Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Submission + - NSA not Assad brought down Internet in Syria (slate.com)

DarkOx writes: In his most recent interview with Wired Edward Snowden makes the claim that in 2012, the NSAâ(TM)s TAO hacking group was attempting to install surveillance malware when it accidentally brought down a crucial router at a Syrian Internet service provider, and the nation's Internet connectivity with it.

The NSA allowd the public to blame the Assad regime, while others within the NSA apparently considered pointing the finger at Israel for the botched intrusion. This revelation raises even more questions about the legality of the NSA actions, as they would seem to be very similar to electronic atacks other officials have suggested the USA would consider acts of war if used against infrastructure based in the USA.

Could the reckless behavior by the NSA cause our nation to be drawn into war?

Comment Re:On come on now Edward (Score 4, Informative) 194

if he was a true patriot as he claims he'd have faced the music

Oh come on, what the hell is patriotic about being shoved in an oubliette some place, after a show trial where you can't present any evidence because everything is classified?

Snowden would never get anything resembling a fair trial before a jury of his peers. A show trial is the most he could hope, but its just as likely he'd be held pretty much indefinitely without trial on some flimsy constitutionally unsound national security pretext. If you want to know who the cowards are its Kerry, Clapper, and Alexander who want to burry him or avoid tackling his criticism with lies and indirection rather than confronting it with actual facts.

Going through the system, and there is evidence he did try does not work. Just try filing and FOIA request about anything that is connected to "terrorism" in their wildest imaginations (like animal rights) and see what happens. The first time you will probably get a nice letter back telling you: "they can't tell you why they can't tell" you what you wanted because 'national security'. Send a another request for ANY information on how they handled your first request and they will probably just stonewall. Which is ILLEGAL the law say they have 20 days to do something and the three letter agencies won't do that.

Statistically you are more likely to die falling out of bed than you currently are from any kind of terrorist attack. Logic would then dictate at the very least we would create a "Bedtime Safety Authority" to make sure we are all tucked in at night before investing more in counter terrorism and yet we keep allocating more and more federal to that; well that is what the NSA tells us they are doing with them anyway preventing terrorism. Then we also dump more money into policing while crime nears all time lows, and yet no recruitment fliers for the BSA are there to be found.

There are no good reasons for these people to be doing what they are so they instead just want to silence critics like Snowden. No Snowden is no coward he is the guy that gave up home, family, and a cushy job in paradise to keep this issue alive.

Comment Re:Should we really be worried? (Score 2) 194

Automating war is a scary. What people should really look at is things like the flash crash to know why; or even the recent BGP hijacks for that matter.

The more automation your create and the more those autonomous systems interact with one another the more potential you have for bizarre positive or negative feedback problems. Eventually the system becomes so complex it is no longer very predictable but plenty dangerous.

The stock market today can plunge 700 points for no fundamental reason what so ever. One machine starts selling, which triggers another machine to act and so on. Its bad enough when its only money, and these people want to weaponize it!

Or one person manages to compromise one machine and instructs it do something like advertise a route and the next thing you know thousands of other machines react to it making the attack possible.

Not to go all SkyNet but something like this could quite literally inflict massive damage on the world before any person even realizes something is wrong. Be pretty sad if a software bug ends modern society as we know it because some asshat military-industrial-complex guy thought automated strikes were a good idea.

Comment Re:Let's play the who goes to jail game.... (Score 1) 127

I am sure it came from all the property the cease without any kind of due process. The DEA like the NSA is so out of control and so culturally broken the ONLY viable solution is complete dissolution of the agency. The cancer is so bad just outright killing the patient is the best outcome; we can't fix'em.

Honestly we need a whole house cleaning of these two agencies (to start with) that includes pretty much anyone who has greater role than sweeping the floors or brewing coffee. Every last 'analyst' every supervisor, every IT guy. We need to ensure the current culture dies completely.

Comment Re:You can't travel anonymously... (Score 1) 127

Given all the ridicules and bullshit mental gymnastics the government does all the time to argue they can do clearly unconstitutional things like compel you to use your private property to purchase a service you may not want; its not hard to construct a right to travel. In fact I think the right to travel is actually pretty clear.

We have a first amendment right to peaceful assembly. In order to assemble one must be able to go to that place the assembly is taking place. (1) this should establish a basic right to right travel.

Now can the government determine how you travel? No it can't. The tenth amendment grants any powers not enumerated for the federal government or reserved for the states to the people. No where is the an enumerated right for the government to define in what manor a citizen may travel. (2) So its clear they cannot constitutionally forbid you to fly, ride a bus or train or car, bike etc.

Which leaves the commerce clause, where you could make an argument that transporting someone over state lines constitutes interstate commerce, so they probably have you there, but if you want to fly from say Cleveland to Cincinnati I don't believe there is any legitimate way the Federal government can interfere constitutionally, but good luck getting thru the TSA line if you are on one of their lists regardless.

Comment Re:This is hilarious (Score 1) 101

What you are looking for is ex post facto but that isn't the case against the Computer fraud and abuse act. What that means is you can't do something which is perfectly legal, congress decide they don't like it, quickly pass a law against it and than prosecute you for what you did before the law was written.

The problems with the CFNA are that it is,
1. Vague - a law that is so broad a prosecutor can apply it to basically anything is unconstitutional, or void for vagueness.

2. Its cruel and unusual in that the sentences is prescribes are often far more severe than many violent crimes. When altering the query string in your URL bar can get your more years than rape something is terribly terribly wrong.

Comment So really bitcoin is incidental (Score 4, Informative) 101

So what we have here are two problems.

One lack of authentication for the miners with the pools. Something a few SSL on the servers and wrapping those sockets calls with openSSL would make the route hijacking ineffective for stealing mining resources.

So there is a lesson in this whatever it is you are doing on the internet if you care AT ALL about it you should be using SSL and checking certs, (Looking at your slashdot) sure there are tons of problems as weaknesses in SSL but until something better comes along its beats the hell out of clear text with no authentication what so ever.

Two BGP needs to be replaced or updated to support much stronger authentication and the network operators need to just push getting it done, even if it means telling customers we can't / won't peer with you and neither will anyone else unless you get you routers and or software update to do this. If they stick together in it there should be no trouble getting that done.

Stealing some computer cycles used to generate bit coins is probably among the least real harm someone with access to advertise bogus routes in BGP could do; and lots of people are in a position to do that. We should be thankful its only a little money these guys were making off with. The Internet has gotten to big for the network operators to just relay on everyone playing nice and being good citizens, We need some stronger technical controls put in place and regular auditing beyound well nobody has complained on NANOG.

Comment Re:Are you kidding me? (Score 4, Insightful) 286

Okay maybe its not the kind of thing I would be willing to invest time and money in; but you could easily ask the opposite question:

What kind of society have we become when we allow vendors to blatantly misrepresent products prior to sale?

Sony should be honest about the products actual specifications. We have regulations in place because we collectively decided that all the snake-oil selling had to stop. We standardized weights and measures, and pass truth in advertising laws. They should be followed, simple as that.

Comment Re:40% of 680,000 is useless (Score 2) 256

Exactly the entire effort is wrong headed. If someone wants to cause a calamity they can.

Consider the west. You don't even need cells of 5 people, if you just had 20 people that all agreed they were going to drive out some highway in 20 different areas out west and start a wild fire all on the same day it could easily be enough to exhaust fire fighting resources. All of the could accomplish that with no training and supplies they could acquire at any gas station on the way to job without raising any suspicion. It could very well be the largest loss of property this country has ever seen.

The reality the SECURITY apparatus does not want to admit is there are in fact NOT that many people who want to hurt the United States AND are capable of getting here in the first place. There are so many soft but high value targets, we would be victims of high impact domestic terrorism every frigging day if even a few percent of the people on the list had real intent to act. The list is worse than useless its a distraction its pull resources that either don't need to go to security in the first place or security resources that would be more effective utilized elsewhere.

Really what we NEED to do is secure our boarder. its a fucking joke to strip search airline passengers, when literally any able bodied person can just walk in over our southern boarder, having come from the essentially lawless regions of South American and the Mexican state doing nothing to impede them. The best way to improve our security situation here would be fix the boarder problems so that people can not cross it illegally, and be much much more careful about who we grant visas and allow in here.
 

Comment Write some! (Score 2) 430

I bet most projects would be happy to accept patches to their man pages, and files they store in /usr/doc/ if they improve quality or accuracy.

This is one of the few areas where just about anyone can contribute even if you don't code. Chances are you can still read it enough glean what the expected options are etc.

Comment Re:Radicalization (Score 1) 868

Seriously, does this justify carpet bombing?

No it does not and Israel isn't "carpet bombing" In fact they are going out their way to the point where it undermines their mission to avoid civilian casualties. Do think Hamas does not attempt to move rockets, launchers, and fighters when Israel names targets?

What Israel is doing and has always does is conduct one of the most carefully targeted offensives in history.

The fact is Hamas intentionally places legitimate targets in and around civilian populations and non-targets schools, hospitals, etc. The Israelis do their best; but at the end of they day a military kills people and destroy property; that is what they are for and that is always the outcome. You can try and target carefully but their will always be collateral damage in a conflict of any size or duration. The damage will be higher when one side (Hamas) refuses to adopt conventions that would help restrict the direct harm to those that who are direct actors themselves.

In the grand scheme of cosmic justice should more Israeli soldiers die because Hamas decided not to take steps to protect their own civilian population? Because the only real alternative would be for Israel to have infantry work their way thru Gaza building to building street to street with small arms; and I can assure you the casualties would be higher, although the mixture would change.

Comment Re:Radicalization (Score 1) 868

If one who abstaining should be considered every bit as responsible for the outcome as those who voted in favor of whatever proposition wins and is executed upon. Abdicating your responsibly to contribute and informed decision to a democratic process does not earn your pass.

Those who voted against Hamas leadership and those who were prevented from voting or were coerced might be innocent but that does not describe the majority of the electorate. Israel has to deal with the group as a whole, they don't get a choice in that. Maybe it "isn't fair" to some but its the reality we all have to live with.

Slashdot Top Deals

"You shouldn't make my toaster angry." -- Household security explained in "Johnny Quest"

Working...