The AP kerfuffle
Locked
12345
... 7
12345
... 7
Re: PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
 
|
``I think they're taking the usual approach to large data sets, save it all
(or as much as you can) just in case you find an anomaly you want to study.'' A short term sample of all traffic could be used analogously to a UAV video recording. Take any suspect or event and look for any and all signals leading to them backward in time. Declare the source of those signals suspects & find the correlated physical sites & compromise them. Recurse. Marcus -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web.com What can On Demand Business Solutions do for you? http://link.mail2web.com/Business/SharePoint ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
Administrator
|
A good point make in the article was that keeping the metadata allows you to retrieve full-take data if at a later time you need deleted buffered data.
So full-take also has a full-retake aspect.
-- Owen
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:08 AM, [hidden email] <[hidden email]> wrote: ``I think they're taking the usual approach to large data sets, save it all ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Marcus G. Daniels
[hidden email] wrote at 07/15/2013 10:08 AM:
> A short term sample of all traffic could be used analogously to a UAV video > recording. Take any suspect or event and look for any and all signals > leading to them backward in time. Declare the source of those signals > suspects & find the correlated physical sites & compromise them. Recurse. Yeah, that does imply a good index ... a kind of inverted light cone. I can imagine an explosion in the number of compromised sites, though. You'd need some way of rolling out ancillary sites, perhaps based on the number of associated indices. -- glen e. p. ropella, 971-255-2847, http://tempusdictum.com All governments suffer a recurring problem: Power attracts pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to the corruptible. - Frank Herbert "Dune" ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
glen e. p. ropella wrote at 07/15/2013 10:21 AM:
> Yeah, that does imply a good index ... a kind of inverted light cone. I can > imagine an explosion in the number of compromised sites, though. You'd need > some way of rolling out ancillary sites, perhaps based on the number of > associated indices. You'd also need upgrade survivable root kits and dynammic dns updates. -- glen e. p. ropella, 971-255-2847, http://tempusdictum.com I believe in only one thing: liberty; but I do not believe in liberty enough to want to force it upon anyone. -- H. L. Mencken ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Marcus G. Daniels
This mode of use is powerful (TiVO for intell) but at least it limits
(in principle) use to an actual incident, something determined (legally?) to be actionable. I have worked on projects which DID NOT presume ubiquitous data like this but which would become unnaturally powerful if the data coverage was near complete, even meta-data. I'm surprised when people believe that the "time-registered network topology" of all human (or just US Citizens, or just those who have communicated with a non-US Citizen, and those who have communicated with those... you get the picture). Correlation does not imply Causation... except in nearly every human intuition on the planet. Think of every person you have known (of) who was implicated in a crime (or terrorist attack)... do you want to be implicated by association? OK, maybe you feel that any investigation into your behaviour because a fellow FRIAM member got implicated (doing X, Y, or Z) will be exonerated when it is looked into further. One of the worries I have from the tools I have helped build and have seen along the way is that at some point, all evidence becomes circumstantial and as the *probability* goes up that you are guilty and exceeds some threshold, it is too easy for many to conflate that with whether you did it or not, or more to the point, people become willing to "take the chance we are wrong", when the stakes go up. Around 9/11, and around horrific murders, serial cases, etc. People often speak as if the risk of a few false positives is acceptable. It *MAY BE* but I claim that a statistical (especially network-oriented) approach to analysis is extra risky for many reasons. One is that I don't believe we (SFI included) has a sophisticated enough science behind networks to honestly analyze and judge. The last suite of projects I worked on in this domain (Multi Investment Decision Support Tool, Pre-Incident-Indicator-Analysis, and Faceted Ontologies) were very specifically interested in what could be *inferred* across a time-iterated series of events on a complex network. Among other things, we found that we needed to include Uncertainty Measures (how many tools or methodologies do you know that actually incorporate uncertainty measures and do it well?) In answer to Owen's question "what can they do with it?", the answer is *plenty*. A corollary question is "what can they do with it which is well understood and honest?" is a more questionable question. My experience is that there is a LOT we can do with it that is *intuitively* compelling but very little which we have formal proofs that transform what would normally be considered "circumstantial" to "proof". In the meantime, gung ho law enforcement (and the general public) will continue to charge forward, cheering abuses of power without realizing that is what they are doing. - Steve > ``I think they're taking the usual approach to large data sets, save it all > (or as much as you can) just in case you find an anomaly you want to > study.'' > > A short term sample of all traffic could be used analogously to a UAV video > recording. Take any suspect or event and look for any and all signals > leading to them backward in time. Declare the source of those signals > suspects & find the correlated physical sites & compromise them. Recurse. > > Marcus > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > mail2web.com – What can On Demand Business Solutions do for you? > http://link.mail2web.com/Business/SharePoint > > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by Steve Smith
Totally agree. Snowden is honest. Its interesting to see his insight that "the public should decide" along with Lessig's notion of "Win back the Republic".
Neither are rabidly anti-American nor extreme right or left. They present a common sense plea to return to simple, basic "american values", one of which is to let the people decide issues in open discussion and debate. Lessig has the Tea Party discussing policies with Environmentalists, and it seems to all work, sorta a TED for Public Discussion.
-- Owen ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
Re: PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
|
|
In reply to this post by Steve Smith
On 7/15/13 11:28 AM, Steve Smith wrote:
> This mode of use is powerful (TiVO for intell) but at least it limits > (in principle) use to an actual incident, something determined > (legally?) to be actionable. > The secret guidance from the attorney general was that the NSA director has the latitude to pass on intel from `incidental' collection to the FBI if there is evidence of a crime being committed. So even if the FBI doesn't have legally usable intel after given the NSA digest they obviously can invent some pretty easily by watching the right people at the right time (duh!). Even more curious is that it is not the NSA hardware, it's FBI hardware, oh, except when it is the vendors'. The NSA is looking for international bad actors with FBI hardware, except when it is handy to make an illegal arrest on a U.S. citizen. We now return you to your regularly scheduled Zimmerman idiocy. Where's Doug when you need him.. :-) Marcus ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
fluid - network - molecules (was PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc)
|
|
In reply to this post by Steve Smith
Preamble: Politically, I've been interested in the (false?) dichotomy between individualism and collectivism. Professionally, I'm forced to be interested in the dichotomy between fields vs. particles, as well as processes vs. objects. I think it's interesting to study the boundary between special cases and general trends. Individualists tend to argue that there is no such thing as "the average person", that every case is special. Collectivists tend to argue that large scale patterns do exist and, if harnessed, can lead to economies of scale. My (slightly facetious) Point: It seems to me that with populations of _thousands_ or more for most demographics, we're beyond individualism. We can no longer consider individualism a pragmatic approach to any domain. Choose any demographic... from professional gamblers to classic car enthusiasts and you get a statistically significant population. Sure, there remain methodological problems like sampling. But as long as the base population (6 billion?) is so high, aren't most special cases arbitrarily approachable with general trends? And if so, then do we still need/want things like jury trials? Who cares about the specific details of the interactions between Zimmerman and Martin? Can't we just say that Zimmerman is _enough_ like 80% of the upstanding citizens out there and Martin is _enough_ like 80% of the disenfranchised teens out there to rule without the jury? Steve Smith wrote at 07/15/2013 10:28 AM: > Think of every person you have known (of) who was implicated in a crime (or > terrorist attack)... do you want to be implicated by association? OK, maybe > you feel that any investigation into your behaviour because a fellow FRIAM > member got implicated (doing X, Y, or Z) will be exonerated when it is > looked into further. > > [...] People often speak as if the risk of a few false positives is > acceptable. > > [...] Among other things, we found that we needed to include Uncertainty > Measures (how many tools or methodologies do you know that actually > incorporate uncertainty measures and do it well?) -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella Citizens of Sodom, I'm gonna show you the light ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Owen Densmore
Owen Densmore wrote at 07/15/2013 11:02 AM:
> Totally agree. Snowden is honest. Well, depending on how you define "honest". E.g. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/24/edward-snowden-booz-allen-hamilton_n_3491203.html He is analogous to a mole or a spy. He's honest in the same way that James O'Keefe is honest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_O%27Keefe -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella But never seen around ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
Administrator
|
I mean that I believe what he says. -- Owen On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 12:21 PM, glen <[hidden email]> wrote: Owen Densmore wrote at 07/15/2013 11:02 AM: ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
Re: PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
|
|
In reply to this post by glen ropella
On 7/15/13 12:21 PM, glen wrote:
> > He's honest in the same way that James O'Keefe is honest. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_O%27Keefe > > The more important question, I think, is how these agencies are organizing the > long-term storage. What schema are they using? How is it indexed? What > storage media do they use? These are the questions that make me want to apply > for a job with the NSA. I read his remarks consistent with your remarks immediately above. I think they were taking him out of context to make a headline. Marcus ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Owen Densmore
Owen Densmore wrote at 07/15/2013 11:27 AM:
> I mean that I believe what he says. Yeah, but so did the hiring managers at Booz-Allen and whoever accepted his signature on the NDA when he signed onto the NSA contract. The trouble with people like Snowden (as opposed to an honest whistle blower) is that he intentionally lied at the outset. That means that he is capable of intentionally lying again whenever he deems it will serve his agenda. In the same way that you can't trust a defector not to defect again, you can't trust Snowden to tell the truth for any altruistic purposes. He's gaming us just like the NSA is gaming us. I believe some of what Snowden says. I also believe some of what the Clapper says ... and some of what Obama says. Etc. And it has _nothing_ to do with that "slimy" feeling I get when I listen to them talk. -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella Pushin up and pushin down against the sky ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
Re: PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
|
|
This article points out some of the real fun: So several months ago the DOJ got a suit by the usual anti-surveillance do-gooders dismissed in the SCOTUS by arguing that the do-gooders had no standing to sue, only someone who's actually being tried by the USGOVT based on or derived from surveillance evidence had the standing to challenge the constitutionality of the surveillance. The majority opinion parrotted the DOJ's argument.
Now, the DOJ is arguing in court cases that those being tried by the USGOVT have no right to challenge the constitutionality of the surveillance, either. -- rec -- On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 12:38 PM, glen <[hidden email]> wrote: Owen Densmore wrote at 07/15/2013 11:27 AM: ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Marcus G. Daniels
Marcus G. Daniels wrote at 07/15/2013 11:36 AM:
>> The more important question, I think, is how these agencies are organizing the >> long-term storage. What schema are they using? How is it indexed? What >> storage media do they use? These are the questions that make me want to apply >> for a job with the NSA. > > I read his remarks consistent with your remarks immediately above. > I think they were taking him out of context to make a headline. I doubt his motives would be consistent with mine. I do admit that I may not know C++ as well as one might infer from my resume'. 8^) But I would _never_ (have never) claim(ed) to have attended a university that I didn't actually attend. -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella Float away from those horizons ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
Re: PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
|
|
In reply to this post by glen ropella
On 7/15/13 12:38 PM, glen wrote:
> > Yeah, but so did the hiring managers at Booz-Allen and whoever accepted his > signature on the NDA when he signed onto the NSA contract. The trouble with > people like Snowden (as opposed to an honest whistle blower) is that he > intentionally lied at the outset. He signed an NDA and in all likeliness become a corpse, a fugitive or a prisoner for the rest of his life because he broke that deal. His 2nd interview with the Guardian make it clear that he knew he'd go down for this. There's no selfish upside I can see. A few weeks of grandiosity? You'd think that if the Clapper, the AG, etc. really had one bit of evidence he was a spy they'd have it all over the news and use it to full propaganda effect. It's possible he could be pressured in to that (say by the Russians), but where's the evidence? If the U.S. govt. is afraid of the latter, they should be making him feel like he'll get reasonable consideration as a whistle blower, or at least lie plausibly to that effect. If for some reason Snowden had specific prescience into the NSA's capabilities and prior to signing the NDA (someone leaked to him?) those beliefs could have been falsified after he was in. > That means that he is capable of > intentionally lying again whenever he deems it will serve his agenda. It's intelligence arena; it's all about deception and manipulation. Children need not apply. It's fine if you think deception and manipulation cannot serve the greater good of the democracy and promoting individual freedom. But by that standard every competent employee in the intelligence community would be guilty of having that character flaw/feature. Marcus ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
Marcus G. Daniels wrote at 07/15/2013 12:09 PM:
> He signed an NDA and in all likeliness become a corpse, a fugitive or a prisoner > for the rest of his life because he broke that deal. His 2nd interview with the > Guardian make it clear that he knew he'd go down for this. There's no selfish > upside I can see. There need be no selfish upside. His lies could easily be seen as motivated by a delusional disorder. He may feel like a martyr. He may feel his chances of surviving are greater than they actually are. ... Whatever. The point is that he saw lying to and about perfectly innocent people as his means to an end. Take my point as a comment on our byzantine "rule of law", where laws must be broken in order for justice to be done, or take it as naive rhetoric for "two wrongs don't make a right." It doesn't change the fact that Snowden is a weasel. Now, I happen to be OK with weasels when their actions make our lives, our democracy better. I don't expect people to have infinite foresight or even to be ideologically stable. People make mistakes and, whenever possible, systemic causes should be sought before assigning blame to a pure, single cause. Persoally, I think Snowden should be welcomed back to the US as a hero, at least to some demographic, perhaps in the same way Ollie North is treated these days. But you can safely bet that I won't be telling any of my secrets to Snowden. 8^) He'll have to steal them (which is not hard, given my lax security). > It's intelligence arena; it's all about deception and manipulation. Children > need not apply. It's fine if you think deception and manipulation cannot serve > the greater good of the democracy and promoting individual freedom. But by that > standard every competent employee in the intelligence community would be guilty > of having that character flaw/feature. No, I don't think so. I actually think the balance between empathy for those you've infiltrated and your original mission is a _difficult_ balance. To paint the whole community of spies and undercover cops as having this particular character flaw/feature is too broad. It does a disservice to those who think long and hard ... and get professional training regarding ... what it means to go undercover. O'Keefe and Snowden seem particularly cavalier to me. They seem very agenda-driven and don't have much respect for the humanity of their targets. -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella There's a light that used to shine ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
Re: PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
|
|
In reply to this post by Steve Smith
"The point is that he saw lying to and about perfectly innocent people as
his means to an end." Ironic that some of the people that are especially mad at him are in Congress! Marcus -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web LIVE Free email based on Microsoft® Exchange technology - http://link.mail2web.com/LIVE ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
[hidden email] wrote at 07/15/2013 01:01 PM:
> "The point is that he saw lying to and about perfectly innocent people as > his means to an end." > > Ironic that some of the people that are especially mad at him are in > Congress! I agree completely, there. But Shakespeare taught us that the _loudest_ condemners of weasels are other weasels. I even think Wyden (D-OR) is being a bit overly dramatic about all this. I'd be much more interested in hearing what Snowden's co-workers and bosses think. It's too bad he wasn't there long enough to develop any real relationships with them before he flew off to Hong Kong to break his oath. -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella I'm gonna bleed on this town until its red ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
Re: PRISM/AP kerfluffle, etc
|
|
In reply to this post by Steve Smith
"I'd be much more interested in hearing what
Snowden's co-workers and bosses think. It's too bad he wasn't there long enough to develop any real relationships with them before he flew off to Hong Kong to break his oath." I recall there was an interview late-June with one of his colleagues that expressed roughly "I understand but wish he hadn't done it alone." Sorry I can't find the reference at the moment. In any case, the media fixation on this guy's judgement, training, loyalty or whatever is moot at this point. He's a person, so he's flawed. This all may have just been a royal screw-up on his part. So what? The issue should be what was disclosed (even if misguided or accidental) and how it relates to the constitution of the United States. It's fine to dismiss him as weasel or a mole -- provided collective attention is given to these questionable moves at the highest levels of our government. I'll be disappointed if the conclusion is just fascism: "Do absolutely anything to protect U.S. economic interests from harm." Marcus -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web.com Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on Microsoft® Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
|
|
[hidden email] wrote at 07/15/2013 01:34 PM:
> In any case, the media fixation on this guy's judgement, training, loyalty > or whatever is moot at this point. He's a person, so he's flawed. This > all may have just been a royal screw-up on his part. So what? > > The issue should be what was disclosed (even if misguided or accidental) > and how it relates to the constitution of the United States. It's fine to > dismiss him as weasel or a mole -- provided collective attention is given > to these questionable moves at the highest levels of our government. I disagree. I think the circumstances surrounding his judgement, training, loyalty, etc. is _primary_ at this point. I have this opinion because I already "knew" the government was (or intended to) spy(ing) on my every behavior prior to Snowden's actions. And, frankly, I don't much care. When my government decides to put me in prison or kill me, it will find a way to do it. Such is life. What I do care about, however, is whether or not our government is of/by/for the people or not. The fact that we need people like Snowden (and Manning and Swartz) is an indicator that it's not. And the fact that we label all these guys as traitors, terrorists, or criminals for doing the work of the "fourth estate" is what's wrong. Snowden was encouraged to do what he did, in the way he did it, by our system of laws and the way we enforce them. The same can be said of lots of do-gooder law breakers (e.g. filming animal abuse at industrial farms, medical marijuana growers, etc.). These people feel like they _cannot_ achieve anything from within the system. They feel like they must break the law in the service of some higher justice. That's the problem. What Snowden revealed is trivial. The fact that he had to sacrifice his life to reveal it is non-trivial. > I'll be disappointed if the conclusion is just fascism: "Do absolutely > anything to protect U.S. economic interests from harm." Me too. -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella Well they look so pencil thin ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
«
Return to Friam
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |