Exclusive: Snowden Swiped Password From NSA Coworker
Source: NBC News
A civilian NSA employee recently resigned after being stripped of his security clearance for allowing former agency contractor Edward Snowden to use his personal log-in credentials to access classified information, according to an agency memo obtained by NBC News.
In addition, an active duty member of the U.S. military and a contractor have been barred from accessing National Security Agency facilities after they were “implicated” in actions that may have aided Snowden, the memo states. Their status is now being reviewed by their employers, the memo says.
The Feb. 10 memo, sent to congressional intelligence and judiciary committees this week, provides the first official account of a sweeping NSA internal inquiry aimed at identifying intelligence officials and contractors who may been responsible for one of the biggest security breaches in U.S. history. The memo is unclassified but labeled “for official use.
While the memo’s account is sketchy, it suggests that, contrary to Snowden’s statements, he used an element of trickery to retrieve his trove of tens of thousands of classified documents: “At Snowden’s request,” the civilian NSA employee, who is not identified by name, entered his password onto Snowden’s computer terminal, the memo states.
Read more: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/investigations/exclusive-snowden-swiped-password-nsa-coworker-n29006
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)What scheming little weasel, Comrade Eddie is...wow...
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)We all know who the scheming weasel is : The NSA. What shame they must feel being so Un-American.
mimi85
(1,805 posts)Snowden may be a hero to some, but not to me. The flight to China and then Russia is totally illogical. Two of the worst countries with human rights violations. Just too strange.
quakerboy
(13,919 posts)I think you are misusing language. Its actually fairly logical that if you perceive(rightly or wrongly) enough of a threat by the government of one country, you would attempt to seek refuge in another country that is at cross purposes with that country, thus less likely to take sides against you in the matter.
joshcryer
(62,269 posts)And Russia has complied with our nuclear weapons disposal pledge.
The world is not that black and white. Russia uses the "west" as an "Emmanuel Goldstein." If Obama offered up a drawdown of the anti-missile range he could get Snowden in a heartbeat. No country is "at complete and absolute odds" with another.
Ecuador handed over some guys the DEA wanted, the very country that has granted Assange asylum. Offer Ecuador something big and the asylum offer is dropped.
The key is that the US doesn't consider it important enough.
quakerboy
(13,919 posts)They virtually all have ties to the US, in one way or another. And if the US genuinely wanted someone bad enough, I'm sure we could make a deal sweet enough for even Rouhani to jump at.
But S is small potatoes, his data is all distributed, and pulling him in doesnt do anything but chill other whistleblowers more. So our government doesn't think its important enough to offer up anything valuable enough to talk Russia, who may work on nukes, but doesn't particularly love us, or China, who loves our markets, but isn't particularly fond of our interference in the politics of their region, to hand him over. The UK or Canada, those would be illogical places to go. Your return ride would arrive practically the moment you arrived, and it would be a cheap trip for the US to arrange, probably with no more cost than a request and a wink. But as long as you are a mild political figure, harmlessly making the US look bad, Russia or China are fairly logical places to go. They will most likely treat you fairly well, even if they treat the rest of their people like shit, because you have added value as compared to Dmitry Citizen off the street.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Although, of course, we may find out that no country has that much motivation and military power. Snowden is not safe and will never be safe anywhere in the world. He knew that when he went to China. He said so.
Tonight I watched a movie about two Danish-Korean comedians who went to North Korea. Now that is a country that has no whistleblowers. It's all lock-step. No one thinks for himself. It's a sure death sentence.
One thing you have to admit about Snowden, he thought for himself. He followed his conscience. It is terrible that people working in our intelligence agencies do not have whistleblower protection within our own country.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)The U.S. has a military budget that is TWICE the entire civilized world put together!
This is a ridiculous response...Neither country has a military that could pull that off even if they worked together!
reusrename
(1,716 posts)And it's America that claims the right to use "enhanced interrogation techniques."
These are not the official policies of any other nation that I know of. We are alone here, I think.
The hypocrisy is disappointing. No, it's actually nauseating.
aquart
(69,014 posts)reusrename
(1,716 posts)Institutionalized torture. When was that last seen on this planet?
Institutionalized concentration camps. Who was the last country to try that?
Bonus question: why would it matter if this stuff was done covertly or if it was legalized. What makes that a big deal?
I don't know if there's a correct answer to any of those questions, but I'm pretty sure they are the right questions to be asking.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)the administration seeks to a enact trade deal (TPP) that will send more American jobs to them, all without any regard or rectification of those human rights violations. Apparently the outrage of human rights violations is of concern only in response to "certain" topics of discussion.
Rockyj
(538 posts)to say...so I won't say that, but I will say, I believe, if you're against Snowden's whistle blowing about our government illegally collecting mega data on all of us without probable cause then SADLY you must be for an Orwellian future for us all.
underthematrix
(5,811 posts)AnalystInParadise
(1,832 posts)Two of the countries that the U.S. has very few HUMINT assets in. If you are going to flee with classified government data, where better to hide than the two countries with few U.S. assets in the Human Intelligence Collection Game and an active counter intelligence force that both nations possess. You see human rights abuses, I see someone who did his homework and knew where the U.S. would have the least chances of ever touching him.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)
Cha
(297,136 posts)Russia.
okaawhatever
(9,461 posts)what does that mean exactly? What part of the country is that expression from? I've lived in many states thanks to a military family, but that's a new one.
mimi85
(1,805 posts)I don't consider ES a whistleblower at all. That would be someone like Wendell Potter who I have enormous respect for.
Cha
(297,136 posts)
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)he borrowed them from a co-worker who ALLOWED him to use it.
"Comrad Eddie" my Aunt Martha. 
BeyondGeography
(39,369 posts)Good one. Sounds like some truth-in-lending rules were breached.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)". . . for allowing former agency contractor Edward Snowden to use his personal log-in credentials . . ."
What word would you suggest, then?
BeyondGeography
(39,369 posts)The article dances around the topic of wrongdoing. "Unwittingly," is as strong as it gets.
Hard to believe anyone would give a co-worker his or her password, especially in a high-security environment. But at least one person if not many did. Much more to be learned here about the how and why.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)Snowden and not what he revealed -- the NSA's activities, their wide-spread use, their secrecy, their unaccountability and their complete violation of the Constitution, not to mention our agreements with other governments. The scope is mind-boggling and you're pissed at the messenger. I don't get it. I will never get it.
BeyondGeography
(39,369 posts)And boredom usually doesn't lead to heroism.
frylock
(34,825 posts)your opinion with ZERO insight.
BeyondGeography
(39,369 posts)It's not like there's the scantest bit of evidence showing that he cares about relationships with other people. Or maybe that's why some of you relate to him. I don't know.
frylock
(34,825 posts)are they afraid to discuss the greater issue here? why do they continue to make shit up in their quest to kill the message? how will they feel about the NSA when president Jeb has the keys to the store?
BeyondGeography
(39,369 posts)Something approaching what happened to the careers of Ed's colleagues here for being drawn into his orbit, e.g. An innocent individual victim, not another government.
The reason no one can find anything along those lines is because NSA's data collection is a huge scam first and foremost. More crunching equals more money equals more personal power for those involved. Bureaucratic empire building and private sector profiteering, complete with the usual revolving door components. I see the profit motive trumping politics by a mile, but that's dull and doesn't get the attention it deserves imo.
frylock
(34,825 posts)fast comrade eddie the red is a traitor, but the guy that enabled snowden's actions by giving out his log/pass is just some poor schmuck that was duped out of his credentials? man, I hope you don't work in IT, let alone in a high-security environment.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)and likely will be blackballed from any govt work going forward....
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Much as the anti-Snowden crowd are so focused on him also. Six of one, half a dozen of the other 
(Insert distinction without a difference here)
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Comrade Eddie for sure....
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)lol. He better stay far away from America. They are starting to find "associates" who supposedly assisted in him and tarnishing them. Snowden is smarter then we think. He needs to NOT trust the government at this time.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)LOL..
Just a low level IT stooge doing server admin...
he didn't "hack" into anything, more proof
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)A "genius", or a "stooge". Seems both side predicate their best arguments on melodramatic name calling-- however, I'm quite sure you'll rationalize your use of it as constructive or some such... to better justify holding others to a higher standard than you hold yourself to.
(additionally, let's not confuse 'evidence' with 'proof'. It's indicative of sub-literate and biased reasoning...)
(insert creative rationalization here)
mike_c
(36,281 posts)
I heard he leaves the toilet seat up, too.
QC
(26,371 posts)
frylock
(34,825 posts)AnalystInParadise
(1,832 posts)Does that make the crimes he exposed better or worse? Or are you just trying to kill the messenger? I get so confused during the daily two minute hate towards Snowden
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)As was so infamously said by then Sec of Defense Stimson just prior to America's entry into Word War I, "Gentlemen do not read each other's mail..."
I can see that so many gentlemen to this day, heed those words as fonts of wisdom, regardless of the petulant need to label one a Comrade... or a weasel either.
(insert rationalization here...)
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)We also now know that Clapper knew he was lying. In an interview with NBC’s Andrea Mitchell that aired this past Sunday, Clapper was asked why he answered Wyden the way he did. He replied:
“I thought, though in retrospect, I was asked [a] ‘when are you going to … stop beating your wife’ kind of question, which is … not answerable necessarily by a simple yes or no. So I responded in what I thought was the most truthful, or least untruthful, manner by saying, ‘No.’ ” http://slate.me/18CZw4Y
They would make up any story or tell any lie that would serve their self interest, I think it's been proven, right?
jmowreader
(50,553 posts)To the intel community "collection" means recording the contents of a communication - in this case, the voice part of phone calls. And when he talks about "millions or hundreds of millions" of Americans...well no, they weren't collecting (using the term as it is used in the building) on that many Americans. If Sen. Wyden would have asked "does the NSA have any type of data at all..." then the answer would have been yes.
Simple example:
99.99999999 percent of the world would agree this is a red car. An intel guy will go to the grave swearing it's a maroon car.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)Also, that point about collection.... the quote from Wyden was "any type of data". If Clapper was cagey and SMART he could have said, "well of course we have every americans names"..... "and addresses".... "and vehicle...." etc. Avoidance.
In my view, since they have zero credibility, AND are corrupt, have zero regard for the Constitution, and are not the sharpest tools in the shed, they should be broken up and/or arrested, not that that will ever happen!
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)he doesn't have the super duper hacker skills he has claimed to have....He has lied on his applications from the get go...Yet people her believe he walks on water.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)credibility. Which makes them a useless appendage.
Not only that, they have complete disregard for the US Constitution - the very thing that have sworn to protect!
You seem like a nice person. Don't let liars take advantage of you
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)to get you through the night...
AnalystInParadise
(1,832 posts)I am curious what you are trying to claim.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Gerhard28
(59 posts)...that enlighten us and brighten our days?
grasswire
(50,130 posts)Do you really think that anyone being questioned would say "Yes, I happily cooperated with Ed"?
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)I can see it now ...
"Sure Ed, I'll give you my password and help you steal a big pile of national security secrets. What? You're going to run to Russia and hide afterward to avoid prosecution? Cool. No problem!! Here ya go, my password is 123456! Say hi to Putin for me!"
markpkessinger
(8,392 posts). . . was the employee himself. Having worked in corporate IT securityf, I will say simply that user IDs/password combinations exist for a reason. The responsibility for keeping a password secure rests solely with the user to whom the password belongs And certainly, any employee of an IT contractor doing work for the NSA should have fully understood and appreciated the critical importance of security in such an environment. If he didn't adequately grasp that, then he was not competent to be doing that kind of work in the first place, and thus deserved to be terminated.
AnalystInParadise
(1,832 posts)makes massive Fourth Amendment violations ok in your book? Interesting, you must have had no problems at all with Bush since he is an even larger dickbag
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)AnalystInParadise
(1,832 posts)James R. Clapper Jr., the director of national intelligence, has acknowledged that the court found the NSA in breach of the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures,
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)provided indicates that the FISA court did not find the program itself unconstitutional, but the implementation of the program originally created violations that ranged from trivial and inadvertent to serious. The court apparently allowed the NSA time to resolve these issues and did not shut the program down. Another collection method was shut down, apparently because it could not conform to privacy rules.
The program itself, you will note, is constitutional.
AnalystInParadise
(1,832 posts)That is an interesting spin on the facts. I was correct to be rude initially, my assessment of you was correct, protect the administration at any cost, even the loss of freedoms. No I will not be polite to you, you are happy with this situation.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)I think Mitnick wrote pretty comprehensively on this. 30 years ago or so. And people still don't listen, even in allegedly the most security-conscious place on earth. 
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)None of this would matter if the NSA's conduct was legal and did not violate our Constitution. None of this would matter because the surveillance would not be so shameful and such an affront to democracy that no one would care. But the fact is the surveillance is despicable and the administration and Congress are embarrassed by what they are doing, so they do what embarrassed "leaders" who have been caught doing something despicable always do: they call the revelation of their crimes, what else, crimes.
It's a topsy-turvy world. The criminals call the witnesses who come forward to reveal the criminals' crimes -- criminals.
RC
(25,592 posts)It is self-evident common sense. Yet, some still think the messenger is somehow the problem, the criminal, when, as you said, it is the NSA, our own government, that is engaged in far worse crimes that violate the Constitution and International law.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)That's what heroes would do...
Snowden has said he has already released everything he has (which was scant as it was)...GG claims to have more...but he is saving it for cashing out!
RC
(25,592 posts)You really don't understand, do you?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Duh....You really don't understand DO YOU???
So we no longer need be concerned about NSA overreach.
Common Sense Party
(14,139 posts) 1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)But only those unaffected by the means can stand on that claim ... these people implicated have just found themselves unemployed and unemployable in they chosen field. Oh well ... collateral damage.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)Leave Eddie alone!
snot
(10,520 posts)Maybe, finally, we can discuss the message.
dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)Nothing, that's what. And that is, in the end, the only thing that matters.
The focus on the messenger in this whole mess is one of the more pathetic statements about our country (and some DU posters) I have ever seen.
We are living under a system impervious to reform.
When it's time to choose new representatives, and eventually a new President, our system (both parties) does everything it can to ensure that nobody gets elected who isn't with the program. Time for the people to stand up and change that.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I wonder if those supportive of snowden's actions would be as supportive, if they, personally, were the people sacrificed at the alter of snowden's glorious mission? (See: Veil of Innocence, Rawls)
Assuming the people whose pass-word he used didn't knowingly give snowden their password, their careers/future employability has been seriously damaged.
Oh well, they're just collateral damage in the larger war for justice ... I guess.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)In their myopic world, it's ok for corporations to collect the most sensitive data on everyone in the United States - and have been since the inception of Credit Reporting Agencies - but Big Bad Gubmint must be curtailed and hamstrung, especially in a post 9/11 world, and especially when there's a black man in the White House.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Nobody has made this claim, and you are being flat-out dishonest.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Nobody's complained as LOUDLY about it as they are of the NSA, either, are they? If so, please provide a link where there is as much ballyhoo about corporations collecting the most sensitive data on us as the NSA's metadata search. Give me a break.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Fixed.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Thanks for playing, though.
See, the bad thing about the Ignore list is, you can't see me, but I can still see (and comment on) you.
Even though you can't see me . . . 
frylock
(34,825 posts)do you have any numbers?
frylock
(34,825 posts)to give him their credentials? I know I wouldn't, but then again I happen to know a thing or three about IT security.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)so is that a vote for: "No Ethical Dilemma"; "Yes I have an ethical dilemma"; "It's Complicated"; or, "What's an Ethical Dilemma?"?
frylock
(34,825 posts)I work in IT in the healthcare industry. every year we are required to complete compliance training, one module of course being IT security. it is DRUMMED into you that you do not, under any circumstances, provide your credentials to another employee. the fact that someone in a high-security setting working exclusively within the security sector would provide their credentials to another user is beyond the pale. that people here are defending that poor, poor fellow and bemoaning their dismissal is laughable, at best.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)just questioning whether his friendship/relationship/stupid being exploited by snowden poses any ethical dilemma for snowden supporters?
Clearly, it does not.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)If he acted "stupid" (and all signs seem to point to the fact that he acted beyond "stupidly" in light of the security situation with IT and the NSA), shouldn't he be held responsible/accountable?
And if we're going to go into ethical dilemmas, isn't the entire premise of the NSA unethical? And by what order of magnitude larger? So whose really the "most" unethical in this situation?
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Whether snowden and the guy were friends, had a personal relation or was just plan stupid ... is not my question or really concern. My question is whether snowden's exploiting whatever the guys condition (i.e., unethical conduct) to advance purpose poses an ethical problem for the folks supporting snowden?
The question really is that simple ... but I understand why people don't answer it.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Which came first?
The guy (against protocol) voluntarily handing over his password info?
Or Snowden using it?
And I too can understand why you don't want to answer that either.
Also I see you've completely avoided answering the larger ethical question of the NSA's unConstitutional activities vis a vis US citizens and the "morally ethical" aspect of that.
Because if the NSA's actions are "unethical" from the get-go, then their employees' actions either the guy in the OP or Snowden's are certainly lesser fish to fry.
And the guy in the OP is being made a scape-goat for the NSA in an attempt to camouflage their larger wrong.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)that is the first unethical act.
The "larger ethical question" was not what I asked ... it is your attempt to side-step my question.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)We don't know if Snowden "asked" him. Do you know that for sure?
Or if "as a friend", he just offered to do it? Because of "personal relationships" etc that you keep insisting are mitigating factors.
Your assumption that Snowden acted improperly is based on... nothing actually. Just this guy whose been fired (and even that action is fraught with unknowables).
The only thing we've been told that we MIGHT be able to take as a reasonable fact (and maybe not even that) is that this guy and Snowden had some kind of interface in regards to the NSA and intel. Honestly we don't even know (truthfully) that the NSA is telling the truth about how this went down or if this guy is just being set up to be the fall guy.
Aren't you an attorney? I'm pretty surprised at your immediate assumption of guilt on one part of the other - especially in light of the exposures of NSA transgressions.
Its weird to me how people decide guilt or innocence with the thinnest evidence. The OP's story is as tangible as cotton candy - all spun sugar - yet people seize upon it as though its some kind of diamond in the rough.
I'm just a horse trader. I don't take anyone's word for anything til I've looked in the horse's mouth and watched it go.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)The article stated that snowden asked/had the dope to log onto snowden's computer (and that's all we have to go on) ... and even if you believe the article to be B.S., how else can you explain the dope giving up his pass-word, in violation of protocol.
Yes ... But I am not assuming guilt (the guilt or innocence of anyone is not my concern in this matter); but rather taking the "facts" as reported (the only thing we have to go on) and asking an ethical question.
Would you agree that exploiting another's weakness, be it a personal relational or stupidity, to the detriment of another, to advance one's hidden agenda, is unethical?
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)But an NSA staffer who contacted me last month and asked not to be identified–and whose claims we checked with Snowden himself via his ACLU lawyer Ben Wizner—offered me a very different, firsthand portrait of how Snowden was seen by his colleagues in the agency’s Hawaii office: A principled and ultra-competent, if somewhat eccentric employee, and one who earned the access used to pull off his leak by impressing superiors with sheer talent.
The anonymous NSA staffer’s priority in contacting me, in fact, was to refute stories that have surfaced as the NSA and the media attempt to explain how a contractor was able to obtain and leak the tens of thousands of highly classified documents that have become the biggest public disclosure of NSA secrets in history. According to the source, Snowden didn’t dupe coworkers into handing over their passwords, as one report has claimed. Nor did Snowden fabricate SSH keys to gain unauthorized access, he or she says.
Instead, there’s little mystery as to how Snowden gained his access: It was given to him.
“That kid was a genius among geniuses,” says the NSA staffer. “NSA is full of smart people, but anybody who sat in a meeting with Ed will tell you he was in a class of his own…I’ve never seen anything like it.”
MORE AT LINK
So whose "facts" are correct?
I don't share your presumption that the NSA blurbs are "facts" at all. I don't even share your presumption that ANYTHING they're putting out there now as damage control is correct.
YMMV
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)the story continues to evolve, so I will withdraw the question. But, understand, your belief in the veracity of the anonymous staffer, is just as dubious to me, as the NSA favoring report is to you.
But will you answer my question, assuming the "facts" as first reported?
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Then still want me to answer "your question" based on completely unsubstantiated rumors?
Really?
Like I said, I'm no lawyer. Just a lowly horse trader and even I know that your premise is completely bogus. Why would I answer such a preposterous question based on a complete fabrication?
You, nor I, know if any of this is real. Except the hard data presented by Snowden of NSA unconstitutional overreach. Everything else is speculation and I refuse to be drawn into such ridiculous speculation.
Honestly, I don't even believe the "guy" in the OP is guilty of anything that would be a firing offense because I don't even know if that story is true. Do you? What evidence do you have that Snowden wasn't given free access to whatever info, ever?
My link is at least as plausible as the OP. And based on what I/we know about the NSA, entirely more believable that this guy's being set up as a fall guy.
I really like you. I mean that as a genuine compliment. This has been a real conversation - something DU has been entirely lacking lately. If you are ever in Chicago (I'm considered "rural" 40 miles west of Chi-town), I'd buy you a drink in a heartbeat (please know I'm a married middle age mom so there's no sexual connotations here... I just like the way your brain works!) Mopinko and I have been trying to do a DU meet-up here for forever....
Maybe if you came in, there'd be some impetus!
Peace!
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)And only one is reasonable assumed to be "based on completely unsubstantiated rumors" and "based on a complete fabrication"; whereas, the anonymous quote, is assumed to be ... at least as plausible; but not plausible to answer the, at this point, tangential question. See a problem here?
Chicago is my favorite city in the U.S. Every year, from 1988-1996, I spent two weeks in Chicago and loved every minute of it. And I have promised Mrs. 1SBM that we will get to The Taste of Chicago. Is it still held over the 4th of July weekend?
If we make it this year (which is a real possibility), I'll be sure to hit you up ... and I'll bring my wife, so no worries that I'll be seeking sex from you.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Last edited Fri Feb 14, 2014, 12:14 AM - Edit history (1)
And I'll drag Mr. Rider off the damn farm when you come in and we'll make it a proper DU meet up. Trust me, I'm an old pudgy curmudgeon with zero designs on your physical self - I'm married to a professional athlete and way beyond flirting games. You and your wife are safe with me.
Mopinko and I have been itching to pull it together. There are so many Chicago area DUers and its been wayyyy too long.
Peace!
First drinks on me...
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)The guy's someone with a high level of security clearance, working at one of the world's premier hacking organizations...
... and he does something that you want to mildly label as "stupid" and that he's just an "innocent victim". And yet, knowing this guy violated protocol six ways to Sunday, you still want this to be SNOWDEN'S fault?
You know the bigger ethical issues are the NSA violating our Constitution. And honestly, the NSA has the internal security problem. Its most likely not this guy's OR Snowden's fault that they were so easily hacked. Clearly the NSA's own internal issues are the problem but they want a fall guy.
And here he is.
Sucks because we don't even know if he's guilty or not. Truly.
Since Alexander is a big fat liar, he could just be selecting someone out of a small pool to take the fall.
Do you trust this?
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)Zero credibility.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Enrique
(27,461 posts)supporters of Snowden have already heard a number of irrelevant attacks on his character. This latest one doesn't stand out in any way that I can see.
AnalystInParadise
(1,832 posts)more deserving of protecting than the Constitutional rights of 300 million Americans. That is a particularly stupid line of reasoning. Typical response from the daily two minute hate on snowden crowd though.
Here is something: If the government was not doing anything illegal, the VAST majority of Snowden supporters would be on you side. But most of you seem to have decided that protecting this government more than protecting your fellow citizens. Fucking fascists make me sick.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)complete missing of the point.
AnalystInParadise
(1,832 posts)You want to defend the IC, ironically I work in the IC and there is no excuse for what has happened here.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)the fact you saw my question as "defending" anything, just shows you completely missed my point.
And the fact that you work in the "IC" (Industrial Complex?) that you rile against suggests a great deal about your ethics.
AnalystInParadise
(1,832 posts)Intelligence Community.
I was in the Army until retirement now a contractor (for hopefully only a few weeks more or less),I was a 96B/35F All Source Analyst, so much of this was beyond my level of knowing where the data was coming from. I don't work for a single INT, I am an All Source Analyst so all I would know is what INT it came from, not the actual source (sensor, platform, etc) or the method of collection. And yes I am leaving the IC after 20+ years after this. These activities are all illegal and constitutional violations and once made public have changed my attitude. Family needs to eat, but the job search continues. Say what you want about my ethics, but I am leaving the community.
But you can take heart, all the people with a conscience are leaving, pretty soon the only people left will be the fascists like you that defend this travesty. So cheer up, you and all your little jack booted friends will be left to run the workshop pretty soon.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)where I work, what I do/have done, yet you feel comfortable calling my a fascist and call my friends "jack booted" ... and yet, we KNOW where you worked and where you continue to work (in support of the system you claim to hate) ... it really must hurt to be so conflicted in thought and action ... or maybe not!
AnalystInParadise
(1,832 posts)or not? It really is that simple of a test.
As for me, I loved my job until a little over a year ago. And I am not conflicted, a conflicted person would stay and not be leaving. I became aware of the abuses, and immediately began looking to transition out. Family has to eat and I have principles, but also need to put food on the table. My conscience can handle this for a little while longer. Once I am free, I can really speak my mind.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I believe that snowden committed a crime to expose activities that he believed to be unconstitutional and he committed a crime to expose activities that have nothing to do with the U.S. Constitution.
Do I believe what the IC has done/is doing is unconstitutional? No ... and the arbitrator of what is/is not constitutional (the SCOTUS), has so said, when last asked to decide on meta-data/privacy (see: United States v. Miller, 425 U.S. 435 (1976); Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979); and relying there on: on that, this: http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/cases/show.php?db=special&id=364; though I have no doubt this question will be before the SCOTUS, again.)
I thank you for that bit of honesty ... while some might lambast you for engaging in situational ethics (and demand that you quit your job immediately), I see you engaging in real life decision making.
unblock
(52,195 posts)don't share your password!
the story is that he did it unwittingly, implying that snowden had some sneaky password-capture software in place (or maybe he just watched carefully over his shoulder). perhaps that's so, but i find it more plausible that the bozo did it quite willingly.
it's hard to imagine a scenario where the bozo logs into snowden's computer at snowden's request without violating basic security rules.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]“If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.”
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr]
unblock
(52,195 posts)valerief
(53,235 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)but I can imagine his/her doing so, without knowing snowden's intent. For example, "Hey Joe, I have a bug here ... My pass-word isn't working. Would you log on so I can see if it's just me?" "Sure pal!"
Stupid, but it happens all the time.
unblock
(52,195 posts)they drill it into your heads repeatedly. you can't even just jot down notes on a post-it and simply shred it later. as soon as you put classified information on a post-it, that post-it becomes a classified document and you have to register it as such into the system that tracks classified documents, and it has to be shredded through the official process (and people) for destroying classified documents.
when i was on a destroyer, we used to joke about writing something classified on someone else's dirty underwear in permanent ink while they were sleeping, so that they would have to register their dirty underwear with security as a classified document and then have it officially destroyed (there's no provision for washing away classified information.)
with that level of strictness, sharing a password is a very basic no-no.
it's merely stupid in a typical corporate setting. but in a highly secure environment you can't do this without major alarms going off inside your head.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Without exposing misplaced trust.
unblock
(52,195 posts)you have to prove your credentials every time you walk past security. you have to prove your credentials every time you log in to your computer. you cannot leave your computer unattended. you cannot take notes. you cannot share passwords. you have to log out to go to the bathroom.
there is no trust, misplaced or otherwise. they drill it in to you, everything needs to be verified, everything needs to go through proper security procedures, and you do it by the book a dozen times every day.
what this bozo did was a clear and obvious departure from routine practice, something he'd been told not to do many times.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)with everything you have written with respect to rules and protocol ... But the application of rules and/or protocol breaks down when personal relationships get involved ... that's my reference to "misplaced trust."
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)STRIPPING OF SECURITY CLEARANCE IS NOT ENOUGH
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)To the Constitution, not so much.
Pholus
(4,062 posts)Zero tolerance statement, check.
Disobeying basic grammatical rules, in this case punctuation, check.
Vaguely eliminationist sounding rhetoric, check.
It's like I just had a facebook post from my wingnut brother!
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)But an NSA staffer who contacted me last month and asked not to be identified–and whose claims we checked with Snowden himself via his ACLU lawyer Ben Wizner—offered me a very different, firsthand portrait of how Snowden was seen by his colleagues in the agency’s Hawaii office: A principled and ultra-competent, if somewhat eccentric employee, and one who earned the access used to pull off his leak by impressing superiors with sheer talent.
The anonymous NSA staffer’s priority in contacting me, in fact, was to refute stories that have surfaced as the NSA and the media attempt to explain how a contractor was able to obtain and leak the tens of thousands of highly classified documents that have become the biggest public disclosure of NSA secrets in history. According to the source, Snowden didn’t dupe coworkers into handing over their passwords, as one report has claimed. Nor did Snowden fabricate SSH keys to gain unauthorized access, he or she says.
Instead, there’s little mystery as to how Snowden gained his access: It was given to him.
“That kid was a genius among geniuses,” says the NSA staffer. “NSA is full of smart people, but anybody who sat in a meeting with Ed will tell you he was in a class of his own…I’ve never seen anything like it.”
MORE AT LINK
Sounds to me like the NSA is trying to find SOMEONE, some lower level person to blame and take the fall for their own internal lax security.
Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)And how a few here forgot it was posted here.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Its been on this thread sitting for hours and nobody wants to touch it.
Thanks for (trying) to draw attention to it (again, since I've posted it elsewhere and its usually the thread killer since nobody responds...)
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)joshcryer
(62,269 posts)Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)I forgot we gave the passwords to a private corporation who could do with them whatever they pleased and are not accountable the way a federal employee is.
If anyone thinks snowden had access to all this info, can you imagine what his bosses at his company have access to.
The NSA doesn't need to break the law when it's contractor can do it for them.
unreadierLizard
(475 posts)How so many people here railed rightfully so against the Patriot Act when it was introduced by the Shrub, yet when Obama and the NSA continue repressive surveillance state programs, those who expose said programs are traitors.
frylock
(34,825 posts)these people are very consistent with their inconsistencies.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)
sendero
(28,552 posts).... and I heard steps on cracks (thus potentially breaking his momma's back) and has a secret collection of fortune cookie fortunes.
Big. Fat. Hairy. Deal.
melm00se
(4,990 posts)is only as good as the people who are governed by it.
the most robust passwords and security layers are great...until some chucklehead decides to give his password to his buddy.
NoodleyAppendage
(4,619 posts)The question needs to be asked and considered, "Who benefits most from news from the NSA that Snowden reportedly used subterfuge in gaining the keys to the kingdom vs. access was standard for Booz Allen IT people of the same grade as Snowden?"
Sorry...not buying it NSA. Why don't you just trump up some child porn or rape charges, that seems to work much better in the character assassination game.
struggle4progress
(118,275 posts)By DAVID E. SANGER
FEB. 13, 2014
The National Security Agency has told Congress that it has forced out a civilian employee after a lengthy investigation to “assign accountability” for the disclosure of intelligence secrets by Edward J. Snowden, one of its former contractors.
Two others — identified only as an “active-duty military member” and another contractor — were “removed from access to N.S.A. information” and facilities last August. But because neither worked directly for the N.S.A., the agency told the House Judiciary Committee in a letter, any further action would have to be determined by their employers.
The letter, first reported by NBC News, was intended to answer congressional queries about who, beyond Mr. Snowden himself, would be held accountable for the security lapses that led to his disclosures. The answer appeared to suggest that no senior officials of the N.S.A. or its oversight organization, the office of the director of national intelligence, will be disciplined or fired for what officials have called the largest and most damaging disclosure of classified material in American history ...
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/14/us/politics/nsa-fires-civilian-employee-tied-to-snowden-leaks.html?hpw&rref=politics&_r=0
struggle4progress
(118,275 posts)By Ellen Nakashima, Updated: Thursday, February 13, 3:55 PM
A National Security Agency employee has resigned from his job after admitting to FBI investigators that he allowed Edward Snowden, then an NSA contractor, to use his personal computer credentials to gain access to classified information, according to an agency memo.
The unidentified employee was not aware that Snowden intended to obtain classified material for the purposes of disclosure, said the memo, which was first reported by NBC News.
The employee is one of three people who have been under investigation for their unwitting involvement in Snowden’s effort to remove the material in what may be the largest breach of classified information in history.
None was accused of collusion, said a senior U.S. official familiar with the investigation. “It’s a violation of procedures . . . but no ‘Hey, let’s conspire with him to steal information,’ ” said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing ...
Hissyspit
(45,788 posts)national intelligence, will be disciplined or fired."
struggle4progress
(118,275 posts)deserves some grief, too
markpkessinger
(8,392 posts)When the article says Snowden was "able to capture" the login information of NSA employees who logged on to his computer, it is implying that there was some kind of utility installed on Snowden's cmoputer that could capture and decrypt encrypted passwords. In an environment where security is so utterly mission-critical, the idea that a contractor would be permitted to connect his own computer to the NSA's servers. If contractors need to use dedicated computers of their own, then the way to do that securely is to have the NSA itself provide the computers with whatever applications the contractor has specified he or she needs pre-installed. And then you lock that user down from being able to install ANY software on that machine.
The story, if true, doesn't really impugn Snowden so much as it further indicts the competence of the NSA to know how to handle highly sensitive, secure data.
