NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad
[ NNSquad ] Why Edward Snowden May Be the Wackos' Dream Come True
Why Edward Snowden May Be the Wackos' Dream Come True
http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/001047.html
NSA leaker/whistleblower Edward Snowden may yet have some real
"bombshells" to divulge, but at least for the moment it seems possible
pull back our vantage point a bit, and start thinking about the likely
results of what he's done so far. Be warned, you may not enjoy this
analysis very much.
It's clear what he's done to his own life. From this point forward
into the foreseeable future, he'll be on the run, in exile, or in
prison. To hear administration, congressional, and other officials
foaming at the mouth about the supposedly enormous damage he's done to
USA national security, it's obvious they want to lock him up and throw
away the key (we can discard the "they're gonna kill him with drones"
ravings of Ron Paul, however).
The fact is that -- based on what we know so far -- Snowden has done
little if any real damage, because his revelations have been so
relatively inconsequential for anyone who has been paying attention.
Comparisons are frequently being made with Bradley Manning, but they
are mostly inappropriate. Manning was a "data dumper" -- he basically
grabbed all the classified materials he could get his hands on and
sent them off to a third party. This included an enormous cache of
detailed operational data. I won't argue here the intricacies of his
case, other than to note that it's entirely different from Snowden's,
except for the foundational fact that they both obviously did violate
information secrecy laws associated with their clearances, which can
carry very significant penalties even on a standalone basis.
In contrast, Snowden (at least so far) hasn't released any specific
operational data, only rather broad outlines (largely without context,
and in some key respects subject to misinterpretation) about NSA
programs that -- and this is the important part -- NSA watchers (and
presumably our adversaries) have long surmised existed. And Snowden
himself has muddied the picture by adding what are clearly
embellishments and exaggerations to some of his stories, for motives
known only to himself.
Anyone who has followed the history of NSA, particularly since the
PATRIOT Act, but even long before, would have assumed that telephone
metadata records were easily available to NSA for analysis. Remember,
these are the same records that the phone companies have been treating
as a profit center -- selling to third parties for commercial
purposes -- for many years! To assume the government couldn't get their
hands on them -- when fly-by-night solicitation companies could -- would be
nonsensical. Confirmation is interesting, but hardly revelatory.
Other parts of his information are even less surprising. We already
knew that FISA/NSL data requests/demands are routinely made of Web
service providers. We could assume NSA maintains massive, advanced
databases of metadata and other information. It's long been obvious
that the U.S. engaged in offensive as well as defensive "cyberwar"
operations, in the finest tradition of "Spy vs. Spy."
The ostensibly most alarming parts of Snowden's "revelations" are
where he obviously is -- let's be charitable in our choice of
terminology -- exaggerating.
There is no believable evidence to suggest that he had the wiretapping
and email spying capabilities (or authority) that he has claimed. In
fact, such capabilities simply do not exist in the form he described.
There are technical as well as policy reasons to be quite confident
about this.
Similarly unsupportable on technical and policy grounds are
suggestions that NSA or other outside entities have direct access to
rummage around on fishing expeditions in Google, Facebook, or other
major Web service company servers. Even if you bizarrely and with
notable paranoia buy into discredited "they're all evil" conspiracy
theories and want to assume that statements denying the existence of
such programs are outright lies, there's simply no practical way the
necessary engineering could have been accomplished and kept secret,
and mass resignations would have been obvious at these firms had word
of such projects leaked internally (as would be inevitable).
Sticking with the facts that make sense (and not the paranoid
ramblings) it still wouldn't be fair to say that Snowden hasn't moved
the ball. He has indeed gotten the issues back into public discourse
again, where they have long been largely ignored. Unfortunately, even
this may not have the results that might be hoped.
The logical, confirmable facts about NSA and other surveillance are
bad enough. Articles and postings condemning them (including my own)
are appropriate, but mostly could have been written two weeks ago
(before most of us had heard of Snowden) or even anytime since the
passage of PATRIOT -- or even earlier. And in fact, such essays have
indeed been written, all along. Snowden's "revelations" have added
little of overall note, relatively.
The history of surveillance and intelligence in this country has long
been one of constant oscillation. There are abuses revealed and
Congress cracks down a bit, but over time this lightens up, and the
pendulum swings the other way again. Over and over.
In today's situation, there will be hemming and hawing, and perhaps a
bit more transparency for a while. Unrelated to Snowden, a court
decision suggests that we may be able to learn more about the
rationale behind some FISA court decisions. We can hope that DOJ
allows Google, Facebook, Microsoft and others to report aggregate data
and scope information about FISA requests, as these firms have
requested.
But it's already obvious that NSA and the administration are going to
stand behind their "these programs are critical to stopping
terrorists" mantra, and will trot out just enough information (without
sufficient details to understand if these events would have been
thwarted without expansive access to phone metadata, for example) to
keep their co-opted Congress on their side.
In the end, especially in the long run, little will change. And given
one major (or perhaps even minor) new successful terrorist attack, you
can bet that we will move backwards in terms of civil liberties at an
enormous rate, even though this will not stop terrorism, and will help
the terrorists succeed in destroying our country's greatest ideals
from within.
In the meantime, conspiratorial wackos and political opportunists are
thrilled with Snowden. They are spinning his information --
particularly his unsupportable exaggerations that play into their
preexisting mindsets, to their full advantage.
One need only look at a single video to get an idea of how this is
playing out in the political sphere -- this sickly amusing compilation
of FOX News' Sean Hannity vigorously praising the same PATRIOT/NSA
surveillance programs under Bush that he is now condemning under
Obama. ( http://j.mp/10fUUmB [YouTube] )
And herein, unfortunately, may be Snowden's ultimate, most apparent
long-range effect -- providing fuel for the conspiracy theorists and
most hypocritically dangerous of politicians and their minions.
We can reasonably assume that this was not Snowden's intention.
It may, however, turn out to be his legacy.
--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein (lauren@vortex.com): http://www.vortex.com/lauren
Co-Founder: People For Internet Responsibility: http://www.pfir.org/pfir-info
Founder:
- Network Neutrality Squad: http://www.nnsquad.org
- PRIVACY Forum: http://www.vortex.com/privacy-info
- Data Wisdom Explorers League: http://www.dwel.org
- Global Coalition for Transparent Internet Performance: http://www.gctip.org
Member: ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
Google+: http://vortex.com/g+lauren / Twitter: http://vortex.com/t-lauren
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800 / Skype: vortex.com
_______________________________________________
nnsquad mailing list
http://lists.nnsquad.org/mailman/listinfo/nnsquad