"DROPOUT JEEP" NSA back door, penetration of iOS devices [Archive]

View Full Version : "DROPOUT JEEP" NSA back door, penetration of iOS devices

jpmuscle

12-31-13, 02:56

...Sigh.... and to think I was going to this week to upgrade my phone too. I got it narrowed down to Galaxy S4 or 5s because part of me wants to see how good the koolaid tastes...

Definitely sounds like more affirmation that Apple was in bed with the feds all along though.. shocking... not really..:rolleyes:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-12-30/how-nsa-hacks-your-iphone-presenting-dropout-jeep

Following up on the latest stunning revelations released yesterday by German Spiegel which exposed the spy agency's 50 page catalog of "backdoor penetration techniques", today during a speech given by Jacob Applebaum (@ioerror) at the 30th Chaos Communication Congress, a new bombshell emerged: specifically the complete and detailed description of how the NSA bugs, remotely, your iPhone. The way the NSA accomplishes this is using software known as Dropout Jeep, which it describes as follows: "DROPOUT JEEP is a software implant for the Apple iPhone that utilizes modular mission applications to provide specific SIGINT functionality. This functionality includes the ability to remotely push/pull files from the device. SMS retrieval, contact list retrieval, voicemail, geolocation, hot mic, camera capture, cell tower location, etc. Command, control and data exfiltration can occur over SMS messaging or a GPRS data connection. All communications with the implant will be covert and encrypted."

The flowchart of how the NSA makes your iPhone its iPhone is presented below:

•NSA ROC operator
•Load specified module
•Send data request
•iPhone accepts request
•Retrieves required SIGINT data
•Encrypt and send exfil data
•Rinse repeat

And visually:

Edit: Image removed due to labels on document shown - SeriousStudent

What is perhaps just as disturbing is the following rhetorical sequence from Applebaum:

"Do you think Apple helped them build that? I don't know. I hope Apple will clarify that. Here's the problem: I don't really believe that Apple didn't help them, I can't really prove it but [the NSA] literally claim that anytime they target an iOS device that it will succeed for implantation. Either they have a huge collection of exploits that work against Apple products, meaning that they are hoarding information about critical systems that American companies produce and sabotaging them, or Apple sabotaged it themselves. Not sure which one it is. I'd like to believe that since Apple didn't join the PRISM program until after Steve Jobs died, that maybe it's just that they write shitty software. We know that's true."

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2013/12/iOS%20NSA_0.jpg

Or, Apple's software is hardly "shitty" even if it seems like that to the vast majority of experts (kinda like the Fed's various programs), and in fact it achieves precisely what it is meant to achieve.

Either way, now everyone knows that their iPhone is nothing but a gateway for the NSA to peruse everyone's "private" data at will. Which, incidentally, is not news, and was revealed when we showed how the "NSA Mocks Apple's "Zombie" Customers; Asks "Your Target Is Using A BlackBerry? Now What?"

How ironic would it be if Blackberry, left for dead by virtually everyone, began marketing its products as the only smartphone that does not allow the NSA access to one's data (and did so accordingly). Since pretty much everything else it has tried has failed, we don't see the downside to this hail mary attempt to strike back at Big Brother and maybe make some money, by doing the right thing for once.

We urge readers to watch the full one hour speech by Jacob Applebaum to realize just how massive Big Brother truly is, but those who want to just listen to the section on Apple can do so beginning 44 minutes 30 seconds in the presentation below.

Oh and their hacking your wi-fi too...

http://www.engadget.com/2013/12/30/nsa-can-hack-wifi-devices-from-eight-miles-away/

Moose-Knuckle

12-31-13, 03:09

trinydex

12-31-13, 04:55

Household "smart" microwave ovens and dishwashers have been hacked, toll tags, RFID, WiFi, GPS, EDRs, home security systems to include CAMERAs . . . privacy is a by-gone concept. Corporations get tax breaks and other perks for letting Big Brother uhh look over their shoulder.

look over their shoulder to what end? information obtained in this fashion cannot be used to prosecute you as it has circumvented the 4th amendment. what are you worried about?

extrajudicial information gathering is used for extrajudicial operations. none of which you're important enough for...

jesuvuah

12-31-13, 06:29

kwelz

12-31-13, 07:49

The thing is that nothing is safe. If you think a GS4 is any safer than an iPhone I have news for you.

Tzed250

12-31-13, 07:54

I've nothing to hide, but still....

Grizzly16

12-31-13, 08:06

look over their shoulder to what end? information obtained in this fashion cannot be used to prosecute you as it has circumvented the 4th amendment. what are you worried about?

extrajudicial information gathering is used for extrajudicial operations. none of which you're important enough for...

Thankfully there is no case where you could be declared a terrorist or possible terrorist and held with out trial.......

It isn't hard to imagine a case where the meta data or snippets of a conversation flag you as a threat. Or the spider web of NSA stuff accidentally associates you with terrorists and you get picked up for investigation. And the way some terrorist threats are investigated involved throwing people in a hole for years. It is like a computer automated Salem witch hunt where rumors of rumors get people screwed over. When your software collection web is too confusing for one person to understand (admitted by the NSA already), low paid interns are admins (snowden), rights are continually being eroded (thanks "war on terror" ), nearly every electronic device is/can be compromised and for bonus points numerous foreign governments dedicated messing with cyber war/harassment you have a system rife for potential abuse with little recourse from citizens.

On a side note, even if your particular device isn't compromised the memory card you put in it could be: http://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?p=3554

Airhasz

12-31-13, 09:02

I do believe the time to head to the hills and get off the grid is upon us!

jpmuscle

12-31-13, 10:34

Mo_Zam_Beek

12-31-13, 12:05

Mo_Zam_Beek

12-31-13, 12:16

Highly advise all to watch the video. Note - in addition to the tyranny of the state, because they are retarding the security of the web - they are weakening US technology corps and most concerning - they are leaving critical functions open to attack. Think our banking system, think power grid, think nuke power, think routing trains to collide. Oh and BTW - they can radiate you with up to 1KW of energy - should they choose to. Think that is healthy? (See 56:00).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0w36GAyZIA&feature

Moose-Knuckle

12-31-13, 12:29

Belmont31R

12-31-13, 14:12

jpmuscle

12-31-13, 14:40

iOS has been exploited in every main version since it came out for jailbreaking. Not hard to imagine that the gov would also attempt to exploit it.

Android is less secure...so those of you thinking an S4 or other Android phone will protect you better good luck. I thought people buy them so they can root them and all kinds of other 'hacks'.

Yea but from the sounds of things they didn't really need to try all that hard and just asked for they keys so to speak.

Idk all the more reason to hate apple I suppose.

Sent from my DROID X2

Belmont31R

12-31-13, 14:47

Yea but from the sounds of things they didn't really need to try all that hard and just asked for they keys so to speak.

Idk all the more reason to hate apple I suppose.

Sent from my DROID X2

I didn't see anything that explicitly said that Apple is working the NSA to give them backdoor access to iOS devices. That was speculation on someone else's part.

Moose-Knuckle

12-31-13, 14:54

Meh . . . no big deal.

“It’s really a turnkey situation where it can be turned quickly and become a totalitarian state pretty quickly. The capacity to do that is being set up. If we get the wrong person in office or in government they could make that happen quickly.”
– William Binney 40 year veteran of the NSA and now an Information Privacy Advocate.

“The only way to have perfect security is to have a perfect surveillance state. That’s George Orwell, that’s 1984 . . . that’s what the world would look like".
– Thomas Drake former NSA Senior Official and Information Privacy Advocate

trinydex

12-31-13, 15:00

Some people care about privacy as mush as they do about security. If you cant see the problem with giving this much power in to the hands of a few then I don't think I can explain it.

i feel this sentiment is so disingenuous. the fact is with this perspective and the arguments that usually back it up, it would stand to reason that such proponents don't actually care about privacy at all, only privacy in direct conflict with security.

you are not complaining about verizon wireless or any other business entity. only that verizon wireless hands whatever it has over to .gov. naturally you can't complain about verizon wireless, they're allowed to conduct business however they want and you asked for their services. you asked for this.

what's even more offensive about this kind of position is that the government is seen as some sort of all knowing all malicious entity.

let's go back to the second amendment argument conerning school shooting. blame the gun or blame the person?

if we are in the business of blaming people over emotional abstractions then why aren't we more concerned by the millions that work in the telecom industry that have the capability to snoop our data, have FURTHER motivations to snoop it and then HIDE it so they don't lose profits. why doesn't anyone complain about hackers who actually steal data and then misuse it, actually steal from your wallet? why isn't there a rally for the formulation of a private entity backed by true patriots to extinguish criminals that directly violate your personal lives? oh wait... is that what the government is for? i don't think so, i think there should be an extrajudicial committee that hunts down egregious offenders and deals with them. if it's private sector it's way better.

there is some sort of a perception that government has a monopoly on force and that therefore makes it the most dangerous entity. that presuposition is false. how does the government have a monopoly on force when it is constantly restrained by all the legal framework that exists? you know what freedom is? freedom is the allowance of every american citizen (and even undocumented immigrants) to continuously break the law everyday and not suffer any consequences, whether those laws are moral or technical in nature. the fourth amendment protects people and where has there been a case where someone's fourth amendment rights were breached and charges brought to bear? that's called fruit of the poisonous tree. if you're complaining about a mere listening-in, do you get all bent out of shape at the mcdonalds when someone in line leans in to hear what you're saying?

i think it's ridiculous to ignore the threat that is so much larger than the government, people. people everyday play the knock out game. people hack and siphon target's credit card transcaction data. people bomb buses. people do all this stuff that the government doesn't do. yet the premiere concern is the perception that the government has wronged you. i'm not saying the government has to stop all these threats, i'm not saying that government should get larger to prevent all these things from happening. but why is there not more finger pointing at the real problems? because you can't stop those things? because you're not entitled to complain about those things? what's the reason? is it just tacit acceptance that shit happens in life?

i'm not saying when the government does wrong it's not bad. the government messes up, every entity does, but is this even a mess up? does anyone think any of this will actually change? what's better off if it all changes? what is the potential risk?

trinydex

12-31-13, 15:05

Are you a schill for the Government, or is your head just in your ass?

http://www.policymic.com/articles/58119/the-dea-is-using-nsa-surveillance-and-covering-it-up

At this point, ignorance is the same as being complicit.

do you know anything about this? do you know what information they use and what the nature of that information is? if dea (a domestic law enforcement entity) uses it do you think it hasn't been reviewed by fisa. would there have to be some qualification met to use the information?

Belmont31R

12-31-13, 15:08

That has to be one of the oddest excuses for what is going that I've read yet.

Almost all of that is not true. People do care about their privacy. Verizon was handed a court order and they are using NSL's to coerce these companies to hand out data. In fact, the government forbids them from even disclosing the exact number of requests.

Belmont31R

12-31-13, 15:10

do you know anything about this? do you know what information they use and what the nature of that information is? if dea (a domestic law enforcement entity) uses it do you think it hasn't been reviewed by fisa. would there have to be some qualification met to use the information?

They don't have to use NSA collected data. The NSA can just tell another agency Joe Blow is up to no good. Might want to check him out wink-wink.

Further, do you think its possible that prosecutors would withhold evidence or that investigators would hide how someone came to be under investigation?

trinydex

12-31-13, 15:13

Soooo because most people are inconsequential to the extreme that somehow makes it tolerable? Our gov has great track record when it comes to stopping terrorism and considering the obvious measures that could be put in place but aren't suggests the big all collecting ears of intel et al are being turned inward in the American populace. As for that extrajudicial nonsense recall that whole notion of parallel reconstruction regarding the manufacturing of probable cause?

Sent from my DROID X2

probable cause is found, not manufactured. you can't manufacture probable cause. you wait for it to be found. a cop should have a good idea of whether or not someone is participating in criminal activities. he waits for the person to perform criminal acts so that the evidence can be acquried for prosecution.

parallel reconstruction could conceivably be used to substitute the use of many different types of evidence.

the base question you'd have to ask is whether or not nsa acquired evidence is legitimate. if you're going to automatically assume that everything the nsa does is illegal or malicious then there's no way to address you. if you're then then ask are they allowed to listen to the people they are listening to? who are these people? are they american citizens? are they foreign nationals? what does fisa say about it? are these things reviewed regularly? do you personally know enough about law and the judicial system to make an educated assessment of the situation? and here's a friendly reminder, not everyone is an attorney and that's why the miranda rights are explicitly given.

trinydex

12-31-13, 15:16

Thankfully there is no case where you could be declared a terrorist or possible terrorist and held with out trial.......

It isn't hard to imagine a case where the meta data or snippets of a conversation flag you as a threat. Or the spider web of NSA stuff accidentally associates you with terrorists and you get picked up for investigation. And the way some terrorist threats are investigated involved throwing people in a hole for years. It is like a computer automated Salem witch hunt where rumors of rumors get people screwed over. When your software collection web is too confusing for one person to understand (admitted by the NSA already), low paid interns are admins (snowden), rights are continually being eroded (thanks "war on terror" ), nearly every electronic device is/can be compromised and for bonus points numerous foreign governments dedicated messing with cyber war/harassment you have a system rife for potential abuse with little recourse from citizens.

On a side note, even if your particular device isn't compromised the memory card you put in it could be: http://www.bunniestudios.com/blog/?p=3554

ok, i'll play.

how many people do you think could, would or have fallen into your scenario? let's say the number is nonzero, would it be worth it?

i'm of the perspective that the death penalty should exist, even if there are some wrongfully accused. why? because the price of the alternative is unsustainable.

make your assessment about whether or not it's worth it.

trinydex

12-31-13, 15:20

They don't have to use NSA collected data. The NSA can just tell another agency Joe Blow is up to no good. Might want to check him out wink-wink.

Further, do you think its possible that prosecutors would withhold evidence or that investigators would hide how someone came to be under investigation?

the defense is entitled to discovery and this would include how the person came under investigation. if the basis for the investigation is not legitimate the whole case must be aborted. the fruit of the poisonous tree. law enforcement is heavily punished in order to keep them in line with proper judicial practice. this is the premiere reason that most people who are criminal do not get prosecuted. prosecutions are difficult. this is what americans call freedom. do whatever you want. systematically hurt others, deprive them of blood, treasure, pride and happiness. then continue living without consequence.

my position is this. people care about "privacy" only in so much as they don't want to get in trouble. otherwise people would target the real privacy violators, amazon, google, verizon, every credit card etc. what they do is snoop your information, your most intimate stuff. but since they don't get you in trouble for it except when you accidentally leave your ashley madison account open on the livingroom computer, it's fine. is this the case or not?

Belmont31R

12-31-13, 15:33

the defense is entitled to discovery and this would include how the person came under investigation. if the basis for the investigation is not legitimate the whole case must be aborted. the fruit of the poisonous tree. law enforcement is heavily punished in order to keep them in line with proper judicial practice. this is the premiere reason that most people who are criminal do not get prosecuted. prosecutions are difficult. this is what americans call freedom. do whatever you want. systematically hurt others, deprive them of blood, treasure, pride and happiness. then continue living without consequence.

my position is this. people care about "privacy" only in so much as they don't want to get in trouble. otherwise people would target the real privacy violators, amazon, google, verizon, every credit card etc. what they do is snoop your information, your most intimate stuff. but since they don't get you in trouble for it except when you accidentally leave your ashley madison account open on the livingroom computer, it's fine. is this the case or not?

So no one has ever been prosecuted when the prosecution withheld evidence? Everything is on the up and up all the time?

People voluntarily agree to a contract with Verizon or to shop at various stores or use credit cards. But most people don't read the user agreements. Just like people bitch about targeted ads from Gmail yet the EULA people agree to allows Google to scan emails for keywords.

No such agreement exists with the NSA. And Google or any other company doesn't operate the justice system which puts people in jail. They also don't make laws.

trinydex

12-31-13, 15:37

So no one has ever been prosecuted when the prosecution withheld evidence? Everything is on the up and up all the time?

People voluntarily agree to a contract with Verizon or to shop at various stores or use credit cards. But most people don't read the user agreements. Just like people bitch about targeted ads from Gmail yet the EULA people agree to allows Google to scan emails for keywords.

No such agreement exists with the NSA. And Google or any other company doesn't operate the justice system which puts people in jail. They also don't make laws.

i think your united states citizenship is the agreement with the nsa. if anything it's the agreement that entitles you to the most protection from that entity. you can renouce...

that same citizenship gets you

http://abcnews.go.com/International/jessica-buchanan-missionary-loves-africa/story?id=15439390

there's a quote of her coworker saying he was lucky to be abducted with an american.

and to answer your former question. yes i'm sure prosecutions have happened with withheld evidence. no system can be perfect. that's why there are appeals. that's why there are exonerations. that's even why there are pardons. now the question to you is... is it worth it? is it good enough?

everyone here wants to cry down on america. where are all the people screaming murka all the way?

Belmont31R

12-31-13, 15:46

i think your united states citizenship is the agreement with the nsa. if anything it's the agreement that entitles you to the most protection from that entity. you can renouce...

that same citizenship gets you

http://abcnews.go.com/International/jessica-buchanan-missionary-loves-africa/story?id=15439390

there's a quote of her coworker saying he was lucky to be abducted with an american.

and to answer your former question. yes i'm sure prosecutions have happened with withheld evidence. no system can be perfect. that's why there are appeals. that's why there are exonerations. that's even why there are pardons. now the question to you is... is it worth it? is it good enough?

everyone here wants to cry down on america. where are all the people screaming murka all the way?

That only works if the prosecution 'gets caught'. I imagine quite a bit of the time they don't. You can't really prove a negative.

And just because 'fruit of the poisonous tree' can't be used in court doesn't mean it doesn't have other purposes. For instance, if the NSA has evidence of a crime, they can simply tip off the FBI or another agency that person X is doing criminal acts, and allow them to get their own evidence which can then be used in court. It would be only a matter of time before legal evidence was dug up since they already know a crime is being committed. I also think that just because NSA collected evidence cannot be used in court that is should be collected in the first place. The threshold for violating someone's rights isn't that they were prosecuted for a crime. Its quite a bit of a false assertion that just because the data is 'fruit of a poisonous tree' that its ok to collect in the first place.

trinydex

12-31-13, 15:53

That only works if the prosecution 'gets caught'. I imagine quite a bit of the time they don't. You can't really prove a negative.

And just because 'fruit of the poisonous tree' can't be used in court doesn't mean it doesn't have other purposes. For instance, if the NSA has evidence of a crime, they can simply tip off the FBI or another agency that person X is doing criminal acts, and allow them to get their own evidence which can then be used in court. It would be only a matter of time before legal evidence was dug up since they already know a crime is being committed. I also think that just because NSA collected evidence cannot be used in court that is should be collected in the first place. The threshold for violating someone's rights isn't that they were prosecuted for a crime. Its quite a bit of a false assertion that just because the data is 'fruit of a poisonous tree' that its ok to collect in the first place.

so are you saying all prosecutions are evil? how often should real criminals get away with crime? give me a number, a percentage.

BTW you've totally answered my question. its all about not getting in trouble. has nothing to do with this faux banner of privacy.

I suppose law enforcement shouldn't get tips from anywhere. not angry ex wives or slighted criminal associates, not other law enforcement entities.

seriously? I guess this haven of a society where you get to surf the internet is just too cushy. you need more edge in your life, anarchy. so you can freely do whatever you like with the impunity that you accuse and condemn the nsa

Belmont31R

12-31-13, 16:12

so are you saying all prosecutions are evil? how often should real criminals get away with crime? give me a number, a percentage.

BTW you've totally answered my question. its all about not getting in trouble. has nothing to do with this faux banner of privacy.

I suppose law enforcement shouldn't get tips from anywhere. not angry ex wives or slighted criminal associates, not other law enforcement entities.

seriously? I guess this haven of a society where you get to surf the internet is just too cushy. you need more edge in your life, anarchy. so you can freely do whatever you like with the impunity that you accuse and condemn the nsa

What on Earth are you talking about? All I said was theres a good probability a majority of the time evidence is actually withheld by the prosecution that they don't get caught. I never said anything about ALL prosecutions being bad.

Yes, people should get caught the legal way. Just because there are criminals out there doesn't mean the gov should be able to catch them however they want. A lot of innocent people get their right's violated that way.

I like how you go from me saying the NSA shouldn't be collecting evidence on Americans to saying LE shouldn't get tips from anywhere. I never said anything close to that but I guess when you don't have a valid argument you have to make fake sweeping generalizations about what I did say.

Are you drunk or high? Your babbling is very hard to follow.

Moose-Knuckle

12-31-13, 16:47

What on Earth are you talking about?

Are you drunk or high? Your babbling is very hard to follow.

Two words . . . TOPIC DILUTION.

SeriousStudent

12-31-13, 16:59

Depersonalize the conversation, or accept the results if you do not.

Consider this the only warning you will get.

NWPilgrim

12-31-13, 17:05

I suppose one's interpretation of massive unregulated spying on citizens depends on whether you believe the govt to be truthful and benign ruler or a body of often lying and corrupt officials seeking ever more control.

Heartland Hawk

12-31-13, 18:05

This.

I suppose one's interpretation of massive unregulated spying on citizens depends on whether you believe the govt to be truthful and benign ruler or a body of often lying and corrupt officials seeking ever more control.

ABNAK

12-31-13, 18:06

look over their shoulder to what end? information obtained in this fashion cannot be used to prosecute you as it has circumvented the 4th amendment. what are you worried about?

extrajudicial information gathering is used for extrajudicial operations. none of which you're important enough for...

BOLD #1) You do remember the thread where the NSA/Justice Dept. had put out info on how to obscure how you got the information for their prosecutions, right? i.e. NSA tips off the DEA about something they "happen" to come across during their eavesdropping and then the DEA has to hide how they came about that information from the courts (structure their case so that it looks like they got their evidence the good old-fashioned way----by freaking WORKING for it).

BOLD #2) Not yet anyway. Wait until some future gun ban. I'll bet we ALL become VERY important.

I've said it here before and I'll say it again: If I'm ever on a jury---and I don't care if it's the biggest drug lord since Pablo Escobar or even the country's most prolific kiddie diddler---and I sense the evidence has been obtained from the NSA's snooping (which is ONLY supposed to be for national security, right?) I will immediately vote NOT GUILTY and no amount of pressure will change my decision.

trinydex

12-31-13, 18:26

What on Earth are you talking about? All I said was theres a good probability a majority of the time evidence is actually withheld by the prosecution that they don't get caught. I never said anything about ALL prosecutions being bad.

Yes, people should get caught the legal way. Just because there are criminals out there doesn't mean the gov should be able to catch them however they want. A lot of innocent people get their right's violated that way.

I like how you go from me saying the NSA shouldn't be collecting evidence on Americans to saying LE shouldn't get tips from anywhere. I never said anything close to that but I guess when you don't have a valid argument you have to make fake sweeping generalizations about what I did say.

Are you drunk or high? Your babbling is very hard to follow.

pardon my hyperbole, but it stems from the how basic the disagreement is. perhaps it would please you for me to obtain permission from your mommy in the form of a sarcasm or hyperbole warrant the next time i serve up hyperbole or sarcasm at your internet address...

kidding aside the basic disagreement is this, you are operating under the fundamental assumption that what the government is doing is wrong. i am not operating under that assumption.

allow me to explain why i hyperbolized. you suggested, with a seemingly stretched scenario that the nsa informs the fbi that people are doing something bad and to go sick 'em. if you don't want this to happen then i am highly inclined to believe that you don't want anyone caught for anything. you're removing tools that could be available to law enforcement, and why? have there been reports of abuse? have innocent people been charged or made guilty? or is it again just the mere thought that information was comprimised? because if it's really just the mere thought that information was comprimised then i would say your information is comprimised daily, from the line at mcdonalds to every credit card transaction and every googlemaps query. but you don't blame those entities, you only blame the gov. and already i postulated that the reason you blame the gov is because the gov is constantly trying to get you in trouble with the threat of prosecution. is this the case or not?

why is it ok for the nsa to do what it does? my understanding, based on the talking heads i've listened to is this: analysis resulting in corrective actions from 911 determined that we had intelligence from the intelligence agencies that could have aided in preemptive or preventative investigations of entites related to the 911 attacks. this information was not and could not have been shared at the time due to separation between law enforcement and intelligence services. reading between the lines i deduced that after 911 the nsa is SUPPOSED to inform the fbi that people are doing "bad things," and bad things can be defined later in this post.

from what i've read and heard the fbi is not primarily tasked with counter terrorism, it would only make sense that they work closely then with the intelligence community as the domestic arm of counter terror.

from what i've read and heard from talking heads about fisa: the surveillance is of foreign nationals that are either in the united states or communicating with people within the united states. that is right on the boundary of what should and shouldn't be allowed as far as surveillance goes. when you are at an international border, the laws change. when you're at a similar junction in the communications world, do the laws change? which side do we favor? you answer that for yourself, i have an idea of what your answer is, but i think you know what mine is also.

if it has been allowed that the communications between internationals and americans can be snooped with reasonable suspicion (not probable cause, the rules may be different at this international/domestic intersection in the communications world)... then why can't this information be used? why wouldn't the nsa pass that information off to the fbi? you suggested that the nsa tipping the fbi should be verbotten. why aren't all tips verbotten then? why shouldn't they be allowed to listen to reasonably suspicious foreigners? it's not like they listen to ALL foreigners. that's not the case. this is why i begged the hyperbole. you're operating under the assertion that the gov is already doing something wrong. i am not operating under that assertion. if the gov only does wrong in your eyes, or does mostly wrong in your eyes, it'd be very difficult for any prosecutions to be conducted with your approval.

if this type of information is not to be used, if it is verbotten as you suggest, then what would the world look like? keep in mind, no other country has denied doing the same. everyone does it. every single thing i've heard and read suggests that every country does this. when battling international problems, do we keep our heads in the sand and lose the arms race of knowing stuff in a timely fashion? or do we deal with it, because is anyone actually checking or care about your porn downloads or conversations with mom or your mistress?

on the definition of "bad things," if internationals are communicating with americans about crimes, why shouldn't the dea know? these are people funneling money back to mexico or wherever to propogate their illicit empires. thousands dying each year so the corruption and anarchy can continue. these are foreign nationals... talking to people in america. when a foreign national comes here, can they just do whatever the hell they want (i mean i get it, the undocumented immigrant population is getting it close to that level, but people don't like that right? that's not a good thing we want to propagate)? if foreign nationals come here and conspire with americans to commit crime the whole group should be culpable. if the prosecution began with something derived from the foreign national that could only be derived because he or she was a foreign national and the whole case started from that one piece of evidence, that evidence should still form a legitimate basis for legitimate prosecution of the american coconspirators. so this example leads me to ask, should we give equal privacy to foreign nationals at the foreign national to american intersection in the communciations space? if so, then what would the world look like? would any other country reciprocate this?

to be clear, from what i've heard, if you want to listen to two americans in america you have to use a warrant.

on the meta data collection. this is my little anecdote. many years ago i requested information from a telecom company because i noticed a billing anomoly. i requested records for a year and they said it would cost me 5 dollars per month requested and it would take them several months to process my request. now i can only imagine the nsa requests more than one number at a time. do i want the nsa waiting several months to make game time decisions that involve life and death of americans and bad guys? no. i don't. they can keep my metadata and i will trust a system in place for theim to query it responsibly so some contractor isn't snooping his girlfriend, because i know the contractor isn't really interested in my life.

i'm not at all saying the system is perfect. i'm saying it's the best. it has comprimises, but those comprimises aren't damaging my life and to my knowledge it's damaging people's lives who need their lives damaged.

trinydex

12-31-13, 18:26

trinydex

12-31-13, 18:34

BOLD #1) You do remember the thread where the NSA/Justice Dept. had put out info on how to obscure how you got the information for their prosecutions, right? i.e. NSA tips off the DEA about something they "happen" to come across during their eavesdropping and then the DEA has to hide how they came about that information from the courts (structure their case so that it looks like they got their evidence the good old-fashioned way----by freaking WORKING for it).

"happen" to come across? there's a reasonable suspicion clause that i keep hearing repeated in every single hearing on this subject. that suspicion comes from somewhere doesn't it? so there's no happenstance... if they were listening for a reason and there was criminality... why can't a tip be passed off? how would we ever stop terrorism?

I've said it here before and I'll say it again: If I'm ever on a jury---and I don't care if it's the biggest drug lord since Pablo Escobar or even the country's most prolific kiddie diddler---and I sense the evidence has been obtained from the NSA's snooping (which is ONLY supposed to be for national security, right?) I will immediately vote NOT GUILTY and no amount of pressure will change my decision.

i think the idea is that it would never go to a jury if the information was derrived from the intelligence community. so you shouldn't have to worry about that. if it did somehow go to trial and the information came out that the intelligence services were used there would be an immediate mistrial. you'd never have to cast your vote.

RogerinTPA

12-31-13, 18:45

They got us coming and going. We are officially under a tyrannical government. Ironic how all the stuff we used to track non US personnel world wide, also includes US citizens in the past few years or so. They can turn your phone mic on and use it to bug you and every form of electronic communication. Time to find my old blackberry, go back to old school flip phones (removing the GPS antenna) or get a crate of disposable phones...we're phoqued.

HackerF15E

12-31-13, 18:52

or get a crate of disposable phones

Given how we have come to understand through the Snowden documents that pretty much every mobile phone software type has been actively exploited, what makes you think that the "burner" cellphone you pick up from Walmart or the corner drug store hasn't also been compromised by the time you buy it?

Moose-Knuckle

12-31-13, 18:56

Given how we have come to understand through the Snowden documents that pretty much every mobile phone software type has been actively exploited, what makes you think that the "burner" cellphone you pick up from Walmart or the corner drug store hasn't also been compromised by the time you buy it?

Especially when one purchases them with a CC or debit card.

Mo_Zam_Beek

12-31-13, 19:13

or get a crate of disposable phones...we're phoqued.

Heads up on 'Burner' phones: http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/09/03/hemisphere_project_an_aclu_lawyer_on_the_troubling_database_used_to_id_burner.html

From the article: It turns out that, for the past several years, the government has had a way to identify those phones….n other words, to locate the tiny number of people who evade law enforcement agents by using burners, an AT&T-government partnership is sifting through sensitive phone records of vast numbers of people. While this may sometimes be justified, today it is happening without any supervision by a judge. And the government is deliberately concealing the origins of all information obtained by the program, making it impossible for criminal defendants to know that they were subjected to scrutiny though the program. As a result, defendants have no opportunity to test the legality of these investigative tactics—and, just as troublingly, no court will have the chance to weigh in on the program’s validity.

Raise your hand if you think it is just AT&T….

FromMyColdDeadHand

12-31-13, 19:13

Depersonalize the conversation, or accept the results if you do not.

Consider this the only warning you will get.

The best way to depersonalize is to add people to the ignore list. I just wish it hid responses that other people make to the person in the ignore list.

Someone PM me when he adds something rational and finds his shift key...

SeriousStudent

12-31-13, 19:19

And we are done. That did not take long.

Some people can talk about issues, and some people talk about other posters. If you are the later, think about your continued participation on this board.