http://defensetech.org/2006/03/06/rapid-fire-030606/ The Future of the Military, Law Enforcement and National Security Fri, 10 Feb 2012 06:47:14 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://defensetech.org/2006/03/06/rapid-fire-030606/#comment-126415 S.F Thu, 09 Mar 2006 18:38:37 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=3046#comment-126415 re: Telcos' spooky ties The article pretty clearly states that "...If the reports in the Times and other newspapers are true, these companies have allowed the NSA to intercept thousands of telephone calls, fax messages and e-mails..." *and* "Some companies, according to the same reports, have given the NSA a direct hookup to their huge databases of communications records." Combining the two "The NSA ... sifts through this data for key words and phrases that could indicate communication to or from suspected terrorists or terrorist sympathizers and then tracks those individuals and their ever-widening circle of associates. " Thus as as far as the author is concerned NSA has access to both the conversations - which they recorded and can mine for information and communications records provided by the telcos that would show who else has spoken with individuals in the suspicious conversation. Recordings and records are indeed apples and oranges, but the article is clear in its belief that NSA has had access to both. I do not see anything in the article to suggest an improper comparison in this regard. I cannot like the fact that information used is so fragmentary. "Some companies", and "If reports are true" are not the strongest ways to begin an article purporting to show sinister government activity. Might as well have written, "Everyone knows the government is listening [and reading blogs]. Here are some of the ways it could be done." re: Telcos’ spooky ties
The article pretty clearly states that “…If the reports in the Times and other newspapers are true, these companies have allowed the NSA to intercept thousands of telephone calls, fax messages and e-mails…” *and* “Some companies, according to the same reports, have given the NSA a direct hookup to their huge databases of communications records.” Combining the two “The NSA … sifts through this data for key words and phrases that could indicate communication to or from suspected terrorists or terrorist sympathizers and then tracks those individuals and their ever-widening circle of associates. “
Thus as as far as the author is concerned NSA has access to both the conversations — which they recorded and can mine for information and communications records provided by the telcos that would show who else has spoken with individuals in the suspicious conversation. Recordings and records are indeed apples and oranges, but the article is clear in its belief that NSA has had access to both. I do not see anything in the article to suggest an improper comparison in this regard.
I cannot like the fact that information used is so fragmentary. “Some companies”, and “If reports are true” are not the strongest ways to begin an article purporting to show sinister government activity. Might as well have written, “Everyone knows the government is listening [and reading blogs]. Here are some of the ways it could be done.”

]]> http://defensetech.org/2006/03/06/rapid-fire-030606/#comment-126414 anon Tue, 07 Mar 2006 17:18:27 +0000 http://deftech.usmilblog.com/?p=3046#comment-126414 The point is that you have a monster database of number X called number Y at time Z, and then you link that to other databases. The whole point of databases is that you can link them together to extract interesting data. The point is that you have a monster database of number X called number Y at time Z, and then you link that to other databases. The whole point of databases is that you can link them together to extract interesting data.

]]>