And it's an outrage!

When actually, it's just Verizon turning over phone numbers, which they already possess and probably make some corporate use out of.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

the vacuuming of data was occurring. Am I the only one here that remembers? Am I remembering incorrectly?

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

the door behind which transmissions, data? were duplicated...

Thanks

As long as there has been a NSA, they've been spying on Americans. The same people crying now are the people who cry, "why didn't they stop it," when a bombing occurs.

They is recordin' all me calls

All the Intertube traffic goes through that one room (again )


Tell me this-

How large would the file be if you were to capture the RTP on a 12 minute long call using G.722.

How many billions of mintes of usage per month across all US based carriers?

How much would it cost to have mirror ports and 10G taps across your entire network?

"secrets room"

Why is everyone running around with their hair on fire based on a court order that doesn't even go as far as the AT&T stuff?

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

binary, lacking all the nuance of reality. Agree or you have your hair on fire! Intellectually vapid.

with the whole "OMG telecoms are spying on us".. so long after it started.

Why now?

Just my opinion, of course.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

But I can't think of a single thing in my life that has changed since 9/11 except some extra check-in time at the airport. I'm betting that's true for the vast majority of people.

If NSA has a list of numbers I've dialed, that means nothing to me because it means nothing to them.

A lot of hypotheticals are being pushed here. 'Well, they COULD do this or this or this.'

Hypotheticals don't bother me unless they have a better chance of becoming reality.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

See my post on another thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022955725#post57

not sure why this is a surprise to anyone.

The 'warrantless wiretap' was, as far as I remember, in the context of specific investigations - an agency would go to a phone company and say "give us all the historical records you have for this number, and all the activity for it from now on". This is about them taking that information for the entire customer base, whether or not there are any suspicions. And they will presumably keep these records forever.

Yes, we may have suspected this was actually happening; but now this proves it - for this period, anyway. It may have been happening for years, and this is just the current secret court order for it. It's reasonable to assume it has happened before, anyway.

On edit: Or, as written up on Wikipedia, it was for calls that were partly abroad - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surveillance_controversy . This is for purely domestic calls.

The smart guys use simple code. But since it is between friends the code makes no sense to outsiders. Thus we need to not only gather mega terabytes of data we would also need four digit computing to make sense of it all. OK, you won't need organic computing to catch the nutters but you will need it to catch the smart bad guys.

"special language" is suspect, right?

Shop talk. Twin talk. Pot smoker to dealer. Lots of folks have a made up vocabulary. It would take a bank of Cray AI Computers(Mythical right now) to make sense of it all. The system in use looks for "Key" words and phrases.

Supposedly about who calls who - so they can figure out if Mohammed Atta is calling Osama bin Laden repeatedly and conclude that means maybe Mohammed Atta is up to no good, since they already know OBL is a terrorist.

And then get another warrant to actually tap the calls. And maybe break the code.

that surveillance agencies, under an opposing party's administration, do this.

There aren't enough of "them" to actually sit down and listen to these phone calls to see who is up to no good.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2010/03/wireless-survey-91-of-americans-have-cell-phones/

According to a survey done in 2010, there are 285 million cell phones in the US and a total of 6.1 billion minutes of cell phone use each day. Even if NSA had 10,000 spies listening in on peoples phone conversations 24 hours per day they could only hear 1/4 of 1% of those minutes. And that's just cell phones. And they don't have anywhere near that capability.

So yes, in theory I'm outraged and have been for the 10 years or so I've known about this. But as a practical matter it really is no BFD. They're wasting their time listening to my phone calls anyway. On the off chance they ever hear one.

Get ready for the clue stick whacking you quite hard here....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Data_Center

http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/21/analysis-nsa-utah-data-center-would-be-worlds-biggest-ipod/

So, the data storage capacity is estimated between 5 zettabytes and 1 yottabyte. A yottabyte is like a trillion years of audio encoded at mp3 data rates. It is one million times the estimated annual global internet traffic worldwide of 2015. A zettabyte is only 1000 times smaller.

So either way, that's a lot of storage.

So why do you need that much storage in a building that costs 10% of NASA's annual budget?

And you are soooooo 20th century, why bother listening if all you need is a searchbar and the name of the person you'd like to monitor and every electronic factoid and communication about that person comes right up along with their photo.

Fits right in with the legal dodge that it's okay to collect as long you're not actually LOOKING at it until you have a warrant or you're just data mining.

too. NSA bots are mining though all the voice data as we speak.

I already support the EFF and the ACLU with donations too, noting that this is a top issue for me.

But perhaps from your perspective I am missing something. Share your wisdom or are you just lost in apathy?

And yes, opposing George Bush's implementation of these policies in 2001-2008 somehow makes me a right wing paranoid for continuing to oppose them now.

Your logical abilities are also. duly. noted.

Just FYI


Call the folks at Quantico maybe they can give you a little primer.

So I just got you and the links I cited. I'm listening so why don't you 'splain it?

or how a VoIP switch works, or a 5ESS, or how the FBI is actually really fucking understaffed?

you know what it takes to actually send audio real time to LEA?

read up on CALEA and come back with any questions you might have...

In my life, I have run up against more than enough "I have an oh-so-secret clearance" or "I know so much of this I can't even summarize it in terms you'd understand" snobs who try to snow me with buzzwords before to not recognize what looks like the opening gambit.

So excuse me as I ask for some evidence of your credentials.

The context of the evidence required is that I gave some publically available (and cited) estimates for the storage capacity of the NSA Utah Data Center. You have countered with the information-filled statement that "I have no clue what I am talking about." Fine. I will accept your premise given that you back it up.

Now your initial explanation as to why I haven't got a clue consists of a string of buzzwords: warrants, VoIP switch, 5ESS, "what it takes to send audio real time to LEA" and FBI staffing levels.

I simply want the connection spelled out. What about those items you listed is relevant to me not knowing what I am talking about when I am merely citing estimates of the storage that could be placed in that data center?

You don't even have to be kind -- I have a Ph.D. in Computational Physics and have configured more than one class B network during my career, so you are unlikely to lose me in jargon. I am a fan of Bruce Schenier and read his blog and the many speculative threads started by communications engineers trying to puzzle out the Utah Data Center. I freely admit to not having experience in telephony and so I am perfectly willing to have you school me and in fact welcome the opportunity to learn something new!

So, go on, let's see what you got then!

Give me your phone number and I'll do a LNP query for you...

Or, I can go across the street and point a call generator in the lab to it. Maybe starting with 1 CPS ramping up to 10 CPS with a peak of 200 sessions but your provider might not like that

Everything in that article are "theories" on what they COULD do...

What's the biggest blade server available today? Are they getting their own dark fiber? How are they handling a fairly new concept called big data? How many of the resources in that facility will be for operating systems and the processing power to run said systems?


Also, it's one thing just to have raw storage capabilities. Data are useless unless you can assimilate usefull information from said data. Are they using Brio or something way more advanced? The answer to these questions will remain open because you and I and 99.99% of the population aren't involved.


Also, on Big Data-
"To store a yottabyte on terabyte sized hard drives would require a million city block size data-centers, as big as the states of Delaware and Rhode Island.[1] If 64 GB microSDXC cards (the most compact data storage medium available to public as of early 2013) were used instead, the total volume would be approximately 2500000 cubic meters, or the volume of the Great Pyramid of Giza."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yottabyte




Economist Intelligence Unit Special Report

The business landscape is being shaped by data as never before. The sheer magnitude of data being produced is staggering. According to Eric Schmidt, Google's chief executive officer, the world creates 5 exabytes of data every two days. That is roughly the same amount created between the dawn of civilization and 2003.


The Economist Intelligence Unit sought insight on this issue and more. 752 senior executives from a broad range of sectors and countries shared their thoughts on the world of data.

http://www.sas.com/en_us/offers/big-data/register.html?gclid=CMSl5cyA0LcCFRDl7AodpFsABw

Theory doesn't mean completely unknown. Back when the resolution of spy satellites was classified just knowing that all telescopes are diffraction limited pretty much gave you what they could do and a knowledge of simple image processing gave you the rest. Guess what -- bang on.

Same thing here. The numbers which ARE presented tell a story. That data center a LOT of capability to be buying without an obvious application besides the one we're told isn't the one.

So it comes down to the assertion that a yottabyte is needed. It isn't. Worldwide creation of data doesn't mean we see it. More realistic to use Cisco's prediction.

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/solutions/collateral/ns341/ns525/ns537/ns705/ns827/white_paper_c11-481360_ns827_Networking_Solutions_White_Paper.html

By 2017, US IP traffic predicted to be 40 exabytes per month, half a zettabyte per year.

A population of 300 million people, using the phone 150 minutes per day (I certainly don't) at 64 kbs encoding creates 64 exabytes of data per year. Negligible compared to predicted IP traffic and unlikely to change.

Do you even need a yottabyte then? Sounds like half a zettabyte a year does well. So Fox's five zettabyte number (the smallest one mentioned in connection with the center) is consistent with 10 years of storage of everything for everyone. Databasing it is a challenge but smaller than keeping it given that you have the metadata.

Getting the data is a technical issue, not an impossibility.

Still waiting on how "don't have a clue" factors in here.

...listening to right wing talking heads have the vapors about wiretapping is just another example of their selective memory and rewriting of history. These goons knew damn well what the Patriot Act and expanding the role of domestic surveillance during the dubya regime was about. They were cheerleading finding "leakers" and sending them to Gitmo...wanting to listen in on any and every conversation and email in their zeal to fight their "war on terra". Now when there's the coloured fella with the power, they're all aghast! This also goes for the stenographers at the AP and other "newsgathering" organizations that gladly took the dubya regime's "leaks" and lies and led to the disasters in Iraq, Afghanistan and to our domestic economy...

We have our own About-Facers, who were outraged about all this when GWB was president, and are now saying it's no big deal, He only wants to protect us, etc.

Yes, I see plenty of those who showed lots of outrage when we faced the "unitary executive" days of Crashcart Cheney yet want executive orders for their own special interests or think President Obama alone can fix all problems (Congress? What's that?) or have other partisan reasons. There does have to be some nuance here as this administration has had to walk on egg shells to get anything accomplished and no matter what move is made its greeted with heavy criticism from right and left.

Earlier today I heard a talking head speculate that maybe these disclosures were pushed by the administration in hopes of forcing light on Congress' role in first passing FISA and now playing politics with it. Maybe the extreme abuses...that date back nearly a decade...will lead to some long needed safeguards to privacy, but I remain cynical.

One must always keep in mind that anything on does when you go "outside"...and that includes electronically can be monitored and to act accordingly...

Cheers....

I think folks should listen to Obama's recent speech on this war on terror.
Until the US pulls out of Afghanistan and war ceases nothing will change.
The question is how does he stop Bushco's amorphous use of the word terror for non-stop war,

Why all the feigned surprise now that people still don't approve of this blatant blanket violation of our privacy?

Hmmm...

All those people listening to phone calls, reading emails, etc.
You can choose to see the glass as half full.

/sarcasm

it is mostly done by computers

It is amazing how people lack a sense of history. And there are already cases in the courts objecting to it. It's too boring to read and follow those cases. It's more fun to put your hair on fire.

Oh and then let there be a terrorist attack and "the FBI dropped the ball." Why didn't they get a list of Tamerlan's phone calls? Some people just want to complain.

https://www.eff.org/cases/jewel

and many of us are simply being consistent.]

Oh, and yes, we expected better from a dem- whatever his/her fucking color. got it?

when a terrorist attack did occur, right? Never blamed the government for not catching Tamerlan first?

You ought to be ashamed for attacking a poster personally with false shaming rather than sticking to the argument.

A Democratic administration will use the laws available to it rather than risk a terror attack. We challenge the law. You ought to be ashamed for not reading the link I posted. That's too boring, considering the arguments the court will hear on both sides. Not when you want to hear both sides of anything. It's all blame the administration, blame Obama, fuck the administration or whatever else you said. Emotion rules. Guess whose fault it will be when there is another terror attack? I'd love to see your boston marathon posts. I have this hunch they claim the FBI dropped the ball.

The summary of the link isn't even that objective. Read the opinions when they come down. Oh wait, that's too hard. Too hard to be a responsible citizen.

their attack.

And you attack people criticizing the administration as racists.

Let's see, the right wingers who were OK with it all before?

And some of the left wingers on DU whom I suspect to actually be right wingers in real life.

Compare to, ohhhh, keeping tabs on the opposition.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2002/07/the-fbi-and-martin-luther-king/302537/

And some people just don't want to hear complaints. Which is worse? Can't say.

The political opposition is open and yakking to the media every day. Who needs to keep tabs on them?

Mitch McConnell's phone calls are as predictable as day. Who needs to check Verizon's records to find that out?

Never heard of it.

This matter concerns court opinions, not TV shows. What are the arguments pro and con in the court briefs? Why do we not consider both sides?

https://www.eff.org/cases/jewel

Read that instead of watching TV.

Since half the post was about the TV show and the rest of the post was about a CNN article talking about the abuses of FBI surveillance with MLK.

So let's do this your way.

Let's try again:

a) with smaller words

b) no more than one concept in a sentence

c) more explanation

d) no confusing pop culture references so you don't get too taxed, poor dear.

Here it is:

1) MLK really ticked off Hoover.

2) Hoover controlled the FBI.

3) The FBI put MLK under surveillance.

4) Surprise, they caught MLK in PERSONAL misdeeds.

5) MLK wasn't yakking to the media about those misdeeds.

6) The FBI wrote a taunting little note to MLK letting him know they knew too.

7) Hilarity ensued.

But ignoring the playacting here, you obviously don't quite know how to attack this part. Sorry. Reality has a way of not going down easily when hit with dogma.

Were you on their side back then?

If your principles flip around 180 degrees whenever your team gets into power, can you really be said have any principles at all? A question for the philosophers, I suppose.

They blamed themselves for 911 happening?

They wanted the courts to review the laws? A lot of conservatives don't like the courts having the power to review laws like the Patriot Act.

Bushies used to say the Executive needed be able to spy illegally in order to "protect us". They also said that the same people "whining" about their rights would be complaining that all possible steps weren't taken to protect them if there were another big terrorist attack. They used to claim that anyone who didn't agree with these outrageously authoritarian tactics was just "whining".

You really don't remember any of this, huh?

The question is the balance between the demand the government "do something" about terrorism before it occurs and the demand that it not have access to this or that, with or without court orders, warrants, etc.

In fact on DU itself there were plenty of people blaming the Bush administration that 911 even happened. Everyone who thinks the government has some duty to stop terrorism needs to consider the balance of equities here.

Did you mention her nationality because she was targeted somehow?

Did they think she was a Commie agent?

It always interested me that Oswald actually gave us his citizenship to go to Russia, and yet a nation paranoid about communism let him back in and let him bring his Russian wife.

"Khrushchev Khrushchev he's our man, if he can't do it no one can". She was talking about helping bring peace between US & Russia. She was only 11 or 12 at the time. Sure enough, she recalls clicking and other noises during her phone calls, then finally a visit from "some people" who her parents spoke to. It seems the paranoia level at that time was even greater than it is today. If I wrote that in a textbook today no one would be knocking on my door.

They sure were paranoid in those days. An 11 year old? Holy cow.

Even the Muslims of today wouldn't get that kind of look-after.

and we all know how terrible he's been.

you people are a fucking trip. smh

that was when I first read about the programs.

Maybe the assumption prevents me from getting worked up currently, but really I don't care. If someone has the job of going through my e-mails and phone calls, I feel sorry for them - that is one dull job.

.

because it's under a Dem administration.

That's the key difference.

Thanks for the clip.

And the fact the government is committed to secrecy in both legislative and executive function while carrying out spy operations on domestic citizens is anathema to our democracy.

It is indefensible.

Although I know some partisans will give a solid, Blue Team go of it.

My hair has been on fire so long, I'm pretty much bald. "Our" government is madly collecting our private information while prosecuting those that reveal any of theirs. If you aren't alarmed by these circumstances, you don't care about democracy.

at least for a few more fucking years. We sure were pissed then, now it's all good.

and we've raged everytime we've heard about it, we've argued against it, and those that are in the telecomm industry despise it, but we abide by it because we are forced to.

Any questions?

That's surprising, a little, to me. But there it is.

BTW, did you hear about Justin Bieber's latest antics?

and you don't understand how things have changed in the last five years. Not at all.

However, your second statement doesn't follow at all. You have no idea what I do or do not understand. I'll just leave it at that.

Take care MineralMan.

I hope you gave a good day, because while I agree with your letter of the law campaign, I will follow both the letter of it, and the spirit of it, if I possibly can. Judgment and common sense are excellent qualities for anyone in life to possess. They are probably the worse things for anyone in government to possess.

And I always do take care.

That's telecomm

You on BOGBS?

Best wishes

Second, if I remember correctly, under Bush they only monitored communications in which one end of it was outside the U.S. Now they're monitoring everything.

Third, many people probably thought the snooping ended when Obama took over. Of course, an early clue about that came when he broke his promise to vote against the FISA Amendments act in 2008.

Fourth, even if people are guilty of having short memories, isn't this still outrageous?