months ago | (#45534307)

Can you imagine if Snowden's friends and associates started receiving threatening visits with government agents? If anyone is going to go after Snowden they're either going to be very very quiet, or very very anonymous.

"Threatening visits" would indeed cause problems. By detain; I meant detain, as in "make quietly disappear", at least for a while.

After some polygraphs, and a few interrogation sessions cleared them, they should be free to go, after swearing an oath, and signing a document, agreeing to cooperate, promising not to discuss their interrogation with anyone, etc.

Re:Security is a tricky thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533871)

If the USA was smart, they would silently negotiate a deal with Snowden where he is absolved of all charges and is allowed to live freely, perhaps in some undisclosed country, under the protection of US authorities. This would satisfy Snowden's desire for safety and liberty and it would satisfy the government's desire to protect the documents from being released in bulk to an adversary who is seeking to kill him to get them.

Re:Security is a tricky thing (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about 9 months ago | (#45534233)

If the USA was smart, they would silently negotiate a deal with Snowden where he is absolved of all charges and is allowed to live freely, perhaps in some undisclosed country, under the protection of US authorities.

1. That would be sensible, and hence contrary to government policy.

2. If I were Snowden, I wouldn't trust a proposed deal like that as far as I could throw a potato chip.

Re:Security is a tricky thing (1)

sg_oneill (159032) | about 9 months ago | (#45533899)

Indeed, and personally I'd rather take my chances with the CIA than russia's CIS. Those polonium umbrellas ought give anyone pause.

Re:Security is a tricky thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533997)

Well Snowden seems to be very smart and he had access to enough secret data to let him assess the relative risk level between the CIA and Russia's CIS, and he chose the latter. Makes you think doesn't it?

Re:Security is a tricky thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45534013)

Indeed, and personally I'd rather take my chances with the CIA than russia's CIS. Those polonium umbrellas ought give anyone pause.

The umbrella which killed Markov used ricin, not polonium.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgi_Markov#Assassination

But you do also have to be careful drinking tea.

Re:Security is a tricky thing (1)

Spy Handler (822350) | about 9 months ago | (#45533939)

Very interesting... so now U.S. is afraid to kill him, but Russia/China/Iran have something to gain by killing him.

His only choice now is to put himself completely at Putin's mercy, give the Russians everything he's got that he hasn't released yet, seek KGB protection, and find a nice Russian gal to settle down with for the rest of his life. Oh and deactivate the doomsday switch so the Chinese don't have an incentive to kill him anymore.

Re:Security is a tricky thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533965)

So if the US doesn't want those secret released, they had better send in some secret body guards for Snowden against other parties.

Torn (2)

Oysterville (2944937) | about 9 months ago | (#45533689)

I don't want Snowden captured, but I do want to see this cache very, very badly.

Re:Torn (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533779)

Knowing how arrogant our government is, they'll capture him, the documents will get released, there will be major fallout, and the government will bitterly say "well we don't negotiate with terrorists" or some such nonsense.

Re:Torn (5, Informative)

bigfoottoo (2947459) | about 9 months ago | (#45534071)

This was covered earlier in http://slashdot.org/story/13/08/18/1641241/wikileaks-releases-a-massive-insurance-file-that-no-one-can-open [slashdot.org]

A: 3.6Gb http://wlstorage.net/torrent/wlinsurance-20130815-A.aes256.torrent [wlstorage.net] [wlstorage.net]
B: 49Gb http://wlstorage.net/torrent/wlinsurance-20130815-B.aes256.torrent [wlstorage.net] [wlstorage.net]
C: 349GB http://wlstorage.net/torrent/wlinsurance-20130815-C.aes256.torrent [wlstorage.net] [wlstorage.net]

I think we all can agree that 3.6GB was within Snowden's opportunity and ability to gather. But, 49GB and 349GB ?!! That is a LOT of data to quietly move to USB sticks. If the last two truely are Snowden files, then it looks to me like he may have had an accomplice. Wouldn't it be so cool if there is a freedom-loving mole in a high position of the NSA?

Re:Torn (1)

msauve (701917) | about 9 months ago | (#45534165)

dd if=/dev/null of=./wlinsurance-20130815-C.aes256 bs=1M count=349000

Decrypt that, NSA!

Re:Torn (3, Funny)

msauve (701917) | about 9 months ago | (#45534171)

s/null/random/ Doh.

Fuck Amerikkka (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533691)

Good. Fuck Amerikkka.

Re:Fuck Amerikkka (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533823)

I misread your post as "God Fuck America".

The way we are going, we are doing a damn good job of doing it all by ourselves.

YuGo fail it (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533721)

those obligations. SESSION AND JOIN IN a BSD box that Fear the reaper and as BSd sinks the project as a LOOK AT YOUR SOFT,

valid for only a brief time window each day (4, Interesting)

Arancaytar (966377) | about 9 months ago | (#45533727)

How would that even work? Is there a central server that keeps the data and decides what time it is? That sure sounds safe.

Re:valid for only a brief time window each day (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533913)

There is likely a key on a tor server that can only be retrieved at certain times.

More importantly, WTF is the insurance files I'm seeding? FFS.

Re:valid for only a brief time window each day (2)

TechyImmigrant (175943) | about 9 months ago | (#45533953)

Or a hash of the quantised TOD of the hosting system is factored into the key derivation function.

Why would anyone possibly think of doing it any other way? Sheesh!

Re:valid for only a brief time window each day (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45534265)

There is likely a key on a tor server that can only be retrieved at certain times.

Or perhaps a Bitcoin spend has to be sent to a certain address; and appear in a block, that has a number within a certain range modulo 1400, so that the doomesday machines read the transaction from the block chain, and immediately load up the TOR service, providing the encrypted shares on a URL that has to be downloaded within 2 hours, before the contents are recycled, and shredded.

if "arrested" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533737)

Well, as much as i agree that he shouldnt be. Most of this wasnt transparent, but most of this (released thus far) falls within clear journalistic integrity. no people's names outed re: spies, etc .no confidential informants, etc. proper news papers are the editorial custodians, not snowden himself. they probably have all kinds of shit censored. But if arrested? i disagree. if renditioned, if tortured, if killed, if any "with malice" anything toward him then i dont disagree with an insurance policy. but he did things for which he already said he would face a legit trial. if he gets one, releasing an un-redacted pile of insanity would be morally wrong, despite the moral wrong already done as per the leaks he has revealed. 2 wrongs do not make a right, and he's already done the upstanding thing morally, and if he can get a fair trial with guarantees of safety, a trial by an untampered jury of his peers, equality under the law, etc. then he should consider it and back down on the nuclear option. but if any of the fairness is revoked from the other end, drop the bomb son :) you get kidnapped in the night and tortured? i hope its in place to dump the cargo

What could be juicy? (1)

hcs_$reboot (1536101) | about 9 months ago | (#45533745)

JFK? Gorbachev and Berlin wall? 9/11? Irak & MDW? ...

Re:What could be juicy? (1)

BringsApples (3418089) | about 9 months ago | (#45534189)

Let's say, for an extreme example, that it is indeed facts about cover-ups like 9/11 or JFK. If Snowden knows it, and keeps it a secret, isn't he doing the same thing that the NSA is doing? It seems like it's possible that the public is being used here, by both sides.

Brief time window? (1, Interesting)

Adrian Lopez (2615) | about 9 months ago | (#45533749)

"The passwords ... are valid for only a brief time window each day, they said."

How does that work?

Re:Brief time window? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533819)

#!/bin/bash

nc -lp 31337 | while read key
do
        if [ `date` 9am -or 9pm `date` ]
        then
                echo "skipping key read because the world is sleeping and no one would notice a massive release of information at this time..."
        else
                if [ "$key" == "zomgztheygotme!" ]
                then
                        cat /tmp/massive.info | openssl aes256cbc -k "$key" -iv ~/iv.data -d | pastebin -t "Snowden's Docs"
                fi
        fi
done

- stoops!

Re:Brief time window? (1)

johnsnails (1715452) | about 9 months ago | (#45533925)

without being certain... Whoosh

Re:Brief time window? (5, Interesting)

dnavid (2842431) | about 9 months ago | (#45533937)

"The passwords ... are valid for only a brief time window each day, they said."

How does that work?

There's no literal way for that to work, but there are ways to protect sensitive data in a way that could be described in that way.

One way I can think of is to get someone I know to buy something like an Amazon instance in a way that isn't traceable to me. Then I upload my data in an encrypted fashion into the instance. Then I give a set of people different passwords to log into the virtual machine running in that instance. Then I set the instance to power on in a scheduled manner so that the instance is only accessible at certain moments in time known to the people I give the passwords to. At all other times the instance is powered off and the people with the passwords to it do not have any knowledge of how to manage the instance itself directly. Thus, the people I designate as trustees for the data only have access at certain times. On top of that, they could have different segments of a key-split so that to actually access the data requires at least two different people logging into the instance and providing their keys, or alternatively one person logging in and providing two different key segments.

Why you might do something like this is to try to minimize the availability of the data from being discovered or cracked. Most of the time, the data isn't on a system that is in any real way accessible from the internet. Furthermore, it also makes it less expensive to create multiple data caches in the cloud because the cost of running the systems would be very low, since they would not be running most of the time.

Re:Brief time window? (1)

c0lo (1497653) | about 9 months ago | (#45534097)

"The passwords ... are valid for only a brief time window each day, they said."

How does that work?

The archer casts his arrow at dawn [tvtropes.org] (or something on this line)

(grin)

Re:Brief time window? (1)

BringsApples (3418089) | about 9 months ago | (#45534197)

Everyone's daily schedules only align for a little while each day, in a reliable way?

... valid for only a brief time window each day (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533759)

So the encrypted file knows the time of day? I call bullshit.

Yay! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533761)

Go Team Edward!

valid for only a brief time window each day ??? (3, Insightful)

csumpi (2258986) | about 9 months ago | (#45533777)

What does that even mean? He re-encrypts it every 4 hours and emails out the passwords and the file? This is either super spy sheit, or just plain bull sheit.

Re:valid for only a brief time window each day ??? (1)

dmbasso (1052166) | about 9 months ago | (#45533857)

Perhaps the data are only accessible online, and the server expects a key formed by their secret hashed together with the period of the day... nothing too difficult to code, but doesn't sound very fault tolerant. Hopefully he made several servers available.

Why tell everyone you believe it? (4, Insightful)

femtobyte (710429) | about 9 months ago | (#45533825)

Why would the US government intentionally indicate that they believe such a thing? What this accomplishes is to encourage anyone who wants to hurt the US to kill Snowden (forcing the release of the supposed super-damaging materials). If that's the message the US propaganda spooks want everyone to hear, then you should be looking for ulterior motives. I'd guess there isn't anything so terribly damaging (that can't be whitewashed away as well as the rest of the stuff has been) that would really be "doomsday" for the US.

Rather than having everything eventually trickle out over several years, well-times to keep the media pressure against the US surveillance state, I suspect it would be preferable to the NSA and friends if Snowden were forced to dump everything all at once (perhaps by being killed). Everything's going to come out eventually --- by having it all in one heap, the total impact on public perceptions (what really matters here) is reduced: one quick spike in media attention and outrage, then it's all "old news" and there's no time for serious public analysis of the implications of each individual revelation.

Snowden and friends of democracy and freedom have an advantage by controlling the gradual release of information --- otherwise, they'd have dumped it all already. Forcing everything out at once (by encouraging every dumber enemy of the US to try assassinating Snowden) would help the PR effort to quickly wash this whole mess away from public attention. It would sure make it easier for the US officials to keep their lies straight, if everything they were lying to refute was already available.

Re:Why tell everyone you believe it? (1)

Cognizant (2791467) | about 9 months ago | (#45533993)

I would think that slowly dealing with the information would make it easier to discredit and the passage of time would out date or make irrelevant the information. Plus it gives them time to watch and find where it might be maybe? Cutting the rest out if found.

Re:Why tell everyone you believe it? (2)

femtobyte (710429) | about 9 months ago | (#45534093)

If it's such a disadvantage, then why would Snowden et al. be doing it? They're currently the ones in control of the data; so, if releasing everything at once (or at least most but a smaller "security" file) makes it more credible and relevant, then they could just do so. Since they aren't --- and, I think it's clear how this provides the leakers quite a bit of leverage --- changing to the opposite situation would likely benefit the NSA spooks. Not as much as having Snowden and all his files vanish completely; but there's little chance of that happening (Snowden's had plenty of time to set up the mother of all paranoid multiple-failsafes backup plans).

Being able to selectively leak the files out one at a time means that for the next couple of years gives Snowden a lot of leverage for optimizing impact on public perceptions --- which is all any of this is about. The only threat to the NSA is the American public; nothing in any of these documents will have much if any impact on actual operations aside from PR fiascos. Ability to time information to remind the American public at opportune moments which of their politicians has been lying to their face about surveillance, and how much they should value voting anyone into office who promises to cut back on NSA programs, is a significant advantage.

Re:Why tell everyone you believe it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45534255)

JFK died long time ago and they are still doing research. If everything was dumped at the same time then researchers would spend more than a decade combing through the info. Journalist would be reporting the info for a few years. Foreign government would raise the issue for a few years if not decades interacting with the USA politically.

Re:Why tell everyone you believe it? (1)

femtobyte (710429) | about 9 months ago | (#45534319)

I can pretty much guarantee you that, if there were a brand-new piece of information on the JFK assassination not already available in the reams of public documents until now, it would receive a heck of a lot of media attention than yet-another-rehash-of-the-same-old-stuff.

Foreign governments interacting with the US aren't the issue here. They know we're full of shit (just like they know they'd do the same wherever possible). This is all a matter of public perception. Journalists who harp on multi-year-old news are easy to dismiss as quacks with an agenda (even if that "agenda" is manifestly in the public interest) --- there's plenty of decades-old history, fully available in the public record, that the US public would be greatly enlightened by being made more aware of; but it's "old news" now. Any reporter who reminds the viewers about the big lies of years past won't keep their jobs (consider how many folks who blatantly lied to push the Iraq invasion are still treated as respectable foreign policy commentators today, because history past last year has been tossed down the memory hole). But, a "brand new" revelation still has a chance of breaking through, and keeping the American public cognizant of what their "national security" overlords are up to.

It appears the USA has been up to some nasty stuff (5, Insightful)

Nyder (754090) | about 9 months ago | (#45533863)

if they are fearing what he hasn't released yet.

They know what they did was wrong, and apparently have done even worse stuff.

Time for a change in Government.

Re: It appears the USA has been up to some nasty s (1)

Badblackdog (1211452) | about 9 months ago | (#45534025)

Elections are coming and we can swap out the current lot for the other bums. Big deal! How do we position ourselves to make money off of "Snowden's Secret Docs" when they are released?

Re:It appears the USA has been up to some nasty st (1)

Neo-Rio-101 (700494) | about 9 months ago | (#45534043)

As long as it exposes who killed JFK, and exposes how to exploit the rigged forex market in order to make millions in a week, I'd be all for it.

Re:It appears the USA has been up to some nasty st (1)

ebno-10db (1459097) | about 9 months ago | (#45534253)

As long as it exposes who killed JFK

Terrible idea. There is an entire cottage industry devoted to arguing about that. Many books are sold. Considering how bad the economy still is, why would you want to destroy another part of it?

Re:It appears the USA has been up to some nasty st (1)

YukariHirai (2674609) | about 9 months ago | (#45534081)

Time for a change in Government.

If you mean changing what political party is in charge right now, that won't make any difference at all. Probably even changing the system of government wouldn't do it.

The problem is the intelligence agencies. It would take completely disbanding them and seeing to it that none of the people currently involved can ever be part of the new ones or make any other kind of trouble.

Re:It appears the USA has been up to some nasty st (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45534227)

Maybe it's the U.S. government spying apparatus crossing over into corporate spying on american civil groups?

http://slashdot.org/submission/3146393/ralph-nader-corporate-espionage-undermines-democracy

"Many different types of nonprofit civic organizations have been targeted by corporate spies: environmental, public interest, consumer, food safety, animal rights, pesticide reform, nursing home reform, gun control and social justice."

"Plenty of mercenary spooks have joined up to abet them, including former officials at the FBI, CIA, NSA, Secret Service and U.S. military. Sometimes even government contractors are part of the snooping. In effect, big corporations have been able to hire portions of the national security apparatus, and train their tools of spycraft on the citizens groups of our nation."

Re:It appears the USA has been up to some nasty st (1)

cascadingstylesheet (140919) | about 9 months ago | (#45534245)

if they are fearing what he hasn't released yet.

They know what they did was wrong, and apparently have done even worse stuff.

Time for a change in Government.

What, and give up all this hope and change?

If they're afraid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533911)

Then they've done some really illegal things. More illegal than snooping on US citizens' electronic transmissions.

Re:If they're afraid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45534001)

If they limited the block size of AES just to because the key schedule is insecure on the asymmetric cases, I'm going to be really pissed.

A conspiracy theory.. The same guy - Vincent Rijmen - worked on both Rijndael and Keccak, select by NIST and the NSA for AES and SHA-3 respectively. Who is paying him?

 

If you've done nothing wrong... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45533967)

then you have nothing to worry about...

Sound familiar?

too bad. (5, Insightful)

larry bagina (561269) | about 9 months ago | (#45533975)

They should fear the Constitution and not do this shit in the first place.

Didn't they say you only need privacy if you've got something to hide?

Piffle (-1)

onyxruby (118189) | about 9 months ago | (#45533995)

This is utter nonsense and doesn't pass Occam's razor. Take a look at this with a rational mind and not a politically tainted mind. Assange, self declared enemy of the United States, responsible for Wikileaks and Bradley Manning's trove being publicized. He gets a kick out of embarrassing the US at every opportunity he has and has made clear he doesn't intend to stop and considers himself a martyr. Until he ran out on his rape matters he was walking around a free man in Britain which has fairly strong extradition treaties with the US. The Washington Post recently talked about how even if he came to the US he probably wouldn't be charged with a crime.

Bradley Manning. Responsible for the biggest leak of international diplomatic cables in history. Betrayed his oath of service, traitor to his country and even this his wholesale and indiscriminate release of hundreds of thousands of records resulted in 35 years in prison, not the death penalty. All of this when he was within the military without all of the potential political complications that could have gotten in the way.

Thomas Drake, Raymond McGovern, Jesselyn Radack, Colleen Rowley and Sarah Harrisom, another set of traitors that all betrayed the US. You might think they were locked up for life and the key thrown away? No, in the real world they went and visited fellow traitor Snowden in Russia a little while ago. Take a guess how many traitors Russia lets go on vacation to the United States.

So when they heck has a traitor ever actually been killed by the US? 1865 [wikipedia.org] and that required the assassination of a sitting US president to do it. The Rosenburgs were killed in 1953 but that was for Espionage for the atomic bomb.

In the real world the US Federal Government is a paper tiger that plays catch and release with those that betray the country. When you put down the tin foil hats, Snowden doesn't need to worry about the US government, it's inept about these things. Snowden needs to worry about those people that would benefit from tripping his deadman's switch by killing him.

Re:Piffle (4, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 9 months ago | (#45534131)

Not that they've been doing a particularly good job lately; but the US's strongest international PR move (and, incidentally, weapon in encouraging foreign defectors) is being 'the guys who don't have any creepy secrets (aside from things like the specifics of how atomic bombs work, which the Rosenbergs went down for). Unfortunately, we've squandered that of late. Being 'the good guys' isn't just some bleeding-heart bullshit to appease liberal pinkos. It's a powerful tool in any soft-power contest of ideas. Having nothing but weapons-related details to hide was an extreme moral-high-ground position. We'll be damn lucky to see something nearly so good again in my lifetime. Will we ever see something truly golden, as we did in WWII, with Axis units bumbling around looking for Americans to surrender to? That is what 'soft power' really looks like. It doesn't deliver the goods every day; but on a good day it isn't some theoretical, it's one hell of an advantage. Can we regain that sort of reputation?

doomsday cache says... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45534019)

JEWS DID 9/11!

deal with it, goyim, you've been had!

Re:doomsday cache says... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45534139)

Your mom did 911 Jews.

Look at that.... (2)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 9 months ago | (#45534065)

So, either Irresponsible Terrorist Ruskie Collaborator Snowden is (in fact) concealing numerous US secrets that aren't directly related to what he was planning to blow the whistle on, or the feds are freaking out over nothing. Well, what's it going to be? (Perhaps more realistically: If you were some sort of undercover fed, whose continued freedom and/or life depended on the silence of the feds, would you be comfortable now? Mr. Snowden, to his credit, appears to be trying to minimize the casualties associated with his whistle-blowing; but will you be so lucky next time? A single screwdriver-monkey contractor, not even a full NSA agent, punked the shit out of the agency. Do you think that some poor sucker with nothing but patriotism motivating him is the only clandestine operative in the agency? That there isn't a single other leaker in the, apparently porous, organization? Nobody infiltrating with an actual payoff awaiting him? You sure about that?)

Have a nice day.

I smell Bullshit (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45534105)

Why would government officials tip off the world about Snowdon having a secret stash. That would make it more likely others know about it and start looking for it. No. This is government PR maybe so they can justify killing Snowden with a drone for "National Security".

A hit order? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45534167)

This is such BS. The US Government obviously wants Snowden dead. They would really like Russia to do this job for them, by rubber hose or simple murder, so that more "NSA secrets" come to light. Yet another bounty on Snowden's death. Yawn! He is a *really* bad man you know. Next week: Snowden is really an evil Al Queda agent intent on detonating one atomic bomb in one major city per week, unless his demands are met... If you believe that, I would like to sell you the Golden Gate Bridge, at a fair price....

Does this mean they will let Snowden live (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45534283)

So that we never get to find out what the most juicy documents are?

All Over The Place (2)

AndyCanfield (700565) | about 9 months ago | (#45534301)

I've also heard, don't remember where, that it is one big file and there are copies all over the world transported via Bit Torrent and the like. You know were and anyone can grab a copy of the encrypted archive.

I've also heard that the documents in that archive are originals, not redacted. The original would say something like "CIA Agent John Belushi did such-and-such." The redacted version, when released by Edward Snowden, reads "CIA Agent (name removed) did such and such." If they kill Snowden, the archive opens everywhere. Not only are secrets revealed, but names of agents are revealed, so those spies will be killed, perhaps by terrorists, perhaps by outraged neighbors.

A spy with any brains wants that archive to remain encrypted, so he wants Edward Snowden to live in peace in Moscow.

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>