Recent leaks which seem to come from within the NSA may not originate from Edward Snowden, suggesting there is a second leaker at work.Getty

Just over a year ago Edward Snowden began revealing the breadth and depth of government surveillance around the world.

It has changed the way a lot of people have operated online with an increased interest in privacy and security even among ordinary citizens.

The revelations from the documents Snowden took while working for the NSA continue to shock and surprise, with the latest revelationshowing that the NSA captured and retained intimate and sensitive email conversations, images and documents of more than 10,000 citizens - despite those men and women not being classified as targets.

Another Snowden?

However it was a revelation about NSA spying from last week in Germanywhich has raised another question: Is there another Edward Snowden out there, leaking sensitive information about the NSA's inner workings to journalists?

On Thursday, German website Tagesschaurevealed that the NSA was using a tool called XKeyScore to target web users who searched for anything related to privacy-focused operating system Tails or the anonymity network called Tor, branding those that did as "extremists".

In a report on BoingBoing, Cory Doctorow says he spoke to technical experts who have worked on "the full set of Snowden docs" about this latest leak and they were "shocked".

Another expert Doctorow spoke to suggested that this leak came from a source other than Snowden.

"I think there's a second leaker out there"

View original post here:
Edward Snowden 2.0: Is There Another NSA Leaker at Work?

Julian Assange, founder of whistleblower website WikiLeaks, has said that former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden will not be able to conduct a "meaningful" defense against the U.S. government if he returns to his home country.

In an interview withDemocracy Now, Assange, who has been staying at the Ecuador embassy in London for three years, noted that the U.S. government will use the state secrets privilege in its case against Snowden and try to present evidence in a manner that will render him unable to conduct a defense.

"He has no possibility to conduct a meaningful defense in the United States. That's just a sad reflection of how the federal court system has evolved in relation to national security cases," Assange said.

He added that the U.S. government will make sure that the case is tried in Alexandria, Virginia, which has "the highest density of military intelligence contractors and government employees" in the country. "So they always get what they want" in Alexandria, according to Assange.

"The state secrets privilege is used in these espionage cases, where the government tries to work out a way to present evidence that it doesn't allow to the defense under the basis that it's classified. So, even at the sort of procedural level, he will not be able to conduct a meaningful defense," he added.

"Then, in relation to his obligations under law for classified access, it's a strict liability. So he can't conduct any whistleblower defense that it was in the public interest, etc. It's strict liability."

Snowden attracted international attention after he leaked up to 1.7 million top secret documents about the NSA's surveillance programs. President Barack Obama's administration faced severe criticism around the world as the documents revealed that the NSA tapped telephone conversations and spied on the Internet activities of prominent people, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff.

See the rest here:
Edward Snowden Cannot Mount 'Meaningful' Defence In US: Julian Assange

NSA surveils Americans without court warrants
The National Security Agency collects far more information on American citizens than it does on targeted foreigners, according to documents released by Edward Snowden to The Washington Post....

By: RT America

See the article here:
NSA surveils Americans without court warrants - Video

Ordinary Internet users, American and non-American alike, far outnumber legally targeted foreigners in the communications intercepted by the National Security Agency from U.S. digital networks, according to a four-month investigation by The Washington Post.

Nine of 10 account holders found in a large cache of intercepted conversations, which former NSA contractor Edward Snowden provided in full to The Post, were not the intended surveillance targets but were caught in a net the agency had cast for somebody else.

Many of them were Americans. Nearly half of the surveillance files, a strikingly high proportion, contained names, e-mail addresses or other details that the NSA marked as belonging to U.S. citizens or residents. NSA analysts masked, or minimized, more than 65,000 such references to protect Americans privacy, but The Post found nearly 900 additional e-mail addresses, unmasked in the files, that could be strongly linked to U.S. citizens or U.S.residents.

The surveillance files highlight a policy dilemma that has been aired only abstractly in public. There are discoveries of considerable intelligence value in the intercepted messages and collateral harm to privacy on a scale that the Obama administration has not been willing to address.

Among the most valuable contents which The Post will not describe in detail, to avoid interfering with ongoing operations are fresh revelations about a secret overseas nuclear project, double-dealing by an ostensible ally, a military calamity that befell an unfriendly power, and the identities of aggressive intruders into U.S. computer networks.

Months of tracking communications across more than 50 alias accounts, the files show, led directly to the 2011 capture in Abbottabad of Muhammad Tahir Shahzad, a Pakistan-based bomb builder, and Umar Patek, a suspect in a 2002 terrorist bombing on the Indonesian island of Bali. At the request of CIA officials, The Post is withholding other examples that officials said would compromise ongoing operations.

Many other files, described as useless by the analysts but nonetheless retained, have a startlingly intimate, even voyeuristic quality. They tell stories of love and heartbreak, illicit sexual liaisons, mental-health crises, political and religious conversions, financial anxieties and disappointed hopes. The daily lives of more than 10,000 account holders who were not targeted are catalogued and recorded nevertheless.

In order to allow time for analysis and outside reporting, neither Snowden nor The Post has disclosed until now that he obtained and shared the content of intercepted communications. The cache Snowden provided came from domestic NSA operations under the broad authority granted by Congress in 2008 with amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. FISA content is generally stored in closely controlled data repositories, and for more than a year, senior government officials have depicted it as beyond Snowdens reach.

The Post reviewed roughly 160,000 intercepted e-mail and instant-message conversations, some of them hundreds of pages long, and 7,900 documents taken from more than 11,000 online accounts.

The material spans President Obamas first term, from 2009 to 2012, a period of exponential growth for the NSAs domestic collection.

See original here:
In NSA-intercepted data, those not targeted far outnumber ...

For more than a year, NSA officials have insisted that although Edward Snowden had access to reports about NSA surveillance, he didn't have access to the actual surveillance intercepts themselves. It turns out they were lying.1 In fact, he provided the Washington Post with a cache of 22,000 intercept reports containing 160,000 individual intercepts. The Post has spent months reviewing these files and estimates that 11 percent of the intercepted accounts belonged to NSA targets and the remaining 89 percent were "incidental" collections from bystanders.

So was all of this worth it? The Post's review illustrates just how hard it is to make that judgment:

Among the most valuable contentswhich The Post will not describe in detail, to avoid interfering with ongoing operationsare fresh revelations about a secret overseas nuclear project, double-dealing by an ostensible ally, a military calamity that befell an unfriendly power, and the identities of aggressive intruders into U.S. computer networks.

Months of tracking communications across more than 50 alias accounts, the files show, led directly to the 2011 capture in Abbottabad of Muhammad Tahir Shahzad, a Pakistan-based bomb builder, and Umar Patek, a suspect in a 2002 terrorist bombing on the Indonesian island of Bali. At the request of CIA officials, The Post is withholding other examples that officials said would compromise ongoing operations.

Many other files, described as useless by the analysts but nonetheless retained, have a startlingly intimate, even voyeuristic quality. They tell stories of love and heartbreak, illicit sexual liaisons, mental-health crises, political and religious conversions, financial anxieties and disappointed hopes. The daily lives of more than 10,000 account holders who were not targeted are catalogued and recorded nevertheless.

If Snowden's sample is representative, the population under scrutiny in the PRISM and Upstream programs is far larger than the government has suggested. In a June 26 "transparency report, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence disclosed that 89,138 people were targets of last year's collection under FISA Section 702. At the 9-to-1 ratio of incidental collection in Snowden's sample, the office's figure would correspond to nearly 900,000 accounts, targeted or not, under surveillance.

The whole story is worth a read in order to get a more detailed description of what these intercepts looked like and who they ended up targeting. In some ways, the Snowden intercepts show that the NSA is fairly fastidious about minimizing data on US persons. In other ways, however, the NSA plainly stretches to the limitand probably beyondthe rules for defining who is and isn't a US person. Click the link for more.

1Naturally, the NSA has an explanation:

Robert S. Litt, the general counsel for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, said in a prepared statement that Alexander and other officials were speaking only about "raw" intelligence, the term for intercepted content that has not yet been evaluated, stamped with classification markings or minimized to mask U.S. identities.

"We have talked about the very strict controls on raw traffic" Litt said. "Nothing that you have given us indicates that Snowden was able to circumvent that in any way.

More here:
The NSA Said Edward Snowden Had No Access to Surveillance ...

The agency collected and stored intimate chats, photos, and emails belonging to innocent Americansand secured them so poorly that reporters can now browse them at will.

Edward Snowden's new refugee document granted by Russia is seen during a news conference on August 1, 2013. (Reuters)

Consider the latest leak sourced to Edward Snowden from the perspective of his detractors. The National Security Agency's defenders would have us believe that Snowden is a thief and a criminal at best, and perhaps a traitorous Russian spy. In their telling, the NSA carries out its mission lawfully, honorably, and without unduly compromising the privacy of innocents. For that reason, they regard Snowden's actions as a wrongheaded slur campaign premised on lies and exaggerations.

But their narrative now contradicts itself. The Washington Post's latest article drawing on Snowden's leaked cache of documents includes files "described as useless by the analysts but nonetheless retained" that "tell stories of love and heartbreak, illicit sexual liaisons, mental-health crises, political and religious conversions, financial anxieties and disappointed hopes. The daily lives of more than 10,000 account holders who were not targeted are catalogued and recorded nevertheless."

The article goes on to describe how exactly the privacy of these innocents was violated. The NSA collected "medical records sent from one family member to another, rsums from job hunters and academic transcripts of schoolchildren. In one photo, a young girl in religious dress beams at a camera outside a mosque. Scores of pictures show infants and toddlers in bathtubs, on swings, sprawled on their backs and kissed by their mothers. In some photos, men show off their physiques. In others, women model lingerie, leaning suggestively into a webcam ..."

Have you ever emailed a photograph of your child in the bathtub, or yourself flexing for the camera or modeling lingerie? If so, it could be your photo in theWashington Postnewsroom right now, where it may or may not be secure going forward. In one case, a woman whose private communications were collected by the NSA found herself contacted by a reporter who'd read her correspondence.

Snowden defenders see these leaked files as necessary to proving that the NSA does, in fact, massively violate the private lives of American citizens by collecting and storing contentnot "just" metadatawhen they communicate digitally. They'll point out that Snowden turned these files over to journalists who promised to protect the privacy of affected individuals and followed through on that oath.

What about Snowden critics who defend the NSA? Ben Wittes questions the morality of the disclosure:

Snowden here did not leak programmatic information about government activity. He leaked many tens of thousands of personal communications of a type that, in government hands, are rightly subject to strict controls. They are subject to strict controls precisely so that the woman in lingerie, the kid beaming before a mosque, the men showing off their physiques, and the woman whose love letters have to be collected because her boyfriend is off looking to join the Taliban dont have to pay an unnecessarily high privacy price. Yes, thePosthas kept personal identifying details from the public, and that is laudable. But Snowden did not keep personal identifying details from thePost. He basically outed thousands of peopleinnocent and notand left them to the tender mercies of journalists. This is itself a huge civil liberties violation.

The critique is plausiblebut think of what it means.

Originally posted here:
The Latest Snowden Leak Is Devastating to NSA Defenders