[HN Gopher] Mark Klein, AT&T whistleblower who revealed NSA mass...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Mark Klein, AT&T whistleblower who revealed NSA mass spying, has
       died
        
       Author : leotravis10
       Score  : 1492 points
       Date   : 2025-03-12 21:05 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.eff.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.eff.org)
        
       | aio2 wrote:
       | Damn.
       | 
       | I don't know if this started the whole movement or whatever you'd
       | call it for this push towards privacy and the general public
       | knowing about it, but it helped a lot. Before him releasing info
       | about room 641A and whatever else, there really wasn't definitive
       | evidence of any government spying and tampering, and either with
       | the intention of starting this movement or simply letting people
       | know, he was a big push in the right direction.
       | 
       | tldr: he's a w
        
         | genewitch wrote:
         | not only was there not "definitive evidence"; if you said that
         | the companies did that sort of thing you were called a
         | conspiracy theorist whackaloon. oddly 85% of the general public
         | suddenly was like "well of course they spy on email" after all
         | this came out.
        
           | philipkglass wrote:
           | I'm sure it depended on the audience, but I and others [0]
           | guessed at broad electronic surveillance well before the 641A
           | revelations. I was never called a conspiracy theorist for it
           | either. In the 1990s if you had read Bamford's _The Puzzle
           | Palace_ [1] (published in 1982) and observed the government
           | 's legal fight against Zimmermann's PGP encryption software
           | [2], you could make an educated guess close to the truth. If
           | you phrased it as "I'm _sure_ that the government is spying
           | on everything, " that went beyond the realm of what could be
           | proved then, but airing _suspicions_ about broad government
           | snooping never elicited strong denials in my experience.
           | 
           | [0] Like the people on the Cypherpunks mailing list
           | 
           | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Puzzle_Palace
           | 
           | [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Zimmermann#Arms_Export
           | _Co...
        
             | genewitch wrote:
             | > [1] (published in 1982) and observed the government's
             | legal fight against Zimmermann's PGP encryption software
             | [2], you could make an educated guess close to the truth.
             | 
             | what percentage of the US population do you reckon could
             | "make an educated guess" about the technological
             | capabilities of the US government in 2002?
             | 
             | please remember this is a technology discussion forum, not
             | a general public forum.
             | 
             | > Zimmermann's PGP encryption software
             | 
             | "PG what? Encryption? like the cryptkeeper? I like hans
             | zimmer music"
        
               | zmgsabst wrote:
               | People suspected there was funny business going on since
               | the Patriot Act was passed in 2001. By 2003 gangs were
               | aware government spied on phones at scale. NSA regularly
               | came up in my high school tech class in 2004, in
               | connection with War on Terror. By 2005, the program was
               | confirmed.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surveillanc
               | e_(...
               | 
               | Lots of people knew that mass surveillance was likely
               | with the advent of the internet, prior to 641A in 2006.
        
               | somenameforme wrote:
               | Lots of people know lots of things. The problem is those
               | things aren't always true. And until there is a defacto
               | public acknowledgement of something many people defer to
               | the 'official position.'
               | 
               | Here's a present time one for you - all US based cloud
               | providers, including Apple, are providing full (and
               | probably indirect) real time access to everything stored
               | on those servers to various organizations including, but
               | not limited to, the NSA. Lawsuits around this issue are
               | motivated solely by an effort to do away with parallel
               | construction [1] and enable the evidence obtained through
               | such means to be able to be directly used.
               | 
               | Lots of people know this, lots of people also think this
               | is crazy talk. And prior to Snowden, and to a lesser
               | degree Klein, the _overwhelming_ majority fell into the
               | latter camp regarding anything even remotely close to the
               | scope and scale of what the NSA was doing.
               | 
               | [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction
        
               | genewitch wrote:
               | "My dad owned a 1965 softtop stingray, it was awesome!"
        
               | floweronthehill wrote:
               | Here's another official position relevant to current
               | events but that is beginning to change.
               | 
               | "Electronic voting machines are 100% safe and as safe as
               | paper ballots if not more".
        
           | lern_too_spel wrote:
           | The really odd thing is that 85% of the general public will
           | say "well of course they spy on email" even today, after
           | Snowden's leaks showed that the Obama administration had shut
           | that down.
        
             | rl3 wrote:
             | Setting aside the fact that the leaks you're referring to
             | are over a decade old at this point, they also established
             | that GCHQ buffered the entirety of the UK's internet
             | traffic for 72 hours, bit for bit.
             | 
             | If you think there's no collection on e-mail, rather than
             | just legal shell games being played with terminology and
             | various compartments, then I've got a bridge to sell you.
             | 
             | In fact, the bridge is made of metadata and nothing else.
        
               | lern_too_spel wrote:
               | SMTP connections are wrapped in TLS these days, so even
               | if you were to collect email transfers bit for bit, you
               | wouldn't be able to read them, not even metadata.
        
               | potato3732842 wrote:
               | IIRC there's been speculation that the NSA can/has brute
               | forced TLS keys up through 4096 bit size. I read a paper
               | once that crunched the numbers on energy cost and compute
               | time and whatnot it comes out looking like a reasonable
               | investment for them.
               | 
               | Obviously they'd have to keep such an exercise on the DL
               | if they did do it because increasing key size is pretty
               | trivial.
        
               | kbolino wrote:
               | A 4096-bit RSA key is still well beyond the means of even
               | a very capable state actor. The standard nowadays is
               | 2048-bit RSA keys, cracking of which is also (probably)
               | still beyond anyone's capabilities. Maybe a multi-year
               | effort directed at a specific target might manage to
               | crack a single key, but I wouldn't bet on it. RSA
               | cracking efforts would almost certainly focus on smaller
               | keys that are still being used despite the warnings.
               | 
               | However, even if they did crack a major infrastructure
               | provider's RSA key, TLS nowadays uses ephemeral key
               | exchange which provides forward secrecy. So it doesn't
               | matter if an intelligence agency collected every packet,
               | they could not decipher the contents after the fact. They
               | would have to actively interdict _every_ TLS handshake
               | and perform a man-in-the-middle attack against both
               | parties _all the time_.
               | 
               | It is extremely doubtful that this is happening _en
               | masse_. Such a process would require an immense amount of
               | online computing power directly in the path of all
               | Internet traffic. Much of the compute available to
               | intelligence agencies (and accounted for in back-of-the-
               | envelope calculations by outside parties) is effectively
               | offline due to airgaps. It 's not like they want people
               | doing to them what they're doing to others, after all.
               | 
               | It's much easier to send an NSL to Google to read your
               | email than to try to intercept it over the wire. The
               | latter capability would be reserved for high-value
               | targets unreachable by the US legal system, not mass
               | surveillance.
        
             | somenameforme wrote:
             | What? No it didn't, not at all. The leaks clearly showed
             | email as being one of the many things being directly
             | surveilled. Here is one of the many slides directly
             | acknowledging as much. [1]
             | 
             | If you mean the rhetoric around it, then yeah - politicians
             | lie, especially when engaging in what would be seen as
             | deeply unpopular behavior. This isn't a shock. I assure you
             | the admin that passed indefinite detention without charge
             | or trial [2] wasn't some crusader for civil rights. Obama
             | was just ridiculously charismatic and could sell a drowning
             | man water, but he was no different than the rest in
             | behavior.
             | 
             | [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM#/media/File:PRISM
             | _Collec...
             | 
             | [2] - https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/president-obama-
             | signs-in...
        
               | lern_too_spel wrote:
               | We were talking about mass surveillance. PRISM isn't
               | that. They used to collect mass email metadata, using
               | facilities like Room 641A. Snowden's leaks showed that
               | they had already stopped. These days, it wouldn't even be
               | technically possible, let alone legally possible, because
               | pretty much all SMTP traffic is over TLS. Gmail won't
               | even accept unencrypted SMTP connections.
        
               | somenameforme wrote:
               | What!?!? Yes PRISM is a mass surveillance program. And
               | it's not metadata, it's piping entire content straight
               | from the target to the NSA, in real time. This involves
               | direct filtered data (such as Skype messages/videos)
               | indirectly handed over by participating companies (which
               | is probably _all_ major tech companies in the US at this
               | point), as well as raw upstream (essentially line
               | tapping) data such as provided via STORMBREW. [1]
               | 
               | [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STORMBREW
        
               | lern_too_spel wrote:
               | > Yes PRISM is a mass surveillance program
               | 
               | You're more than 11 years behind the news. Less than a
               | week after Greenwald published his initial ridiculous
               | description of PRISM, it was corrected by the people who
               | actually built the systems at the tech companies. He
               | stupidly thought that the DITU was a machine at the
               | companies that could get any data, when anybody with half
               | a clue could have told him that it's obviously https://en
               | .wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Intercept_Technology_Unit. The
               | Wikipedia PRISM article's description is very clear and
               | well-cited, and it includes Snowden's slides there to
               | cross reference the description with.
               | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM#The_program
               | 
               | The FBI tells the companies to forward the communications
               | of specific targets to the FBI. PRISM is a data
               | integration system that ingests that data from the FBI
               | into NSA systems.
        
               | somenameforme wrote:
               | This is overt misinformation. PRISM works directly with
               | the companies (well, "indirectly" to offer plausible
               | deniability). The section you're linking to entirely
               | quotes some random government organization which is
               | obviously an unreliable source on such topics. As is the
               | writing, as opposed to sources, on Wiki.
               | 
               | This [1] is one of the more telling leaks. It's a
               | technical users guide for NSA employees on using realtime
               | Skype surveillance for all modes including video and
               | landline on arbitrary targets. [1] It even includes
               | debugging guides like why an agent might be getting
               | multiple copies of the same message, as happens when
               | somebody being spied on boots up a new device and all of
               | their messages are sent from Microsoft to them (and the
               | NSA) simultaneously, resulting a copy of older messages
               | (from the snooper's perspective).
               | 
               | [1] - https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_docu
               | ment/Guid...
        
               | ChrisKnott wrote:
               | In what way do you think your document contradicts GP?
        
               | autoexec wrote:
               | > These days, it wouldn't even be technically possible,
               | let alone legally possible, because pretty much all SMTP
               | traffic is over TLS.
               | 
               | These days the government wouldn't need to decrypt email
               | traffic going over the backbone. They'd march into the
               | companies and ISPs who run the mail servers and
               | monitor/collect everything from there directly, the same
               | way they marched into AT&T and set up camp. The vast
               | majority of the American's email can be obtained by
               | controlling the servers of a very small number of
               | corporations. We have Lavabit to thank for demonstrating
               | that when the government comes knocking your only options
               | are to comply or shut down
               | (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavabit)
               | 
               | There's no reason to think that there isn't a Room 641A
               | at Google, Apple, MS, etc.
        
               | autoexec wrote:
               | I actually believed Obama when he spoke about ending the
               | NSA's mass surveillance on the American people. He taught
               | constitutional law. He knew exactly how wrong it was. I
               | suspect that once he got into office he was either strong
               | armed into changing his tune (and into ultimately giving
               | the NSA more spying powers on the public) or he was shown
               | enough secret evidence that it scared him into thinking
               | it was necessary to violate the freedom of all Americans
               | in order to keep us safe from terrorists. I'm not sure
               | which scenario should worry me more, but at this point I
               | don't think anyone in government has the ability to
               | really stop the NSA.
        
               | somenameforme wrote:
               | The sayings about power corrupting date back to time
               | immemorial. It's easy to say something is wrong (or
               | right) when you are in no position to meaningfully
               | impact, or be impacted, by what you're speaking of. It's
               | another altogether different thing when you are in a
               | situation to define the limits of your own powers, or
               | that which even _might_ affect you.
               | 
               | This, in many ways, is what made the Founding Fathers so
               | unique. They were in a position to grant themselves
               | effectively any and all powers they might ever desire.
               | Yet instead, they sacrificed all of that in pursuit of a
               | more free and just society, in many cases to their own
               | detriment. In modern times I do not think there's any
               | real comparable examples. Instead it's just endless power
               | accumulation, tempered only by the oft liminal protest of
               | the citizenry.
        
               | mandmandam wrote:
               | > In modern times I do not think there's any real
               | comparable examples
               | 
               | There are real comparable examples, from South America
               | and Africa, and America herself. You won't hear about
               | them much, partly because they break important narratives
               | and partly because often the US went to extraordinary
               | lengths to smear, coup and/or murder those people.
               | 
               | Examples:
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvador_Allende
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrice_Lumumba
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Hampton
        
               | simoncion wrote:
               | > I actually believed Obama when he spoke about ending
               | the NSA's mass surveillance on the American people. He
               | taught constitutional law. He knew exactly how wrong it
               | was. I suspect that once he got into office he was either
               | strong armed into changing his tune (and into ultimately
               | giving the NSA more spying powers on the public) or he
               | was shown enough secret evidence that it scared him into
               | thinking it was necessary to violate the freedom of all
               | Americans in order to keep us safe from terrorists.
               | 
               | Man... When a bombastic politician promises something but
               | doesn't deliver, the common response is "Oh, well, of
               | course he just made an empty promise. What can you
               | expect?". When a more genial politician that affects a
               | more-typical reserved public face promises something but
               | doesn't deliver, they get the benefit of the doubt.
               | "Surely that wasn't an empty promise just to get more
               | power! Surely _something happened_ that convinced them
               | against their better judgement not to do it. ".
               | 
               | Respectfully, these are a class of people who have no
               | problems saying trivially-verifiable lies to the public
               | at large (as time has proven that there are no lasting
               | consequences for lying to the public), and little problem
               | with lying to members of Congress or even the courts
               | (again, because here "lately" there are no real
               | consequences for the act).
               | 
               | Don't believe what they say, believe what they _do_...
               | because you 're not privy to the conversations that they
               | have that actually matter, so you have no idea what they
               | actually intend.
        
             | serial_dev wrote:
             | It's really odd, indeed, that people think some reorg and a
             | smooth politician didn't in fact change the very nature of
             | the surveillance companies.
        
           | nvarsj wrote:
           | It's pretty depressing how society went from "that would
           | never happen" to general apathy.
        
           | rcxdude wrote:
           | That's not the general sentiment I recall. There was a
           | general sense of 'the government's probably watching' (along
           | with who knows who else: early internet protocols like email
           | really aren't resistant to snooping by more or less anyone),
           | just no public info on specifically how (and you might get
           | some disapproving looks if you claimed any specific approach
           | without evidence).
        
           | potato3732842 wrote:
           | That's a really charitable way of framing the fact that a 15%
           | minority screeching about "the government would never" and
           | "but there's no proof" was able to control the narrative
           | despite people generally having doubt or believing otherwise
           | privately right up until the point that the proof was public
           | record and so ironclad that even mainstream media had to
           | report on it.
           | 
           | (I assume the 85% number is made up, but for whatever the
           | number is the point stands)
        
         | DoingIsLearning wrote:
         | > started the whole movement or whatever you'd call it for this
         | push towards privacy
         | 
         | I don't really like this framing because it makes it sound like
         | if you care for privacy you are some form of fringe advocate.
         | 
         | We should always try to reframe:
         | 
         | Would you be ok with government employees or law enforcement
         | indiscriminately opening your letters? Ask any senior and the
         | answer is a clear no.
         | 
         | So why are we discussing this as if privacy is entirely
         | optional as soon as you change medium from written letters to
         | emails, sms, instant message?
        
           | cj wrote:
           | I wonder what percent of Americans would trade their privacy
           | to bring their monthly cell phone bill from $100/mo to $0/mo
           | in exchange for sharing texts and emails with a telecom
           | company.
           | 
           | I suspect the percentage would be surprisingly high.
           | 
           | Unfortunately normal people don't really care that much about
           | privacy (even if we all think everyone should).
        
             | 1oooqooq wrote:
             | you mean, exactly like most the public on this site did
             | when moving from Gmail and abandoning their isp provided
             | email?
        
               | lotsofpulp wrote:
               | Why would ISP provided email be any more private than
               | Gmail? If anything, I expect ISP provided email to be
               | more compromised.
        
               | mulmen wrote:
               | Because it's a lot easier to compromise one email
               | provider instead of a million. I'm surprised I have to
               | explain the benefits of federated over centralized
               | systems here.
        
           | pjc50 wrote:
           | You can make this work in the other direction:
           | 
           | "Would you be ok with government employees or law enforcement
           | indiscriminately opening the letters of illegal immigrants?"
           | 
           | You'd immediately get the answer yes. Of course, in order to
           | find the illegal immigrant letters they have to open _all_ of
           | the letters.
           | 
           | People will give law enforcement huge amounts of power
           | because they think it will be used against groups they don't
           | like.
        
           | shadowgovt wrote:
           | It's also interesting to float the thought experiment of what
           | Gen Z would say about this question because the online norms
           | are so different.
           | 
           | "Hey, sometimes people try to send bombs through the mail.
           | Would you be okay with the government opening 1% of packages,
           | inspecting them, and re-sealing them to make sure they're
           | safe?
           | 
           | ... what if they threw in a coupon so the next package mailed
           | is free?"
           | 
           | (... and suddenly I've discovered of my own psyche that if
           | those "The TSA inspected this bag" slips included a coupon
           | for a free coffee, the visceral response to their presence
           | would do a 180. "Oh, sweet! Free coffee!").
        
         | mulmen wrote:
         | The Fourth Amendment seems like a more appropriate starting
         | point. Most people call the "privacy movement" "the American
         | revolution".
        
       | DannyBee wrote:
       | RIP - truly someone who tried to make the world better.
        
       | madrox wrote:
       | Had the privilege of watching him receive an award from EFF years
       | ago at ETech. Gave a brief speech. Struck me as a gentle man who
       | really did what he thought was right and for no other purpose. It
       | took moral strength to do what he did. I hope he rests easy.
        
         | toomuchtodo wrote:
         | https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2007/02/t-whistleblower-wins-a...
        
       | kstrauser wrote:
       | Nooooooo! He was my next door neighbor a few years ago, and I
       | knew him as a person before I realized that I knew him as a hero.
       | 
       | His dogs were fiercely protective of his house, which is
       | perfectly understandable. One day I saw a "sewer cleaning" van
       | behind his house, and I have a hard time believing that's what it
       | really was: https://honeypot.net/2025/03/12/rip-mark-klein.html
        
         | itisit wrote:
         | The money shot! I did not realize sewer cleaning required so
         | much onsite IT. Are those rack units running computational
         | fluid dynamics models to figure out how to unclog elaborate
         | networks of pipes?
        
           | spaceribs wrote:
           | I'd like to believe it was an inspection van:
           | https://nationalplant.com/services/digital-tv-inspection/
           | 
           | I'd like to believe that, but I don't.
        
             | kstrauser wrote:
             | That very well could be what it was. If it had been
             | anything other than:
             | 
             | 1. Spotless.
             | 
             | 2. Parked right behind Klein's (and by extension, my)
             | house.
             | 
             | 3. Skittish, such that they closed the door right after I
             | took the picture and drove off less than a minute later
             | without pulling any gear up out of a manhole or something.
             | 
             | then that's probably what I'd chalk it up to. I am
             | absolutely not 100% convinced it was, say, an undercover
             | NSA van.
             | 
             | And yet, that's exactly what I thought it was from the
             | moment I saw the gear racks and monitors inside.
        
               | Boogie_Man wrote:
               | Somebody give the number on the van a call and post
               | results
        
               | lukan wrote:
               | If it would be a spy van, it would be a real number
               | (likely for the real company). Otherwise way too easy to
               | spot.
        
               | rkagerer wrote:
               | I called and asked them if they were NSA. Very nice lady
               | explained "No, trust me, we're definitely just NPS"
               | (j/k).
               | 
               | https://www.linkedin.com/posts/national-plant-services-
               | inc_e...
        
               | bunabhucan wrote:
               | We have a manhole outside our house and it was inspected
               | like this. I work with GIS for electric and gas
               | companies. I used to keep small ear protectors in the
               | Burley so me and the kids could go up and ask "diggermen"
               | about holes in the road.
               | 
               | Xcel used directional drilling for a plastic gas main
               | down our street and then did sewer intrusion inspections
               | after. A neighbor had their sewer line pierced. It's a
               | hazard because it isn't detectible until the sewer line
               | blocks and then the blade thingy the plumber uses can
               | sever the plastic gas service lateral in the sewer line.
               | 
               | There is a gas overflow valve (like a ball bearing that
               | too much flow can push in to block the pipe) back at the
               | service tee fitting on the main. If that doesn't work
               | then you could have a gas explosion in the sewer or
               | house. It happens and it is bad. Clients give
               | presentations on these projects at conferences (e.g. use
               | GIS to combine the sewer and gas topology to identify
               | where the crossings are.)
               | 
               | That truck isn't for inspecting _your_ sewer, it 's for
               | inspecting every junction on that sewer line, 8 hours per
               | day, every day. They will have a map and linear reference
               | showing where every other underground utility
               | (fiber/gas/electricity) intersects it and be recording
               | and cross referencing it in case it needs to be produced
               | in court at a later date.
               | 
               | People are conflating do-you-need-a-$30k-sewer-line
               | "plumber inspection" with this service. This kind of
               | inspection is more like the "assuming tort liability"
               | role that the companies like sitewise serve. Even with
               | the robot done and packed, the operator in the truck was
               | working for a bit, making copies of the videos and
               | tagging them and stuff. If your gas main piercing a sewer
               | causes explosions the settlements can be in the tens of
               | millions.
               | 
               | BigUtility uses trenchless directional drilling to poke a
               | drill horizontally down the street and then laterally to
               | each house saving millions of dollars in open trench
               | costs. The gotcha is that they can't see where they are
               | digging and thus can burn, electrocute, explode or kill
               | taxpayers. The inspections help with sewer maintenance /
               | cleaning but the big money/concern is on the liability
               | for cross bored gas lines.
               | 
               | The robot (the one I saw outside my house) was over $10k
               | and kitting out the whole truck with a crane and the
               | monitors and reels was $90k. They hosed the robot down
               | completely with high pressure water from the truck once
               | it came back out and checked it over for damage. That and
               | the fact that the van guys typically don't go in the
               | sewer is why the van is clean. It's an "expensive
               | equipment" van, not a plumbers van. For comparison the
               | fiber optic inspection a plumber might use is more like
               | $2k and you can rent them.
               | 
               | Depending on the job they can inflate a balloon at the
               | next manhole upstream or even pump/route the sewer
               | through a temp pipe on the street surface (looks like a
               | big fire hose) from the previous manhole to the one after
               | where the van is. That needs 3 crews plus flaggers for
               | traffic. They use a radio to coordinate with the other
               | crews.
               | 
               | With the line blocked for inspection the robot typically
               | just has a film of that nasty sewer grease on it.
               | 
               | They told me the door stays open even in winter because
               | the crane operator / tether wrangler guy is right by an
               | open sewer which is a fall and methane hazard.
               | 
               | The job isn't quick - there might be 300 feet / 100m of
               | line to the robot near the next manhole. Unless they were
               | just looking at one service main, if they were able to
               | leave they must have been winding up already.
               | 
               | The more important question is: is there a sewer manhole
               | where they parked?
               | 
               | If we can surveil people with drones from miles away,
               | what technology are the FBI using that requires guys
               | physically in a van outside a house? If you were going to
               | park outside, why would you use a method that usually
               | blocks the street?
               | 
               | I dug up a pic. If you look carefully you can see two
               | tethers, one for the 4 wheel metal sled that moves it and
               | a thicker one for the camera and lights on the "head"
               | part. The crew used the controls to move the head around
               | until it was looking at my kids and they could see
               | themselves on the second screen (one screen faced out the
               | door.) The kids thought it was cool:
               | https://i.imgur.com/2ltz8bj.png
               | 
               | Story about a fatal explosion caused by horizontal
               | directional drilling piercing a gas main:
               | 
               | https://www.cnn.com/2013/03/13/us/missouri-gas-
               | explosion/ind...
               | 
               | I can't find any conference papers but the industry term
               | to google is "crossbore" and this blog post has some
               | pictures of gas service laterals piercing sewers:
               | 
               | https://blog.envirosight.com/sewer-school-preventing-
               | cross-b...
               | 
               | ESRI page on using GIS to identify the potential
               | crossbores and assign them 90 day inspection windows to
               | try to detect it before the sewer backs up:
               | 
               | https://community.esri.com/t5/gas-and-pipeline-
               | blog/arcgis-f...
        
               | therealcamino wrote:
               | Here's the thing, there's never going to be convincing
               | evidence for you to decide that it wasn't what your hunch
               | said it was. That's the nature of suspicion.
               | 
               | You could Google "national plant services van" on image
               | search and find similar vans, and that the company is
               | owned by is the Carylon Corporation, with revenue of
               | $300m/year -- but that couldn't convince you that a
               | government agency (it wouldn't be the NSA unless they're
               | violating the law) didn't borrow it or copy it.
               | 
               | You could read that their services include "Digital CCTV
               | inspection. Laser profiling. Sonar pipeline inspection."
               | but that couldn't convince you that the monitor+joystick
               | and other equipment is needed for sewer inspection,
               | because you already believe it is for surveillance. (The
               | irony being that the kind of mass surveillance Mark Klein
               | exposed, or Snowden exposed, means there's absolutely no
               | need to park a truck outside someone's house. You can
               | track who they're communicating with already, and you can
               | subvert their own devices to listen in, instead of
               | parking a van out front for their neighbors to notice.)
               | 
               | You could look at who has the contract to inspect sewers
               | in your town -- it's public record. But you could still
               | choose to believe that the federal government did the
               | same check, and went out and got an identical truck so as
               | to be less suspicious (although in this thread half the
               | people are saying "that's too clean/fancy/technological
               | to be a sewer inspection van!" so if they did it would
               | have backfired.)
               | 
               | Was he under surveillance? Who knows. Does this truck
               | prove anything either way? No. Everybody is going to
               | leave this thread with whatever hunch they came in with.
        
             | 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
             | I am willing to believe it was innocuous. The guy already
             | spilled the beans and has been blackballed from government
             | access. Does he require clandestine surveillance any more?
             | Easy enough to get "national security" reasons why all of
             | his devices need to be tapped. More intimidating to have
             | visible GMen watching him for life.
        
               | somenameforme wrote:
               | For some reason this reminded me of Ernest Hemingway. In
               | the later parts of his life, he began to believe he was
               | being followed and tracked by the FBI, and these
               | delusions eventually gave way to various other issues. Or
               | perhaps it could be the other way around, but there is a
               | catch here.
               | 
               | In either case this led to him being somewhat brutally
               | treated with electroconvulsive therapy, repeatedly, to
               | little effect beyond damaging his mind. A quote from on
               | that was, "What is the sense of ruining my head and
               | erasing my memory, which is my capital, and putting me
               | out of business? It was a brilliant cure, but we lost the
               | patient." He would kill himself not long thereafter.
               | 
               | The interesting thing is that the FBI _was_ following and
               | tracking him, and simply stayed silent as this all played
               | out.
        
           | mikeyouse wrote:
           | Interestingly, it seems the 'real' sewer cleaning company
           | uses a bunch of tech to do their inspections, etc.:
           | 
           | https://specializedmaintenance.com/services/digital-tv-
           | inspe...
           | 
           | (Which would make it an excellent van for the 3-letter spooks
           | to copy, so not really persuasive either way)
        
             | cookiengineer wrote:
             | I wanted to point out that when visiting those sites from
             | Germany (nationalplant.com and the
             | specializedmaintenance.com website) it shows the same
             | unavailable geoblocked message. I wouldn't have recognized
             | it but after opening both links in new tabs on my phone I
             | thought I forgot to open one of the links in this thread
             | and I double-checked it.
             | 
             | Are those fake companies both hosted on wordfence or
             | something? What are the odds, huh?
        
               | johnisgood wrote:
               | Upon clicking the link above, I get:
               | 
               | Your access to this site has been limited by the site
               | owner
               | 
               | Your access to this service has been limited. (HTTP
               | response code 503)
        
             | adastra22 wrote:
             | That's just a display monitor and a small computer.
             | Grandpaarent's photo had two half racks of data center
             | grade AV equipment.
        
           | rkagerer wrote:
           | Conversely, makes me think my IT truck with all its network
           | cables and racks, needs a toilet.
        
         | nabakin wrote:
         | I don't think I've ever seen the inside of an actual undercover
         | van before. Crazy picture. Do we know anything else about them?
        
           | lukan wrote:
           | I would not jump to conclusions so soon.
           | 
           | A) I would question why they would do the effort of still
           | doing surveillance on him
           | 
           | B) if they do, they are usually so smart to keep the door
           | closed
           | 
           | C) like others have mentioned, sewer cleaning comes with a
           | lot of tech (I assume remote controlled machines)
        
             | adastra22 wrote:
             | One thing for certain: that is absolutely NOT a sewer
             | inspection van. Seriously, you ever worked trades? It is
             | way too clean on the interior and not fitted for working
             | dirty jobs, to say nothing of the visible surveillance
             | workstation.
        
               | Velofellow wrote:
               | yes, and that looks pretty much just like some of the
               | vans I've been in the back of for CCTV sewer inspections.
        
             | throwaway201606 wrote:
             | I would think that anyone working in a sewer inspection van
             | would keep the door open because it is highly likely that
             | sewer inspection vans smell like, well, sewer.
        
               | geraldwhen wrote:
               | If the van is loaded with equipment, or even if it isn't,
               | theft and robbery are common in most of the US. You can't
               | leave a van door open and not be extremely vigilant.
        
             | serial_dev wrote:
             | While I can honestly believe both (it was a surveillance
             | van vs it was a sewer maintenance company), do you think
             | that the intimidation and surveillance of Snowden or
             | Assange won't last until the end of their lives?
        
           | londons_explore wrote:
           | I feel like a real undercover van would have a policy about
           | not opening the side door during a mission too...
        
         | tptacek wrote:
         | That's almost definitely just a sewer inspection van; I found
         | videos that company has of "multi-sensor pipeline inspections"
         | with the same van, open, with the same equipment visible, and a
         | bunch of people following a bunch of equipment down into a
         | manhole.
        
           | kstrauser wrote:
           | It probably was! But given the batch of circumstances, I
           | think it's at least plausible that it was more than that.
        
             | tptacek wrote:
             | I don't think it's very plausible. The subtext of the photo
             | is "that looks comically unlike what you'd inspect from a
             | sewer inspection van". Well, I can tell you pretty much for
             | sure: thats' what the inside of a sewer inspection van from
             | that company looks like.
             | 
             | It took just a couple minutes (less than 5) to go look this
             | up and find the video, for what it's worth.
             | 
             | Maybe it's an NSA wet team! Wet, because they do sewer
             | inspection work. :)
        
               | bawolff wrote:
               | If we are going down the conspiracy rabbit hole, i assume
               | spies can purchase real sewer vans with the logo of real
               | sewer companies on it.
               | 
               | I agree though that it seems more plausible to just be a
               | real sewer van.
        
               | tptacek wrote:
               | I think if they're buying a fake sewer inspection van
               | they're probably smart enough to find one that doesn't
               | look to people on the Internet like it's a prop out of
               | the movie Enemy of the State.
        
               | tharkun__ wrote:
               | I hope the owner of the company doesn't read this. They
               | probably like their designs! :)
               | 
               | I just went to Google maps to the address written on the
               | van's passenger door and lo and behold, Google did drive
               | down the alley behind and while this is a larger vehicle
               | and not just a van, that's their look (they also have
               | black versions if you look around): https://www.google.co
               | m/maps/@33.7851188,-118.211276,3a,67.3y...
        
               | johnisgood wrote:
               | Is no one cleaning the streets? Damn.
        
           | Bluecobra wrote:
           | As an aside, if you are purchasing an older home make sure
           | you pay for a sewer line inspection. I had no idea this was a
           | thing until a few years later when I had to replace mine and
           | it cost ~$25,000.
        
             | tptacek wrote:
             | We had ours done when we moved in a couple years ago and it
             | was a cool snakey camera thing; they only got us out to the
             | service line; past that would have been a lot more
             | elaborate. Also: that video feed? Pretty gross.
             | 
             | As an aside: I think a lot of people here would be
             | surprised at the amount of technology (and surveillance)
             | that goes into setting speed limits and placing stop signs
             | in residential areas.
        
               | mhb wrote:
               | A lot of people might also be surprised how frequently
               | traffic engineers will OK unnecessary and less safe four
               | way stops in order to get the annoying citizen pestering
               | them to just leave them alone.
        
               | WWLink wrote:
               | The neighborhood that I have to drive through to get from
               | where I live to where I work hates that their precious
               | little neighborhood is used as a commuter route by a lot
               | of people, so they stuck stop signs EVERY. SINGLE. BLOCK.
               | 
               | I make sure to come to a complete fucking stop at every
               | one of those signs. Partially because I hate the feeling
               | of rolling through stop signs, but partially out of spite
               | lol.
        
             | edaemon wrote:
             | I also have an older home and we had to repair our sewer
             | line. It was clay pipe which had broken in a few spots and
             | had major root intrusion. Thankfully there's some newer
             | technology that makes it significantly cheaper in the right
             | circumstances -- instead of digging up your street
             | connection and laying in new pipe they can blow an epoxy-
             | soaked liner into your existing pipe, then run a curing
             | light through it. It ended up being less than 40% of the
             | cost of replacement and works just as well.
        
             | genewitch wrote:
             | how far is that sewer line run, 6 miles? they usually just
             | bore it out and put a PVC sleeve inside. This is done with
             | the cast iron sewer lines, because if they're not properly
             | taken care of, they will rust into nothing and then you
             | just have a suggestion of a hole through the dirt to the
             | sewer line.
             | 
             | my lines are 4" PVC, if we somehow clog those, someone call
             | me an ambulance.
        
               | WWLink wrote:
               | The old shitty clay lines are what you find in most
               | rentals in SoCal. Then one day none of your toilets
               | flushes and the landlord says you flush too many wipes
               | down the toilet. You argue and they make you pay for a
               | plumber who's like "yea they all do that DONT USE
               | WIPES!!!!!One!!!" And then finally after getting to know
               | every other plumber in town, one offers to run a camera
               | for free and shows you that the main line is fucking
               | falling apart and that's why it keeps plugging up.
               | 
               | TBH sewer main inspections should be required any time
               | someone wants to rent a house out.
        
               | genewitch wrote:
               | eh, clay, cast iron. I had to dig a few trenches of
               | greasy earth in socal.
        
             | silisili wrote:
             | I'm always amazed by regional differences in pricing.
             | 
             | I had a company(wrongly) tell me I needed a new septic tank
             | and drainfield installed, and quoted me out at 7800.
             | 
             | Which is way, way more work and parts than a sewer line.
        
         | taosx wrote:
         | This is crazy.. you guys are focused on vans and mini stories
         | when all his sacrifice and that of thousand if not more
         | americans was snuffed.
         | 
         | `Congress intervened by passing the FISA Amendments Act which,
         | in part, granted "retroactive immunity" to the
         | telecommunications carriers for their involvement in the NSA
         | spying programs. This massive grant of immunity for past
         | violations of multiple state and federal laws protecting
         | communications privacy was unprecedented.`
        
           | kstrauser wrote:
           | Be the change you want to see. I mentioned the vans and his
           | dogs because Mark wasn't some random picture on the Internet,
           | but the nice guy a couple houses down who talked about the
           | volunteer work he did for harbor seals[0]. He was a real
           | person we liked a lot and I thought others might enjoy
           | hearing about his noisy, overprotective golden retrievers.
           | 
           | But yes, he was also a personal hero to me before I met him
           | in real life, and we should absolutely still be talking about
           | the things he uncovered and what happened to them afterward.
           | Please do tell those stories, too.
           | 
           | [0]https://goldengatebirdalliance.org/blog-posts/wild-ly-
           | succes...
        
             | jll29 wrote:
             | Where are today's technicians that are prostituting
             | themselves for the communications companies around the
             | world that this can still be happening?
             | 
             | Man up and remove those splitters, cables, show us the
             | drawings, reports and PPT slides!
             | 
             | R.I.P. Mark
        
               | lukan wrote:
               | I guess not too many want to have to hide in russia.
        
               | firen777 wrote:
               | Judging from the way things are going, what's the
               | difference?
        
           | ziddoap wrote:
           | Mark Klein was not some mythical hero, but a _real person_
           | who did heroic things. It 's nice to be reminded of that. If
           | anything, I find it inspiring.
        
             | HexPhantom wrote:
             | That kind of courage is rare, and it makes his story even
             | more powerful. Real people can make a difference
        
             | leotravis10 wrote:
             | Indeed, something that we sadly lack today. We need people
             | like Mark more than ever, not less.
        
           | shadowgovt wrote:
           | You have to remember that half, possibly more than half, of
           | the country is more than okay with what the NSA was doing and
           | is doing.
           | 
           | It's not at all surprising that Congress would indemnify
           | people for, more or less, doing what Congress authorized them
           | to do. If we don't like it, we could consider, maybe not
           | voting the same people into that Congress. Over. And over.
           | And over. And over. And over. And over.
           | 
           | A full 24 Senators and 63 Representatives have held their
           | seats for _over 36 years_. That 's not what you'd expect of a
           | citizenship that was actually upset about being spied upon by
           | their government.
        
             | llmthrow103 wrote:
             | It's obviously not a problem of electing the wrong people.
             | There are enough checks and balances in the system to
             | ensure that there is no change forthcoming.
        
               | shadowgovt wrote:
               | The system is, indeed, set up to minimize revolutionary
               | churn. The tilt that we're seeing right now towards
               | fascism and white nationalism has been some 40 years in
               | the making. It takes a lot of organization to tilt the
               | whole thing.
               | 
               | This is a feature, not a bug. The system is architected,
               | when something is controversial, default to no motion.
        
             | timewizard wrote:
             | > You have to remember that half, possibly more than half,
             | of the country is more than okay with what the NSA was
             | doing and is doing.
             | 
             | I doubt this. I'd also be interested to see if those people
             | actually know, on any real level, what the NSA was actually
             | doing.
             | 
             | > If we don't like it, we could consider, maybe not voting
             | the same people into that Congress. Over. And over. And
             | over. And over. And over. And over.
             | 
             | They so reliably do the opposite of what people want and
             | yet continue to win. You don't find this at all odd and you
             | put it down to lack of consideration on the part of the
             | electorate.
             | 
             | > That's not what you'd expect of a citizenship that was
             | actually upset about being spied upon by their government.
             | 
             | The joys of being old enough to remember the Church
             | Committee, The House Select Committee on Assassinations,
             | The JFK Records Review Board. PEOPLE ARE CLEARLY NOT OKAY
             | WITH THIS. Yet those who carry water for the deep state are
             | unimpeded by this. Please see this, or at least, don't
             | repeat simple falsehoods about the electorate.
             | 
             | It's like coming across a drowning man and laughing in his
             | face about his predicament.
        
               | sethaurus wrote:
               | Forgive me for being obtuse, but what exactly are you
               | claiming here? Are election results being faked?
        
               | shadowgovt wrote:
               | They aren't. Fewer than 3/4 of eligible voters voted in
               | 2020. In general, somewhere around 10% to a third of
               | eligible voters actually vote in primaries, which are the
               | elections that actually have the most impact on office
               | holding.
               | 
               | Nobody needs to fake election results when Americans just
               | don't show up to vote. It's a disquietingly under-
               | informed and apathetic electorate.
        
               | timewizard wrote:
               | > Fewer than 3/4 of eligible voters voted in 2020.
               | 
               | This is not completely true[0]. I'd also give the advice
               | that you shouldn't take a "nationwide" average to mean
               | much of anything. The wikipedia article shows wide
               | variation across the states which is true for almost any
               | statistic you can think of.
               | 
               | > actually vote in primaries
               | 
               | Bernie voters might give you a hint as to why. I guess
               | this is the problem Mayor Pete's "shadow" app was meant
               | to solve. It honestly seems like parties don't genuinely
               | like people voting in primaries. The person who's "turn"
               | it is might lose.
               | 
               | > elections that actually have the most impact
               | 
               | Unfortunately we're talking about the legislature here
               | because they write the laws in question and are the
               | proper party to wage your grievances against. Have you
               | ever looked into how competitive those primaries actually
               | are? Anyways this is why I vote for Greens and
               | Libertarians. Then they might stand a chance of cracking
               | 5% and getting recognized fully by the Federal Election
               | Commission.
               | 
               | > Americans just don't show up to vote.
               | 
               | All evidence to the contrary. What they don't do is vote
               | in senate elections. There districts with as low as 25%
               | voter turn out. Which means you only need 12% of the
               | eligible population to turn out for you to secure your
               | seat. So you're right. No need to cheat. Just be
               | arbitrary and capricious to the point that busy and
               | worried people no longer feel that using their time in
               | the voting booth can actually change something.
               | 
               | > It's a disquietingly under-informed and apathetic
               | electorate.
               | 
               | As always, back to where this conversation starts, who
               | should bear the responsibility for this? I don't think
               | blaming the electorate itself brings you anywhere other
               | than helping to chase people further away from an
               | important civil institution.
               | 
               | [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_turnout_in_Unite
               | d_States...
        
               | shadowgovt wrote:
               | > who should bear the responsibility
               | 
               | Unfortunately, in a representative democracy, the people.
               | It's right there in the Constitution, first three words.
        
               | timewizard wrote:
               | Yea, but I'm not a signatory to the constitution, the
               | /states/ are. Which is why the document immediately tells
               | you it is to "form a more perfect union." The union isn't
               | between you and I nor does it grant either of us law
               | enforcement powers.
               | 
               | Then _immediately_ after you get Section 1: "All
               | legislative powers herin granted shall be vested in a
               | congress of the United States." Which, by the way, prior
               | to the 17th amendment, the Senate was selected directly
               | by the states. Then again immediately after that you get
               | a set of limitations as to who can be admitted to this
               | congress. You'll also note that as citizens we have
               | absolutely no voice in the operation of this congress,
               | the selection of it's bills, nor in the voting on them.
               | 
               | No, in a representative /republican/ democracy, it's the
               | representatives that are first and foremost responsible.
               | The most I can do is offer my input on who those people
               | should be every 2 years, so I certainly bear some, but
               | it's inane to suggest that the current outcome is the
               | fault of the electorate. In particular when billions of
               | dollars are spent every year on campaigns and
               | advertising.
               | 
               | Your idea is austere and unhelpful to a broken and
               | corrupted system. I'd like to develop a notion of
               | jurisprudence that helps the people out of their
               | predicament, not points the finger blamefully at them.
        
               | shadowgovt wrote:
               | You are right that Congress are the immediate legislative
               | agents, but the Congressional responsibility is back-
               | stopped by the people, because ultimately (with the
               | exception of impeachment and removal from office, which
               | is asking the legislature to police itself) only the
               | people can decide to stop supporting them. And you're
               | right about the 17th Amendment, but that's in the past;
               | modern American voters have more power to choose their
               | representatives than they have in most of American
               | history, and they do not exercise it.
               | 
               | I don't know who else's fault it can be _but_ the
               | electorate when they saw how the current President
               | operates and re-elected him. To say nothing of re-
               | electing the same Congress over and over despite that
               | body having a sub-30% approval rating.
               | 
               | ... and if the people don 't hold the responsibility,
               | what would you recommend the people do? I'm not sure what
               | "a notion of jurisprudence" means in this context: are
               | you suggesting replacing he power-at-a-distance of an
               | unpopular legislature with rule by nine _unelected_
               | _life-appointed_ officials and their underlings?
        
               | mulmen wrote:
               | > It's a disquietingly under-informed and apathetic
               | electorate.
               | 
               | The United States has elevated voter suppression to an
               | art form. Last minute polling relocations, inadequate
               | polling locations, unreasonable ID requirements,
               | unreasonable registration requirements, "accidental"
               | voter roll purges. It's not easy to vote here. And it's
               | especially hard if you are in a group the incumbents
               | don't like.
               | 
               | See
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Act_of_1965.
               | 
               | If those in power cared about our opinions it would be a
               | national holiday and we'd vote by mail.
        
           | georgeplusplus wrote:
           | So glad you pointed this out. people are numb to these sort
           | of news now a days.
           | 
           | Reminds me of George Carlins words, " It's never gonna get
           | any better. Don't look for it. Be happy with what you got."
        
           | HexPhantom wrote:
           | He risked everything, and in the end, the system closed ranks
           | to protect itself. Retroactive immunity was basically a way
           | of saying - "Yep, it was illegal, but it doesn't matter."
        
         | orblivion wrote:
         | Flowers By Irene
        
         | themcaffee wrote:
         | That certainly is just a Sewer TV inspection van! I have a hand
         | in writing some of the software that is run on these and
         | processes the videos that come out of them. They all have rack
         | mounted PCs and a monitor with a joystick to control the
         | crawler that goes in the pipe.
        
           | tptacek wrote:
           | Gotta love this site.
        
             | burnished wrote:
             | Makes for a treasure trove of impromptu QA's in the
             | comments
        
               | AceJohnny2 wrote:
               | "Did you win the Putnam?"
               | 
               | Sorry u/sanj & hat-tip to u/cperciva ;)
        
           | ryanisnan wrote:
           | I mean, if a sufficiently capable entity is interested in
           | snooping on an individual like this, mimicking a sewer tv
           | inspection van is a trivial endeavour. You don't know at all
           | what that van was doing.
        
             | tptacek wrote:
             | Yes we do. It was a sewer inspection van. If it was the
             | NSA, their van wouldn't look so goofy that people took one
             | look at the photo and assumed it _had to be_ an NSA van,
             | which is what happened here. This is a bad movie plot
             | trope: the bad guys can 't simultaneously be omniscient and
             | so dumb they're trivially outed like this, just like the
             | real supervillain isn't going to monologue while you free
             | yourself from the chains lowering you into the shark tank.
        
               | ryanisnan wrote:
               | It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble.
               | It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
        
               | tptacek wrote:
               | Can I interest you in some fresh alien urine? Still
               | plenty saturated with Zephyron. I'll give you Dale
               | Gribble's price! :)
        
               | ziddoap wrote:
               | I think it was a sewer inspection van.
               | 
               | Having said that, reading comments like this, I sometimes
               | think it would actually be great cover. Because you have
               | respected people, like yourself, unequivocally stating
               | that it couldn't possibly be an NSA van.
               | 
               | But, to say it again, I agree that I don't think the NSA
               | would need to do this. My above line of reasoning
               | certainly doesn't hold too much water under serious
               | scrutiny.
        
               | tptacek wrote:
               | A significant multiplier of my certainty here comes from
               | the fact that I was responding to a thread full of people
               | who seemed certain that no sewer inspection van could
               | look like that, which to me says "this van is not
               | inconspicuous", which defeats the whole purpose of having
               | a cover-story van.
               | 
               | You can second-guess that, but I think past this point,
               | we're reenacting the duel between Vizzini and Westley.
        
               | t-3 wrote:
               | From personal experience with police investigations...
               | they aren't really all that inconspicuous when they come
               | aspying. The van with tints several shades darker than
               | the legal limit that sits outside and the trucks with
               | dash-mount computers and racks of equipment visible
               | through the windshield shadowing your every move aren't
               | exactly hard to see if you're paying attention. When
               | they've got telescopic lenses watching from an adjacent
               | building, you can also see those with the naked eye if
               | you look closely. Hopefully national spy agencies are
               | better at it than small town drug task forces, but...
        
               | Lerc wrote:
               | That's an odd take. There are numerous examples of people
               | prosaicly defeating the purpose of something that has
               | taken considerable resources to establish.
               | 
               | It's like the spies working in embassies that were easily
               | detectable despite an elaborate cover because they used
               | the car that the previous spy left behind when they went
               | home.
        
               | dandelany wrote:
               | Perhaps they are optimizing for having plausible
               | deniability/a fully fleshed out backstory in case they
               | are questioned by eg. local cops or a security guard,
               | moreso than inconspicuousness to a random passerby who is
               | unlikely to pose any danger with their idle theorizing
        
               | tptacek wrote:
               | Or, you know, they're inspecting the sewers.
        
               | juliusdavies wrote:
               | I think NSA has hacked the van (without the van operators
               | realizing) and so it's both a sewer inspection van and an
               | NSA surveillance van at the same time.
        
               | d0mine wrote:
               | There is no hack. The system sends data to NSA by design.
        
               | saghm wrote:
               | > You can second-guess that, but I think past this point,
               | we're reenacting the duel between Vizzini and Westley
               | 
               | So I guess the reveal is that it _is_ a real sewer
               | inspection van, but the NSA has legitimately been
               | inspecting sewers for years to innoculate themselves from
               | suspicion?
               | 
               | I guess they must be down there looking for rodents of
               | unusual size.
        
               | Paracompact wrote:
               | I see it like this:
               | 
               | You can either disguise your operation as a goofy sewer
               | inspection van and hope you trick every single person who
               | notices it into second-guessing themselves along the
               | lines of "surely the FBI would be more low-key than
               | that..."
               | 
               | Or you can just be low-key in the first place, end of
               | story. I assume the tech in the modern day (as compared
               | to, like, the 80s when this trope was born) is advanced
               | enough to facilitate this option.
        
               | autoexec wrote:
               | I think I'd rather assume that I couldn't successfully
               | pull off low key 100% of the time while actively
               | monitoring someone from the street in front of their
               | house, so instead I'd make sure that while 99% of the
               | people will see a sewer inspection van and think nothing
               | of it, the 1% who catches a look inside of the van and
               | thinks it's suspicious will easily find a perfectly
               | reasonable explanation for what they think they saw.
        
               | hox wrote:
               | That, and it would be an FBI van, not an NSA van. But the
               | point holds.
        
               | TheSpiceIsLife wrote:
               | Sometime there's vehicle from at least three businesses
               | and two government agencies gathered round an
               | inconspicuous looking civil infrastructure element, and I
               | have to wonder who spying on who. And how much that's
               | costing.
        
               | foobarian wrote:
               | I mean, why not both? If I was a shadowy agency I would
               | start an actual legit sewer inspection company that does
               | real sewer inspections. And then just collect and share a
               | little extra data as needed. Nobody would be the wiser!
        
               | waterlu wrote:
               | There's an HVAC company like this also, I'll bet.
               | 
               | Corporate ventilation. A wonderful thing. Everyone needs
               | it. No one suspects it.
               | 
               | Or maybe it's the aquarium guy.
               | 
               | No, those are the guys making meth.
               | 
               | Gotta love paranoia.
        
               | chelmzy wrote:
               | Crypto AG confirmed this sort of thing to be possible.
        
               | johnisgood wrote:
               | Gotta be paranoid. :D
        
               | eitland wrote:
               | > There's an HVAC company like this also, I'll bet.
               | 
               | IIRC a hacked HVAC vendor was how credit card skimming
               | software was infiltrated into Target and credit card data
               | was exfiltrated a decade or so ago.
               | 
               | Edit, source: https://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/02/target-
               | hackers-broke-in-...
        
               | speckx wrote:
               | > Or maybe it's the aquarium guy.
               | 
               | Shhhhh!
        
               | lurk2 wrote:
               | > the bad guys can't simultaneously be omniscient and so
               | dumb they're trivially outed like this
               | 
               | This is a false dichotomy. Federal agencies prove
               | themselves to be fallible (even incompetent) all the
               | time, they just have far more resources available to make
               | up for their mistakes.
        
               | tptacek wrote:
               | I mean, the real argument here is between "something
               | interesting" and "something boring", and it's message
               | board so "boring" is heavily disfavored. But, yeah, it's
               | a sewer inspection van.
        
               | lurk2 wrote:
               | My comment did not express any opinion as to whether this
               | was or was not a surveillance van, and this has no
               | bearing on the proposed alternatives being a false
               | dichotomy.
        
               | freedomben wrote:
               | With GP's clarification, it's still shaped like a false
               | dichotomy but I don't think it's one in spirit. It sounds
               | more like reductio ad absurdum to me, with a sprinkling
               | of hyperbole for effect.
        
               | kortilla wrote:
               | Unmarked vans drive around all of the time and nobody
               | bats an eye at them. There is no reason to even bother
               | with a big elaborate company name that anyone could
               | google and do further background checks on
        
               | seanw444 wrote:
               | Unmarked vans _drive around_ all the time. They don 't
               | typically park out front of a whistleblower's house.
               | There is more scrutiny there than driving down any random
               | street. Therefore, a more sufficient cover would be
               | required.
        
               | godshatter wrote:
               | An unmarked white van (without windows) parked a house or
               | two down the street hacking your wifi might not be that
               | noticeable. One across the street with a radio dish
               | spinning around and a parabolic mic sticking out the
               | window and a few people entering and exiting it with
               | donuts and coffee multiple times probably would be.
        
               | jghn wrote:
               | In Russia people "fall out the window" all the time. It
               | is intentional. We need to adjust.
        
               | jorvi wrote:
               | Legacy of Ashes is a great book about the CIA on this, on
               | how they basically stumbled into some of their biggest
               | accomplishments.
        
               | rsoto2 wrote:
               | Wouldn't it be the perfect plot to LOOK like you are a
               | goofy badly run agency to hide the reality?
        
               | highwaylights wrote:
               | Now I'm starting to wonder if that guy habitually leaves
               | the door open because he got sick of people winking at
               | him with a wry smile every time he had to go to a job.
        
               | Kinrany wrote:
               | Reminds me of the joke where students prove by induction
               | that the teacher is not actually planning a surprise
               | test, and are surprised when there's a test the next day
        
               | sim7c00 wrote:
               | haha well dont assume spies are some godmode infallable
               | people. spies also are humans and can have varying
               | degrees of freedom to express their stupidity in their
               | work..
               | 
               | in our country some spies got caught drivin around with
               | wifi pineapple in plain sight circling govt and ngo
               | sites.
               | 
               | in my mind thats next level dumb stuff, but maybe they
               | arent really hackers and think its not conspicuous, or
               | even the opposite, they know exactly what it is but think
               | 'oh normal people wont stop to think about this, they
               | dont recognise such equipment'.
               | 
               | if you werent there, didnt know the guys in the van etc.
               | etc. - its all just guesswork.
               | 
               | even public record of a sewer inspection right then and
               | there at that time (which i kinda doubt exists) wouldnt
               | confirm or deny what that van was really doing there.
               | 
               | that being said, i would _assume_ its a sewer inspection
               | van. but thats an assumption, not a known fact.
        
               | dosman33 wrote:
               | Regardless of what the real story is on this van, lookup
               | the Bernie S. case if you want an easy case with proof of
               | government surveillance incompetence. Under cover Secret
               | Service agents were photographed surveilling a 2600
               | meeting in a mall court, then got embarrassed when the
               | 2600 guys posted flyers with their photographs around.
               | Most criminals are dumb which is a good thing as I like
               | the bad guys getting caught, but unfortunately the smart
               | ones graduate to become politicians.
        
             | autoexec wrote:
             | > mimicking a sewer tv inspection van is a trivial
             | endeavour.
             | 
             | Why bother mimicking a sewer inspection van when you can
             | just buy or commandeer an actual sewer inspection van?
        
             | potato3732842 wrote:
             | You're thinking like a normal person. You need to think
             | like an institution that has the entire weight of
             | government behind them and who nobody wants to be on the
             | wrong side of.
             | 
             | They either find someone who has suitable vans they can
             | threaten with prosecution. That person then agrees to be an
             | "informant" because that's better than losing your life to
             | the feds and then their handler asks to borrow a van. They
             | like this because no money needs to get spent specifically
             | on it so it doesn't tend to get scrutinized. If they're
             | going full above the table they register a business with
             | the state complete with valid HVAC license or whatever and
             | then rent a van from some company the FBI owns/runs that
             | rents white vans and have some decals printed up. (For
             | those inclined to do further reading, the OSINT hobbyists
             | have done a lot to expose this workflow as it relates to
             | aircraft so probably start there.)
        
           | dgrin91 wrote:
           | I can't tell if this is honest or sarcasm
        
             | highwaylights wrote:
             | Same. I can totally buy the joystick and the robot as I've
             | seen this done in my area, but the rack mounted PCs and the
             | headphones makes it seem awfully like he's telling Tom
             | Cruise which wire to cut.
        
           | frugalmail wrote:
           | I'm really curious then.
           | 
           | Why's the visible person holding the headphones tighter
           | against his ear? What kind of sounds need to be processed by
           | a human for sewer inspection?
           | 
           | To their benefit, if it was sus, they would have kept the
           | door shut.
        
             | themcaffee wrote:
             | Generally these are done in coordination with a sewer
             | cleaning truck at the next manhole in the pipe. Very common
             | for them to stay on the phone with each other
        
               | frugalmail wrote:
               | That makes sense that they would use higher quality
               | headphones on a radio to collaborate. Thanks for the
               | insight!
        
             | kortilla wrote:
             | > Why's the visible person holding the headphones tighter
             | against his ear?
             | 
             | "Hey boss, we just finished up the job. Everything is good
             | here, what site do you want us to go to next?"
             | 
             |  _hangs up phone_
        
             | Kinrany wrote:
             | Holding the headphones tighter is never suspicious
        
           | waste_monk wrote:
           | Do you work for the National Sewerage Agency? :D
        
             | acomjean wrote:
             | Flowers By Irene.
             | 
             | https://frinkiac.com/caption/S03E04/719740
        
             | sim7c00 wrote:
             | it would be too funny if that was a re sewage company.
             | black vans with small print n.s.a. on it haha xD
        
               | MisterTea wrote:
               | door bell rings .... five men in dark suits standing
               | outside ... hair on the back of my neck stands on end. I
               | open the door, hands shaking with that burning feeling in
               | my guts "Yea, how can I help you gentlemen" The tallest
               | one, intimidating, gruff, ex marine perhaps, shoves a
               | badge in my face: "N S A, National Sewer Agency" they
               | push me aside and push inside my hosue .. a violation but
               | what do I say?!? They look around ... circling me like a
               | pack of wolves .. then, another pulls a bag from under
               | his arm and produces a plastic jar in a biohazard bag...
               | looks like ice cream and garbage inside, then grufly
               | states "Sir, do you recognize these napkins?" "napkins?"
               | I squeak out ... it hit me.... FUCK! .... the other night
               | .... I was drunk, out of TP, desperate... paper towels
               | staring me in the face - dare I? It was a moment of
               | weakness, desperation and drunkeness rolled into one ...
               | and here I am, staring the consequences in the face....
               | "Sir, your going to have to come with us" And no one ever
               | heard from me again. Please take heed, only flush TP!
        
               | AStonesThrow wrote:
               | This is fairly close to reality, if you think about it
               | 
               | Medicaid here in Arizona is called "AHCCCS" which is
               | pronounced "access" so imagine the fun homophonic
               | confusion in a conversation about "do you have access?"
               | "well I got access but then I lost it..."
               | 
               | Many conservative Christians have termed homosexuality as
               | "Same-Sex Attraction" or SSA, so they often speak of
               | "suffering from SSA" or being afflicted with it. When I
               | applied to the Social Security Administration for
               | disability, I couldn't help but notice, and their
               | disability program is called "SSDI" which has nothing to
               | do with Reagan's "Star Wars/Strategic Defense Initiative"
               | 
               | Nor do my dealings with the F.A.A. in the past several
               | years have anything to do with a pilot's license or
               | flight clearances; the Family Assistance Administration
               | here doles out funds for food stamps ("SNAP", another
               | good homophone, lets you purchase plenty of alphabet soup
               | for the fam) and other basic needs.
               | 
               | https://xkcd.com/932/
               | 
               | Fact: The "Obamaphone" program didn't begin or end with
               | President Obama. Discuss!
        
           | jancsika wrote:
           | > That certainly is just a Sewer TV inspection van!
           | 
           | Hee hee, I can hear the NSA now: "Dammit, who parked a sewer
           | inspection van in the middle of our massive surveillance
           | network?!?"
           | 
           | Back on the topic of indiscriminate wide-net surveillance
           | (which I think was also the focus of the AT&T whistleblower),
           | I quote Bruce Schneier on the Snowden leaks:
           | 
           | "I started this talk by naming three different programs that
           | collect Google user data. Those programs work under different
           | technical capabilities, different corporate alliances, and
           | different legal authorities. You should expect the same thing
           | to be true for cell phone data, for internet data, for
           | everything else. When you have the budget of the NSA and
           | you're given the choice, 'Should you do it this way or that
           | way?' The correct answer is: both."
           | 
           | 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iMFPMqboZc
        
           | belter wrote:
           | https://youtu.be/HQY93oaaN6k
        
         | kens wrote:
         | I found a video with an identical National Plant Services sewer
         | inspection van, inspecting a large-diameter sewer line:
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVXceJ3Yxnw (The photo shows
         | van TV-230 while the video shows van TV-217, so they are
         | different instances of the van.)
        
           | emmelaich wrote:
           | I went to the Carylon website to find a list of their
           | companies and got
           | 
           | > _Block Reason: Access from your area has been temporarily
           | limited for security reasons._
           | 
           | My area is Australia.
           | 
           | https://caryloncorp.com/find-a-company/
        
             | kube-system wrote:
             | It's not uncommon for site firewalls to be configured this
             | way for business that do not do work internationally.
        
               | dkga wrote:
               | Yes, but calling it ,,security" is a bit of a stretch...
        
               | sim7c00 wrote:
               | it is security... block most of the world is also block
               | most attacks to your infra...
        
               | kube-system wrote:
               | It's just one slice in the swiss cheese model.
        
           | rkagerer wrote:
           | Please obtain one of each, and do a teardown to confirm ;-)
        
         | brk wrote:
         | That is a van built by Ares (I might have the spelling slightly
         | wrong).
         | 
         | Funny enough I once bought a used one, stripped the sewer
         | inspection equipment out, kept the Oman diesel generator and
         | made it into an actual surveillance van.
         | 
         | The inspection robots that came with it were cool. I sold them
         | and the other equipment I pulled out for a good chunk of cash.
        
         | nzeid wrote:
         | This whole sewer inspection thing must be particularly
         | hilarious to the people performing the inspection. "Yo dude,
         | we're officially spies! _hi5_ "
        
         | southernplaces7 wrote:
         | "sewer cleaning van"... This might be apt. The feds and their
         | many tactics..... Flowers By Irene
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_HSNMLfhFM
        
         | HexPhantom wrote:
         | That must have been surreal.. knowing him first as just a
         | neighbor, then realizing the weight of what he did
        
       | toomuchtodo wrote:
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Klein
       | 
       | https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/homefront/interview...
       | 
       | https://www.eff.org/document/public-unredacted-klein-declara...
       | 
       | https://medium.com/@illicitpopsicle/mark-klein-the-nsa-whist... |
       | https://archive.today/LlZSs
       | 
       | https://medium.com/@chelsealynnqueen94/mark-klein-whistleblo... |
       | https://archive.today/7RlfJ
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44edsh6_LUc
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqeMkv5FHfU
       | 
       | (Senator Chris Dodd interviewed Mark, but the video is currently
       | private unfortunately: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9aeKF-
       | rOGA)
        
       | roenxi wrote:
       | The tolerance for the US mass spying efforts remains weird. It
       | undermines the credibility of many US politicians around Trump -
       | yes the US public appears to be set to vote in Hitler-equivalents
       | for the forseeable future. No, dismantling the insane spying
       | apparatus is not a major agenda point.
       | 
       | Marry those two ideas together.
        
         | bloomingkales wrote:
         | It's pretty much a forgone conclusion since they are putting AI
         | into every intersection. How are you going to argue against the
         | fact that government AI needs your data for training?
        
         | psadauskas wrote:
         | Its fine, as long as they're spying on the radical woke
         | leftists. They'd never spy on one of the good guys like me! /s
        
       | dang wrote:
       | Related. There were probably other relevant threads over the
       | years--can anyone find some?
       | 
       |  _Room 641A_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41507188 -
       | Sept 2024 (5 comments)
       | 
       |  _The secrets of Room 641A (2008)_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38305501 - Nov 2023 (4
       | comments)
       | 
       |  _Room 641A_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32984515 -
       | Sept 2022 (2 comments)
       | 
       |  _Room 641A_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23350120 -
       | May 2020 (70 comments)
       | 
       |  _Room 641A_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12515724 -
       | Sept 2016 (75 comments)
       | 
       |  _Room 641A_ - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5847166 -
       | June 2013 (44 comments)
        
         | samstave wrote:
         | I _knew_ I would be in that 2013 thread...
         | 
         | I mistook the building, but I do remember details that Twitter
         | had a direct fiber connection to that room...
         | 
         | Also, we have a LOT of evidence of prior NSA backdoors and
         | interceptions...
         | 
         | in 1998 I had to hire a CSIE (cisco expert) (like a 3 digit
         | uuid) to help me recover a router password from infra I
         | inherited... and during the password reset procedure on a 3640
         | - he was telling me how "the NSA requires Cisco to put in back
         | doors into all the routers)
         | 
         | ((The passwd BTW was Feet4Monkey))
         | 
         | --
         | 
         | Then recall Carnivore? (and its predecessor eschelon - and a
         | whole bunch of reveals) -- what was interesting was that the
         | only company to refuse to install Carnivor was Earthlink.net
         | (ISP) -- and the reason they stated they wouldnt put in
         | Carnivore, was because they stated they already had their user
         | tracking system (They were owned by the Mormon Church) ((and
         | for some reason Whoopi Goldberg was one of their large notable
         | investors))
         | 
         | And recall how they stated that the NSA specifically likes to
         | hire Mormons?
         | 
         | And recall North First Street DC that was purchased by Cerberus
         | Group which was the ~Bush-Cabal hedgie, and the reason they
         | bought it because it housed MAE WEST and they wanted to inject
         | NBAR/Surveilling into it -- once they completed that, they sold
         | it off again (To one of their subs, IIRC)
         | 
         | I hate that I am getting old and I start to forget a lot of the
         | malfeasance I have witnessed in my ~30+ years in SV.
        
         | rogerallen wrote:
         | My top post ever on reddit:
         | 
         | https://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/6dwg/wired_unve...
        
           | rogerallen wrote:
           | and only 1 link still works. 19 years is a long time to the
           | internet.
        
             | schiffern wrote:
             | Wayback Machine has the rest (for as long as it lasts).
             | 
             | OP https://web.archive.org/web/20060615052051/https://www.w
             | ired...
             | 
             | https://web.archive.org/web/20051219151049/http://www.cnn.c
             | o...
             | 
             | https://web.archive.org/web/20000302002228/https://www.wire
             | d...
             | 
             | https://web.archive.org/web/20060904193022/http://blog.wire
             | d...
             | 
             | Remember to donate, folks.
        
           | samstave wrote:
           | Thats awesome.
           | 
           | See my post below -- I have been tracking Eschelon since the
           | early 90s...
           | 
           | Guess what NSA router backdoors have become (mobile phones
           | with socialifelog media apps on them)
           | 
           | ---
           | 
           | And like @tptacek said
           | 
           | >> _If it was the NSA, their van wouldn 't look so goofy that
           | people took one look at the photo and assumed it had to be an
           | NSA van, which is what happened here. This is a bad movie
           | plot trope: the bad guys can't simultaneously be omniscient
           | and so dumb they're trivially outed like this, just like the
           | real supervillain isn't going to monologue while you free
           | yourself from the chains lowering you into the shark tank._
           | 
           | ---
           | 
           | Love that but, I do think that both is true...
           | 
           | Look incompetent so they don't think you're competent
           | (Stuxnet/DUQU)
        
             | Scoundreller wrote:
             | The Onion was on this a looong time ago:
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJ380SHZvYU
        
               | samstave wrote:
               | :-) thank you for that. DOPE
        
       | neil_s_anderson wrote:
       | I find it odd how many people automatically assume that whatever
       | the NSA is up to must be undesirable and therefore should be
       | opposed.
       | 
       | I mean, where do you think analysis of plans by terrorists and
       | nation state adversaries to attack our nation and its allies
       | comes from? The raw intelligence data these are based on can only
       | be gathered by surveillance of communications, both targeted and
       | in bulk.
       | 
       | You should all be supporting this, as you benefit from it every
       | day.
        
         | rozap wrote:
         | Yea, it's a good thing that since we live in a democracy we'd
         | never elect anyone with bad intentions.
         | 
         | What a silly take.
        
         | skoopie wrote:
         | We benefit from drug dealers too. They bring extra money into
         | the community and they give rappers something to rap about.
        
         | BobaFloutist wrote:
         | The point is that mass domestic surveillance of American
         | nationals violates common understanding of the law. It makes no
         | sense for the requirements to get a wiretap to be so stringent
         | but the requirements to monitor someone's internet traffic to
         | be nonexistent, just because it's laundered through
         | "intelligence gathering" and you argue it's therefore not "law
         | enforcement."
        
           | neil_s_anderson wrote:
           | The point of bulk data collection is to be able to, in
           | effect, take a wiretap in the past before you knew what you'd
           | need to be wiretapping in the present, by querying the bulk
           | datasets for communications between specific endpoints within
           | specific points in time.
           | 
           | As time travel doesn't exist, this is the next best
           | technology available.
        
             | ziddoap wrote:
             | I think we all know that. We, or I at least, don't agree
             | with it.
        
               | neil_s_anderson wrote:
               | You don't agree with monitoring the communications of
               | adversaries at all, or you don't agree with doing the
               | equivalent for communications made in the recent past?
        
               | ziddoap wrote:
               | I don't agree with mass collection of data of non-
               | guilty/non-suspected citizens for "just in case"
               | situations in the future.
        
               | t-3 wrote:
               | When the country's own citizens are the "adversaries",
               | that's a highly fucked up government and government
               | agency. If the people are the enemy the country is dead.
        
               | akomtu wrote:
               | And the adversaries is the entire nation at this point.
        
             | netsharc wrote:
             | Ah, the East German State Police mentality...
             | 
             | Sadly, governments end up becoming corrupt. In one formerly
             | free nation (or at least it was one that obnoxiously
             | bragged about being one), data about women's periods became
             | weaponized in a witchhunt against abortions.
        
           | lern_too_spel wrote:
           | > The point is that mass domestic surveillance of American
           | nationals violates common understanding of the law.
           | 
           | It also violates the courts' understanding of the law. That's
           | probably why one such program was shut down prior to the
           | Snowden leaks and definitely why the other was shut down
           | after.
        
           | energy123 wrote:
           | If it's illegal then why aren't the courts stopping it? Has
           | there been a court case? What did the ruling say? Details
           | would be useful.
        
         | kstrauser wrote:
         | Think of how safe we'd all be if we were on camera 24/7/365!
         | 
         | Let me put it this way: I don't do anything illegal in my
         | bathroom, but damned if I want someone watching me in there.
         | Everyone has their line they don't want crossed. Klein's - and
         | the EFF's, and mine - is somewhere past the NSA monitoring
         | every single communication in the entire country without a
         | warrant. I have no objection with them monitoring specific
         | suspects with a court order, but I don't want them listening to
         | people who aren't being actively, personally investigated.
        
           | neil_s_anderson wrote:
           | Just because your communications data or metadata exists in
           | some bulk dataset somewhere doesn't mean that it's being
           | actively and personally investigated by anyone.
           | 
           | As with the issuance of a warrant for wiretapping, there
           | would need to be a proportionate and legitmate reason for
           | your communications within a such a dataset to be looked at.
        
             | kstrauser wrote:
             | I do not want my data included in the dataset. "We're not
             | looking at it, pinky swear!" rings hollow.
        
               | neil_s_anderson wrote:
               | Why would an analyst at the NSA be looking at your
               | communications data?
               | 
               | It's a bit like the police getting a search warrant to
               | look around your home. If there's no legitimate reason to
               | do it, like having reasonable suspicion of a crime that
               | requires investigation, then they're not going to.
        
               | ziddoap wrote:
               | This is just a rewording of the "nothing to hide"
               | argument.
               | 
               | And your edit seems to ignore that the analysts are
               | humans. Police get caught abusing their access to data
               | resources for personal gain frequently, why are NSA
               | analysts different?
               | 
               | (Not even touching on the fact that mistakes happen,
               | leaks happen, breaches happen, laws change, political
               | winds change direction)
        
               | t-3 wrote:
               | Maybe they want to look at the naked pics being sent
               | between you and your sexual partners, as has happened
               | many times. Maybe they want to spy on their own sexual
               | partners or prospective partners, which has also happened
               | many times. Maybe they want to blackmail people for their
               | own gain, which has, once again, happened many times.
               | There are innumerable reasons with plenty of precedent
               | for each and every one.
        
               | orthecreedence wrote:
               | > It's a bit like the police getting a search warrant to
               | look around your home. If there's no legitimate reason to
               | do it, like having reasonable suspicion of a crime that
               | requires investigation, then they're not going to.
               | 
               | Yes, it is a bit like this. Except in this case the
               | police don't need a warrant, they can enter your home for
               | any reason at their discretion. You're putting a lot of
               | trust in a bunch of people you've (I'm assuming) never
               | met working for an agency that has demonstrated a
               | complete lack of regard for the constitution. Either that
               | or you're a really terrible glowie: "How do you do,
               | fellow tech enthusiasts??"
        
               | Hikikomori wrote:
               | How long until the new US administration starts using
               | this data?
        
               | GuinansEyebrows wrote:
               | Setting aside the legality/morality/whatever of the data
               | collection itself, you seem to place a lot of faith in
               | the NSA's ability to keep that data private.
        
             | nyolfen wrote:
             | the problem is that this data exists somewhere where i have
             | no control over it and was collected without my consent, in
             | clear violation of my constitutional rights. perhaps you
             | have perfect trust in the current and future good faith of
             | the US federal government, but perhaps you can understand
             | why others do not. i would not want the local police
             | keeping copies of all of my emails "just in case", why
             | would it be any better for unaccountable strangers to keep
             | secret dossiers on me?
        
         | dannyobrien wrote:
         | Well, the question at hand was, and is: _what_ should we be
         | supporting? I don 't, in fact, assume that what the NSA is
         | doing is bad, but in order for the public and the oversight
         | systems the legislature put in place, _someone_ has to know
         | what 's going on. The program Mark Klein revealed surprised
         | legislators, including John Sensenbrenner, the author of the
         | legislation that was used as a justification for the program:
         | https://www.rstreet.org/commentary/patriot-act-author-introd...
         | 
         | Many people worried that the PATRIOT Act was overreach for
         | surveillance, but the bill did pass. What happened with Mark's
         | whistleblowing is that policymakers and the public found out
         | that there were other programs, potentially illegal under even
         | the PATRIOT Act (and, indeed the US Constitution), that had
         | been hidden or obfuscated to their oversight bodies.
         | 
         | (Incidentally, the government's strategy in the cases against
         | the NSA program was to say that even asking about legal
         | authorisation and grounding of the program was in itself, a
         | violation of national security. Many years after Mark's act, Ed
         | Snowden's first published leak was this authorisation document,
         | confirming that Mark was right, and that, had those cases been
         | able to proceed, there would have been grounds for
         | investigation.)
        
         | f4 wrote:
         | To not be scrutinized for any and everything is vital. When all
         | is accessible, actors playing the part of the good citizen are
         | the prime. I would rather have pain than the pretense of good.
        
         | akomtu wrote:
         | The thing is, it no longer matters whether we support it.
         | Nobody's asked for our permission and we have no power to stop
         | it.
        
         | Atreiden wrote:
         | This is at best a strawman, and at worst blatant astroturfing.
         | The benefit of the doubt is given to these organizations a
         | priori. The idea that the average person should not be able to
         | know about government intelligence programs is common sense -
         | if the average person knows, so do our adversaries, defeating
         | the purpose of the program.
         | 
         | But there have to be limits on this power, or you enable, and
         | even empower, an Orwellian regime.
         | 
         | NSA has been caught, multiple times, flagrantly disregarding
         | the law, violating privacy rights afforded to every citizen by
         | the Constitution, and gathering an amount of data that could
         | easily enable a hostile regime to enact vengeance on
         | dissenters.
         | 
         | So imagine this hostile regime comes to power. Now everyone is
         | forced to either support the regime, or face harsh consequences
         | without recourse. Any plan you construct, or group of
         | supporters you amass, will inevitably be compromised by this
         | machine and eradicated, one way or another.
         | 
         | You have totalitarianism, and no means to resist it. ou've
         | given up your immune system. You no longer have a democracy,
         | even if you do on paper. And before you make the argument that
         | "the ends justify the means" consider that this hostile regime
         | might not share your ends. You may get wrapped up in "the
         | means".
         | 
         | Is that a desirable outcome for you? If not, you should rethink
         | your position. If that outcome seems desirable to you, there
         | are a very limited number of reasons why that could be the
         | case, and none of them are charitable.
        
       | AtomBalm wrote:
       | He revealed unlawful surveillance years prior to and of the same
       | gravity as Snowden, but only one became a celebrity. I would love
       | to know the reason for that.
        
         | kstrauser wrote:
         | I say this without intending to denigrate Snowden at all:
         | Klein's situation was less messy. Snowden had a top secret
         | clearance and vowed to safeguard all the secrets he came
         | across. Klein was just a regular guy doing regular work for a
         | regular company when he saw something strange. That doesn't
         | mean I think Snowden was wrong, just that there's a ton of room
         | for people to say "I agree with him but he shouldn't have done
         | that because he swore not to". Klein didn't have those
         | obligations.
        
           | marxisttemp wrote:
           | Likewise, Manning got pardoned when her release was clearly
           | messier and less targeted than Snowden's. There isn't much
           | logic to these things.
           | 
           | To be clear, all 3 are personal heroes of mine.
        
           | anonym29 wrote:
           | Snowden also swore an oath to uphold the constitution,
           | including the fourth amendment that the NSA was illegally
           | violating (one NSA crime) and covering up (second NSA crime),
           | including by lying to congress (third NSA crime), as well as
           | to protect America from domestic enemies, like the kind of
           | traitors who'd come up with a secret plan to violate the
           | constitutional rights of the entire country and lie about it
           | to congress.
           | 
           | Thank goodness he took his oath more seriously than the "I
           | was just following orders" crowd. We know from WW2 that "I
           | was just following orders" is not a legitimate excuse to help
           | facilitate grave atrocities, like all of those other NSA
           | employees did every single day, in violation of their own
           | oaths that they each swore.
        
             | kstrauser wrote:
             | You won't get any argument from me. I agree. And even in
             | agreement, I still say that there's a much larger grey area
             | in Snowden's case. We can and should discuss whether his
             | actions were justified. I think they are. But I can at
             | least appreciate that people who disagree have legitimate
             | reasons to see it otherwise.
             | 
             | Klein's case didn't come with all that other baggage.
        
               | anonym29 wrote:
               | No argument from me with what you wrote, either, I just
               | wanted to make sure I was doing my interpretation justice
               | by sharing it - there's certainly no shortage of posters
               | parroting the other side's talking points.
               | 
               | It's interesting that Klein's tell-all didn't get as much
               | attention despite being less legally fraught. It makes me
               | wonder how much of the Snowden media frenzy was organic
               | in the first place, and if not much, who was pulling the
               | strings to draw attention to practices that our own
               | government had an obvious interest in repressing and
               | concealing discussion of.
        
               | jll29 wrote:
               | Could be that Snowden took it to The Guardian, a foreign
               | and international news outlet. The story how British
               | intelligence folks showed up at the Guardian HQ and
               | symbolically destroyed a hard drive, and the way Guardian
               | management used their New York offices to work around
               | restrictions in UK law to publish the story, that's quite
               | a story itself, and of course journalists know how to get
               | coverage and reach.
               | 
               | Mark targeted the EFF, not a news outlet, in contrast.
               | The EFF probably first and foremost had the legal pursuit
               | in mind, not making a story big.
               | 
               | The most shocking things of all for me was how ignorant
               | ordinary people were and still are about both whistle
               | blowers' disclosures and the subsequent pretend fixes by
               | lawmakers. (Cynically, I'm inclined to add there might be
               | more riots and demonstrations if you take Heinz ketchup
               | away from people than theirlegitimate rights to privacy.)
        
               | Tepix wrote:
               | > Mark targeted the EFF, not a news outlet, in contrast.
               | 
               | "Mark not only saw how it works, he had the documents to
               | prove it. He brought us over a hundred pages of
               | authenticated AT&T schematic diagrams and tables. _Mark
               | also shared this information with major media outlets,
               | numerous Congressional staffers, and at least two
               | senators personally_. "
        
               | axus wrote:
               | The moment which struck me the most from all the recent
               | confirmation hearings was the parade of senator after
               | senator asking Tulsi Gabbard if Edward Snowden was a
               | traitor. It was like the #1 priority for them that people
               | believe that, and they would skip any relevant questions
               | about the job only to pursue that one topic over and
               | over.
        
               | anonym29 wrote:
               | A litmus test for uncompromising ideological loyalty to
               | an obviously false but politically correct narrative
               | among TPTB.
        
             | worik wrote:
             | > grave atrocities
             | 
             | Tapping phones is immoral and unethical, IMO.
             | 
             | But a long was from the "grave atrocities" that were
             | uncovered at the end of WWII
        
               | anonym29 wrote:
               | It wasn't simply tapping phones, it is the warrantless
               | collection of close to all global electronic
               | communications.
               | 
               | And the immorality doesn't stop there, that's where it
               | starts.
               | 
               | "We kill people based on metadata." - General Michael
               | Hayden, former Director of the NSA, former Principal
               | Deputy Director of National Intelligence, and former
               | Director of the CIA.
               | 
               | This includes innocent people. Women, children,
               | civilians. Deliberately. "Acceptable collateral damage"
               | is the euphemism used to mask the moral evil of
               | deliberately murdering women and children.
        
               | bb88 wrote:
               | If you're in a war of attrition (like the the US was in
               | Afghanistan), and the other side already has agreed it's
               | okay to kill innocents (9/11), then you're not going to
               | win by fighting an "ethical" war -- whatever that means.
               | 
               | I'm not going to defend the CIA/NSA for actions taken
               | inside the country. On the other hand, I'm not going to
               | second guess decisions happening on the ground in an
               | active war zone.
        
               | aucisson_masque wrote:
               | The end never justify the mean, that's how you end up
               | with concentration camps, massive executions and other
               | atrocities.
               | 
               | Beside, killing without distinction combattant and
               | civilians didn't work, see the result of the American
               | Afghanistan war.
               | 
               | Even during the war, 99% of the country was to the hand
               | of war leaders and talibans because everyone hated
               | Americans. Guess why.
               | 
               | It took only a handful of days for Talibans to defeat the
               | American sponsored 'democratic' gouvernement.
        
               | bb88 wrote:
               | > The end never justify the mean
               | 
               | It's working so far for Russia. It worked for Germany in
               | WWII until the US stepped and fought our way through
               | Europe.
               | 
               | If you see a certain group as your sworn enemy for life
               | which should be destroyed at all means possible -- then
               | you will never have peace. All you can have is war.
        
               | worik wrote:
               | > It worked for Germany in WWII until...
               | 
               | they took on the Russians
        
               | simoncion wrote:
               | > ...you're not going to win by fighting an "ethical" war
               | -- whatever that means.
               | 
               | By not fighting ethically abroad and by permitting our
               | authoritarians largely free-rein both abroad and
               | domestically, we gave the folks who planned and caused
               | the destruction of the WTC towers nearly everything they
               | were hoping for.
               | 
               | Overreacting and letting Bush II run his military
               | campaigns in the Middle East was one of the greatest
               | gifts we could have given Al Qaeda and those like them.
               | Encouraging our populace to permit themselves to _be_
               | (and continue to be) terrorized is a lesser but still
               | significant gift to those same organizations.
        
               | anonym29 wrote:
               | Afghanistan had nothing to do with 9/11. Neither did
               | Syria, or Iraq.
               | 
               | Vietnam wasn't self-defense. Korean war wasn't self-
               | defense. CIA-instigated Color revolutions and Euromaidan
               | weren't self-defense. Kosovo wasn't self-defense.
               | Launching a cruise missile (a precision weapon that
               | requires the operator to enter precise geographic
               | coordinates prior to launch) at the Chinese embassy in
               | Belgrade wasn't self-defense.
               | 
               | A vast and overwhelming majority of the military
               | operations the post-WW2 USA conducts overseas are not
               | acts of self-defense, they are acts of imperialism.
               | 
               | "I want to grow the imperial empire's influence and
               | footprint" is not justification for murdering unarmed
               | civilians. Never has been, never will be.
        
             | shadowgovt wrote:
             | And now he's nice and cozy in a country that is busy
             | invading its neighbor... But one that the US President has
             | himself cozied up to the leadership of as of late.
             | 
             | It's an odd world that makes odd bedfellows. One wonders
             | depending on how the next four years go if Snowden could
             | even catch a pardon.
             | 
             | ... or if he did, the Russians would even let him leave.
        
             | serial_dev wrote:
             | "I was just following orders" is only a bad excuse if your
             | side loses.
        
             | bb88 wrote:
             | I don't recall agreeing to any oath like that when I
             | applied for a US clearance. I just recall the NDA.
             | 
             | I may have pledged allegiance to the US flag when I was a
             | kid, but that wasn't the same as taking an oath of elected
             | office to uphold the constitution.
        
           | nabla9 wrote:
           | Snowden explained it well. There were four other
           | whistleblowers besides Snowden and Klein.
           | 
           | (1) Russ Tice: USAF intelligence analyst
           | 
           | (2) William Binney: NSA Technical Director.
           | 
           | (3) Thomas Tamm: DOJ lawyer
           | 
           | (4) Thomas A. Drake: senior executive at NSA
           | 
           | Each of them was a senior position relative to Snowden and
           | Klein and all these cases were shut down. What change Snowden
           | had to do traditionally by the book whistleblow or tiny
           | traditional leak. He made the conscious decision to take the
           | information so that they could not shut him down, and make a
           | scene from outside the US (Hong Kong) so that there would be
           | time to talk to the press.
           | 
           | Snowden made a political crime that was morally justified. It
           | was not self serving. It turns out that Americans don't care
           | but at least he made a splash.
        
         | tehwebguy wrote:
         | Probably because one absconded half-successfully and became
         | sort of stateless. That's a way more exciting story!
        
       | jmpman wrote:
       | I expect there were 10,000 who knew, and he's the only one who
       | spoke up. Now, the other 9,999 likely believed it was to thwart
       | terrorism, as this was post 9/11. Maybe those who had visibility
       | into who was being surveyed were checking to ensure the spying
       | didn't cross their ethical boundaries. Interesting to think of
       | what each individual in the system was considering.
        
         | shadowgovt wrote:
         | Oh, I think it's much simpler: the other 9,999 didn't care
         | enough to risk continued employment. Security today was dearer
         | to them than the hypothetical benefits to strangers.
         | 
         | (Perhaps worth noting: not to detract from what Mark did, but
         | he was retired and therefore didn't have a job on the line.
         | Credit to him for leveraging his position of privilege as a
         | retiree to speak out about what he knew.)
        
         | nabla9 wrote:
         | >he's the only one who spoke up.
         | 
         | Not true.
         | 
         | (1) Russ Tice: USAF intelligence analyst
         | 
         | (2) William Binney: NSA Technical Director.
         | 
         | (3) Thomas Tamm: DOJ lawyer
         | 
         | (4) Thomas A. Drake: senior executive at NSA
         | 
         | Each of them had a senior position relative Klein and Snowden
         | and all these cases were shut down and you seemingly never knew
         | about them.
        
       | jypepin wrote:
       | Is his book "Wiring Up The Big Brother Machine...And Fighting It"
       | worth a read?
        
       | xyst wrote:
       | NSA and AT&T (telecom in general?) caught with their pants down
       | not just once, but twice.
       | 
       | All of this heavily publicized yet here we are today with privacy
       | being an afterthought in everyone's mind.
       | 
       | I hate to say it but the private corporations and state have
       | really made most of the population complacent with wide net
       | surveillance -- cameras everywhere, privacy non-existent, "kyc",
       | "selfies", social media, big tech creating profiles of users, and
       | data brokerages selling and buying "anonymized" profiles.
        
       | djmips wrote:
       | Age 79/80 ?
        
       | trescenzi wrote:
       | I'm watching Person of Interest for the first time. It's
       | interesting watching it today now that the premise, minus 100%
       | accurate crime prediction, is largely a forgone conclusion. It
       | was produced after Klein but before Snowden and does a good job
       | exploring the expansion of surveillance and just how motivated
       | the government is to have a system that tracks everyone. Of
       | course it's fiction but it's a fun watch that asks a lot of good
       | questions.
        
         | ziddoap wrote:
         | I really enjoyed that show. Such a shame it was cancelled!
         | Despite critical acclaim (in later seasons, at least), it
         | apparently wasn't profitable enough.
         | 
         | I actually tried to find a legal way to rewatch it the other
         | day, but all of my current subscriptions list it with "rights
         | expired" or some such.
        
         | LinuxBender wrote:
         | I enjoyed that show enough that I was willing to put up with
         | Amazon's "Freevee" ads because they would not just let me buy
         | the show. I've never done that with any other shows.
        
         | choult wrote:
         | Oh dear... You should hear some of the stories about Jim
         | Caviezel[0]...
         | 
         | On second thought, maybe make up your own mind before you dip
         | into that.
         | 
         | [0] https://open.spotify.com/episode/1euFlDCuryFSzMw6BjQCWA
        
           | trescenzi wrote:
           | Oh yea I always read about actors during commercial break.
           | Was a bit startled when reading his Wikipedia.
        
         | michh wrote:
         | It's weird how a lot of stuff in that show I dismissed as
         | unrealistic techno-babble back then, now is very real.
        
       | rsingel wrote:
       | R.I.P.
       | 
       | He was a true and brave whistleblower.
       | 
       | I had the luck of getting a hold of his docs when they were under
       | court seal, and we published them at Wired.
       | 
       | Only met and interviewed him later. He was a gentle man with a
       | moral compass. A rarity even among whistleblowers.
       | 
       | The world is poorer without him.
        
         | HexPhantom wrote:
         | A gentle man with a strong moral compass
        
       | tehjoker wrote:
       | It's crazy almost nothing changed after this revelation. What a
       | fake democracy we live in.
        
         | shadowgovt wrote:
         | Or a real democracy with voters either deeply apathetic about
         | being watched or deeply anxious about what happens if nobody's
         | watching.
        
           | timeon wrote:
           | Real but too constrained with two-party system.
        
       | motohagiography wrote:
       | A lot of influential people were quietly radicalized by Klein's
       | disclosures and they took that forward in their ventures,
       | careers, and lives. Change takes time, and almost two decades
       | later, I think we are seeing the results of what those early
       | voices in the wilderness were calling out.
       | 
       | I hope on the other side of current bureaucratic reforms we can
       | make a monument that includes Klein and the other surveillance
       | whistleblowers whose disclosures, and specifically whose courage,
       | turned the popular tide against government overreach.
        
       | cynicalpeace wrote:
       | Tom Drake, John Kiriakou, Ed Snowden, Mark Klein.
       | 
       | These are people that have shown that parts of the intelligence
       | community are guilty of crimes against humanity and the American
       | people.
       | 
       | Yet every time more evidence comes out, people are so quick to
       | dismiss it as "wacko conspiracy theories".
        
         | sim7c00 wrote:
         | they have done heroes jobs, but unfortunely the effect was that
         | now its all become normal. ppl dont give a toss..
         | 
         | if you mention beam splitters on fiber, tap rooms at telcos,
         | the 'black boxes' at ISPs.. people just pretend thats normal.
         | they think most othe ppl are pedophiles, rapists and murderes
         | somehow and so think its fine for everything to be tapped and
         | logged. crazy world.
         | 
         | these folks give up their remaining lives for the good of
         | others, and the others just spit on it.
        
       | samstave wrote:
       | Needs black banner
        
       | CaffeineLD50 wrote:
       | Its not mass spying. The NSA is just making time capsule backups
       | for everyone. Stop being so dramatic.
       | 
       | In a hundred years when it gets published its gonna be the bomb
       | hilarious. Totes.
        
       | emmelaich wrote:
       | Related, I'm rewatching "Enemy of the State" a 1998 film about
       | government surveillance and assassinations and the deep state.
       | 
       | Underrated in my opinion.
       | 
       | Has Gene Hackman (also topical, which is why I am rewatching) and
       | Will Smith.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enemy_of_the_State_(film)
        
         | emmelaich wrote:
         | Pretty cool is that they mention Keyhole a few times. Keyhole
         | (later Google Earth) was created a year later, in 1999.
        
           | willvarfar wrote:
           | The US camera surveillance satellites are called Key Hole.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_Hole
        
           | defrost wrote:
           | As willvarfar points out, there's a satellite system from the
           | 1960s and quite a gap from there until Keyhole Inc.
           | Keyhole Inc. specialized in geospatial data visualization
           | applications. The name "Keyhole" paid homage to the original
           | KH reconnaissance satellites, also known as Corona
           | satellites, which were operated by the U.S. between 1959 and
           | 1972.
           | 
           | ~ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Earth#History
           | 
           | Many companies operated in the gap, one in public was
           | ERMapper (Earth Resources Mapping) which had Google Map like
           | displays in the early 1990s and was mainly focussed on
           | geospatial computing - stitching and correcting air and sat
           | images, multispectral data with nonstandard nonlinear
           | geocords, magnetic and radiometric displays and corrections,
           | etc. Other such suites existed at that time.
           | 
           | Keyhole|Google Earth was not the first, it was the one that
           | went very widely public.
        
       | artursapek wrote:
       | RIP
        
       | zombot wrote:
       | > who risked civil liability and criminal prosecution to help
       | expose a massive spying program that violated the rights of
       | millions of Americans.
       | 
       | That's how corrupt the system is. You get punished for revealing
       | crimes against everyone.
       | 
       | Who is going to erect statues for him and people like him?
        
         | PostOnce wrote:
         | We could do it. We could fundraise to cast a bronze of him and
         | put it anywhere we like. It wouldn't take that many people or
         | that much time, in the grand scheme of things.
         | 
         | Actually, the world might be a nicer place with more statues
         | and less goofy abstract modernist art in public for even more
         | money than bronzes.
        
           | krunck wrote:
           | Put it right in the middle of Trump's "National Garden of
           | American Heroes"[1] He'd love that. Ha!
           | 
           | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Garden_of_American
           | _He...
        
       | kleiba wrote:
       | This is the sentence I was looking for:
       | 
       |  _> While we were able to use his evidence to make some change,
       | both EFF and Mark were ultimately let down by Congress and the
       | Courts, which have refused to take the steps necessary to end the
       | mass spying even after Edward Snowden provided even more evidence
       | of it in 2013._
       | 
       | Do you have to be a cynic to pretty much have expected this?
        
         | fsflover wrote:
         | Unfortunately this spying is exactly what all the government
         | wants,
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_wha...
        
           | shadowgovt wrote:
           | It's also hard to make the case that it isn't, ultimately,
           | what the people want, by "the standard you walk past is the
           | standard you accept" principle.
           | 
           | It's been nearly twenty years. If Americans were deeply,
           | deeply bothered by the government spying on them, they'd have
           | burned down this government by now. At most charitable, this
           | speaks to a _deep_ ignorance or apathy in the American
           | electorate and American citizenship. Or a general anxiety
           | about what  "the other people" are doing that exceeds their
           | anxiety about what the government can do with panopticon
           | surveillance.
           | 
           | I think, in general, hackers vastly overestimate the average
           | human concern or sensitivity to this kind of thing.
        
             | fsflover wrote:
             | > _deep_ ignorance or apathy in the American electorate
             | 
             | Which party is against spying? The only possible action is
             | probably protesting. This doesn't work well, e.g.: https://
             | en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_enforcement_and_the_Occupy....
             | And spying is used against the protestors, too:
             | https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/spying-occupy.
        
               | shadowgovt wrote:
               | > Which party is against spying?
               | 
               | The one that hasn't formed yet because the electorate has
               | failed to recognize that parties only exist because they
               | can consolidate mass political power. This is part of the
               | "apathy" category. People don't care enough to meet up on
               | this issue. They don't even care enough to be members of
               | the existing parties or do more than show up to elections
               | (and then, only between half and three-quarters for
               | President, less for Congress, and hovering around 10-20%
               | for primaries).
               | 
               | People care, but not enough to overcome institutional
               | inertia.
        
               | fsflover wrote:
               | > The one that hasn't formed yet because the electorate
               | has failed to recognize that parties only exist because
               | they can consolidate mass political power.
               | 
               | This is not the reason. The reason is the how the system
               | was designed:
               | 
               | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger's_law
        
             | LoganDark wrote:
             | > If Americans were deeply, deeply bothered by the
             | government spying on them, they'd have burned down this
             | government by now.
             | 
             | Right now stuff is happening that does deeply bothers
             | Americans, and what do they do? They walk around with
             | signs, they file legal papers, and maybe some other forms
             | of peaceful, albeit useless, protest... a lot of other
             | countries truly would be burning down the government right
             | now if something like Elon happened there, but so far
             | America has just been saying they don't want it, in as many
             | ways as possible, but while still continuing to fully let
             | it happen.
        
               | fshr wrote:
               | Can you give an example of a country where you think the
               | population would do something violent or upending if they
               | had an Elon?
        
             | gosub100 wrote:
             | Victim blaming. "How dare you get victimized and not do
             | more to stop it?"
        
         | 7e wrote:
         | No, you're not a cynic. The EFF takes exquisite pains to hide
         | from you the fact that these programs spied on foreigners,
         | which is the job of the NSA. Thus, they are necessary and
         | proper, and perfectly legal.
         | 
         | The EFF is a propaganda platform. You shouldn't take its claims
         | at face value.
        
           | showerst wrote:
           | Foriegners like the US citizen spouses and (ex)girlfriends of
           | NSA employees?
           | 
           | https://www.reuters.com/article/world/uk/nsa-staff-used-
           | spy-...
        
           | throw-qqqqq wrote:
           | Let's not confuse the fact that they are only legally allowed
           | to spy on foreigners, with what they actually do.
           | 
           | I have no idea how you effectively filter mass wiretaps in
           | fibre raw data and exclude americans. It's impossible to not
           | catch some/lots of domestic data as well..
        
           | amiga386 wrote:
           | Don't give us this "perfectly legal" crap. To remind you: the
           | NSA killed off ThinThread (that explicitly took care to avoid
           | wiretapping US citizens' data) in favour of Trailblazer,
           | which grabs ALL data, ALL the time, including ALL US
           | citizens' data.
           | 
           | Their explicit intent was to break the law. They broke the
           | law. Then Congress retroactively let them get away with it.
           | They're still breaking the law today.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ThinThread
           | 
           | > The "change in priority" consisted of the decision made by
           | the director of NSA General Michael V. Hayden to go with a
           | concept called Trailblazer, despite the fact that ThinThread
           | was a working prototype that claimed to protect the privacy
           | of U.S. citizens. ThinThread was dismissed and replaced by
           | the Trailblazer Project, which lacked the privacy protections
        
           | kmeisthax wrote:
           | So what you're saying is that the NSA wiretapping is OK
           | because they're not doing it to you? That's really dumb.
           | 
           | Currently, the US is in a number of intelligence sharing
           | arrangements in which countries ask other countries to spy on
           | their own citizens for them. e.g. if the NSA can't spy on
           | someone because they know they're American, they ask GCHQ to
           | do it for them. And vice versa. This is why human rights need
           | to be as universal as possible, because otherwise you just
           | ask your buddy to do what you can't legally do yourself.
           | 
           | "We only spy on foreigners" is a water sandwich.
           | 
           | Furthermore, it is NSA policy to treat all encrypted traffic
           | as foreign, and to archive it forever until it can be
           | decrypted and searched to determine if it was legal to
           | decrypt and search it. In other words, "we only spy on
           | foreigners" is a guilty until proven innocent policy.
           | 
           | "Necessary and proper" is decided by a security apparatus
           | with a conflict of interest. Nobody voted for this, the
           | executive branch just decided to do it. As for legality,
           | well, I'll give you that Congress _retroactively made the
           | spying legal_. On the other hand, the US Constitution has a
           | pretty clear restriction on the use of state power in order
           | to search and seize. Being a foreigner is not in and of
           | itself necessary suspicion to justify searching through all
           | their shit, _because being from another country is not a
           | crime_.
        
         | basisword wrote:
         | How close are we to "bypassing" a lot of this spying when some
         | of the most popular communications platforms (e.g. WhatsApp)
         | are end to end encrypted? Will the tech eventually solve the
         | problem in a convenient way, at least for those who care?
        
           | kelipso wrote:
           | Really, the likelihood of all of them having backdoors is
           | almost 100%.
        
       | HexPhantom wrote:
       | Mark Klein was just a guy doing his job... until he saw something
       | he couldn't ignore. He didn't have to speak up. He could have
       | walked away, lived his life, and let someone else deal with it.
       | But he didn't. Rest in peace, Mark
        
       | BiteCode_dev wrote:
       | I'm expecting nobody will do that anymore in the US.
       | 
       | First, those heroes were treated as enemies, then their
       | revelations lead to nothing for the country, and great pain for
       | them.
       | 
       | Finally, I doubt they would be proud of what their country is
       | today and think it's worth the sacrifice.
        
       | INTPenis wrote:
       | Rest in peace sweet prince. I'll never forget this discovery, it
       | was probably my first realization that whatever is possible
       | technically is most likely being done somewhere to exert power
       | over people.
       | 
       | And in this case most people in tech knew you could split a
       | network backbone, and if you can do it then most likely someone
       | is doing it. But Mark actually brought it into the light.
       | 
       | And that's what we can't forget in 2025, that whatever is
       | possible technically is most likely being done by someone
       | somewhere. Today it would be using AI to oppress people, track
       | citizens, predict crimes, accuse people of crimes they might
       | commit, or whatever your imagination anchored in technical
       | reality can picture.
        
       | user99999999 wrote:
       | RIP to privacy too
        
       | heraldgeezer wrote:
       | Such a different time. I got kind of anti-american after that but
       | now with the world I am 100% pro USA/EU/Western world and Israel
       | because the others are much worse. Much, much worse.
        
       | krunck wrote:
       | I am thankful for what he did. We need more Mark Kleins.
        
       | 7e wrote:
       | The NSA's Upstream program primarily targeted foreign
       | communications under the authority of Section 702 of the FISA
       | Amendments Act. However, it also incidentally collected data from
       | U.S. citizens, particularly when their communications were
       | intercepted while in contact with foreign targets.
       | 
       | The court cases were thrown out because of congressional action,
       | as they should be, because the entire purpose of the NSA is to
       | spy on foreigners. Thus these programs were legal and this
       | whistleblowing was not, in fact, whistleblowing at all, just
       | leaks of classified information.
        
       | Integrape wrote:
       | Does this not count as a political post? It would have been
       | flagged if the title had DOGE instead of NSA.
        
       | neilv wrote:
       | Side comment about suboptimal HN commenting or UI...
       | 
       | This post is about someone noteworthy dying, but the top relevant
       | comment is followed by _over a dozen screenfulls_ of text about a
       | sewer inspection van, before you get to anything else.
       | 
       | If you start paging through it, do you close the browser tab in
       | annoyance before you get to any further discussion of the person
       | and why they're noteworthy?
       | 
       | > _4. Mark Klein, AT &T whistleblower who revealed NSA mass
       | spying, has died (eff.org) 1404 points by leotravis10 20 hours
       | ago | flag | hide | 306 comments_
        
         | 0xffff2 wrote:
         | Are you aware that you can collapse comments chains?
        
           | neilv wrote:
           | Yes, or go up and hit "next", but I don't normally have to on
           | HN.
           | 
           | With the mouse-over-to-and-click-on-tiny-gray-link UI, it's
           | usually faster to autoscroll/scrollwheel or hit PgDn.
           | 
           | So if you start doing the usual way, and it's not working,
           | that's frustration with the post.
           | 
           | And is it worth your time to figure out where to prune/skip
           | within the tree, when you have to go navigate to the tree
           | links. And probably have hide/next/prev multiple times, to
           | get past the entire tree from where you realize.
           | 
           | If people had more UI-efficient tree operations (like in past
           | threading newsreaders), and knew how to use them, then it
           | would be easier.
           | 
           | But with what we have, we can get important posts where
           | important comments are effectively suppressed, for many
           | readers, just by putting a dozen pages of frustrating
           | distraction in front of them.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-03-13 23:01 UTC)