Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

General Michael Hayden and the NSA

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
    I'm sure my info is out of date, but they used to use Carnivore and Magic Lantern, two advanced programs that shifted through both written and audio traffic.

    Its far beyond key phrases. Those old systems indexed content by numerous factors, not the least being link analysis.

    For example, the DHS gets word that Samuel Adams, AKA Nichols, is a person of interest. They plug his name & Net moniker into their data base, and they discover, amongst other things, that he is a frequent poster on ACG, Stormfront, four prepping sites, and the Topeka Needlers forum, the latter a site devoted to knitting.

    The program notes that on the first six sites Nichols has a word reference index (WRI) of 8.2, which is high. On the knitting site, WRI 0.

    Then they run all seven sites to see who else on their member rolls has a high WRI. What is interesting is that while the first six all have a high WRI roster (not unusual given the topics), but also that there are twelve alumni of the first six, all high WRI, on the knitting forum, where all have a WRI of 0.

    That's ten minutes of Human interaction with a computer.

    Now maybe a bunch of guys who like to rant and discuss hardware on fringe websites also knit. Or maybe Nichols is recruiting fringe members and is using an unrelated public forum as a medium to coordinate communications.

    Just one simplistic example. Link analysis is key in cracking organization. Groups need fast, simple, and reliable internal communications.
    Carnivore, IIRC, was overtaken by DST2000, which was overtaken by something else.

    Meanwhile, NSA now has confirmation that knitting sites are actually covers for terrorism!

    Leave a comment:


  • Arnold J Rimmer
    replied
    Originally posted by Nichols View Post
    We assume they are filtered through several programs, that being said; what/who determines the filter?

    This forum would be a magnet for any program that is looking for key words or phrases. All of the leads are going to have to be looked at by a human to determine if it is actionable intel.

    When you have the ability to collect all data and not targeted data, numerous rabbit holes are going to be searched for no reason other than they have the ability to collect the data.
    I'm sure my info is out of date, but they used to use Carnivore and Magic Lantern, two advanced programs that shifted through both written and audio traffic.

    Its far beyond key phrases. Those old systems indexed content by numerous factors, not the least being link analysis.

    For example, the DHS gets word that Samuel Adams, AKA Nichols, is a person of interest. They plug his name & Net moniker into their data base, and they discover, amongst other things, that he is a frequent poster on ACG, Stormfront, four prepping sites, and the Topeka Needlers forum, the latter a site devoted to knitting.

    The program notes that on the first six sites Nichols has a word reference index (WRI) of 8.2, which is high. On the knitting site, WRI 0.

    Then they run all seven sites to see who else on their member rolls has a high WRI. What is interesting is that while the first six all have a high WRI roster (not unusual given the topics), but also that there are twelve alumni of the first six, all high WRI, on the knitting forum, where all have a WRI of 0.

    That's ten minutes of Human interaction with a computer.

    Now maybe a bunch of guys who like to rant and discuss hardware on fringe websites also knit. Or maybe Nichols is recruiting fringe members and is using an unrelated public forum as a medium to coordinate communications.

    Just one simplistic example. Link analysis is key in cracking organization. Groups need fast, simple, and reliable internal communications.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by Nichols View Post
    We assume they are filtered through several programs, that being said; what/who determines the filter?

    This forum would be a magnet for any program that is looking for key words or phrases. All of the leads are going to have to be looked at by a human to determine if it is actionable intel.

    When you have the ability to collect all data and not targeted data, numerous rabbit holes are going to be searched for no reason other than they have the ability to collect the data.
    A minimum wage civil servant does, after the list has been "passed through" - think consumed, digested and crapped out - multiple committees and staff conferences. You can be absolutely certain that the official government list of "hot words" is larger than the average American's total vocabulary. After all, they don't want to miss anything by excluding too much.

    Hut hey...don't worry...just use the words "terrorism" and Muslim" or "Islamic"a lot, instead. Obama has declared those terms non grata so the computers won't even see them.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nichols
    replied
    Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
    The bulk collections are filtered through several programs before the first human eye hits any of it. The key to it is development of data bases, rather than actual review.
    We assume they are filtered through several programs, that being said; what/who determines the filter?

    This forum would be a magnet for any program that is looking for key words or phrases. All of the leads are going to have to be looked at by a human to determine if it is actionable intel.

    When you have the ability to collect all data and not targeted data, numerous rabbit holes are going to be searched for no reason other than they have the ability to collect the data.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
    No joke.



    The bulk collections are filtered through several programs before the first human eye hits any of it. The key to it is development of data bases, rather than actual review.

    As to ACG, some has at least one for certain. Probably more.
    Don't worry, AJ - I'm sure you're well up near the top of their list.

    Leave a comment:


  • Arnold J Rimmer
    replied
    Originally posted by Darth Holliday View Post
    That kinda stumps em every-time...
    No joke.

    Originally posted by Nichols
    I'm on the fence on this.

    Getting warrants to target specific intel makes sense. Collecting everything leads to a lot of clutter that needs to be developed.

    I wonder how much time and effort has been focused on ACG members.
    The bulk collections are filtered through several programs before the first human eye hits any of it. The key to it is development of data bases, rather than actual review.

    As to ACG, some has at least one for certain. Probably more.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    More like "buried in bulls***".

    Leave a comment:


  • Trung Si
    replied
    Originally posted by Nichols View Post
    Something to keep in mind, many times too much intel bogs down the decision making process.
    As in: Paralysis by Analysis?

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by Nichols View Post
    I'm on the fence on this.

    Getting warrants to target specific intel makes sense. Collecting everything leads to a lot of clutter that needs to be developed.

    I wonder how much time and effort has been focused on ACG members.
    Probably a lot more than you would expect.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by wolfhnd View Post
    The perceived need for privacy is always a result of mistrust. We should strive for a society in which liberty not privacy is key to protecting ourselves.

    In the past privacy was the providence of the rich and powerful and the teaming masses had little opportunity to achieve it nor much need for it. The inequality of privacy remains an issue as most of what is needed to know does not concern knowledge about the average citizen. While the NSA spies on the average citizen who is watching the too big to fail and ponzi scheme money men.

    Rand Paul may be a misguided libertarian conservative but I don't doubt his integrity as much as I doubt the integrity of many of the people at the NSA.

    The way to remove the need for privacy is to denounce all the unnecessary and intrusive prohibitive laws that are the real threat to liberty. This is the essential point to take away from the libertarian position.

    Prohibition and the war on drugs are excellent examples of how to create a nation of organized criminality. If you want to create a population that needs to be watched the best way is to excessively restrict their freedoms.

    A free and responsible citizenry will do all the internal spying that is necessary for the state if they do not fear authority.
    History says otherwise. The lack of citizen concern and self-policing is the reason why we have all of the government laws and intrusions in the first place.

    Leave a comment:


  • Massena
    replied
    Originally posted by Nichols View Post
    I'm on the fence on this.

    Getting warrants to target specific intel makes sense. Collecting everything leads to a lot of clutter that needs to be developed.

    I wonder how much time and effort has been focused on ACG members.
    Well....there are a few that I would keep an eye on...

    Sincerely,
    M

    Leave a comment:


  • Nichols
    replied
    Originally posted by Massena View Post
    That is correct. Sometimes it does. However, limiting the ability to collect information that can be turned into intelligence is a major handicap.

    Sincerely,
    M
    I'm on the fence on this.

    Getting warrants to target specific intel makes sense. Collecting everything leads to a lot of clutter that needs to be developed.

    I wonder how much time and effort has been focused on ACG members.

    Leave a comment:


  • Massena
    replied
    Originally posted by Darth Holliday View Post
    That kinda stumps em every-time...


    Sincerely,
    M

    Leave a comment:


  • Massena
    replied
    Originally posted by Nichols View Post
    Something to keep in mind, many times too much intel bogs down the decision making process.
    That is correct. Sometimes it does. However, limiting the ability to collect information that can be turned into intelligence is a major handicap.

    Sincerely,
    M

    Leave a comment:


  • Nichols
    replied
    Originally posted by Massena View Post
    don't understand intelligence work and what the intelligence is used for.
    Something to keep in mind, many times too much intel bogs down the decision making process.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X