Wikileaks Editor Sarah Harrison on Helping Snowden
In the latest revelations from documents leaked by National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden, The Washington Post has revealed the Foreign Intell...
By: freespeechtv
Originally posted here:
Wikileaks Editor Sarah Harrison on Helping Snowden - Video
Splinter Cell Blacklist, Edward Snowden and retro games
Recorded in September 2013, we review Splinter Cell Blacklist and discuss Edward Snowden #39;s revelations about the NSA and how games should portray governments...
By: HatchetJobdotcom
Read the original post:
Splinter Cell Blacklist, Edward Snowden and retro games - Video
By M. Cherif Bassiouni
When Edward Snowden obtained documents as an employee of Booz Allen Hamilton and made them public, the information disclosed was covered by secrecy under US law. That obligation was part of his employment contract, and such disclosure constituted a crime.
He first disclosed this material to Glenn Greenwald of The Guardian in early June of 2013. On 14 June, the Department of Justice filed a complaint against Snowden, charging him with unauthorized disclosure of national defense information under the 1917 Espionage Act, unauthorized disclosure of classified communication intelligence, and theft of government property.
Snowden made these disclosures while in Hong Kong, and it is reported that the United States sought his extradition pursuant to the treaty it has with Hong Kong, which contains a provision for the exclusion of political offenses. This brings into question the nature of Snowdens offence.
The Snowden case is inherently simple, and comes down to whether Snowdens actions were politically motivated or based on social interest. There was no harm to human life, and there was no general social harm. On the contrary, it revealed abuses of secret practices that violate the constitutional right of privacy. Harm to the national security is not only subjective but it is also dependent upon who decides what is and what is not part of national security.
When it comes to extradition, both the nature of the crime and the motive of the requesting state are taken into account. If the crime for which the person is requested is of a political nature and there is no human or social harm, extradition may be denied on the grounds that it is a purely political offense. This theory is extended to what is called the relative political offense exception, when, as incidental to a purely political offense exception an unintended social harm results. For example, if someone exercises freedom of speech by speaking loudly in the middle of a square and is charged with disturbing the peace, flees the country, and is sought for extradition, that is a purely political offense exception. If, in the course of fleeing the park they accidentally knock over an aged person who is injured and the state charges him with assault and battery, which would be a relative political offense exception. But the fact that Snowden himself maintains that he did not make public any information that could put intelligence officers in harms way, or reveal sources to foreign rivals of the United States means that under extradition law, his case is purely political.
Almost all states allow for the purely political offense exception to apply. Those that do not, bypass the exception for political reasons. This explains why Snowden went to Russia, though the UK would have found it difficult to extradite him too. It helps to look back to the case of Julian Assange, who was sought by the United States when in the UK. When the UK could not extradite Assange because of the purely political offense exception doctrine, the United States had Sweden seek his extradition from the UK for what was a criminal investigation into a common crime (sexual assault). This is what led Assange to seek refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy.
The fact that the purely political offence exception doctrine arose with respect to the Snowden case, assuming it would be the subject of extradition proceedings, is curious to say the least. Would a government official of, say, the Comoros Islands be the subject of similar international attention for the disclosure of some secret skullduggery that the government had classified as top secret? The answer is of course no. What makes this case a cause clbre is that it has to do with the United States, because it embarrasses the United States, and because it reveals that the government of the United States and at least one of its most important agencies (the NSA) has engaged in violations of the Constitution and laws on the protection of individual privacy. It has shown abuses of the powers by the executive branch to obtain information from private sector companies, which would not be otherwise obtainable without a proper court order. This of course is what makes the Snowden case so extraordinary since it is about a US citizen doing what he believed was right to better serve his country and whose very government was violating its constitution and laws.
M. Cherif Bassiouni is Emeritus Professor of Law at DePaul University where he taught from 1964-2012, where he was a founding member of the International Human Rights Law Institute (established in 1990), and served as President from 1990-2007, and then President Emeritus. He is also President, International Institute of Higher Studies in Criminal Sciences, Siracusa, Italy since 1989. He is the author of International Extradition: United States Law and Practice, Sixth Edition.
Subscribe to the OUPblog via email or RSS. Subscribe to only law articles on the OUPblog via email or RSS.
Read the original:
For social good, for political interest: the case of ...
By Harmeet Shah Singh and Ben Brumfield, CNN
updated 3:38 PM EDT, Wed July 2, 2014
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
(CNN) -- India has summoned a senior U.S. diplomat over reports the United States authorized its National Security Agency to spy on the ruling party, the BJP, an official said Wednesday.
The official spoke on condition of anonymity.
According to the latest disclosures by NSA leaker Edward Snowden published by the Washington Post on Monday, the NSA obtained legal authorization to spy on the BJP in 2010, when it was the opposition party.
The BJP, or Bharatiya Janata Party, came to national power in May in an electoral landslide.
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court approved a broad certification for spying abroad in 2010, which included a list of 193 countries to concentrate on, the Post reported.
The Post reported that the list was a recommendation and that the agency was not required to spy on all of them.
The approval permitted the NSA to intercept communications through U.S. companies related to targets on the list, the report said.
See the rest here:
India summons U.S. diplomat over report of NSA spying ...
Reuters
EYES CLOSED: Anti-spying protesters outside the US Department of Justice in Washington, DC.
Endorsement of the NSA's internet surveillance programs by a bipartisan privacy board has deeply disappointed civil liberties activists while providing a measure of vindication for beleaguered US intelligence officials.
James Clapper, director of national intelligence, welcomed the conclusion by the independent Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board that the National Security Agency's internet spying on foreign targets in the US has been legal, effective and subject to rigorous oversight to protect the rights of Americans.
Activist groups panned the report as a dud.
It was a dizzying turnabout for a privacy board that in January drew criticism in the other direction for branding the NSA's collection of domestic calling records unconstitutional.
As they unanimously adopted their 190-page report, the five board members - all appointed by President Barack Obama - sought to explain their largely favourable conclusions about surveillance programs that have provoked worldwide outrage since former NSA systems administrator Edward Snowden revealed them last year.
At issue is a spying regime, first definitively disclosed in Snowden documents last year, under which the NSA is using court orders to obtain foreign customers' emails, chats, videos and texts from Google, Facebook and other US tech companies under a program known as PRISM. The documents also showed that the agency is intercepting foreign data as it transits fiber optic lines in the US
Yahoo, Apple, Microsoft, Twitter and Facebook did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Google and LinkedIn declined to comment.
The reputations of American technology companies have suffered abroad over the perception that they cannot protect customer data from US spy agencies. Last week, the German government said it would end a contract with Verizon over concerns about network security.
See the original post:
Privacy group gives NSA spying thumbs-up | Stuff.co.nz
Reuters
EYES CLOSED: Anti-spying protesters outside the US Department of Justice in Washington, DC.
Endorsement of the NSA's internet surveillance programs by a bipartisan privacy board has deeply disappointed civil liberties activists while providing a measure of vindication for beleaguered US intelligence officials.
James Clapper, director of national intelligence, welcomed the conclusion by the independent Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board that the National Security Agency's internet spying on foreign targets in the US has been legal, effective and subject to rigorous oversight to protect the rights of Americans.
Activist groups panned the report as a dud.
It was a dizzying turnabout for a privacy board that in January drew criticism in the other direction for branding the NSA's collection of domestic calling records unconstitutional.
As they unanimously adopted their 190-page report, the five board members - all appointed by President Barack Obama - sought to explain their largely favourable conclusions about surveillance programs that have provoked worldwide outrage since former NSA systems administrator Edward Snowden revealed them last year.
At issue is a spying regime, first definitively disclosed in Snowden documents last year, under which the NSA is using court orders to obtain foreign customers' emails, chats, videos and texts from Google, Facebook and other US tech companies under a program known as PRISM. The documents also showed that the agency is intercepting foreign data as it transits fiber optic lines in the US
Yahoo, Apple, Microsoft, Twitter and Facebook did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Google and LinkedIn declined to comment.
The reputations of American technology companies have suffered abroad over the perception that they cannot protect customer data from US spy agencies. Last week, the German government said it would end a contract with Verizon over concerns about network security.
Original post:
Privacy group gives NSA spying thumbs-up
This is the board's second report on NSA spy programs
A U.S. privacy board recently said that the National Security Administration's (NSAs) data collection methods have been effective for security purposes, but also treading on U.S. citizens' privacy in some instances.
According to Reuters,the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board -- whichis an independent government agency established in 2004 that advises the U.S. president and Congress on counter-terrorism operations -- said in a recent report thatthedata collection programallowed the government to collect foreign intelligence "quickly and effectively."
However,some parts of the program have pushed into "constitutional unreasonableness" when it comes to the privacy of U.S. citizens, according to the board.
The board also offered some recommendations so that the program could balance privacy, civil rights and national security better than before.
The NSA has had the spotlight ever since former NSA contractor Edward Snowdenblew the cover on its surveillance programs early last year, which consisted of bulk data collection from sources like phone records, where the government took on a "collect now, filter later" approach.The agency has said that the bulk data collection was meant toidentify terrorist threats, but was discovered that the data of Americans has been collected without any clear evidence of terrorist links.
A presidential review panelmade 46 recommendations regarding greater restraint on the NSA's surveillance programs in December 2013, where one of themajor recommendationsinvolved the elimination ofbulk collection of phone call records.
Source: Reuters
Read the original here:
Report: NSA Spying Program Effective But Pushes Into "Constitutional Unreasonableness
Encryption Part I: Introduction to Encryption 1
The first part of a new series on encryption: what it is, how it works, and how you can protect yourself.
By: Shane Killian
More:
Encryption Part I: Introduction to Encryption 1 - Video
Photo: Getty
The spread of usable encryption tools hasnt exactly made law enforcement wiretaps obsolete. But in a handful of cases over the past yearand more than ever beforeit did shut down cops attempts to eavesdrop on criminal suspects, the latest sign of a slow but steady increase in encryptions adoption by police targets over the last decade.
In nine cases in 2013, state police were unable to break the encryption used by criminal suspects they were investigating, according to an annual report on law enforcement eavesdropping released by the U.S. court system on Wednesday. Thats more than twice as many cases as in 2012, when police said that theyd been stymied by crypto in four casesand that was the first year theyd ever reported encryption preventing them from successfully surveilling a criminal suspect. Before then, the number stood at zero.
The cases in which cops encountered encryption at all, its worth noting, still represent just a tiny fraction of law enforcements growing overall number of surveillance targets. Feds and state police eavesdropped on U.S. suspects phone calls, text messages, and other communications at least 3,500 times in 2013, a statistic that will likely be revised upwards over the next year as law enforcements data becomes more complete. Of those thousands of cases, only 41 involved encryption at all. And in 32 cases cops were able to somehow circumvent or break suspects privacy protections to eavesdrop on their targets unimpeded. The report doesnt include details of the specific cases.
Those numbers still contradict the warnings from government agencies like the FBI for more than a decade that the free availability of encryption tools will eventually lead to a going dark problem, a dystopian future where criminals and terrorists use privacy tools to make their communications invisible to law enforcement. Last year, for instance, the Drug Enforcement Agency leaked an internal report complaining that Apples iMessage encryption was blocking their investigations of drug dealers. So the cryptapocalypse they warned us about in the 90s has come to pass, University of Pennsylvania computer science professor Matt Blaze noted drily on twitter. Strong crypto used in a whopping 0.25% of wiretaps last year.
Even so, a look back at the last ten years statistics from police reports shows that encryption use is on the rise, even if the number of cases remains small and most encryption use is still futile. As recently as 2006 and 2007, police reported that they hadnt encountered any uses of encryption at all, and only dealt with one case of a suspect using encryption in 2009, as shown in the chart below. (In Thursdays report, police also counted another 52 cases of encryption use by their targets prior to 2013, but didnt specify in which years those incidents had occurred.)
That steady trickle of encryption tools into the publics hands is a sign that Americans awareness of surveillance is rising. Edward Snowdens leaks about NSA surveillance began dropping in July of last year, and carried with them a wave of interest in new privacy technologies. Post-Snowden, both people and companies have become more sophisticated in safeguarding their communications, says Hanni Fakhoury, a surveillance-focused attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. When you look at this report next year, there will no doubt be even more use of encryption.
Crypto aside, the report noted a significant drop in the cost of cops surveillance. Police reported an average of $41,119 per case in which they intercepted a suspects communications in 2013. Thats down 18 percent from the year before, and represents the cheapest snooping ever, perhaps thanks to advances in surveillance technology. In 2003, for instance, a wiretap cost an average of $62,164, almost 50 percent more than today.
That steady drop in the price of spying may be one reason why the number of total wiretap cases has steadily grown over the past decade. Although the total wiretap count for 2013 is still incomplete, it added up to 4,927 cases in 2012, more than twice the 2,136 cases in 2003.
Follow this link:
Rising Use of Encryption Foiled the Cops a Record 9 Times in 2013
Original illustration: Getty
Encryption is hard. When NSA leaker Edward Snowden wanted to communicate with journalist Glenn Greenwald via encrypted email, Greenwald couldnt figure out the venerable crypto program PGP even after Snowden made a 12-minute tutorial video.
Nadim Kobeissi wants to bulldoze that steep learning curve. At the HOPE hacker conference in New York later this month hell release a beta version of an all-purpose file encryption program called miniLock, a free and open-source browser plugin designed to let even Luddites encrypt and decrypt files with practically uncrackable cryptographic protection in seconds.
The tagline is that this is file encryption that does more with less, says Kobeissi, a 23-year old coder, activist and security consultant. Its super simple, approachable, and its almost impossible to be confused using it.
A screenshot from an early demo of miniLock.
Kobeissis creation, which he says is in an experimental phase and shouldnt yet be used for high security files, may in fact be the easiest encryption software of its kind. In an early version of the Google Chrome plugin tested by WIRED, we were able to drag and drop a file into the program in seconds, scrambling the data such that no one but the intended recipientin theory not even law enforcement or intelligence agenciescould unscramble and read it. MiniLock can be used to encrypt anything from video email attachments to photos stored on a USB drive, or to encrypt files for secure storage on Dropbox or Google Drive.
Like the older PGP, miniLock offers so-called public key encryption. In public key encryption systems, users have two cryptographic keys, a public key and a private one. They share the public key with anyone who wants to securely send them files; anything encrypted with that public key can only be decrypted with their private key, which the user guards closely.
Kobeissis version of public key encryption hides nearly all of that complexity. Theres no need to even register or log inevery time miniLock launches, the user enters only a passphrase, though miniLock requires a strong one with as many as 30 characters or a lot of symbols and numbers. From that passphrase, the program derives a public key, which it calls a miniLock ID, and a private key, which the user never sees and is erased when the program closes. Both are the same every time the user enters the passphrase. That trick of generating the same keys again in every session means anyone can use the program on any computer without worrying about safely storing or moving a sensitive private key.
No logins, and no private keys to manage. Both are eliminated. Thats whats special, says Kobeissi. Users can have their identity for sending and receiving files on any computer that has miniLock installed, without needing to have an account like a web service does, and without needing to manage key files like PGP.
In fact, miniLock uses a flavor of encryption that had barely been developed when PGP became popular in the 1990s: elliptic curve cryptography. Kobeissi says that crypto toolset allows for tricks that havent been possible before; PGPs public keys, which users have to share with anyone who wants to send them encrypted files, often fill close to a page with random text. MiniLock IDs are only 44 characters, small enough that they can fit in a tweet with room to spare. And elliptic curve crypto makes possible miniLocks feature of deriving the users keys from his or her passphrase every time its entered rather than storing them. Kobeissi says hes saving the full technical explanation of miniLocks elliptic curve feats for his HOPE conference talk.
See the original post here:
The Ultra-Simple App That Lets Anyone Encrypt Anything