DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech examines the intersection of technology and defense from every angle and provides analysis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • ‘Canes
  • Af-Cam
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the “Buzz”
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Crazy Ivan
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT’s Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • F-35 Watch
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Bubble with Joe Buff
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • PEO Soldier
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar’s Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples’ Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward’z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Data Diving » NSA Spying: Two Views

NSA Spying: Two Views

What’s behind the NSA domestic eavesdropping program? And how bad it is, really? Defense analyst Willliam Arkin and law professor Orin Kerr have competing theories.
wiretap_cover.jpgArkin takes a peek at section 126 of the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act Of 2005, which requires the Attorney General to submit a report to Congress “on any initiative of the Department of Justice that uses or is intended to develop pattern-based data-mining technology.” He wonders if that data-mining might be what the NSA is up to.

Patterns of activity associated with actual terrorists in the past are derived from investigations and debriefings — let’s say, for example, visas from certain countries, calls from public phone booths to Pakistan, renting of cars with newly acquired driver’s licenses, one-way airline tickets. Patterns are used to trigger “tip-offs.“
Massive amounts of collected data — actual intercepts of phone calls, e-mails, etc. — together with “transaction” data — travel or credit card records or telephone or Internet service provider logs — are mixed through a mind-boggling array of government and private sector software programs to look for potential matches…
The law says “the search does not use personal identifiers of a specific individual or does not utilize inputs that appear on their face to identify or be associated with a specified individual to acquire information,” I take it to mean the new computer-based data mining isn’t looking for an individual per se, it is looking at information about all individuals (at least all who make international telephone calls or send e-mails overseas or travel to foreign countries according to the government) to select individuals who may be worthy of a closer look.
In other words, with the digitization of everything and new computer and software capabilities, the government couldn’t go to the Court or the Congress and say, “hey, we’d like to monitor everyone on a fishing expedition to find the next Mohamed Atta.”

Senator Jay Rockefeller and others have made noises that the NSA project reminds them of the most notorious of data-mining efforts, Total Information Awareness, or TIA.
But Kerr, leafing through James Risen’s new book, says that “it seems less likely to me than it did before that this is a TIA-like data-mining program.“
“As best I can tell, the NSA program was not actually recording domestic Internet traffic, putting it in a database, and then ‘mining’ it for key words and the like,” he writes. Instead, what went on is packet-sniffing — “installing a monitoring device on a steam of traffic that looks for specific sequences of letters, numbers, or symbols… [like] phone numbers and e-mail accounts… For those with criminal law experience, this was basically a large-scale pen regsister/trap-and-trace or wiretap, depending on how the filters are configured.“
Which, of course, would be a whole lot less scary than some ginormous profiling project. We’ll see.
(Big ups: David)
UPDATE 10:50 AM PST: FBI whistle-blower Coleen Rowley calls BS on claims that the courts somehow got in the way of catching Zacarias Moussaoui, the so-called “20th hijacker.” NSA whistle-blower Russ Tice, says he wants to talk about the agency’s “highly classified Special Access Programs.” A little birdie tells me that he won’t be the last.

Share |

January 5th, 2006 | Data Diving, You can run... | 30156 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2006/01/05/nsa-spying-two-views/NSA+Spying%3A+Two+Views2006-01-05+18%3A23%3A55jason You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Navy Wants Insurgent-Predicting Program | Real-Life Hyperspace Drive? » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. rutty says:
    January 5, 2006 at 5:43 pm

    Why would Tice choose to first go to that pinko tinfoil hat factory Democracy Now? Link: http://​www​.democracynow​.org/​a​r​t​i​c​l​e​.​p​l​?​s​i​d​=​0​6​/​0​1​/​0​3​/​1​4​3​5​201. Those people make World Net Daily look sane.

    Reply
  2. Amy says:
    January 5, 2006 at 5:56 pm

    I used to work at NSA when I was in the Air Force & as far as I am concerned, we knew & know what we are doing there! There is a reason for all the things we did & people should not be reviewing what NSA is doing! We are all highly trained & detect many things in the world that should or should not be going on. Trust the Military & other NSA workers for once!!

    Reply
  3. Andy says:
    January 6, 2006 at 10:04 am

    This NSA “spying” operation is problematic. On the one hand, I absolutely agree that if you’re within the U.S. you have NO EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY in your communication with anyone involved with Al Qaeda. It would be like expecting to have your communications with the Japanese protected by the 4th amendment in 1943. It would be absurd to expect that you could communicate by phone or email with the enemy in time of war, and that that communication should be protected. If, in fact, the Executive Branch of government is monitoring communications and/or activities of people in contact with the enemy overseas then I have no problem with them doing so.…Except.…
    I don’t trust the Executive Branch of government, nor do I really trust any branch of government. Government is not your friend. By its nature, government will always seek to expand its power, and ultimately the result of that will be an erosion of our individual liberty. That is why the framers of the Constitution established checks and balances, and divided power among 3 branches of government. They understood that power corrupts, and that no one in government could be trusted.
    That being said, the problem is (as I understand the issue…admittedly my understanding of it is incomplete, as I don’t know all the details of what the NSA is REALLY doing, nor should I…it’s a secret!!) that the Executive Branch of government is carrying on this activity with no check or balance from the other 2 branches of government…no warrants, no judicial review, no congressional review, etc.
    Perhaps my suspicion is unwarranted. MAYBE the Executive Branch of government really is my friend, and maybe they really do care about me, and maybe…just maybe…I CAN trust them not to eventually steal my freedom. But I don’t think I’m willing to take the chance.
    In short, YES, I want the NSA to stop these people. YES I want the Executive Branch to have the power to monitor communications and gather information to break up terrorist cells and stop terrorist attacks. YES I realize we are at war, and that this activity must go on. BUT…not without judicial and/or congressional review of the activities of the executive.

    Reply
  4. ok.sure says:
    January 10, 2006 at 2:22 am

    How do you know they are only looking at communications between AL Quada? In order for them to know it was Al Quada in the first place, they have to listen in first and decipher the intent and parties to the communication. If the NSA secretly knew who every Al QUada agent was and what specific communications were “Al quada related”, the war would be over. Please grow some brains.
    And Amy, I suggest you read the Constitution. And all those fancy machines you use, someone else in the next room over could be using them for not so honorable purposes. Such as political espionage, industrial espionage, and profiling the citizens in this country to carry out a more sinical conspiracy.
    Data mining, keywork searching, discerning intent, mood, emotion, of all the communications has been going on for the last 10 years. It is nothing new, just people are ignorant and the majority in this country think it is needed.
    Im going to start talking in code when I use the telephone, this way the NSA cant figure out wth im saying. Either that or I will start making comments like “Must blow up the big guy”. “Its time”, and “Big rover is in the hangar, time to roll”. Either that or I will come up with a dynamic algorithm that only me and my party will be able to decipher. Thatll teach them.
    Too bad everything I do on the internet is monitored.
    BOMB
    UNITED STATES
    AL QUADA
    (Sorry was just attracting the attention of the NSA’s super domestic spying supercomputer with three randomn w0rds)

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Recent Articles
    • JSF Costs Jump 50 Percent
    • Let’s Talk AirSea Battle
    • More Vehicle Digital Camouflage
    • Chinese Digi-Camo
    • Defense Spending Headed Down
    • Those Wonderful Sea Lines of Communication
    • Army’s GCV Not Just MGV Warmed Over
    • Cancel Cyber Command
    • Rough Week for F-35
    • Taking Back the Infantry Half-Kilometer (Part 3)
    Recent Comments
    • JSF Costs Jump 50 Percent
      One must love how a plane that is not designed to really excel at...
      Vitor
    • JSF Costs Jump 50 Percent
      The headline aloge is a CLEAR representation of MISREPORTING on the...
      pfcem
    • JSF Costs Jump 50 Percent
      An increase from 50 million to 95 million is not a 50% increase....
      Steve
    • Let’s Talk AirSea Battle
      China and the U.S. will not be going to war in the forseeable...
      Romeo
    • JSF Costs Jump 50 Percent
      Cant use unmanned tech because they can make choices like a man...
      Carlos
    • JSF Costs Jump 50 Percent
      @Brandon No kidding. I don't even understand why we need this...
      gmanaz
    • JSF Costs Jump 50 Percent
      Scrap the entire thing and make Lockheed pay us back they fubared...
      Brandon
    • JSF Costs Jump 50 Percent
      Is the 95 mill figure with or without the research and...
      Thunder350
    • Let’s Talk AirSea Battle
      I wouldn't believe a word Andrew Krepinevich has to...
      bdwilcox
    • Let’s Talk AirSea Battle
      Economic interdependance is not a deterent to war. Europe...
      MCQknight
  • Channels:Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty |Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money |Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network:Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz |SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps |Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program |Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy |User Agreement| © 2010 Military Advantage