Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

morningfog

(18,115 posts)
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 07:45 AM Aug 2013

How Laura Poitras Helped Snowden Spill His Secrets

This past January, Laura Poitras received a curious e-mail from an anonymous stranger requesting her public encryption key. For almost two years, Poitras had been working on a documentary about surveillance, and she occasionally received queries from strangers. She replied to this one and sent her public key — allowing him or her to send an encrypted e-mail that only Poitras could open, with her private key — but she didn’t think much would come of it.

The stranger responded with instructions for creating an even more secure system to protect their exchanges. Promising sensitive information, the stranger told Poitras to select long pass phrases that could withstand a brute-force attack by networked computers. “Assume that your adversary is capable of a trillion guesses per second,” the stranger wrote.

Before long, Poitras received an encrypted message that outlined a number of secret surveillance programs run by the government. She had heard of one of them but not the others. After describing each program, the stranger wrote some version of the phrase, “This I can prove.”

Seconds after she decrypted and read the e-mail, Poitras disconnected from the Internet and removed the message from her computer. “I thought, O.K., if this is true, my life just changed,” she told me last month. “It was staggering, what he claimed to know and be able to provide. I just knew that I had to change everything.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/18/magazine/laura-poitras-snowden.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

This is a great read. There are some interesting nuggets throughout, such as, Greenwald and Poitras possessing thousands of documents from Snowden that they are working through. It goes into what their motives are and how they work.

54 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
How Laura Poitras Helped Snowden Spill His Secrets (Original Post) morningfog Aug 2013 OP
7,735 words Kolesar Aug 2013 #1
C'mon. You can do better than that. morningfog Aug 2013 #3
Reading 7735 words is sooooo hard. Luminous Animal Aug 2013 #18
And inconvenient when I could be reading about bonds Kolesar Aug 2013 #20
Why? We were told what was in Snowden's garage and there must have been millions of words sabrina 1 Aug 2013 #22
This section is particularly telling. leveymg Aug 2013 #2
Scary!! This is how they treat people who aren't doing anything wrong once the pop up dkf Aug 2013 #9
If we don't address these issues marions ghost Aug 2013 #21
And she wasn't the only one. Was she on the infamous 'no fly list', and whatever happened to that? sabrina 1 Aug 2013 #23
She was on another list: the detain and hassle list. leveymg Aug 2013 #29
Absolutely disgusting hueymahl Aug 2013 #52
Agree. Also, KNR to your 7/15 posting re: Blank on Intel chips, microcodes and MS updates. leveymg Aug 2013 #54
Throw her in a cell with Greenwald and Eddie. Conspiracy to steal state secrets is a crime. MjolnirTime Aug 2013 #4
That's the worst possible crime there could be in the secret surveillance state. dkf Aug 2013 #14
I suppose you can quote those parts that confirm your allegation. Luminous Animal Aug 2013 #16
Snowden said he got the job at Booz to steal secrets. MjolnirTime Aug 2013 #28
Yes. He did say that... Luminous Animal Aug 2013 #31
I see why you need to cling to that belief. It absolves those you admire of guilt. MjolnirTime Aug 2013 #38
So, when are you going to call for the arrest of WaPo's Bart Gellman? Luminous Animal Aug 2013 #39
You're missing the sarcasm tag hueymahl Aug 2013 #53
Everyone needs to read this in its entirety. woo me with science Aug 2013 #5
+1000 n/t Catherina Aug 2013 #7
Frightening, disgusting, disturbing. The new normal. chimpymustgo Aug 2013 #45
I just finished reading the whole thing. It was rivetting Catherina Aug 2013 #6
Not to worry, Clapper is in charge now!! What could go wrong? sabrina 1 Aug 2013 #25
Fantastic article. For those who have exceeded their 10 article NYT limit, mobile link below Luminous Animal Aug 2013 #8
Kick. Luminous Animal Aug 2013 #10
K&R marions ghost Aug 2013 #11
Fascinating. BlueCheese Aug 2013 #12
their effort to... expose government surveillance may have condemned them to a lifetime of it. Luminous Animal Aug 2013 #13
The United States of America. woo me with science Aug 2013 #24
The government cannot justify this behavior. woo me with science Aug 2013 #15
“I’ve been told nothing, I’ve been asked nothing, and I’ve done nothing ... Laughing Mirror Aug 2013 #17
Uh-oh... ljm2002 Aug 2013 #19
Yes, but Greenwald has turned down money we've found out. I haven't seen any comment on that sabrina 1 Aug 2013 #26
funny the "cashing in" crowd never has a problem with Clinton's six-figure speaking engagements frylock Aug 2013 #34
From a chef to now this, Poitras is an interesting person. Waiting For Everyman Aug 2013 #27
The Libertarian Party of Washington St. used Poitras as a reference: Whisp Aug 2013 #30
If she is a Libertarian Savannahmann Aug 2013 #35
the coincidence of GG, Snow and possibly Poitras being of Libertarian bent Whisp Aug 2013 #36
Ooh scary libertarians. Luminous Animal Aug 2013 #40
yes, Ron Paulers are scarey. Whisp Aug 2013 #41
Again I ask the question Savannahmann Aug 2013 #43
beg to differ about the information being accurate! Whisp Aug 2013 #44
Logic at work here. Savannahmann Aug 2013 #46
Nobody cares. It is beside the point. That meme has outlived any usefulness it may have ever had. nt Mojorabbit Aug 2013 #47
Indeed. Some people say.... The new standard for facts. Luminous Animal Aug 2013 #37
Well, then, let's forget the illegal spying on Americans. sabrina 1 Aug 2013 #50
shows the extreme caution Snowden/Poitras exercised to secure communications. nashville_brook Aug 2013 #32
Quite a read... beevul Aug 2013 #33
Kick. Luminous Animal Aug 2013 #42
It's a great piece. n/t DirkGently Aug 2013 #48
Kick woo me with science Aug 2013 #49
k & r. eom wildbilln864 Aug 2013 #51

Kolesar

(31,182 posts)
1. 7,735 words
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 08:25 AM
Aug 2013

You might want to skip past the descriptions of the dogs and the monkeys and what's in Greenwald's refrigerator.

Kolesar

(31,182 posts)
20. And inconvenient when I could be reading about bonds
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 12:56 PM
Aug 2013

Gotta make choices: drama or retirement planning

I read a third of it, btw. How much did you read?

Uh, don't ask

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
22. Why? We were told what was in Snowden's garage and there must have been millions of words
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 01:35 PM
Aug 2013

written about that.

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
2. This section is particularly telling.
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 08:48 AM
Aug 2013

And some people don't seem to grasp that this truly is no longer is the Land of the Free, why the major media is now afraid to independently report the facts on the ground about US military operations, and why a few brave people are blowing the whistle.

This is what happened to Poitras after she made a critical movie about the effects of the occupation of Iraq in which, in one scene, she captured footage from the rooftop of an Iraqi friend's apartment of a US attack on a nearby mosque in Baghdad in which one US soldier was killed. For no other reason than she happened to be there, and shot the scene without prior permission from her military minders, she was accused of aiding the enemy by some in the US Army:

(Note also the reference to the "400 point scale" that the government uses to profile those Americans who are considered security threats, no doubt developed with the aid of the NSA's profiling and surveillance systems, and the Kafkaeque way the Feds detain and search persons at the constitutional no-man's land that is the US border)

Although the allegations were without evidence, they may be related to Poitras’s many detentions and searches. Hendrickson and another soldier told me that in 2007 — months after she was first detained — investigators from the Department of Justice’s Joint Terrorism Task Force interviewed them, inquiring about Poitras’s activities in Baghdad that day. Poitras was never contacted by those or any other investigators, however. “Iraq forces and the U.S. military raided a mosque during Friday prayers and killed several people,” Poitras said. “Violence broke out the next day. I am a documentary filmmaker and was filming in the neighborhood. Any suggestion I knew about an attack is false. The U.S. government should investigate who ordered the raid, not journalists covering the war.”

In June 2006, her tickets on domestic flights were marked “SSSS” — Secondary Security Screening Selection — which means the bearer faces extra scrutiny beyond the usual measures. She was detained for the first time at Newark International Airport before boarding a flight to Israel, where she was showing her film. On her return flight, she was held for two hours before being allowed to re-enter the country. The next month, she traveled to Bosnia to show the film at a festival there. When she flew out of Sarajevo and landed in Vienna, she was paged on the airport loudspeaker and told to go to a security desk; from there she was led to a van and driven to another part of the airport, then taken into a room where luggage was examined.

“They took my bags and checked them,” Poitras said. “They asked me what I was doing, and I said I was showing a movie in Sarajevo about the Iraq war. And then I sort of befriended the security guy. I asked what was going on. He said: ‘You’re flagged. You have a threat score that is off the Richter scale. You are at 400 out of 400.’ I said, ‘Is this a scoring system that works throughout all of Europe, or is this an American scoring system?’ He said. ‘No, this is your government that has this and has told us to stop you.’ ”

After 9/11, the U.S. government began compiling a terrorist watch list that was at one point estimated to contain nearly a million names. There are at least two subsidiary lists that relate to air travel. The no-fly list contains the names of tens of thousands of people who are not allowed to fly into or out of the country. The selectee list, which is larger than the no-fly list, subjects people to extra airport inspections and questioning. These lists have been criticized by civil rights groups for being too broad and arbitrary and for violating the rights of Americans who are on them.

In Vienna, Poitras was eventually cleared to board her connecting flight to New York, but when she landed at J.F.K., she was met at the gate by two armed law-enforcement agents and taken to a room for questioning. It is a routine that has happened so many times since then — on more than 40 occasions — that she has lost precise count. Initially, she said, the authorities were interested in the paper she carried, copying her receipts and, once, her notebook. After she stopped carrying her notes, they focused on her electronics instead, telling her that if she didn’t answer their questions, they would confiscate her gear and get their answers that way. On one occasion, Poitras says, they did seize her computers and cellphones and kept them for weeks. She was also told that her refusal to answer questions was itself a suspicious act. Because the interrogations took place at international boarding crossings, where the government contends that ordinary constitutional rights do not apply, she was not permitted to have a lawyer present.

marions ghost

(19,841 posts)
21. If we don't address these issues
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 01:15 PM
Aug 2013

and do something about it, will we ever know what is real and what is illusion in this society ever again?

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
23. And she wasn't the only one. Was she on the infamous 'no fly list', and whatever happened to that?
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 01:37 PM
Aug 2013

hueymahl

(2,496 posts)
52. Absolutely disgusting
Wed Aug 14, 2013, 10:21 AM
Aug 2013

Makes me ashamed to be an American. Strike that, makes me ashamed of what we have become.

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
54. Agree. Also, KNR to your 7/15 posting re: Blank on Intel chips, microcodes and MS updates.
Wed Aug 14, 2013, 12:08 PM
Aug 2013

Very clear and useful treatment of a complicated subject.

 

MjolnirTime

(1,800 posts)
4. Throw her in a cell with Greenwald and Eddie. Conspiracy to steal state secrets is a crime.
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 10:34 AM
Aug 2013

Snowden did not get the job at Booz until April. This story further confirms that the spying was completely premeditated and assisted.

 

dkf

(37,305 posts)
14. That's the worst possible crime there could be in the secret surveillance state.
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 12:03 PM
Aug 2013

In a Democracy we wouldn't need leaks.

 

MjolnirTime

(1,800 posts)
28. Snowden said he got the job at Booz to steal secrets.
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 02:15 PM
Aug 2013

Greenwald, and now Poitras, have admitted to setting up their link to Snowden in January.

Snowden got the job in April.

It's was a conspiracy to leak state secrets. Plain and simple.

Why ignore it?

You can agree with the action, but you cannot deny it.

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
31. Yes. He did say that...
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 02:58 PM
Aug 2013

Last edited Tue Aug 13, 2013, 04:49 PM - Edit history (1)

but clearly Poitras and Greenwald did not know his work history or who he was or where he was getting his info or when he got it. Neither Poitras or Greenwald were active agents in any of Snowden's actions until they received the documents.

So no, there was no conspiracy. It was a source leaking secrets to journalists.

Why characterize it any other way? And why haven't you called for the arrest of Bart Gellman?

 

MjolnirTime

(1,800 posts)
38. I see why you need to cling to that belief. It absolves those you admire of guilt.
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 04:47 PM
Aug 2013

When Snowden is brought in, Greenwald will follow.

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
39. So, when are you going to call for the arrest of WaPo's Bart Gellman?
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 04:50 PM
Aug 2013

He co-wrote the 2nd NSA story with Poitras.

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
5. Everyone needs to read this in its entirety.
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 11:02 AM
Aug 2013

The treatment of Laura Poitras demonstrates what this government has really become.

Journalism itself is now considered the enemy.

This is the behavior of a growing totalitarian state, not the United States of America.

Catherina

(35,568 posts)
6. I just finished reading the whole thing. It was rivetting
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 11:31 AM
Aug 2013
"Do I think the surveillance state is out of control? Yes, I do. This is scary, and people should be scared. A shadow and secret government has grown and grown, all in the name of national security and without the oversight or national debate that one would think a democracy would have."


Thank you Morningfog!

BlueCheese

(2,522 posts)
12. Fascinating.
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 12:00 PM
Aug 2013

Thanks for posting. Parts of it read like something out of a spy novel.

It was also reassuring to know how technically sophisticated Snowden and Poitras are. They understand this stuff-- they're not just wandering around in the dark here.

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
13. their effort to... expose government surveillance may have condemned them to a lifetime of it.
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 12:03 PM
Aug 2013
“Our lives will never be the same,” Poitras said. “I don’t know if I’ll ever be able to live someplace and feel like I have my privacy. That might be just completely gone.”

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
15. The government cannot justify this behavior.
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 12:20 PM
Aug 2013

Again, every American needs to read what is being done to journalism in this country.

Laughing Mirror

(4,185 posts)
17. “I’ve been told nothing, I’ve been asked nothing, and I’ve done nothing ...
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 12:25 PM
Aug 2013

It’s like Kafka. Nobody ever tells you what the accusation is.”

ljm2002

(10,751 posts)
19. Uh-oh...
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 12:56 PM
Aug 2013

...time to throw Peter Maass under the bus:

Peter Maass is an investigative reporter working on a book about surveillance and privacy.


He's cashing in! The bastard!!

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
26. Yes, but Greenwald has turned down money we've found out. I haven't seen any comment on that
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 01:41 PM
Aug 2013

for some curious reason.

Waiting For Everyman

(9,385 posts)
27. From a chef to now this, Poitras is an interesting person.
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 01:48 PM
Aug 2013

Greenwald calls her "the Kaiser Soze of the NSA leaks story". Very recommended.

I'm also wondering if Peter Maas is related to the Peter Maas who wrote Serpico. From what I can see in his bio, apparently not, but that's an interesting coincidence.

 

Whisp

(24,096 posts)
30. The Libertarian Party of Washington St. used Poitras as a reference:
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 02:24 PM
Aug 2013
http://www.lpwa.org/nsa-spying-on-americans-through-corporations/

NSA Spying on Americans Through Corporations

The NSA is amassing personal information directly from servers of the providers through video chats, emails, photographs, times and dates of connection to the internet, as well as any other documentation proving association.

---
References

Tate, Julie, Robert O’Harrow, Jr., Barton Gellman, and Laura Poitras. “Nation & World.” The Seattle Times. N.p., 7 June 2013. Web. 08 June 2013.

---
I've heard that Poitras is also Libertarian minded, like Greenwald and Snowden. Could this all be just a coincidence if true?
 

Savannahmann

(3,891 posts)
35. If she is a Libertarian
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 04:02 PM
Aug 2013

Does that make the spying OK? What are the credentials of the individual who is OK to report on this in your opinion? I just ask because if the messenger is more important than the message, then who is acceptable to carry this one?

 

Whisp

(24,096 posts)
36. the coincidence of GG, Snow and possibly Poitras being of Libertarian bent
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 04:39 PM
Aug 2013

I think is a fair observation.

 

Whisp

(24,096 posts)
41. yes, Ron Paulers are scarey.
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 05:18 PM
Aug 2013

Fuck Ron Paul is a racist piece of shit, just for starters.
Do we really have to go over this again?

 

Savannahmann

(3,891 posts)
43. Again I ask the question
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 07:49 PM
Aug 2013

If the problem you and others have is related to the messenger, then who would be acceptable to deliver the message?

We know the information being reported is accurate, the Government has charged Snowden for telling the world about it. If it was a lie, then it wouldn't be a crime. So the objection left is the messenger. So who would be acceptable?

 

Whisp

(24,096 posts)
44. beg to differ about the information being accurate!
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 08:54 PM
Aug 2013

The government has charged Snowden with THEFT of classified material.


There doesn't seem to be any point in continuing this if you cannot accept those two proven facts.

 

Savannahmann

(3,891 posts)
46. Logic at work here.
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 09:57 PM
Aug 2013

Theft of classified documents. Ok. But would lies and non existent programs be classified? Your assertion that the information is not accurate because the messenger sucks is asinine. If we are classifying things, then obviously they are true. We don't classify comic books or other fiction. Nobody does for a reason, no one cares if someone reads fiction.

So the information must be true. It is the only logical or rational conclusion. Any other conclusion is like the comic book mentioned above, a belief in fiction over fact.

So it isn't the messenger that people have a problem with. It is the message that the defenders and apologists want quashed.

Mojorabbit

(16,020 posts)
47. Nobody cares. It is beside the point. That meme has outlived any usefulness it may have ever had. nt
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 10:45 PM
Aug 2013

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
50. Well, then, let's forget the illegal spying on Americans.
Wed Aug 14, 2013, 12:24 AM
Aug 2013

Can I ask you something? Do you really view the world this way, that no human being is worth the time of day unless they are part of your political party? No person outside the Democratic Party has ever, EVER said anything worthwhile, ever had a conscience, ever did something good and decent?

This kind of thinking is dangerous frankly, so I hope this is not how you actually think, but are just playing devil's advocate or something.

nashville_brook

(20,958 posts)
32. shows the extreme caution Snowden/Poitras exercised to secure communications.
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 03:22 PM
Aug 2013

'..."She replied to this one and sent her public key — allowing him or her to send an encrypted e-mail that only Poitras could open, with her private key — but she didn’t think much would come of it.

The stranger responded with instructions for creating an even more secure system to protect their exchanges. Promising sensitive information, the stranger told Poitras to select long pass phrases that could withstand a brute-force attack by networked computers. “Assume that your adversary is capable of a trillion guesses per second,” the stranger wrote."

snip

"Once she began working on her surveillance film in 2011, she raised her digital security to an even higher level. She cut down her use of a cellphone, which betrays not only who you are calling and when, but your location at any given point in time. She was careful about e-mailing sensitive documents or having sensitive conversations on the phone. She began using software that masked the Web sites she visited. After she was contacted by Snowden in 2013, she tightened her security yet another notch. In addition to encrypting any sensitive e-mails, she began using different computers for editing film, for communicating and for reading sensitive documents (the one for sensitive documents is air-gapped, meaning it has never been connected to the Internet).

These precautions might seem paranoid — Poitras describes them as “pretty extreme” — but the people she has interviewed for her film were targets of the sort of surveillance and seizure that she fears."



Latest Discussions»General Discussion»How Laura Poitras Helped ...