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!

Snowden: NSA Working On Autonomous Cyberwarfare Bot

Unknown Lamer posted about 2 months ago | from the bad-movie-plot dept.

The Military 194

WIRED published a long piece on Edward Snowden today (worth a read on its own), and simultaneously broke news of "MonsterMind," an NSA program to monitor all network traffic and detect attacks, responding with a counterattack automatically. From the article: Although details of the program are scant, Snowden tells WIRED in an extensive interview with James Bamford that algorithms would scour massive repositories of metadata and analyze it to differentiate normal network traffic from anomalous or malicious traffic. Armed with this knowledge, the NSA could instantly and autonomously identify, and block, a foreign threat. More than this, though, Snowden suggests MonsterMind could one day be designed to return fire — automatically, without human intervention... Snowden raised two issues with the program: the source of an attack could be spoofed to trick the U.S. into attacking an innocent third party, and the violation of the fourth amendment since the NSA would effectively need to monitor all domestic network traffic for the program to work. Also in Bamford's interview are allegations that the NSA knocked Syria offline in 2012 after an attempt to install intercept software on an edge router ended with the router being bricked.

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

On come on now Edward (-1, Flamebait)

gelfling (6534) | about 2 months ago | (#47663927)

You're YEARS out of government service and if we're being honest, we're supposed to believe that you personally had in depth first hand technical knowledge of everything the NSA has ever and will ever do. There's two way to look at this. Either your paranoid soaked liar, or, you have a current contact in the NSA and you are bragging about committing treason.

Re:On come on now Edward (4, Insightful)

ganjadude (952775) | about 2 months ago | (#47664005)

or he knows what hes talking about. Treason is what the NSA is currently doing by failing to uphold the constitution, specifically the 4th amendment

Re:On come on now Edward (0)

Ralph Wiggam (22354) | about 2 months ago | (#47664033)

You should look up what Treason means. Because that's not what it means.

Re:On come on now Edward (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664067)

That's funny, because the OP seems to very much be misunderstanding what it means, yet you didn't call him out on that.

Is there some valid reason you are supporting the NSA's criminal activity?

Re:On come on now Edward (0, Redundant)

Ralph Wiggam (22354) | about 2 months ago | (#47664095)

I actually didn't notice that part at the end of their post. I quickly established that it is a pretty dumb post and didn't read it very carefully.

If you think that "knowing what words mean" is equivalent to "supporting the NSA's criminal activity", then I don't know what to tell you.

Re:On come on now Edward (0)

Virtucon (127420) | about 2 months ago | (#47664193)

It's only criminal if it's against the law. The world of legislation and executive orders have made it legal. We have to change the laws and elect politicians that respect the constitution rather than piss on it all the time. What Snowden did, by it's nature is Treason sadly enough and patriotic initially, now it's just pathetic and played the fuck out.

Re:On come on now Edward (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664255)

It's only criminal if it's against the law.

And it is. Sure, they keep asserting that it is legal, and yet it is so obviously against several parts of our constitution. 1st and 4th amendments being the first place to look.

What Snowden did, by it's nature is Treason sadly enough and patriotic initially, now it's just pathetic and played the fuck out.

No. You absolutely have no idea what you're talking about. You do not get to make up your own definition for "treason." Treason requires that he would be an operative working for a foreign enemy government, or acted to benefit enemies of this government. That is not the case.

Re: On come on now Edward (4, Insightful)

eyegone (644831) | about 2 months ago | (#47664293)

He acted for the benefit of the people of the United States, so he is working for an enemy of the United States government.

Re:On come on now Edward (1)

Ralph Wiggam (22354) | about 2 months ago | (#47664273)

What Snowden did, by it's nature is Treason sadly enough

The reason that Snowden wasn't charged with Treason is that it would be a big stretch to prove that he provided "aid and comfort" to our enemies without any sort of active collaboration with anyone.

Re:On come on now Edward (-1, Troll)

Virtucon (127420) | about 2 months ago | (#47664295)

I think a prosecutor could make that case considering where he wound up. He's become a mouthpiece for the Russian Government like Russia Today. In three years the Russians will dump him and he'll probably wind up in the Ecuadorian Embassy. Sound familiar?

Re:On come on now Edward (2)

Grow Old Timber (1071718) | about 2 months ago | (#47664817)

"I think a prosecutor could make that case considering where he wound up." Wound up? We delivered Russia its' biggest prize by trying to hunt him down now didn't we? If anyone is paranoid its' the US with good reason too I might ad. The truth is hard to deal with when you lie a lot. So stop being such a bad liar.

Re:On come on now Edward (0)

Virtucon (127420) | about 2 months ago | (#47664889)

Wound up?
We delivered Russia its' biggest prize by trying to hunt him down now didn't we?
If anyone is paranoid its' the US with good reason too I might ad.
The truth is hard to deal with when you lie a lot. So stop being such a bad liar.

hunt him down? The news was released when he was in Hong Kong, the US revoked his passport which meant that most countries would only let him return to his country of origin. It wasn't like 30 assassins were on his ass. If there had been he would have been dead. Nope, when he released the info he became wanted, certainly and if he was a true patriot as he claims he'd have faced the music. Instead he's sitting in Russia with his new puppet masters putting out shit and drivel to make you think these new things are happening. He's not that smart, he's not that intelligent and some of the foibles that are being put out are just shit. Frankly the cover of Wired right now makes me more angry and respectful for what this retard has done.

Re:On come on now Edward (1)

redeIm (3779401) | about 2 months ago | (#47664923)

and if he was a true patriot as he claims he'd have faced the music.

Nice No True Scotsman, there. I didn't know the definition of "patriot" required that one be a masochist or a martyr; he gave us the information, and now it's up to all of us to stop the evil organization known as the NSA.

Re:On come on now Edward (2)

redeIm (3779401) | about 2 months ago | (#47664929)

Patriotism is most certainly not blind allegiance to the law or a certain country, in addition to not meaning you're a masochist or a martyr.

Re:On come on now Edward (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664289)

That's half true. You can "push" the law until the courts find you've broken it. Control the courts, control legality.

Re:On come on now Edward (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664745)

It's only criminal if it's against the law. The world of legislation and executive orders have made it legal.

The Constitution makes it illegal and legislation and executive orders are not granted the authority to override the Constitution.

Only a constitutional amendment can make something prohibited by the Bill of Rights legal.

Re:On come on now Edward (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664241)

Is there some valid reason you are supporting the NSA's criminal activity?

Yes. He is a traitor.

Re:On come on now Edward (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664453)

So you are supporting the NSA's criminal activity actively because of Snowden? Does that just mean you just don't want to lose your job?

Re:On come on now Edward (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664699)

You got me backwards. Ralph Wiggam, the guy supporting the NSA is the traitor.

I don't support the NSA, and think Heroic Ed deserves a ticket tape parade down Broadway, lifetime exemption from all taxation for ten generations, and one billion dollars per year stipend.

Re:On come on now Edward (1)

pushing-robot (1037830) | about 2 months ago | (#47664161)

It is according to the 9th amendment, which gives the people the right to claim the Constitution says anything they want it to say.

Re:On come on now Edward (2, Insightful)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 2 months ago | (#47664219)

You should look up what Treason means. Because that's not what it means.

I did... per the constitution:
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."
Base on that definition, neither are traitors under the constitution.

Per the English dictionary:
"the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government."
The NSA is clearly, and without a doubt violating the constitution. So I'd say by that definition, they are guilty. But it's not a legal definition, it's just descriptive. The NSA behaves in a "Treasonous" manner but they are not guilty of legally defined Treason.

Re:On come on now Edward (1)

ganjadude (952775) | about 2 months ago | (#47664593)

except I would argue that the "government" is "the people" and as such, all he did was aid " the People" as such, he is no traitor. Hell jefferson even predicted that we would have overthrown the government numerous times by now and i dont know anyone who would call jefferson a traitor

Re:On come on now Edward (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 2 months ago | (#47664451)

Then perhaps its time we change the definition of treason to cover this stuff. The 4th is more important than the NSA will ever be.

not hero not villain end discussion (1)

globaljustin (574257) | about 2 months ago | (#47664135)

aren't we past this by now?

we've debated Snowden's actions ad infinitum

we've mapped the Snowden possible responses...everyone has expressed their opinions on his motivations...we've examined virtually every scenario

IMHO he was duped or blackmailed and is now essentially in jail in Russia...others say 'hero'...or 'traitor'

we know the whole universe of factors that could be combined to make an opinion on Snowden...we know all the possiblities...and have seen someone argue about them here on /.

**it's time we agree that spy agencies (CIA, NSA, etc) need more oversight & accountability & Snowden is more than he appears to be and has at least mixed motivations**

Re:not hero not villain end discussion (2)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 2 months ago | (#47664169)

Are you insane? We haven't even figured out if Google is evil or not.

Re:not hero not villain end discussion (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664339)

Well, we'll have to Google if Google is evil or not...

https://www.google.com/search?q=is+google+evil+or+not

According to Google, Google is not evil.

--sf

Re:not hero not villain end discussion (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664483)

Are you insane? We haven't even figured out if Google is evil or not.

Or beta..... Oh wait...

Re:not hero not villain end discussion (1)

Obfuscant (592200) | about 2 months ago | (#47664883)

Are you insane? We haven't even figured out if Google is evil or not.

That's easy to figure out. All it took was ten seconds for a Google search to find the answer. They aren't evil.

Re:On come on now Edward (2)

Tharkkun (2605613) | about 2 months ago | (#47664205)

or he knows what hes talking about. Treason is what the NSA is currently doing by failing to uphold the constitution, specifically the 4th amendment

The NSA has blanket authority to do what they want. You do know they haven't stopped doing a thing. All these investigations are nothing more than a dog and pony show. The NSA is business as usual.

Re:On come on now Edward (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | about 2 months ago | (#47664885)

blanket authority doesn't cover constitutional authority.

Re:On come on now Edward (1)

retchdog (1319261) | about 2 months ago | (#47664059)

this is hardly in-depth; it's on the level of office gossip.

anyway, these things might have been mentioned in that pile o' data he snagged, you know, the reason you hate him so much? just a thought.

Re:On come on now Edward (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 2 months ago | (#47664253)

Triple agent... He's secretly sabotaging the Russian economy..

Re:On come on now Edward (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664305)

You're YEARS out of government service

Year. Singular; one year.

On May 20, 2013, [Edward] Snowden [wikipedia.org] flew from Hawaii to Hong Kong, where in early June he met with journalists Glenn Greenwald and Laura Poitras, releasing numerous NSA documents to them. On June 9, four days after the first NSA program was exposed by the press, Snowden revealed his identity in a video filmed by Poitras and published by The Guardian.

TOM SWIFT AND HIS ELECTRIC RIFLE!!11elleven! (1)

Thud457 (234763) | about 2 months ago | (#47664313)

The NSA/Pentagon/CIA always wants all sorts of bullshit [newscientist.com] scifi Star Trek [businessinsider.com] shit.
Doesn't necessarily mean it's feasible.

It's easy to squander Other People's Money.

Re:On come on now Edward (1)

bobbied (2522392) | about 2 months ago | (#47664467)

You're YEARS out of government service and if we're being honest, we're supposed to believe that you personally had in depth first hand technical knowledge of everything the NSA has ever and will ever do. There's two way to look at this. Either your paranoid soaked liar, or, you have a current contact in the NSA and you are bragging about committing treason.

Hold up dude. Snowden has not committed treason, at least if you are talking about the disclosure of classified information without authorization. Where that *could* be treason in some cases, I'm not sure that it is here. That's not to say Snowden wouldn't be found guilty of disclosing classified information and doing grave damage to the national security of the United States if he stood trial, nor does am I claiming he wouldn't find himself making small rocks out of big rocks for a very long time someplace in Kansas or even end up pushing up flowers. I just don't think treason would be the charge.

Now, if he persists in agreeing to be used by Putin as a PR tool and the conflict with Russia ramps up where his participation becomes materially important, then you might get a treason charge to stick.

Should we really be worried? (1)

duke_cheetah2003 (862933) | about 2 months ago | (#47663933)

Considering the absurd amounts of incompetence and waste we see with visible government entities, should we really be overly concerned about the NSA? Not saying I like them, or anything, but I'm not sure they're quite the beast we've made them out to be. Maybe.

Re:Should we really be worried? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664021)

Yes.

Who cares what their competence is. Spying on Americans is wrong.

Re:Should we really be worried? (1)

Ralph Wiggam (22354) | about 2 months ago | (#47664065)

Spying on Americans is wrong.

This revelation has nothing to do with spying on Americans. It actually seems like something the NSA should be doing, and doing secretly.

By leaking this, Snowden is not helping his "concerned citizen" image.

Re:Should we really be worried? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664155)

Committing acts of war undermining the infrastructure of a country that congress hasn't declared war on...hmm.

Just because it's commonplace doesn't mean it's what they're "supposed to be" doing.

Re:Should we really be worried? (1)

Ralph Wiggam (22354) | about 2 months ago | (#47664303)

Committing acts of war undermining the infrastructure of a country that congress hasn't declared war on...hmm

The entire purpose of this system is retaliatory. It will only attack systems that are the source of an attack. It's not going to bring down a country's power grid.

Re:Should we really be worried? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664431)

Unless someone spoof an attack from that power grid.

Re:Should we really be worried? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664913)

or the powers that be decide that a preemtive strike is necessary, Iraq war, if you fail to get the reference.

Re:Should we really be worried? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 months ago | (#47664463)

I'm not sure if preemptive strikes against the IT infrastructure of a country that, essentially, looks at you the wrong way could be considered something that a security service should do. Especially considering the implications of having an automated system do it.

Watch "War Games" if you want to know why.

Re:Should we really be worried? (1)

GenaTrius (3644889) | about 2 months ago | (#47664845)

"Snowden raised two issues with the program: the source of an attack could be spoofed to trick the U.S. into attacking an innocent third party, and the violation of the fourth amendment since the NSA would effectively need to monitor all domestic network traffic for the program to work." The designers of this program define what kind of traffic the program responds to, and how it responds to it. In this sense, the program is an agent for them, performing surveillance and defense on their behalf. It's no different than if they were observing that traffic themselves, and much of that traffic should be protect by the 4th Amendment and by basic decency. And, of course, whenever you put an automated system on the internet, it gets abused. Someone out there probably already knows that if you send this spoofed packet to this .gov address, bad things happen to whoever it looks like that packet came from, instantly and without review. That's very dangerous.

Re:Should we really be worried? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664105)

should we really be overly concerned about the NSA?

Yes. Any government entity that works beyond the limits of the laws and directly attacks citizens with the intent to remove inalienable rights is a threat, no matter how incompetent they may be.

Re:Should we really be worried? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664127)

well the incompetence is a big part of the concern. The warbot they are building could be tricked and used in reverse to hurt us or harm our relationship with our allies. Even just its existence is enough to damage our relationships in technology commerce, in the ways in which it must be propagated and supported means us based technologies are a constantly liability.

Re:Should we really be worried? (4, Insightful)

mspohr (589790) | about 2 months ago | (#47664207)

Incompetence is never good.
Incompetence in collecting and acting on information just means that the wrong people will be targeted and the "bad guys" will be missed.
A powerful, secretive, incompetent organization is the worst of all possible worlds.

A digital version of the "Doomsday Machine" (4, Insightful)

Advocatus Diaboli (1627651) | about 2 months ago | (#47663949)

Do the morons in NSA seriously believe that the USA is the only country with the technology to build a Digital Doomsday Machine? Has anyone of them watched Dr. Strangelove? Having said that, the level of hubris they are displaying seems about right.

Re:A digital version of the "Doomsday Machine" (2)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about 2 months ago | (#47664201)

No, this isn't the 'doomsday machine'. It's much more like William Gibson's ICE programs in 'Neuromancer'.

So very much like it that one wonders.....

Re:A digital version of the "Doomsday Machine" (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 months ago | (#47664479)

What can't be beat in naivete is the attempt to do so automatically. Especially a group whose bread and butter is misinformation and creating false flag scenarios should know that it's probably NOT a good idea to open yourself to that kind of reflection attack.

Re:A digital version of the "Doomsday Machine" (2)

bobbied (2522392) | about 2 months ago | (#47664499)

Gentlemen, We must NOT allow the Digital Doomsday machine gap!

Re:A digital version of the "Doomsday Machine" (1)

jon3k (691256) | about 2 months ago | (#47664647)

What makes you think the NSA thinks they are the only ones working on this? In fact, wouldn't knowing other countries are working on something similar be even MORE of a reason to build it?

Re:A digital version of the "Doomsday Machine" (1)

Obfuscant (592200) | about 2 months ago | (#47664795)

What makes you think the NSA thinks they are the only ones working on this?

What makes you think the NSA is working on this? The words of someone who is trying to revive his fifteen minutes of fame? Here, from the summary:

Snowden suggests MonsterMind could one day be designed to return fire

"Could be". And I "could" decide to go out to my car "one day" and start running grandmothers down in the city park, but that doesn't mean I have done so or am even thinking about doing it.

Other than a car analogy, which I didn't realize I had made until I thought that this would be a good place to make a car analogy, here's this one: Slashdot readers COULD one day actually read the summary for what it says and react accordingly instead of leaping across huge chasms to horrific conclusions.

Re:A digital version of the "Doomsday Machine" (1)

scubamage (727538) | about 2 months ago | (#47664797)

I still think I'd be far more worried about the Russian doomsday machine that was actually built [wikipedia.org] . Though, I suppose given this day and age its usage is growing more and more unlikely.

Where the fuck is the EU? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47663955)

Every US citizen is yelling for their constitutional rights broken by the NSA. But no Europeans complain about what the NSA is doing to THEM. Which is even worse. EU, fucking wake up.

Where the fuck is the EU? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664257)

But no Europeans complain about what the NSA is doing to THEM.

You haven't been paying attention. The Germans and the French howl about this constantly (or at least their governments do). In addition, the Germans want to become full partners in it. [wikipedia.org]

Re:Where the fuck is the EU? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 months ago | (#47664495)

The German government, ok? The Germans are no more their government than the US people are.

Re:Where the fuck is the EU? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664707)

We really have no say what the US government is doing with the infrastructure under their sovereign control. That privilege is solely in the hands of the American people. ;)
    As to the infrastructure under our control, there are likely some inter-agency agreements with data and resource sharing, agreements which our own officials have agreed to without a legislated need for telling our elected representatives, all in the familiar, cold warrian spirit. Furthermore, the NSA and other security agencies most likely consider public CCTV monitoring such as traffic control an equivalent act to the mass surveillance of the Internet traffic. Ah, the continent spreading British CCTV bliss!
  For the public there is always the hope of the next elections producing a multi-year process for an eventual change in procedure we can believe in, not much more. In other words: yo, hop'-and-chang'-w'-can-b'li'v'-in, word!, or not.

Re:Where the fuck is the EU? (1)

HiThere (15173) | about 2 months ago | (#47664871)

If you think it's in the hands of the US citizens...then you haven't been paying attention. It's in the hands of a very small group of extremely powerful people. They usually get their way be fraud, but partially it's because the design of the voting system means that there are only two viable candidates for any national office. (This is a result of the plurality wins voting system.) That means that only two candidates need to be bought off before the election. And the costs of running for office are such than anyone who refuses to be bought off won't get elected. Even Ross Perot couldn't win, despite his incredible wealth. It's also a facto that media celebreties aren't allowed to campaign. During the VietNam incursion Pat Paulson ran a humorous campaign for president. He might well have won if they had counted the votes for him. People were that dissatisfied with the government. So they just didn't count the votes. The consolidation of the media means that only those stories that the owners of the media consider "appropriate" get much coverage. So they barely cover public demonstrations, and when they do the coverage is slanted.

The US isn't yet a true dictatorship, but it's drifting in that direction quite rapidly, and VERY few of the citizens desire this. Most of the areas where those who do are in the majoritye are remote areas where they have little contact with the actions of the government. Also the government is, in conjunction with various technological trends, destroying the middle class. Relatively few leave it by climbing up.

Despotism (1)

bussdriver (620565) | about 2 months ago | (#47664949)

Despotism is the word you are looking for.
Dictators are not mandatory for despotism. New kinds of despotism are possible the US is already well on it's way there but not the dictator kind... if you wait for a dictator you will feel OK all the way up to being sent to the gulag.

Re:Where the fuck is the EU? (1)

GenaTrius (3644889) | about 2 months ago | (#47664755)

Last I heard, Germany's been going crazy over this since it came out.

Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (-1, Troll)

Zontar_Thing_From_Ve (949321) | about 2 months ago | (#47663983)

I find Snowden to be a typical pampered, ego-centric product of his generation. If he actually surrendered himself to US authorities unconditionally, I'd think he just might be insane. So I totally get why he is in Russia. I'm not saying I approve of what he did as I don't, but I get why he felt the need to hide under protection to do what he did. But he undermines his credibility with statements in the article like this:
I told the government I'd volunteer for prison, as long as it served the right purpose,” he says. “I care more about the country than what happens to me."
Yeah. Right.

Re:Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (4, Insightful)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about 2 months ago | (#47664099)

Do you understand what he means? He is saying that if there was some real, genuine change due to his actions he would be willing to return and give evidence in open court, to help with that change, even if it meant a prison sentence due to the letter of the law.

That seems amazingly charitable, considering he should really get a presidential pardon and be welcomed back as the heroic guy who did the right thing to expose law breaking and billions of constitutional violations.

Re:Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664235)

He won't be getting a Presidential pardon as long as he stays in Russia.

Whatever happens to him next is largely up to him, but let's be clear: continuing to seek "asylum" from the US, in Russia, given recent events, only hurts any case he might make about his motivations, and those motivations are the one and only thing with any potential at all to exonerate him.

Re:Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (1)

bobbied (2522392) | about 2 months ago | (#47664567)

Whatever happens to him next is largely up to him, but let's be clear: continuing to seek "asylum" from the US, in Russia, given recent events, only hurts any case he might make about his motivations, and those motivations are the one and only thing with any potential at all to exonerate him.

IMHO, Snowden is now adrift in the events and has zero real control. He's literally stuck between the rock (USA) and the hard place (Russia). What's going to happen next is that Putin will use him for as long as it is to his advantage. As soon as there is no more reason for Putin to keep him, then this whole story will quickly end and Snowden will find himself in handcuffs on his way to the USA. In the mean time, Snowden is stuck trying to remain valuable, which is why he's inventing things to keep his name in the news. They will only get more and more far fetched because Snowden is going to be desperate to stay relevant. He will fail.

My best guess is that Snowden will outlive his usefulness in Russia sometime before the USA's next president takes office. His best hope is that Russia grants him citizenship, but I give him a snowballs chance of that if he's not managed it yet.

Re:Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664731)

He's literally stuck between the rock (USA) and the hard place (Russia).

Someone has to be this guy: He's figuratively stuck between a rock and a hard place.

Re:Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (1)

bobbied (2522392) | about 2 months ago | (#47664969)

OK, OK.. LOL

I'll try to watch my usage closer..

Re:Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (1, Insightful)

LateArthurDent (1403947) | about 2 months ago | (#47664331)

That seems amazingly charitable, considering he should really get a presidential pardon and be welcomed back as the heroic guy who did the right thing to expose law breaking and billions of constitutional violations.

If the only thing he did was expose the illegal spying being done on Americans, I'd agree with that. But he indiscriminately takes everything he can get his hands on and reveals perfectly legal programs, like this one. "Identifying and blocking foreign threats" is the NSA's job, and why wouldn't that include cyber attacks? What justification does he have for revealing this?

I think we should specifically pardon him for for the relevant whistleblowing, to encourage other people in those positions to do the right thing. But we should sure as hell prosecute him for everything else he's leaked.

Re:Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (0)

asylumx (881307) | about 2 months ago | (#47664337)

Seconded.

Re: Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (0)

user317 (656027) | about 2 months ago | (#47664445)

he hasn't actually leaked anything. he gave all the docs he stole to greenwald and his team has been leaking them. his descision to go to russia came well after.

Re: Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (1)

Obfuscant (592200) | about 2 months ago | (#47664847)

he hasn't actually leaked anything. he gave all the docs he stole to greenwald

"I didn't actually steal that Cadillac, I just took it from the owner's driveway and drove it to the chop shop and they stole it." Sorry, but "gave all the docs" to someone who isn't supposed to have them is leaking.

Re:Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (4, Insightful)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about 2 months ago | (#47664455)

"Identifying and blocking foreign threats" is the NSA's job

Sure, but that doesn't extend to knocking Syria off the internet [arstechnica.com] or inserting back-doors into encryption standards or failing to report known vulnerabilities and the like. How about recording every single phone call in made in two countries? Some spying on foreign countries is expected and acceptable, but not the lengths the NSA has gone to. Spying on your allies, like Merkel, is definitely something America should be ashamed of and that the German people have a right to know about.

Knowing what is happening and their capabilities is essential for us to re-build the internet to be bulk-surveillance proof. There is zero chance of the NSA and GCHQ stopping what they are doing, so the only solution is technological.

Re:Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 2 months ago | (#47664491)

You think its right and normal that the NSA can spy on 7 billion souls? You re ok with that? Disgusting, you really dont belong here.

Re:Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (0)

Ryanrule (1657199) | about 2 months ago | (#47664553)

thats their damn job.

Before Prosecuting Him - (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664575)

The law should apply to everyone.

As you yourself pointed out, the NSA did illegal spying on Americans. Where is the court case being pursued on them? And if there is no court case taking up the case against the NSA for their illegal spying. Why would Snowden have ANY reason to expect any fairness in a court case for him? And the Mainstream Media would "cowtow" to whatever info the government would want to expose.

Re:Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 months ago | (#47664505)

Well, the statement is a bit less impressive if you consider that he knows that there is exactly no chance in hell that this administration (or any the US would be getting any time soon) would or could change anything.

Re:Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (-1, Troll)

Virtucon (127420) | about 2 months ago | (#47664101)

His 15 minutes are fucking up already. He's just discrediting himself publishing this kind of drivel. Next thing you'll hear from him is about his anal probing at the hands of aliens in Area 51. It's out there.

Re:Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664121)

Shill

(captcha is 'probed' ha!)

Re:Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (1)

Noryungi (70322) | about 2 months ago | (#47664107)

Typical conservative knee-jerk selfish ego-centric reaction right here.

What is wrong with serving one's own country and being concerned when a shadowy agency deploys a digital net over everything?

Re:Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664291)

Applying for a job with said shadowy agency, using false credentials and under false pretenses, specifically to steal national secrets far above and beyond the scope of said shadowyness, then shopping those secrets around amongst the likes of Venezuela, Pakistan, Cuba, and China, before finally settling on Russia, and lying presumptively to the world by saying that he's fully in control of those secrets, releasing only the relevant bits.

And I'm a liberal, you Paul-smoking libertarian cockstain.

Re:Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664693)

Applying for a job with said shadowy agency, using false credentials and under false pretenses, specifically to steal national secrets far above and beyond the scope of said shadowyness, then shopping those secrets around amongst the likes of Venezuela, Pakistan, Cuba, and China, before finally settling on Russia, and lying presumptively to the world by saying that he's fully in control of those secrets, releasing only the relevant bits.

And I'm a liberal, you Paul-smoking libertarian cockstain.

You need to read up a bit more on the leaks, you are way behind and full of FOX news bullshit facts.
http://www.reddit.com/r/moosearchive/comments/1hhjnb/archive/

Did not need anyone's credentials, did not shop around did not settle on Russia, was forced. The NSA is rogue and doing things well beyond the constitution, they need to be stopped. Also, this:

If an employee does not meet standards of conduct, “You should be fired, period,” Obama said. Whistleblowers, Obama said, should be protected.

“If you blow the whistle,” Obama said, “you should be thanked. You should be protected for doing the right thing. You shouldn’t be ignored and you certainly shouldn’t be punished.”

Obama said that last week, not 4 years ago, here is the one from 4 years ago.
If an employee does not meet standards of conduct, “You should be fired, period,” Obama said. Whistleblowers, Obama said, should be protected.

“If you blow the whistle,” Obama said, “you should be thanked. You should be protected for doing the right thing. You shouldn’t be ignored and you certainly shouldn’t be punished.”

Need a source, google the quote.

Re:Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664799)

LoL... Love the latest rash of neocons trying to pretend to be anti-Faux News. Obama wasn't talking about people who steal national secrets and go hide under the skirt of Mother Russia; he was talking about people who go through the official, established processes of bringing attention to misconduct. Talk about somebody who is high on the Fox Noise scale......

Re:Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664153)

I find Snowden to be a typical pampered, ego-centric product of his generation. If he actually surrendered himself to US authorities unconditionally, I'd think he just might be insane. So I totally get why he is in Russia.

I suspect that you do not "totally get why he is in Russia." You're not, by chance, one of those idiots that watches Fox "news" and believes he "ran off the the Russians with our secrets," are you? So many fools seem to parrot that nonsense that I've lost faith in the average person to actually notice propaganda when it is in plain sight.

I seem to recall only a year ago that he was trapped in Russia (by the US government) while waiting on his plane. Yet, it seems that lies by the media have been repeated often enough that others' have had their memories altered.

Re:Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (1)

Trepidity (597) | about 2 months ago | (#47664165)

What does it have to do with his generation (born 1983, so I guess borderline Millennial)? People have been doing similar things for at least the two generations prior to his. Did you forget the '60s?

Re:Snowden's comments at odds with his actions (1)

Tharkkun (2605613) | about 2 months ago | (#47664225)

I find Snowden to be a typical pampered, ego-centric product of his generation. If he actually surrendered himself to US authorities unconditionally, I'd think he just might be insane. So I totally get why he is in Russia. I'm not saying I approve of what he did as I don't, but I get why he felt the need to hide under protection to do what he did. But he undermines his credibility with statements in the article like this: I told the government I'd volunteer for prison, as long as it served the right purpose,” he says. “I care more about the country than what happens to me." Yeah. Right.

He's now a puppet for Russia who is playing a cyberwarfare game on the US in the media.

Mark my words (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664001)

Slashdot will soon be classified as a target for sharing this article

Re:Mark my words (4, Informative)

Noryungi (70322) | about 2 months ago | (#47664133)

Newsflash! Slashdot already has been targeted by NSA!!

Don't take my word for it: Link 1 [ibtimes.com] and Link 2 [techdirt.com] .

Re:Mark my words (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 2 months ago | (#47664691)

Wow. I wonder if that man-in-the-middle attack could have been prevented if Slashdot used HTTPS by default.

Skynet Anyone? (1)

WoodburyMan (1288090) | about 2 months ago | (#47664221)

Skynet? This looks awfully like the start of Terminator 3 movie...

Re:Skynet Anyone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664399)

I was actually just writing something like that when I noticed this post. Skynet was developed to control military operations almost entirely on its own. So this would be like Skynet Jr ^_^
Somehow, the idea of autonomous counter-attacks to digital threats puts me on edge. If it has a logic engine sufficiently advanced enough to determine the method and intensity of the counter attack, wouldn't it be logical to assume repeated, consistent threats be preemptively struck?

WW3, coming Summer 2020, in theaters everywhere.

Re:Skynet Anyone? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 months ago | (#47664521)

If it means the end of humanity, at least something good came out of that NSA crap.

Re:Skynet Anyone? (1)

seven of five (578993) | about 2 months ago | (#47664899)

I believe MonsterMind is about countering cyber attacks. Not traditional ones with people and guns n' things.

This isn't News....this is public knowledge (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664299)

This is pretty common knowledge in the Net Sec community. Has anyone ever heard of the DARPA cyber grand challenge? That's basically what it is.

http://www.darpa.mil/cybergrandchallenge/

Malicious network traffic repulser .. (2)

lippydude (3635849) | about 2 months ago | (#47664375)

'WIRED published a long piece on .. "MonsterMind," an NSA program to monitor all network traffic and detect attacks, responding with a counterattack automatically. From the article:'

Will this "MonsterMind" work on non Microsoft Windows network traffic?

I for one (2)

elsuperjefe (1487639) | about 2 months ago | (#47664417)

welcome our new ...

A second Great Firewall? (2)

Joe Gillian (3683399) | about 2 months ago | (#47664613)

This project sounds to me like the NSA is attempting to build their own version of China's "great firewall", and that it'll be used domestically far more than it will be against foreign threats. I can easily see them sharing this with law enforcement agencies, even down to the local level, allowing them to essentially "turn off" internet access at will by blocking packets.

For example, yesterday, the FAA issued a no-fly order for parts of Missouri - this was presumably because there were racially-charged demonstrations over police killings planned for that day - to allow police helicopters free rein over that area. Now, with a system like this in place, I could easily see the police getting some intel that some people might be planning demonstrations and using this system to intercept a specific sub-set of packets: say, anything coming to and from social media from within the borders of the no-fly zone, to stop people organizing as easily.

What if it's a triple whammy (0)

Atrox Canis (1266568) | about 2 months ago | (#47664663)

The NSA approaches ES and convinces him to participate in a long-term project. Snowden "escapes" with tonnes of documents. He takes them to China. Then he takes them to Russia. The Russians and Chinese help convince the world he is a credible source. ES then starts releasing major BS aimed at convincing the Russians and Chinese that Uncle Sam still carries the biggest stick on the planet.

ZOMG!11!1!!!!, NSA can haz major counter-attacking AI monstermindbotswithzombiegoodness.

Profit.

I

Darpa Cyber Grand Challenge (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664891)

Snowden's information is no longer cutting edge.

The Darpa Grand Challenge pretty much lays out an automated hacking tool.

http://www.darpa.mil/cybergrandchallenge/

They should probably hire him back. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664941)

because no one but him thought about IP spoofing?

Hmmmmmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47664957)

This would be interesting if it was not already a fully developed program with a 40 year history in network security and network attacks.

Probably what they meant to say is, that we are now telling you about this in case you notice random censorship on the web.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?