New reports indicate that the FISA court has developed what was believed to be a secret part of the surveillance law, setting out rules for the collection, use and access of data based on various intelligence programs. While it is always good to have criteria that limit the processing of personal data, it can prove problematic if these criteria are secret. Furthermore, the information that has been made public indicates that the FISA court does not make any decisions in individual cases weighing the national security interest against the fundamental rights of the individuals concerned, but rather that the court must only authorize procedures at the point of collection (and possibly use ) of personal information of non-US persons. In addition, other safeguards do not appear to include case-level controls other than to ensure that mitigation procedures (procedures to ensure that targeted individuals are not US citizens) are followed.
A third issue is the relationship between intelligence programs under Section 215 of the US Homeland Security Act, Section 702 of the FISA Amendments and Executive Order 12333, on the one hand, and compliance by organizations with conditions for transferring personal data to third countries (including standard contractual clauses binding »Safe Harbor« business rules and principles), on the other hand. Indeed, the Safe Harbor Principles do not allow for the limitation of compliance with the principles »to the extent necessary to meet (...) the requirements of national security«.
The US-EU Safe Harbor is a simplified process for US companies under the EU Directive 95/46/EC on the protection of personal data. should prevent accidental disclosure of information or its loss. American companies can opt for the program as long as they follow the 7 principles from the said Directive. The process was developed by the US Department of Commerce in consultation with the EU.
However, 29WP doubts whether the seemingly large and structural control of personal data that has now emerged can still be considered an exception strictly limited to the necessary scope. In addition, 29WP points out that Article 3.1 (b) of the Commission Decision on the Safe Harbor Principles (Decision 2000/52/EC of 26 July 2000) gives the competent authorities in the Member States the possibility to suspend the flow of data in cases where there is a significant likelihood that the principles will be breached and if the continued transfer would result in an immediate risk of significant harm to data subjects.
It is also necessary to clarify whether US intelligence programs are in accordance with European and international law. This includes the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which sets out the right to privacy in general. It is even more important to assess the necessity and proportionality of these programs in accordance with Convention 108 of the Council of Europe. 29WP therefore considers it likely that the current practice of apparently large-scale collection and access to personal data of non-US persons is not covered by the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime. This is particularly important in the light of the ongoing discussion in the Committee of the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime (T-CY) on the preparation of an additional protocol to facilitate cross-border data flows in this area. ((Draft) elements of the Additional Protocol to the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime regarding cross-border access to data, T-CY (2013) 14 - version 9 April 2013). Such a draft Protocol could legitimize the current practice of the US intelligence community by allowing access to data stored on computers abroad using the law (or definitions of consent) of the party under investigation. According to 29WP, US authorities treat cybercrime as a matter of national security.
As a result, individuals, including those in EU member states, would not benefit from the protection provided by domestic privacy and data protection laws.
Another issue that needs to be addressed is the possibility of reparations for non-US persons. Affected individuals currently do not have the opportunity to enforce their fundamental rights in court or before an independent supervisory authority. It is true that, in general, individuals are not aware that they are of interest to the intelligence services. However, if suspicion arises, for example because an individual is unjustifiably deprived of liberty or restricted freedom of movement, the individual needs the ability to effectively challenge intelligence information, as is the case in many European countries.
As a result, individuals, including those in EU member states, would not benefit from the protection provided by domestic privacy and data protection laws.
29WP wishes to emphasize that it will not only focus its attention on intelligence programs used by the US, but will also seek to assess the impact of PRISM, including the use of information obtained through PRISM on European territory, to the extent that it is made possible by the mandate. In addition, 29WP intends to verify compliance with EU data protection principles and legislation on any similar intelligence programs on the territory of member states, such as Tempora, in its ongoing effort to ensure that the fundamental rights of all individuals are respected.
The European Commission will do its best to find answers to the questions raised above, both within and outside the framework of the ad hoc joint EU-US working group.
At the request of Great Britain and Sweden, the EU member states limited the mandate of the transatlantic working group, and the mixed group cannot touch intelligence issues, as they are the exclusive competence of the members.
NSA partner intelligence agencies in the world
Five Eyes (FVEY)
AU: ASD
CA: CSE
NZ; GCSB
UK: GCHQ
US: NSA
Nine Eyes (+4)
DK: FE
FR: DGSE
NL: AIVD
NO: NIS
Fourteen Eyes (+5)
BE: GISS
DE: BND
IT: AISE
SP: CNI
SE: FRA
Shady companies connected to Israel (IL, ISR) are eavesdropping on US citizens for the NSA. The NSA is getting bigger and stronger this way too. Behind the curtains of secrecy, the NSA relies on contractors with checkered pasts and ties to the Israeli intelligence service to organize and conduct large-scale wiretapping operations [12]. But who is listening to the listeners?
NSA’s main partners
The motto of the NSA is »how to make foreign information our information«!
On the basis of secret court orders, the NSA has obtained the largest US internet and telecommunications companies as the main partners in collecting intelligence.
The view of the NSA is that its operations are directed at the discovery and collection of data only foreign intelligence sources, and the doctrine of the fight against terrorism is justified for many of its actions.
Figure 10 The sketch shows the intersection of the »public internet« and the internal »Google Cloud,«where user data is collected and exploited by the NSA. Two engineers closely associated with Google »went crazy« when they saw the drawing! Leaked NSA Slide of Google Cloud (businessinsider.com)
Figure 11 Access to internet company data
Internet companies and the data they collect:
Microsoft. Some Microsoft websites collect email address, name, home or work address, or phone numbers. Some services require login with email and password. Microsoft also receives information sent by web browsers on the pages visited, along with the IP address, which includes the web address and the time of the visit. The company also uses cookies to provide more information about page views.
Yahoo. Yahoo collects personal information when users sign up for products or services, including name, address, date of birth, zip code and occupation. It also logs data from users’ computers, including IP addresses.
Google. Personal information is required to sign in to Google accounts, including name, email address, and phone number. Google e-mail - Gmail - stores e-mail contacts and e-mail topics for each account, which have a capacity of 10 GB. Search queries, IP addresses, phone information and cookies that uniquely identify each account are also stored. Chats are also collected if the user selects the »unofficial« option.
Snowden revealed that the NSA secretly hacked the main communications links connecting Yahoo and Google data centers around the world.
Facebook. Facebook requires personal information when signing up, such as name, email address, date of birth and gender. It also collects status updates, shared photos or videos, wall posts, comments on other posts, messages and chats. They also record the friends’ names and email details of those friends who have provided addresses on their profiles. They also record user meta-data from friends and also store GPS or other location information.
Paltalk (Video group chat service). Patalk is a service for instant chat, voice and video messages. Users must provide contact information, including an email address. The service uses cookies to track user behavior with the aim of providing targeted advertising.
YouTube. YouTube is owned by Google and the company uses the same data collection methods. Users signed in through their Google Accounts will have their YouTube searches, playlists, and subscriptions recorded through other user accounts.
Skype. Skype is part of Microsoft, its instant messaging service replaced Microsoft Messenger. Users submit personal information, including name, username and address, when signing up. Further profile information such as age, gender and preferred language are also recorded as options. Contact lists are stored, such as mobile device location information. Skype typically stores instant messages, voicemails, and video messages for between 30 and 90 days, although users can choose to keep their instant messaging history for longer.
AOL. AOL collects personal information from users who sign up or register for its products and services, but according to its privacy policy, users who do not report to the company in this way are »generally anonymous.«
Apple. Users signed in to Apple with IDs required for services such as iTunes, or registered for products - must provide personal information, including name, address, email address and phone number. The company also collects information about the people with whom Apple users share content, including their names and email addresses.
William Binney says there is a dossier on almost every American, Google »seems like a joke« compared to NSA data! With the data the NSA keeps in their programs and the government allows, they can see what you do in your life, it’s really scary!
Using satellites and the vast amount of data stored by the NSA, it even creates algorithms that can learn who is talking to whom and thus dissect our private lives. It does so without any regard for the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution. When police conduct an investigation, the amendment requires a showing of probable cause to suspect that the investigation will uncover criminal activity or contraband. There must be legally sufficient grounds for the investigation to be necessary. it is also important to know the following aspect of the U.S. Constitution: that the right of the people to be secure in person, house, papers, and effects against unreasonable search and seizure shall not be violated, and no warrant shall issue except upon probable cause supported by oath or declaration, especially by a description of the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.
According to whistleblower William Binney, the algorithms created by the NSA are actually part of the Big Data Research and Development Initiative, whose official purpose is to improve the tools and techniques needed to access, organize, and collect findings from huge amounts of digital data. Algorithms go through the database and look at everything.
But there is still hope, as the Office of the Director of National Intelligence appears to have recently acknowledged that the government’s spying efforts have crossed legal lines at least once. Let’s hope this all ends and our freedoms are preserved. As Benjamin Franklin said: Those who can give up fundamental liberty to gain a little temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security!
Figure 12 Interception of communications of US citizens
http://www.vice.com/read/a-brief-history-of-the-united-states-governments-warrentless-spying
The mass collection of data on the phones of US citizens is carried out by the NSA based on a close partnership with the FBI and a secret warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), also known as the FISA Court, is a US federal court established by the Act the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) to authorize requests by federal law enforcement agencies to conduct surveillance of suspected foreign intelligence agents within the United States. Such requests are most often initiated by the NSA and the FBI. Congress passed FISA and established its court based on the recommendations of the US Senate Intelligence Committee. Its powers have developed and expanded to such an extent that it has been called a »parallel Supreme Court«. Metadata collected by the NSA’s PRISM program provides information about the messages Americans send and receive, who is speaking to them, where they are, when they are speaking to the recipients, the length of the conversations and what device they are using.
The PRISM program is the NSA’s source of raw intelligence no. 1
The NSA partners with the FBI DITU (Data Technology Intercept Unit) to extract information from the servers of nine major US internet companies: Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, Paltalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube and Apple. This important partnership gives the NSA direct access to audio and video materials, photos, emails, documents and links for each of these systems. The »Top Secret« PRISM program was established in 2007 and allowed the NSA to monitor targeted individuals. The ability to conduct live search term surveillance has given the NSA significant insight into the thoughts and intentions of those being monitored.
.
Figure 13 A list of information providers and the type of data available to NSA analysts.
Figure 14 The flow of data collected by the PRISM program through many NSA systems and databases
Tapping mobile phones
The NSA’s cellphone-tapping program captures nearly 5 billion records a day and fills a massive database that stores 27 terabytes of location data on hundreds of millions of devices. By eavesdropping on the cables connecting cell phone networks around the world and working with partner companies, the NSA has installed interception equipment that can use mathematical techniques that allow NSA analysts to map the attitudes of cell phone owners by correlating their movement patterns over time. period of time with thousands or millions of other phone users crossing their paths. This program is called »Contraveler« and by tracking people whose movements are intercepted, it makes it possible to find unknown participants of known intelligence targets.
Submarine cable tapping strategy
The NSA’s Oakstar, Stormbrew, Blarney, and Fairview systems for eavesdropping on the world’s undersea cable network can process data flowing over the Internet. Each system is responsible for different types of intercepted data. For example, the Blarney system collects metadata that describes who is talking to whom and over which network and device.
There are two methods used to eavesdrop on a submarine cable network. Adapted nuclear submarines are used for techniques and tools that require physical devices to eavesdrop on submarine cables along strategic points in the network. Another method involves using probes to intercept where the cables connect to landing stations in different countries. These probes capture and copy the data that flows on.
Figure 15 Map of world submarine cables
Figure 16 Map of NSA access points for data collection around the world
NSA Intelligence Stalking: ‘Spy Without Borders’
The Borderless Intelligence mapping tool gives NSA analysts the means to track intelligence collection statistics around the world using a color-coded map to quickly determine the extent of data collection by geographic location. This global »heat« map assigns each country a color code indicating the intensity of surveillance, ranging from green for »at least control« through yellow and orange to red for the most intense control. With a monthly volume of domestically collected intelligence up to approximately three billion pieces, the United States of America is assigned the color orange! This would be an assessment that the internal enemy poses a great threat to the United States!
Figure 17 Global »heat« map
Intelligence from other sources
In addition to its own data collection activities, the NSA’s Domestic Surveillance Directorate receives a steady stream of information from its partner sources.
James R. Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, announced on 02/06/2014 that the FISC approved the US government’s request to amend the Telephone Metadata Program.
In his speech on 01/17/2014, US President Barack Obama ordered a transition from the Telephone Metadata Program (Section 215 FISA) as currently implemented and the establishment of a mechanism that maintains the capabilities the US needs without government ownership of this metadata. As a first step in this transition, the President directed the Attorney General to work with the FISC to ensure that phone metadata is only searched after a judicial determination that there is reasonable suspicion that the search terms are associated with a proven international terrorist organization, unless it is absolutely necessary. The president also ordered that query results be limited to metadata within two search terms instead of three.
To implement these two amendments, the Department of Justice filed a proposal with the FISC to amend its most recent amendment of 01/03/2014, specifically the order authorizing the collection of telephone metadata under Section 215 of FISA. The FISC approved the government’s proposal. In addition, the FISC ordered that the government, by February 17, 2014, conduct a classification review of the original government proposal from January 3 on the amendment of this decree and a decision on the approval of the proposal. After the review is complete, the motion and the two orders are posted, as appropriate, on the FISC website, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence has posted them on its website and on the IC on the Record website.
IC on the RECORD The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) was established on 08/21/2013 following the directive of US President Barack Obama from 08/09/2013 for immediate, fluid and direct access to factual information about lawful surveillance by the US intelligence community. icontherecord.tumblr.com in https://www.intelligence.gov/
Immediately after the establishment of IC on the RECORD, the website IC off the RECORD was established with the motto »Truth is coming, and it cannot be stopped«, which provides immediate, fluid and direct access to unauthorized disclosures of intelligence by the US intelligence community and its partners.
NSA ANT (Advanced Network Technology) Product Catalog
You can view the entire catalog or choose one of the product categories below!
Figure 18 Let’s click some icon above to see ANT products from this category! https://nsa.gov1.info/dni/index.html#top
The NSA Advanced Network Technology Catalog is a 50-page classified list of documents available to the National Security Agency (NSA) at the Advanced Network Technology (ANT) Division to assist in cyber surveillance.
Figure 19 Using radio waves to intercept computers
The New York Times (NYT) graphically demonstrated how the NSA uses radio frequencies to intercept computers not connected to the Internet. The NYT also reported that Snowden’s documents show »that the US has set up two data centers in China - shell companies - from which it can inject ‘malware’ into any computer (IC off the RECORD, January 14, 2014 ; the said page contains Snowden’s revelations published between June and December 2013).
Figure 20 Where is XKeyScore? The Xkeyscore program captures almost everything a typical user does on the Internet [16], [17].
In training materials, the NSA brags about Xkeyscore as the »largest« intelligence-gathering system on the Internet.
Snowden’s revelations contributed to an intense public and congressional debate about the scope of the NSA’s surveillance programs. Senior intelligence officials testified to the Senate Judiciary Committee about the classified documents in response »to earlier Guardian communications« about the massive collection of phone records and oversight by the Fisa watchdog.
The documents shed light on one of Snowden’s most controversial statements from his first video interview, published by the Guardian on June 10, 2013. »Me sitting at my desk,« Snowden said, »can eavesdrop on anyone, from you or your accountant to the federal the judge and even the president, provided I have a personal email«.
US officials have vehemently denied this claim by Snowden. Mike Rogers, the Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said of Snowden’s statement: »He’s lying. It’s impossible for him to do what he said he could do.«
However, XKeyscore training materials detail how, by filling out a simple on-screen form to justify a search, analysts can use these and other systems to mine massive agency databases. Claims are not reviewed by a Fisa court or any NSA staff before use!
The NSA touts Xkeyscore as the »most comprehensive« system for developing computer network intelligence - what the agency calls Digital Network Intelligence (DNI). One demo claims the program captures »almost everything a typical user does on the Internet,« including the content of e-mails, websites visited, and searches, as well as their metadata.
Analysts can also use XKeyscore and other NSA systems to intercept an individual’s Internet activity in real time.
Under US law, the NSA must obtain an individualized warrant from the Fisa court only if the target of their surveillance is a »US person,« although such a warrant is not required to intercept Americans’ communications with foreign targets. But XKeyscore provides the technological capability for large-scale electronic surveillance of US citizens without a warrant, provided that certain identifying information is known to the analyst, such as an email address or an IP address (e.g. 193.2.127.250 out.izum.si)
The slide titled »plug-ins« shows the digital activity that XKeyscore continuously collects data on and the analyst’s ability to query the databases at any time.
XKeyscore is intended to allow analysts to search metadata, as well as the content of email messages and other Internet activity, such as browsing history, even if the email account (»picker« in NSA parlance) associated with the targeted individual is not known.
Analysts can also search by name, phone number, IP address, keywords, language in which Internet activity took place, or type of browser used.
This is because »searching by email address limits our options«, as much of the time spent online is about actions that are anonymous.
The NSA claims that by 2008, 300 terrorists had been caught using XKeyscore intelligence.
Analysts warn that searching the entire database for content yields too many results to read. Instead, they are advised to use the metadata also stored in the databases to narrow down what needs to be reviewed.
A slide titled »plug-ins« in the December 2012 NSA document describes the various areas of searchable information. It includes every e-mail address visible in the session by username and domain, phone number visible in the session (e.g. book entry address or signature) and user activity - online mail and chat activity, which includes username, buddylist (list of people the user wants to follow), specific machine cookies, etc.
Email tracking
In another interview with the Guardian in June, Snowden elaborated on his claim that he could read anyone’s email if he had their email address. He said the claim is based in part on Xkeyscore’s email-searching capabilities, which Snowden says he was able to use while working as a Booz Allen contractor for the NSA.
One of the top-secret documents describes how the program »searches email, web pages anddocuments,« including »To, From, CC, BCC« lines and »Contact Us« pages on web pages.
Figure 23 Searches email, web pages and documents KS3 Photograph: Guardian [17]
To search for e-mail messages, an analyst using XKS enters the individual’s e-mail address in a simple online search form, along with the »justification« of the search and the time period in which the e-mail messages are being searched.
Figure 24 Surveillance by clicking on a few simple drop-down menus KS4 Photograph: Guardian [17]
Then the analyst chooses which of those returned messages he wants to read by opening them in the NSA’s reading software. The system is similar to the way NSA analysts can generally intercept any communications they choose, including »communications traversing the United States and communications terminating in the United States.«
One top-secret manual document from 2010, which describes the training of NSA analysts for general surveillance under the 2008 Fisa amendments, explains that analysts can initiate surveillance of each by clicking on a few simple drop-down menus that justify the surveillance from a legal point of view and the selection of a controlled person as a target. When options are selected in the drop-down menus, their destination is marked for electronic surveillance, and the analyst has the ability to review the content of their communications.
Chats, browsing history and other internet activities
In addition to email, the XKeyscore system allows analysts to monitor a virtually unlimited number of other Internet activities, including those on social networks.
Figure 25 Using XKeyscore to read the content of Facebook chats and private messages
KS5 Photograph: Guardian [17]
An NSA tool called DNI Presenter, which is used to read the content of stored email messages, also allows an analyst using XKeyscore to read the content of Facebook chats and private messages.
Figure 26 Monitoring Facebook chats by entering a username and time period in a search screen KS6 Photograph: Guardian [17]
An analyst can monitor such Facebook chats by entering a username and time period in a simple search screen.
Figure 27 Monitoring Internet browsing using user-entered search terms KS7 Photograph: Guardian [17]
Analysts can trace Internet browsing activity using a range of information, including search terms entered by the user and websites viewed.
Figure 28 The ability to search http activity by keyword KS8 Photograph: Guardian [17]
The ability to search HTTP activity by keyword gives the analyst access to what the NSA calls »almost everything the average user does on the Internet«!!!
Figure 29 Identification of the user’s IP address KS9 Photograph: Guardian [17]
The Xkeyscore program also allows the analyst to identify the IP address of each person who visits any website determined by the analyst.
The amount of communication available through programs like XKeyscore is incredible. In 2007, it was estimated that 850 billion »call events« and nearly 150 billion Internet records were collected and stored in NSA databases. They added 1-2 billion records every day.
William Binney, a former NSA mathematician, said the agency collected about 20 million transactions about US citizens with other US citizens, which he said included only phone calls and emails. A 2010 Washington Post article stated that NSA systems intercept and store 1.7 billion emails, phone calls and other types of communications every day.
Figure 30 A multi-level system for storing »interesting« content selected by the analyst KS10 Photograph: Guaridan [17]
The XKeyscore system continuously collects so much Internet data that it can only be stored for a short time. Content stays in the system for only three to five days, while metadata is kept for 30 days. Some sites receive more than 20 terabytes of data per day and only store it for 24 hours.
To solve this problem, the NSA created a multi-tiered system that allows analysts to store »interesting« content in other databases, such as one called Pinwale, which can keep material for up to five years.
One document shows that the XKeyscore databases now contain the most communications data collected by the NSA.
Figure 31 In 2012, at least 41 billion records were collected and stored in XKeyscore in one 30-day period. KS11 Photograph: Guardian [17]
Legal and technical limitations
While the 2008 amendments to the Fisa Act require an individualized warrant for targeted US persons, NSA analysts are allowed to intercept such individuals’ communications without a warrant if they are in contact with one of the NSA’s foreign targets.
ACLU11 Deputy Legal Director Jameel Jaffer told the Guardian that national security officials have made it clear that the main purpose of the new law is to allow the collection of large amounts of Americans’ communications without individualized warrants.
»The government doesn’t have to ‘target’ Americans to collect massive amounts of their communications,« Jaffer said. »The government inevitably collects the communications of many Americans« when it directs surveillance to foreign nationals.
.
Figure 32 An example from one Xkeyscore document shows an NSA target in Tehran communicating with people in Frankfurt, Amsterdam and New York KS12 Photograph: Guardian [17]
In recent years, the NSA has attempted to store exclusively domestic American communications in separate databases. But even the NSA documents acknowledge that such efforts are imperfect, as even purely domestic communications can travel through foreign systems, and NSA tools sometimes cannot determine the national origin of communications.
Additionally, all communications between Americans and from someone on foreign soil are included in the same databases as alien-alien communications, making them searchable without a warrant.
Some NSA analyst searches are regularly reviewed by supervisors within the NSA. »We are very rarely questioned about our searches,« Snowden told the Guardian in June, »but when we were questioned, it was usually along the lines of, ‘grow the rationale.’«
In a letter to Senator Ron Wyden, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper acknowledged that NSA analysts exceeded even legal limits as interpreted by the NSA in domestic surveillance.
Clapper acknowledged what he called »a number of compliance issues« and attributed them to »human error« and »very sophisticated technology issues« rather than »bad luck.«
Wyden, however, said on the Senate floor: »These violations are more serious than the violations of the intelligence community, and they are troubling.«
In a statement to the Guardian, an NSA spokesman said: »NSA activities are directed only against legitimate foreign intelligence targets in response to our leaders’ needs for information to protect our nation and its interests.«
XKeyscore is used as part of a legitimate foreign intelligence collection system.
Claims of unlimited and unverified analyst access to data in NSA collections are simply not true. Access to XKeyscore and all NSA analytical tools is limited to personnel who need access for their assigned duties... In addition, there are numerous technical, manual, and supervisory checks in the system to prevent intentional misuse.
Every NSA analyst search is regularly reviewed for accuracy and compliance with the law.
Programs of this type allow us to collect information for the successful implementation of missions - defense of the country and protection of American and allied military units abroad.
XKS aims to keep the entire content for 3-5 days by effectively »slowing down the Internet« so that analysts can go back and restore sessions that have been overlaid with new ones. Metadata is stored longer, for a period of 30 days. Many analyzes can be done with metadata alone (MARINA is a metadata-only repository).
XKS gives analysts unique access to terabytes of content and metadata. Typical websites select and submit to PINWALE less than 5 of the data they process for DNI. The rest of the data used to be removed, but is now temporarily stored and made available to analysts via X-KEYSCORE. For example, one of the XKS sites stores more data per day than is stored in PINWALE.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/894406-nsa-slides-xkeyscore.html
Innovations and development plan
The priority areas to which innovative activity should be directed are:
high speed selection
Toolbar
integration with the Marina metadata basev
General Packet Radio Service (GPRS); integration of WLAN controllers (Aruba Mobility Controller, WLC (Cisco Wireless LAN Controller), MSM (HP MSM multi-service controller provides advanced radio resource management with customization without having to replace the controller)
physical and personal security (SSO) and internet banking services (Cooperatives Rural and Development Bank (CRDB) in Tanzania)v
work processes
multilevel dictionariesv
Future
A development plan is a necessary condition for a certain future!
The NSA development plan envisages:
increasing speed (algorithmic and Cell Processor (R4))
presentation improvement
getting the essentials
VoIP (Voice over Internet Protocol or IP telephony)
more networking protocols
additional metadata: use of Google satellite images of the Earth, exchangeable image file format (officially Exif - a standard that defines the formats of images, sound and auxiliary tags used by digital cameras (including smartphones), scanners and other systems, integration of all CES-AppProcs12,
easier installation/maintenance/upgrade
Quod erat demonstrandum! What needed to be proven!
Snowden’s Heartbeat
In March 2012, Snowden began working in »The Tunnel,« a former aircraft factory-turned-NSA facility under a pineapple field in Kunia on the island of Oahu, Hawaii. He worked for the NSA under a Dell13 contract. Snowden moved to Hawaii for a more relaxed lifestyle and less stressful duties at a new job to reduce the triggers for his epileptic seizures. He was the sole employee of the Office of Information Sharing, where he worked as a SharePoint system administrator. It was then that he began to actively seek out the NSA’s surveillance capabilities and abuses. As part of his work, Snowden developed the Heartbeat system for automated retrieval of classified documents posted on intelligence community »reading boards.« Heartbeat was able to continuously search for new and unique documents and create a kind of aggregated newsfeed, tailored to each employee based on their interests and clearance. Heartbeat was able to access through the NSA network the networks of the CIA and the FBI, as well as the world’s most secret joint intelligence communications system of the Department of Defense. Heartbeat’s servers stored a copy of every scanned document, allowing Snowden to »conduct deep interagency searches that most agency heads could only dream of.« Snowden says almost all of the documents he later disclosed to reporters were obtained through Heartbeat.
Under the guise of compatibility testing, Snowden transferred documents from the Heartbeat server to outdated Dell desktop computers from his office, then onto SD (Secure Digital) cards after duplicating, compressing and encrypting them. He smuggled SD cards by hiding them in a Rubik’s cube, the latter in a sock or in his pocket. At home, he transferred them to a single external “drive”, which he left out in the open on his desk [14].
With Heartbeat, Snowden leaked documents proving mass surveillance by the US government. To expose mass surveillance, Snowden had to obtain documents from the NSA. Snowden was able to collect all the information he wanted with his Heartbeat program. The NSA knew that Snowden was reading the files, but as Heartbeat’s manager, he was not suspicious of them [29].
Snowden’s first contact with XKEYSCORE
He left Dell on March 15, 2013 to work as an »infrastructure analyst« at the National Threat Operations Center (NTOC) in Honolulu through contract work with Booz Allen Hamilton. NTOC had access to XKEYSCORE. Snowden testified that XKEYSCORE associates, which they called LOVEINT, viewed information about their current and former lovers. He also recalls that he was once affected when he watched a personal video of a father and his young son [14].
Final considerations.
The article is the last part that I wrote according to the tentative plan for my book »Information science on two-way bridges: A selection of theoretical works from information science«, organized according to the model of an »eclectic document« [1]. The »selected works« are classified into groups of sciences that I have envisaged according to their connection to information science, and this article belongs to the group of historical studies on information science and should be read in this context.
Based on his study of the Renaissance, Jean-Jacques Rousseau [30] concluded that progress brings moral decline.
I also show something similar in the »microessay« on the immanent critique of capitalism [31].
Information retrieval (IR) is a central issue of information theory and practice and one of the main phases of development. The term »information retrieval« was coined by C. N. Mooers [32], and the continuous development of modern information science actually began with early research and development of search techniques and systems.
According to Mooers the problem of »information retrieval« is the problem of directing a user to stored information, some of which may be unknown to him. It is a form of temporal signalling, which distinguishes it from the point-to-point signalling. In information retrieval, the addressee or receiver rather than the sender is the active party. Other differences are that communication is temporal from one epoch to a later epoch in time, though possibly at the same point in space. Communication is in all cases unidirectional. The sender cannot know the particular message that will be of later use to the receiver and must send all possible messages. The message is digitally representable. The physical document left in storage which contains the message is a »channel«.
The main purpose of collecting and searching for information is to ensure the discovery of information that is important to the user (relevant and pertinent, see footnote 7, pp. 8), with the help of appropriate search techniques and systems, and in this way the search for information precognitively affects the collection and processing and at the same time depends on them.
The search may refer to bibliographic records, text databases and multimedia systems, which are not limited to written documents.
The ultimate purpose of modern information science regarding the search for information content on the World Wide Web is fact retrieval (FR). However, because facts have a history, past, present and future - historicity, document retrieval (DR), which is traditionally dealt with by librarianship and archival science, is also necessary for their knowledge.
It is precisely from the complexity of the problematics of information retrieval that the interdisciplinary nature of information science originates, which emerges as its main characteristic.
In the 1960s, at the intersection of biomedicine and science of information, which a few years earlier had only been named information science, the theory about the spread of information as an infectious disease (epidemic) emerged. An epidemic is also an ecological process that includes many subtle balances and interdependent cyclical systems that should not be disrupted.
Regarding the growth of scientific literature, a change in semantics and a shift from epidemiology to ecology is needed. The process of spreading information as an infectious disease must be understood and protected, the process of spreading an infectious disease must be controlled and, if possible, epidemics prevented as soon as possible. Some advocated epidemiological approach, others an ecological one. The main intellectual (and technical) problem of scientific information and communication is how to remove garbage without significantly changing its ecology.
Basic elements are authors, articles in journals and books. Authors of articles spread the infection through their articles and books. Articles, journal and books represent infectious material. In addition to the authors’ articles, there are authors who are potential readers and users of published articles and books. Part of the author’s work is »found« - read, understand, use and quote an article or book, thus spreading information like a disease. What a big deal, we’re talking about an epidemic! Part of the readers do not »find« it, because they are »immune« to a certain infectious disease - they read an article or a book, but either do not understand it or do not evaluate it and use it as relevant for their work and scientific publications! Some potential readers have access to the article or book, but do not read it yet, and some do not even have the opportunity to read the article, either because they do not know the language in which the article or book is written (linguistic barrier) or because they do not have physical access to the article or book, which they transmit information like a contagious disease [33 ], [34].
The part of my book on the new theory of information has three parts »Plaidoyer for the renewed theory of information, part 1« [35], »Information Ecology 2nd part« [36]. and »Hoaxes, myths and prejudices in science : the case of Pierre Trémaux« [37].
In the first part, I present the understanding of information from the point of view of semiotics and biosemiotics, as well as biosemiotic interactive reinterpretation of anthropocentric and androcentric semiotics.
In the second part, I show that information is transmitted more widely than infectious diseases. The transmission and dissemination of ideas leads to the growth of knowledge systems. This growth includes the search and ecology of information.
The search for information accelerates the process of spreading knowledge like an infectious disease.
The foundation of information ecology is above all »truth«!
Members of the American Intelligence Community (IC) are convinced that the IC is an organization that 24/7/365 closely monitors and simulates the Earth and provides target users (the President of the United States, the National Security Council, Congress...) and the wider American public, the most recognizable, timely knowledge with clarity, objectivity and independence, necessary to strengthen the national security, economic power and technological superiority of the USA on the basis of information and computer science and the latest science of national security (Science of Security (SoS).
In a material on XKEYSCORE [16], entitled XKeyScore Success Stories, the NSA triumphantly reported that over 300 terrorists had been captured based on XKS intelligence. Daniel R. Coats [38] writes in the preface to the 2019 US National Intelligence Strategy for the next four-year period (2019), the director of the American intelligence community (Director of National Intelligence (DNI), which consists of 17 intelligence agencies), that the United States, faced with significant changes in the domestic and global environment, must be prepared for the 21st century and recognize emerging threats and opportunities. To »navigate« today’s turbulent and complex strategic environment, we need to do things differently, and that means we need to:
increase the integration and coordination of our intelligence activities in order to achieve the best effect and quality in the implementation of the mission without redundancy and duplication of work,
promote innovation for continuous improvement of work,
better leverage strong, unique and valuable partnerships to support and strengthen national security,
increase transparency while protecting national security data to increase accountability and public trust.
As it appears, the leading thought is national security based on the (new) science of security and privacy, but as for national security data, the emphasis is on its protection and the protection of the public against information fraud and deception!
The first issue of the NSA magazine The Next Wave for 2021 is dedicated to Deception Research: Using Science to Reveal the Truth!
The Security Science Initiative as the fundamental cybersecurity science needed to mature the cybersecurity discipline and support advances in cyber defense is being urgently sponsored by the NSA.
The search for elements of a formal basis for the design of security systems includes contributions from computer science, mathematics, behavioral science, economics, physics, and information science.
Such research is currently funded at Carnegie Mellon University, the International Institute for Computer Science in Berkeley, California (computer science), North Carolina State University (mathematics), the University of Illinois (behavioral sciences), the University of Kansas (economics), and Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee State (Physics). Science of Security Virtual Organization (SOS-VO) website - is an online community which promotes cooperation and partnerships within the academic community to advance cyber security science. Science of Security.net
The classification I use in my book includes all the sciences listed here, in addition to others.
In the first decade of the 21st century, the NSA contributed to the development of information science (which had to be proven), and in the second decade it focused on the development of the science of security (Science of Security, SoS).
The last cycle of the development of information science indirectly enabled the development of the science of security with all the positive and negative consequences for the right to privacy and the freedoms of individuals without exception.
According to Kant14, the moral good of an act follows only from a good intention. Hegel15 was critical of this principle, and his saying that intentions are like dry leaves that never turned green is notorious.
Regardless of the purposes and goals, the intelligence sector has become a development-oriented global provider of informational exosomatic social memory16, which also includes commonplaces such as secret meetings with mistresses or passages of grandfathers with grandchildren.
In such an interweaving of circumstances, of course, the right to privacy became a dead letter on paper.
The emergence of security science required a new perspective on information science and technology. Privacy is also the subject of a special research field,
Cloud privacy has become a hot topic after it was revealed that the NSA is working with some of the biggest companies on the internet to collect user data.
Privacy in cloud should not be confused with cloud security. While good security can help ensure privacy, security is more about preventing illegal access to our content. Privacy, on the other hand, is about limiting lawful access: how and with whom the cloud provider can use personal data, and with whom it can and cannot share it.
By definition, a privacy policy is an agreement that requires a company that holds personal information to tell what information is collected and how it is used. In general, such policies are considered standard practice if the company collecting the data has enough information to identify the individual concerned. However, the laws governing these policies vary from state to state!
Reference.
[1] Gerkeš, M,, 1999. Kakovost informacij na WWW in eklektični dokumenti. Cobiss obv. 4 (1), pp. 14-23. file:///C:/Users/tvrtkos/Downloads/publication20(25).pdf
[4] Britovšek, P. and Šercar, T. M., 2014. Utjecaj obavještajne revolucije na razvoj informacijske znanosti, jačanje tendencija informacijskog totalitarizma in razvoj informacijskog prava [Elektronski vir] = Influence of intelligence revolution on the development of infomation science, strengthening the trends of information totalitarianism and the development of information law- Društvo i tehnologija 2014. - dr. Juraj Plenković [elektronski vir] = Society and technology 2014 - dr. Juraj Plenković : book of manuscripts. – pp.682-709. https://bib.irb.hr/datoteka/703746.DIT_2014_-_Dr.Juraj_Plenkovic.pdf [5] Buckland, M. K., 1992. Emanuel Goldberg, electronic documentation retrieval, and Vannaver Bush s Memex. JASIS 43, pp. 284-294.
[6] Burke, C., 1994. Information and secrecy: Vannaver Bush, Ultra, and the other Memex. Metuchan, NJ, Scarecrow Press.
