'Trusted Third Party' Neustar Pays Chertoff Group To Talk FCC Out Of Handing Control Of Crucial Cell Phone Database To Foreign Company

from the don't-put-half-your-eggs-in-one-basket dept

Thanks to some financial prompting and aligned priorities, the Chertoff Group (home of former DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff and former NSA boss Michael Hayden) is sending a letter [pdf link] to the FCC in hopes of preventing control of a crucial cellphone number database from ending up in the hands of a foreign company.

Neustar's lobbying effort to stop a key federal number-portability contract from slipping away to Ericsson's Telcordia unit took another turn via a report sent to the FCC from Michael Chertoff, a former secretary of homeland security. The report, from Chertoff's security consulting firm, the Chertoff Group, concluded that the bidding terms for the contract related to national security were "insufficient in both scope and specificity when compared with widely accepted national and international standards."

While the long report goes into detail about certain potential security deficiencies, the real issue is the fact that putting this information in the hands of a foreign company might move it slightly more out of reach of law enforcement and national security agencies.

The FBI and other law-enforcement agencies said that although they had "no position" on which firm should get the contract, they wanted to air their concerns, especially that there would be no disruption in access to call-routing data "in real time or near real time."

"Law enforcement cannot afford to have a lapse in this vital service," the agencies told the FCC in a letter.

Neustar, one of the "trusted third parties" the government relies on to collect and deliver data from telcos as requested by subpoenas, warrants or even FISA court orders, is lobbying hard to maintain control of its local-number portability administrator (LNPA) position. Losing this contract would do some serious damage to the company.

The LNPA contract accounted for 60 percent, 50 percent and 49 percent of Neustar's revenue in 2011, 2012 and 2013, respectively, according to an annual filing at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Neustar has held the contract since 1997.

Since it can't afford to lose this contract, it can't afford to keep its lobbying efforts hidden.

Neustar did not say how much it paid Chertoff to write the report, indicating only that it was a "modest sum," according to the New York Times.

The Chertoff report does point out some security issues, it's really just stumping for the home team. It's not so much about hackers or foreign entities gaining access as it is about a host of government agencies losing access. Chertoff is closely tied to national security agencies, none of which would welcome any new speed bumps being placed between them and a cellphone database they access over 4 million times a year.

Telcordia, the "foreign" company that may end up with the contract, is already promising big savings and uninterrupted law enforcement access. It's also playing up the USA! USA! angle in hopes of gaining control of the database.

Telcordia has said the software code used for the system will be entirely domestic. "We are not using any of the code used and deployed in foreign installations at all, zero," Iconectiv CTO Chris Drake told the Post last month.

No dirty foreign code here. Just ones and zeroes from good, honest Americans like yourselves. Unconfirmed reports allege this statement was delivered by Drake while wearing a cowboy hat, against a backdrop of American flags.

The NSA (and other agencies) love "domestic" code. It makes for the best backdoors. Telcordia's statements appear to address any law enforcement concerns about accessibility, as well as the security implications raised by Chertoff's impa$$ioned plea on behalf of Neustar. No hurdles here. Just more business as usual.

Filed Under: database, nsa, phone
Companies: chertoff group

Michael Hayden Calls Clemency For Snowden 'Outrageous,' Says It Sends 'Wrong Message' To Potential Whistleblowers

from the he-and-Peter-King-should-recuse-themselves-from-the-'debate' dept

We've already seen one reaction to the New York Times' call for clemency for whistleblower Ed Snowden. That one came courtesy of the terminally-perturbed Rep. Peter King, a man who cares so much for this country that he believes Snowden should be imprisoned for "appeasing terrorists." Calling Snowden a traitor only gains you so much political traction these days, but King's in no hurry to give up his antagonistic calls for Snowden's head, even when his assertions of "terrorist appeasement" clash with his own background as a terrorist appeaser.

Another talking head who can't seem to find a single good word to say about Snowden's leaks is former NSA boss Michael Hayden. His unwavering defense of the NSA would perhaps be admirable if it didn't suggest that his position at the Chertoff Group is dependent on an absurdly healthy surveillance state and a never ending "War on Terror."

[If you're not already familiar with the Chertoff Group, this blurb from its "About" page will give you an indication of how Hayden's defense of all things NSA is intertwined with his "private sector" income:

As Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff worked closely with America’s most experienced intelligence experts and security professionals. Now a select group of them have joined him to form The Chertoff Group.

The Chertoff Group provides business and government leaders with the same kind of high-level, strategic thinking and diligent execution that have kept the American homeland and its people safe since 9/11.

Michael Hayden is just one of the former government officials employed by the Chertoff Group. Many other members are just as connected to government security and intelligence agencies. VP and co-founder Chad Sweet served as Chief of Staff in the DHS. Principal Jayson Ahern? 33 years in the US Customs and Border Protection, a division of the DHS. Richard Falkenrath? Adjunct Senior Fellow for Counterterrorism and Homeland Security at the Council on Foreign Relations. Jay Cohen? Chief of Naval Research. Michael Weatherford? Served as the Deputy Under Secretary for Cybersecurity with the DHS. Larry Castro? NSA Security Service Representative to the DHS.

The list goes on and on.]

So, this is why Hayden's statements on Snowden and the leaked documents resemble those of someone still employed by the NSA. That's because, for all intents and purposes, he pretty much is. His current employer's future prosperity cannot be disentangled from the NSA and other, equally-overreaching branches of the government.

Back to the point at hand. The New York Times strongly suggested Ed Snowden be given clemency for exposing the NSA's abuses and overreach. In an interview Thursday, Hayden had this to say in response.

[M]ichael Hayden, who served as NSA director and CIA director under the last administration, called the suggestion of clemency for Snowden “outrageous.” He predicted any efforts to grant Snowden clemency would be met with significant resistance from U.S. intelligence officials. He pointed to the campaign on behalf of Jonathan Pollard, an Israeli spy who stole secrets for the Jewish state in the early 1980s when he worked as an analyst for the U.S. Navy. “There is a lot of push to give clemency for Jonathan Pollard, who did far less damage than Snowden and the U.S. intelligence community has been adamant against clemency for Pollard,” Hayden said. He added that giving clemency to Snowden would send the message to future leakers: “If you are going to do this, make sure you steal enough secrets to bargain for clemency.”

The suggestion isn't that "outrageous." Snowden's leaks have prompted some normally-complacent politicians to reexamine the NSA. Several pieces of legislation have been introduced in response and the support for these crosses party lines. These excesses, which trace back even before the 9/11 attacks (but increased exponentially shortly thereafter) are finally in "danger" of being reined in. The NSA, and Michael Hayden, have always defended the agency's actions by pointing at the "rigorous oversight" of the House and Senate. The agency's defenders resent the fact that its previously (deliberately) underinformed "oversight" is now privy to the ugly reality of the NSA's programs and is attempting to (finally) curb its power.

Hayden points to Pollard's situation as being comparable when it really isn't. Pollard sold secrets to another country. Snowden gave his documents to the public. Most people can distinguish a spy from a whistleblower. Hayden, apparently, is not one of them. He follows this up by claiming granting Snowden clemency would just encourage whistleblowers to grab massive amounts of documents as bargaining chips. That claim is similarly weak.

First and foremost, this administration has sent a clear message to whistleblowers over the last five years: keep your head down and shut up. The Obama administration has prosecuted more whistleblowers than all other administrations combined. Anyone hoping to blow the whistle under this administration might as well grab all the documents they can because they're going to end up being prosecuted anyway, no matter what "safeguards" are built into the system. The system sets up whistleblowers to fail. Taking the "proper" path just gets you rerouted, stonewalled and finally, flushed from the system.

Hayden believes we can't show Snowden any sort of mercy without encouraging others to follow in his footsteps. He may think this hardline is a necessity to ensure the nation's security, but what it really says is that those defending this agency (and others operating in the same sphere) know there's a whole lot of deep, dark secrets they'd rather not share with the American public. This is a problem with the NSA, not a problem with Snowden or the agency's many detractors. If the agency (through mouthpieces like Gen. Keith "I can't think of another way to do this" Alexander) can't find a way to protect the nation without carving huge holes out of the public's civil liberties, it's only for a lack of trying. It's never had to find another way because it was given free rein to accomplish its goals by uninformed oversight, broad executive orders and a compliant court system.

Granting Snowden clemency would be a step in the direction of contrition -- a small admission of the government's betrayal of its constituents. If the legislators working to rein in the agency truly want to change the system, they need to persuade the executive branch to drop its plans to shoot the messenger. The problems are of the NSA's own making. Punishing the man who finally said, "this is enough" will just allow the "business as usual brigade" to increase the speed at which the surveillance state status quo is restored.

Filed Under: clemency, ed snowden, michael hayden, nsa, surveillance, whistleblowers
Companies: chertoff group