Why did Snowden swipe 900k+ US DoD files? (Or so Uncle Sam claims) Edward Snowden made off with "over 900,000" highly sensitive US Department of Defense documents, according to American government officials whose private memos were published today. The figures were obtained by Vice News following a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) battle with Uncle Sam. According to the undated memos, …
Not really. You'd typically put things as Confidential:NOFORN (NO FOReign Nationals) as the default unless the classification of the systems involved (including the computer, blessed be!) and/or other materials you are working on/with is Secret or higher, then that highest classification applies. Everyone in my family, Mom and Sis included, had Secret walking in the door with higher levels as required later. They certainly don't want to do all the work of a more intensive background check until it looks like you'll be handling classified material of that type sooner or later. [My nuclear school notes were extremely classified and had to be destroyed up graduation. Like anybody without exposure to predicate calculus could read them.]
True, there's a whole heck of a lot of Secret classified documents but you have to take into consideration above that caveat above about systems and materials. That's where you run into stuff from the NYT or Foreign Affairs still being treated as Secret or higher. BTW, that's why an order was issued to government workers and contractors that just because it's published or on TV, you still can't talk about it.
Far too often, secret is abused and things that should be unclassified are marked secret. Confidential is largely ignored.
The stupidest thing I ever saw was a group of DoD contractors, who were marking U/FOUO information as S/FOUO. Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot, over?! FOUO is for unclassified information that should still remain free of FOI requests.
Of course, there's a full alphabet soup after the primary security level is determined, NOFORN being the least and I'll not bother getting into bigot lists.
But, I also started out in things nuclear, holding an N clearance and a standard clearance.
Top Secret is determined by whether the information being released would result in critical damage to the government.
Secret is determined whether the information being released would result in significant damage to the government.
Confidential is determined whether the information being released would result in minor damage to the government.
The damage could be to reputation, standing or things like everyone knowing precisely what is inside of the physics package on a modern thermonuclear warhead.
Unclassified is a valid security designated, if sensitive, such as personnel PII, it's designed Unclassified/FOUO (For Official Use Only) and is typically exempt from FOI requests (or the sensitive details removed from the document).
An N clearance is for things nuclear, in nuclear weapons fields, where direct access to the device is part of one's duties.
A Q clearance allows one just to be around a nuclear weapon, but not to directly access, handle or touch a device.
A Yankee White clearance allows one to be physically around the POTUS, such as workers in the White House and other locations the POTUS frequents.
I'm sure I missed a couple of oddball clearances, but it is late here.
I think we ought to differentiate between the civilian basic security levels and the special access levels. Generally the SAPs are applied on a more local basis and cover various fields as follows:
Operational SAPs which tend to be the ones that we hear about most. These tend to be time sensitive in the operational and tactical sense.
Intelligence SAPs, these tend to be fairly vast and sweeping and are time sensitive in the operational, tactical and strategic sense.
Operational research and acquisition, These tend to be time sensitive in the operational and tactical sense..
The SAPs above give extra discrimination and granularity to the sweeping civilian standard security levels.
As to what he took it is fairly mind boggling and the damage control exercise must have been massive..
The amount of files is less important than the amount of time required to grab the files.
I imagine it would be more time consuming to filter the files than to copy all of them.
OK, if the DoD are telling the truth and did get 1.7million files copied, Snowdon may well of filtered the files post grab. Less files would mean smaller and easier storage requirements for smuggling.
So statements A & B can still be true.
Not really. If a politician who may want to run for the white house sits in congress and swears under oath that he DIDNT have anything to do with xxx then it becomes mighty uncomfortable when Snowdon releases a document proving he actually did. Same goes for various treaties, relationships between countries etc.
If a politician who may want to run for the white house sits in congress and swears under oath that he DIDNT have anything to do with xxx then it becomes mighty uncomfortable when Snowdon releases a document proving he actually did.
Perhaps knowingly lying while under oath might be the issue here, rather than blaming Snowden for exposing this after the fact? It could easily be avoided by actually stating the truth, after promising that you will only state the truth.
I realise that the concept is anathema to politics in general, but to the rest of us it's common sense...
He'll always be a traitor in my eyes. If he didn't agree with what he was doing then he should have walked away (minus the 900K of docs).
He might 'think' that he's not released anything that puts real peoples lives at risk, but he bloody well has!
He's just a jumped up tech that doesn't fully understand what grief he's really caused.
He's done want he set out to do, educate people on something people already knew was going on. If he was any sort of real man he'd go back to the US and face the repercussions of his actions. That way I'd at least respect him a little more rather than the little coward hiding away. Do the deed, have the balls to face the repercussions.
Terrible. How dare he expose the fact that spy agencies are illegally monitoring their own countries, allies and frequently sexual partners too?
Is that a hanging offence? Oh wait, the USA. Yeah, probably lethal injection.
I think we should also shoot everyone at Wikileaks for noting that the TTIP exists and everyone at the Register for reporting it. And then everyone who read it, including me. Because information is important, governments are always moral and right and you totally can stop knowledge getting around by killing lots of people in the Age of the Internet.
He was convinced there was criminal activity going on and that his superiors were covering it up, meaning the standard procedure for reporting it was broken. The courts have confirmed that at least some of the activity he leaked was criminal too, so he was right at least to some degree.
Considering the abuses Manning had when she released documents and handed herself in though though (the courts ruled that her treatment constituted pre-trial punishment) and the threats from congressmen about having him executed as an enemy combatant (which would bypass the whole "fair trial" thing) would make it seem unlikely he would actually face justice and more face revenge for revealing criminal activity
Oh, and Congress members have confirmed that they've not been provided any evidence, even after requesting it, that lives were put at risk by his leaks. Which is probably because of the fact that the documents were redacted before being released to prevent that kind of thing happening
Government is FOR the people, what he did was for the people, so he cannot be a traitor, he acted in their interests.
I don't think he was so much bothered by what he was doing as what the government and it's agencies were doing, that's where treacherous behaviour comes in.
"Do the deed, have the balls to face the repercussions."
Once we've put Blair through due process for his allegedly illegal wars, sorted the banksters and their pain-free (for them) weapons of financial mass destruction, and so on, then yes, Snowden should probably face the consequences too.
Fair enough?
"Once we've put Blair through due process for his allegedly illegal wars,"
And Bush - both of them. I'd include Reagan too, but he's already dead. (Authorising and facilitating the CIA's import of hundreds of tonnes of cocaine into the USA to be turned into the Crack Epidemic should be grounds for digging him up and hanging him all by itself)
I think I can add Harper to that list. Mind you he's more of "too stupid to see how bad the example he's following is" type of issue.
Personally - The figureheads aren't really the issue -- I'd like to see the advisor type folks that lead the charge over the cliff pinned to trees, kept alive and breathing and used as target practice by small children using globs of honey. And keep a few dozen fire ant hills in the neighbourhood.
(sorry - its early and I've only made it through half a coffee)
How would you describe those who designed the system that allowed a "jumped up tech" to walk away with huge quantities of allegedly sensitive information ? What, if any, sanctions should they face?
It's perfectly possible (e.g. via encryption) to allow "jumped up techs" to have access to files (for backup purposes etc) without them having useful access to the information within them.
Is there an analysis anywhere of why this was not done, and what consequences have been imposed on the contractors (and/or specifiers) who chose to ignore this possibility?
I'm a jumped up tech too by the way. Don't take it personal. It was just a turn of phrase.
I have issues with what he did. That's my opinion. I think people who work in certain line of work will agree, but on here i realise I'm up against it. Hence the AC....
How, why, who let it happen. All good questions. I don't have any answers for those.
They don't just give people access to this data. You'll be checked to the hilt. I suspect he even would have done a polygraph before getting the job based on the access he had.
I disagree, What he did was expose a level of surveillance we thought only existed in the movies..
But I think the US & UK governments are the traitors, and I consider our current (British) governments plans regarding surveillance & encryption an attack on the human rights our grandfathers fought to protect!
"But I think the US & UK governments are the traitors, and I consider our current (British) governments plans regarding surveillance & encryption an attack on the human rights our grandfathers fought to protect!"
Amen to that. A little worrying at the moment.
"expose a level of surveillance we thought only existed in the movies.
Really?? You're that naive?"
Short memory syndrome?
Those who were suggesting stuff even vaguely approaching what we now know was standard operating practice were routinely dismissed as tin foil hatters.
Your "everybody knew it was going on" comments aren't going to have the effect you want.
See you in court, sunshine.
What he did was expose a level of surveillance we thought only existed in the movies.
Really?? You're that naive?
Prior to Snowden, I think it was reasonable to believe that either case - the NSA was or was not conducting mass surveillance in quite so sweeping a fashion - was reasonably probable.
There was a decent chance they were, because, hey, they could.
There was also a decent chance they weren't, because it's expensive (and those resources can always be used for something else; money and IT resources are fungible), and they're never going to look at the vast majority of the data, and they achieve much the same result by making people suspect they might be conducting the surveillance. That is, it's the panoptic threat that actually has most of the effect.
He/she explained his/her anonymity with "... but on here i realise I'm up against it. Hence the AC....". Thus, the poster admits to truly being a coward, and I seriously doubt he/she, were he/she in Ed Snowden's current position, would "face the repercussions" of almost-certain life imprisonment and forced silence.
It's ridiculously hypocritical for an admitted coward to accuse a demonstrably brave man not "having balls".
You all may see what you perceive to be the wider implications, but you don't see the other side of the coin. Its all very well commenting on here about your views, and I do value other peoples opinions on this, and do respect all reg commentards, as I know you're a smart bunch, but some of us have seen the other side you don't. Because of that we will always have a different opinion on the matter. Thats all form me on this.
"you're a smart bunch, but some of us have seen the other side you don't" --AC
How fscking patronizing ... "I'm in possession of secret information that shows that I'm right and you are wrong." You really expect to persuade anyone of anything with that sack of horseshit?
"I value other peoples opinions on this ... we will always have a different opinion ... that's all from me on this."
I really fscking hope you don't do anything significant for national security. What a total dimwit you are.
Ac,
I would respect you a (very) small bit if you had the balls to at least not hide behind the cowards' curtain.
You are so empty-headed, naive and intellectually shallow that I am genuinely in awe of your stupidity...
I am currently decorating our kitchen, and have met spiders that are brighter than you.
Carry on in your state of bliss, I hope the reality of what is brewing does not bite you or yours on the derriere, 'cos you ain't going to see it coming...
/feels better
Jay
I don't care about "jumped up tech".
I do care about the insinuation that people knew what was going on. It's become clear in the last 2 years that even Congress didn't know what was going on, and that the CIA/FBI/NSA & GCHQ when convenient play a shell game and pass the soap, with none of the accountability that was legislated taking hold.
Marcie Wheeler has pointed out numerous times how they play these rules, how they even refuse to implement directives for a decade with no repercussions. And of course they string out FOIAs for years and even directly lie to judges and Inspector Generals and Congressfolk, and yet the only ones who ever go to jail are... whistleblowers!!! Amazing how someone can brutally murder someone outside their job can go unpunished, but someone who reports that murder is hurting national security. They manage to say that these illegal activities are "rogue" and "unauthorized" yet reporting these supposedly rare and unsanctioned acts - whether the murder or the direct violation of privacy on a massive scale - is wrong because those rogue unsanctioned acts are confidential? If a CIA agent bludgeoned her husband to death, is that still a state secret for some reason? Why then all these other violations of CIA rules?
Hell, Snowden is just another unauthorized recipient of govt. intel, just like any globalist trade negotiator, economic advisor, captain of industry or R&D director. They don't call the CIA "The Company" for nothin'. I'd like to see a time map for all the CIA department heads' employment records in the great private industry-intel revolving door. You don't think that Halliburton or Bechtel aren't fully apprised in depth of the political lay of the land of the nation hosting their next project, or worse, taking an active, if clandestine, part in destabilizing said nation or interrogating various players of said nation and leaving their bodies in a ditch.
Considering how these agencies are always able to 'know' about someone who ends up performing an act of terror yet unable to do anything due to lack of resources, it's interesting to note that they can instantly deploy 200-250 people to try and plug the gap in their dirty underwear.
Perhaps if these agencies spent more money on actual people, doing actual intelligence, then they might be able to make more of less (data) and not get everyone's arse-hairs in a twist about the massive net they are casting over the populace.
They don't seem to be able to comprehend public opinion; at least they certainly don't give it any credence or respect - and it is that attitude that is distancing themselves from having any kind of popular support.
Fucking idiots if you ask me. Which you didn't :)
Sadly or otherwise(?) they have recruited too many people who failed to understand what they should be doing. Now you can hope this means that they have missed unimportant stuff or that they have not even collected unimportant stuff. However, if the quality of staff was better they might have done a better job of highlighting the dangers a deal sooner. It is a shame that we cannot ask those who died in recent events what they think about their personal security and safety now.
Surely by far and away the vast majority of people who have died are innocent Muslims, perpetually on the receiving end of the same spying military/state apparatuses used against you and I, with the addition of a series of multi-trillion dollar unilateral foreign invasions, divide-and-rule political interference and arms sales, that have laid waste to international communities.
One thing that strikes me is the big numbers being thrown around, 900,000 documents, 1.7 million etc.
How long does it take to read that number of documents, let alone fully digest.understand what they talking about, and then decide if they should be published?
If you take the 900k number,
At one page per document, and a reading time of 30 seconds per page that still takes just shy of 4 working years (8 hours per day, 5 days per week, 48 weeks per year)
given that the 'interesting' documents are morel ikly to be a lot longer than 1 page, you do the maths!
I have a speed-reading course to recommend you - read War & Peace in 3.5 minutes tops, the 2014 Congressional record in a longish bathroom break, the CIA code of honor in 1.7 seconds...
If we're going to stay on top of all these leaks, we better step up our game - through speedlearning!!! (Postage may apply)
«The compromise of NSA systems led the government to hire approximately 200 to 250 people who "triage, analyze, and assess DoD impacts related to the Snowden compromise," it is claimed.» No wonder things are looking up for the 99 % in the good old US of A !... ;-)
Henri
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
