Tornado Alley (PROG)

[fuagf]

An Open (Of Course) Letter to My Friend, the NSA

Sorry, But It’s Really Tough Nowadays To Hire a Non-Leaking
HackerAn Open (Of Course) Letter to My Friend, the NSA

by Cyrus Nemati|June 12, 2013

Dear NSA,

We need to have a chat, so I trust you’re reading this.

Of course you are; good. Now, let’s see … how should I put this? Look, you’ve done a great job cultivating that whole “spook” image for the past 60 years. Really, you’ve just been terrifyingly adept at creating an environment of ironclad secrecy, even more so than the CIA, who’ve bungled too many overseas jobs to be the omnipotent, untouchable agency they’d like us to think they are.

Times are changing, though. For the past several generations, you’ve been the rulers of all information, with no one to challenge you. Americans just had to trust that the good quiet folk at the NSA were looking out for them, because no one else could handle data on such a large scale. It was a simpler time, back when the Internet was young and the Web was just a seed of an idea, and our idea of “big data” was the Yellow Pages.

There are new kids in town, though; kids who grew up on data. They were raised to dish out and take in as much data as possible, and they do it for fun. To you, Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, and all the rest of it are the latest places from which to siphon information. To these new kids, it’s home. It’s where they grew up, which is why they’re much better at it, and why you hire so many of them.

Now, what happens when you raise a generation on a steady diet of data, and then try to keep naughty secrets? They’re going to ask questions. They grew up in a world where information was free, and they took advantage of that fact. They learned more about the world around them than could ever be learned in school, and they went online for the answers to the questions their parents and teachers wouldn’t answer. They grew up not just appreciating that information was free, but expecting information to be free.

It gets worse. Not only are you hiring millennials, for whom secrecy is anathema—you’re hiring millennial hackers. And hacking, as you well know, means finding ways of turning technology to serve a purpose other than its intended one. When information isn’t free, these people have the ability and the will to free it.

I know this because I’m one of them. I may not have top-secret clearance and make six figures working for one of your contractors, but Edward Snowden’s demographic profile still hits close to home. When I was a boy, I used to hack into my computer games to add fart sounds to them. I built my own computers. I made my sister’s Teddy Ruxpin say horrible, horrible things. When I get a new phone, its hackability is its number-one buying point.

When I get my hands on a new piece of technology, my first thought isn’t about what it can do—it’s about what it can’t do, and how can I force it to overcome its limitations to do what I want. I then wonder, “Why wasn’t I ‘allowed’ to do this in the first place?” See, we millennial hackers simply cannot take anything at face value. We’re a bit contrarian and stubborn by nature. It’s why we’re good at what we do. The more constraints you place on us (be they workplace, physical, technological, or copyright) the more we feel a need to disregard, challenge, or overcome those constraints.

To be a hacker is to be cynical about whatever “solid” information or limits you’re faced with, to remove layers of consumer sheen or government spin until raw components are laid bare to reconstruct at will. You reward people like me with fat salaries when we do this with technology, so there’s little sense in expecting us not do the same in the rest of our lives—with your policies, rules, information, even with our own personal lives. We tinker, probe, deconstruct, and reassemble for other purposes. One thing we don’t do is blindly put hand to heart and sing “God Bless, America” —unless we’re in a North Korean gulag and it’s a contrarian move.

Do you see the problem? You need my kind of people for our understanding of data, but we don’t necessarily want or need you. You are anathema to our values and expectations. Sure, you’ve got some very smart graybeards who can do some amazing things, but they’re not going to be the bulk of your army for long, if they even still are. You have no choice but to keep hiring these hackers who didn’t grow up having data hidden from them. It’s ironic that you’ve become so reliant on people who really have no business in a tight-lipped, hierarchical quasi-militarized institution. We are the ones you should be snooping on, if only you could snoop without us.

I feel your pain.

Edward Snowden smoked you, and it wasn’t even very hard for him. Now, I know what you’re going to say. “It won’t happen again! We’ll improve security!” Who is going to improve your security? Is it going to be the naval officers you used to hire, respectful of hierarchy and used to a military lifestyle? Or maybe, say, more young, technical lay-people—contractors with the information freedom ideals of the millennial hacker? Yeah, I thought so.

Let’s face it: This isn’t going to be the last time your secrets are aired to the public. It’s probably not even going to be the last time this year that your secrets are aired to the public by another Edward Snowden, because you’ve got countless Edward Snowdens on your payroll whose first—not last—instinct is to blow open your information infrastructure. I mean, you tried to recruit me years ago, for goodness sake. Those confidential recruitment materials that said “For Your Eyes Only” all over them? Yeah, I showed those to everyone I knew, mostly because you were so heavy-handed with all the confidential stuff.

The important thing now is not to panic. No tears. You’re a big, strong, spooky organization, right? You don’t have to clean out your desk. You’ve still got a big role to play in the cyber-warfare of the next several decades. You’re just learning a hard lesson here, and I realize you’re partly being demonized for implementing what the White House and Congress want. However, you have no choice but to keep hiring these young, entitled, informed, data-driven hackers, who pretty soon might not have any secrets to leak because the Snowdens in your midst will have forced you to turn into a fully transparent (but still efficient!) organization.

Now that I think of it, you really should have played up the six-figure salary and Hawaii angle in those recruiting materials you gave me. I would’ve kept your secrets. Really.

Cheers,

Cyrus

http://www.zocalopublicsquare.org/2013/06/12/an-open-of-course-letter-to-my-friend-the-nsa/ideas/nexus/

======

David Axelrod: Edward Snowden's 'A Whistleblower Who Then Blew The Country' (VIDEO)

The Huffington Post | By Chris Gentilviso Posted: 06/11/2013 10:00 am EDT | Updated: 06/11/2013 10:31 am EDT

Former White House adviser and Obama campaign strategist David Axelrod responded to the NSA leak on Monday, revealing what he found to be "peculiar" about whistleblower Edward Snowden's course of action.

Appearing on "The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell," Axelrod stressed that while the exchange of sensitive information is "a concern," there were other paths that Snowden could have taken.

“My question is of Mr. Snowden is he could have gone to the Congress,” Axelrod said. “He could have gone to the Inspector General. This is a peculiar route he took. I mean, he's a whistleblower who then blew the country."

Axelrod added that the Obama administration has made a significant effort to add safeguards, headed by briefings of Congress. HuffPost's Sam Stein reported Monday that the Obama administration held 22 briefings on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments Act, the law that has been cited as justification for the NSA's collection of phone records.

From the media side of the discussion, The Guardian's Glenn Greenwald argued ..

[ you know it .. inside ..] .. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/11/david-axelrod-edward-snowden_n_3421126.html

I feel Snowden is a well meaning guy who succumbed to a primal do the right thing (in his mind for the public sense) semi-conscious surge .. a little limelight factor in there somewhere, too, i think .. he has acted with full understanding of the consequences, (my basic problem with the other post of yours was the suggestion he was an idiot because he hadn't) .. and, for now, a pause on the treason position .. a couple of other differences between he and Ellsberg is that Ellsberg took much longer before he did what he did .. and, as i understand it he had clear evidence of domestic illegality, like lying to Congress, for one .. i agree with Axelrod, Snowden should have at least spent time trying to do it in a better way first .. also .. IF he has real heavy stuff he knows would be valuable to the Chinese (though i don't think they will go after him) he shouldn't have left the country to Hong Kong ..

See also:

OK this guy is nothing more than a traitor if he has documentation to back this up and shows it to them.

Snowden claims to document U.S. hacking of Chinese targets
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=88936028

from one of the replies to that one

I agree that the NSA does go too far with surveillance of Americans, but that should be resolved through
legislation and judges appointed by elected officials. There needs to be pressure to change the laws.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=88945111

What Does the Fourth Amendment Mean?
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=88851912