national security

Nov 12, 2015 ∞

Is the Russian kamikaze sub misinformation or an inadvertent warning to the West?

Apparently,

The screen capture depicts a project called "Ocean Multipurpose System 'Status-6.'" The weapon would apparently be delivered by a nuclear-powered underwater drone, carried externally by a nuclear submarine. The drone would be capable of depths of up to 3,280 feet and capable of speeds of up to 65 miles an hour. It would also have a range of 6,213 miles.

A weapon like this could take out the transatlantic data cables as mere collateral damage…

Oct 19, 2015 ∞

China hack attacks on US continue despite commercial spying pact

If this surprises you, I’ve got a real-life, fully functional totally Back to the Future hoverboard to sell you…

Jun 10, 2015 ∞

Petraeus' preferential punishment

Mitch Weiss of the Associated Press reports:

A federal judge in Charlotte unsealed the documents Monday, two months after the retired four-star general was sentenced to two years of probation and fined $100,000 for unauthorized removal and retention of classified information.

Once again, it’s hard to see this as anything but hypocrisy from the letter-writers. After all, he didn’t merely disclose classified information, he did it in the context of moral turpitude (providing it to his then-mistress/biographer), and then he lied about it.

Speaking of context, here’s a bit more about someone who only disclosed classified information, with no moral turpitude or subsequent lying:

Supporters of Jeffrey Sterling, a former CIA officer convicted of giving a New York Times reporter classified details of an operation to derail Iran's nuclear ambitions, had noted the Petraeus case. Sterling was sentenced last month to 42 months in prison, but federal prosecutors in Virginia had been urging a stiffer sentence.

Perhaps some people will agree Petraeus, a retired four-star general, should get more latitude than mere officers and analysts would get. But he was the head of the CIA at the time of his offense, and should have been a shining example of perfect adherence to national security classification regulations. Isn’t it possible that the head of the CIA had information even more sensitive than the anti-nuclear Iran operation disclosed by Sterling?

Of course it is possible, and likely. So it’s hard to see justice in an outcome that results in zero jail time for Petraeus.

Previously: Petraeus reaches plea deal with Justice Department - joeross.me/blog

Public domain CIA-produced image found at Wikipedia

Mar 3, 2015 ∞

Petraeus reaches plea deal with Justice Department

Kevin Johnson and Tom Vanden Brook, reporting for USA Today:

The explosive details in the agreement show that Petraeus lied to investigators, divulged a massive amount of sensitive data to Paula Broadwell and worried about how she handled them in an interview she taped with him.

Those who want former NSA analyst Edward Snowden’s head on a plate for disseminating classified information based on his ideals, with which you may or may not agree, and then admitting it, must be really angry at former CIA director General David Petraeus for disseminating classified information to his mistress and then lying about it to FBI agents.

Right?

Jan 30, 2015 ∞

EFF Wins Battle Over Secret Legal Opinions on Government Spying

The EFF said in a press release yesterday:

The U.S. Department of Justice today filed a motion to dismiss its appeal of a ruling over legal opinions about Section 215 of the Patriot Act, the controversial provision of law relied on by the NSA to collect the call records of millions of Americans. As a result of the dismissal, the Justice Department will be forced to release a previously undisclosed opinion from the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) concerning access by law enforcement and intelligence agencies to census data under Section 215.

That’s good news. Census has historically been analyzed only in the aggregate, with individual records held by the United States Census Bureau for 72 years before public release. I’m interested in reading the OLC opinion when it’s finally released.

Jul 6, 2014 ∞

For the NSA, we are the haystack

Barton Gellman, Julie Tate and Ashkan Soltani, reporting at the Washington Post:

Nine of 10 account holders found in a large cache of intercepted conversations, which former NSA contractor Edward Snowden provided in full to The Post, were not the intended surveillance targets but were caught in a net the agency had cast for somebody else.

Dec 4, 2013 ∞

NSA tracking cellphone locations worldwide

Barton Gellman and Ashkan Soltani, reporting at The Washington Post:

The NSA does not target Americans’ location data by design, but the agency acquires a substantial amount of information on the whereabouts of domestic cellphones “incidentally,” a legal term that connotes a foreseeable but not deliberate result.

Incidental indeed.

Apr 5, 2013 ∞

Google fighting National Security Letter

The letters, issued by federal authorities investigating national security concerns, prohibit recipients from disclosing that they have received them, let alone what they’re asking for. The Judge in Google’s case¹ struck down the law’s gag order provision as violative of the First Amendment, but has stayed the effect of that decision while the government pursues an appeal.

I should note that I essentially paraphrased the Wikipedia article for that second sentence, as my knowledge of NSLs is limited. I look forward to reading more on them, and I’m glad to see a company with the clout and caliber of attorneys that Google has questioning the legality of the NSL framework.

At first glance, it may seem odd that a company that siphons so much data about its users would be so protective of it when the government is asking for it.

But it makes sense for Google to defend user information: it needs that information to make its advertising products more relevant, Many accept the trade of having their documents and emails scanned and anonymized by Google in exchange for exceptional and free services. If Google fails to protect that information from surveillance via legal tools of questionable constitutionality, the balance of that trade may tip too far for many users.

Thus, this is one of those rare cases where corporate goals and user concerns are aligned.

The caption for the case in question is In Re Google Inc.’s Petition to Set Aside Legal Process, 13-80063, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (San Francisco) ↩