Former NSA Boss Claims Terrorists Use Gmail, Anonymity Is Awful And The US Built The Internet, So Of Course It Should Spy On It

from the tone-deaf dept

Michael Hayden is the former NSA and CIA boss, whose claim to fame is that he oversaw the illegal warrantless wiretapping of Americans under President George W. Bush. He's pretty consistently managed to stick his foot in his mouth concerning everything regarding the latest NSA leaks every time he speaks. He claimed that Ed Snowden was worse than every American revealed spy in history (despite the fact that, unlike actual spies like Benedict Arnold and the Rosenbergs, Snowden focused on informing the public, rather than selling secrets to our enemies). He brushed off Snowden's supporters as internet shut-ins who can't get laid. Though, perhaps he should talk to a geek or two, because he doesn't even understand what data mining means.

His latest is no better. On Sunday he gave a speech where he revealed that (he claims) terrorists love Gmail:

"Gmail is the preferred Internet service provider of terrorists worldwide," presumably meaning online service rather than the actual provider of Internet service. He added: "I don't think you're going to see that in a Google commercial, but it's free, it's ubiquitous, so of course it is."

Of course, if this is true (and seeing as he hasn't been in the government for a while, I'm not sure how he'd actually know that), it would seem like that statement alone is much worse than anything that Snowden revealed, because General Hayden basically just told every terrorist "don't use Gmail any more, because we're on to you." Of course, from all reports so far of the way that Al Qaeda brass communicates, it appears they learned that lesson since before Gmail existed. It seems highly unlikely that any sophisticated terrorist would be using a service like Gmail, since it's long been suspected that the US government monitored it anyway.

Hayden didn't stop there. He also flat out admitted that the US was "militarizing" the internet (though he called it the web), which is another thing that the government has been trying to deny until Hayden just blurted it out.

Hayden also conceded that the United States. "could be fairly charged with the militarization of the World Wide Web."

Hayden also reveals the rather ridiculous sense of entitlement that the intelligence community has towards snooping on the internet. He argues, effectively, that since the internet rose out of a US government project, then of course it should be able to spy on everything on it.

"We built it here, and it was quintessentially American," he said, adding that partially due to that, much of traffic goes through American servers where the government "takes a picture of it for intelligence purposes."

Of course, that totally ignores the status of the internet today, and how much has changed since the old ARPANET days. Also, as the Washington Post notes, having intelligence community officials say ridiculous crap like that is more or less telling the rest of the world (and many Americans) to stop doing business with American internet companies. Is whatever minor intel the NSA picks up really worth losing many billions to the US economy?

And, of course, Hayden once again made it clear that if he had his way, the NSA would be able to track anything and everything, because anonymity is bad.

At one point, Hayden expressed a distaste for online anonymity, saying "The problem I have with the Internet is that it's anonymous."

Given that, I'd like to challenge Michael Hayden to release his browser history from the past three months. After all, I'm sure he wouldn't want anyone to think he's a hypocrite who surfed the web anonymously, now would he?

Filed Under: anonymity, email, internet, michael hayden, nsa, nsa surveillance, terrorists

Insanity: PayPal Freezes Mailpile's Account, Demands Excessive Info To Get Access

from the why-we-need-paypal-alternatives dept

See update at the bottom

A few weeks ago, we wrote about Mailpile, a new attempt to create a webmail client that is built with both security and usability in mind -- think Gmail/Outlook-type interface, but which you can control and with built in security. The project looks awesome and is greatly needed these days, as we learn more and more about government intrusions into hosted webmail accounts. Their IndieGoGo campaign has been a huge success, going past their $100,000 target, and is currently at around $137,000, which will allow the three person team to focus on it full time.

Except... as the team announced this morning, PayPal, for reasons known only to PayPal, has decided to freeze their funds and won't let Mailpile access the money that people donated:

Saturday August 31st I woke to two emails from PayPal. The first notified me they had cancelled the debit card associated with my sole proprietor business account, the second was informing me they placed a block on my account barring me from withdrawing or sending any money out of my PayPal account.

Assuming this would get sorted out after a little explaining/security check, the team has been trying to get PayPal to unfreeze the account, with no luck. PayPal is demanding an insane level of detail into Mailpile's personal finances and business:

Afer 4 phone calls, the last of which I spoke to a supervisor, the understanding I have come to is, unless Mailpile provides PayPal with a detailed budgetary breakdown of how we plan to use the donations from our crowd funding campaign they will not release the block on my account for 1 year until we have shipped a 1.0 version of our product. A final email communication from PayPal reaffirmed us of their stance by stating:

"Please provide an itemized budget and your development goal dates for your project"

This puts us in an incredibly uncomfortable position as we do not feel that it's remotely in their jurisdiction to ask for a detailed budget of our business, any more than it is within our right to ask for theirs.

Even worse, it seems that the folks at PayPal recognize that it holds power over Mailpile, and seems almost to be lording that power over them:

Communications with PayPal have implied that they would use any excuse available to them to delay delivering as much of our cash as possible for as long as possible. Asking us to give them justification for such behavior is obviously not in our best interests. PayPal's position particularly ridiculous when contrasted with IndieGoGo's policy of transferring all funds to successful campaigns within 15 days of their conclusion. If IndieGoGo can do it, so can PayPal.

This isn't all of the money raised -- it's about $45,000 of the $137,000, but it's still a huge pain. Mailpile has now had the Software Freedom Law Center look into their legal options for obtaining the money that people donated to the project.

Yes, PayPal has a long history of similar things, but that doesn't make it okay.

Update: And... of course, the inevitable backtrack. After all the publicity. From PayPal:

We have reached out to MailPile and the limitation has been lifted. Supporting crowd funding campaigns is an exciting new part of our business.We are working closely with industry-leaders like IndieGoGo and adapting our processes and policies to better serve the innovative companies that are relying on PayPal and crowd funding campaigns to grow their businesses. We never want to get in the way of innovation, but as a global payments company we must ensure the payments flowing through our system around the world are in compliance with laws and regulations. We understand that the way in which we are complying to these rules can be frustrating in some cases and we've made significant changes in North America to adapt to the unique needs of crowd funding campaigns. We are currently working to roll these improvements out around the world.

Filed Under: email, frozen account, paypal, secure email
Companies: mailpile, paypal

Lost An Email? Just Call The NSA!

from the backup-and-disaster-recovery-for-idiots dept

Throughout all the reporting on the NSA's massive surveillance programs, both international and domestic, you'll occasionally hear an increasingly common response: let's just all troll the hell out of them. The idea, of course, is that the NSA's collection of everything ever simply sets up a massive problem of extrapolating the number and size of haystacks in which they must find the terrorism needle. Anyone pissed off about how the American government is treating them via spying on their activities might suggest that they surreptitiously insert a bunch of likely flagged words into normal communications just to make things a bit tougher on the agency. And, despite the fact that these suggestions are usually made half-seriously, often accompanied by nervous laughter and a quick review of surroundings to ensure no black vans are present, the NSA has acknowledged the problem and has said it is prepared for the trolls. This is in response to entire websites devoted to online antics and shenanigans, all designed to make the job of the NSA just a tad bit more difficult.

But not all such antics need take place online, as evidenced by my new personal hero, a man in Holland who called the NSA to retrieve and an email he said he'd accidentally deleted. This is what brilliance looks like. The logic is as flawless as the hapless NSA receptionist is flummoxed. In case you can't see the embedded video, this wonderful man called the NSA's general number and claimed he accidentally deleted a Gmail email and that his local computer repair tech had suggested calling the federal agency, since they obviously have a copy. What follows is a lengthy conversation with a woman, who is likely just trying to do her job, that should probably be up for some kind of comedy award.

But take note, people: this doesn't work. While the NSA certainly may have your email, but they won't serve as your backup provider. Which is just as well, since that'd take a significant revenue stream away from me, personally. Thanks for not intruding everywhere, NSA.

Filed Under: backup, email, nsa, nsa surveillance, pranks

India Wants To Ban US-Based Email Systems For Government Communications Over NSA Concerns

from the pissing-off-our-allies dept

Back in June and July, during much more innocent times, Glyn Moody and Tim Cushing doubled up on stories about the intrusive surveillance system India had set up and commented on how the NSA must have been drooling over having that kind of capability. Now, those stories probably seem sweetly ignorant, since we know much more about what the NSA is both capable of doing and how little restraint they suffer, but the point is that India is not made up of saints when it comes to respecting the privacy of their citizens.

But, having said that, India is an incredibly important friend and ally of the United States. They're an important trading partner and a nation with aligned goals when it comes to fighting terrorism. So it may be a sign of trouble that India distrusts the American government enough to force government officials to pull their email from American-based email providers.

The move is intended to increase the security of confidential government data and information after it was revealed earlier that NSA may be involved in widespread spying and surveillance activities across the globe.

In a statement to reporters here J. Satyanarayana, secretary in the department of electronics and information technology, said that data of Indian citizens using US based email services like Gmail is residing on servers which are located outside India and for now the government is concerned about the large amount of official and critical data that may be resident on those servers.

That's the problem with unfettered hubris from a global power like the United States: you're going to start losing friends. It's one thing to spy on unfriendly nations. That might still have its problems, but you're going to have an easy sell to your citizens on the question and it doesn't matter all that much if you're found out because, hey, the spied-upon already hate you. But when you begin turning your spy-sights on your allies, particularly allies as important as the Indian government, you just have to wonder whether more harm than good will come of all this. Yes, there's a cynical response that this also helps those in power in India better use their own surveillance capabilities to spy on everyone within the government, but that doesn't diminish the potential harm between US and India.

In an increasingly connected globe, the postures of our allies are every bit as important as those of our enemies. The American government pissed off a friend in India, Hopefully that won't come back to bite us.

Filed Under: allies, email, india, nsa surveillance, surveillance

Steve Jobs' Email Shows Apple Changed In-App Purchasing Rules Specifically To Retaliate Against Amazon

from the oops dept

In the ongoing legal fight between Apple and the DOJ over how Apple will be punished for violating antitrust law concerning ebooks, the DOJ has presented one interesting bit of new evidence: an email from Steve Jobs, in which he flat out tells Phil Schiller to change how in-app purchases work solely to punish Amazon for daring to suggest that it's easy to switch from an iPhone to Android, since your Kindle books show up in both places. In case you can't read that, it involves Schiller complaining to Jobs and other top Apple execs about a Kindle TV ad that shows someone buying an ebook via an iPhone and having it appear on an Android phone as well. He then notes:

While the primary message is that there are Kindle apps on lots of mobile devices, the secondary message that can't be missed is that it is easy to switch from iPhone to Android.

Not fun to watch

Less than an hour later, Jobs replies with a suggestion:

The first step might be to say that they must use our payment system for everything, including books (triggered by the newspapers and magazines). If they want to compare us to Android, let's force them to use our far superior payment system. Thoughts?

That's pretty damning, as it shows the decision had little to do with reasonable choices for consumers, and a lot to do with punishing a competitor.

Filed Under: android, antitrust, doj, ebooks, email, in-app purchasing, iphone, kindle, retaliation, steve jobs
Companies: amazon, apple

UK Law Enforcement Told Miranda He'd Go To Jail If He Didn't Reveal His Email, Social Media Passwords

from the shameful dept

It's already pretty damn clear that the UK government had no legitimate "terrorist threat" when it detained Glenn Greenwald's partner, David Miranda, for almost nine hours (the legal limit without an arrest) under an anti-terrorism law. Now, Miranda has also revealed that his interrogators told him they would lock him up in jail if he didn't reveal the passwords to his email and social media accounts.

Mr Miranda told the BBC he was forced to disclose his social media passwords.

"I am very angry. This feeling of invasion. It's like I'm naked in front of a crowd," he said. "They said I had to co-operate or else I was going to jail."

It's difficult to see how this was meant as anything other than an intimidation tactic against Greenwald, and as a weak attempt to try to uncover what Greenwald is working on by getting his partner's passwords. It seems unlikely, given Greenwald's crash course in encryption and government spying, that Miranda's passwords would be helpful in any way. So, instead, it's just more bullying. There was simply no basis to throw Miranda in jail, and yet UK law enforcement intimidated him with such threats to get him to cough up his passwords. Just incredibly shameful.

Filed Under: david miranda, email, glenn greenwald, passwords, social media, uk

Supreme Court Justices Can't Figure Out Email, Completely Mystified By Social Media

from the and-yet-they-make-judgments-on-this-stuff? dept

There are legitimate reasons to avoid email -- such as Ladar Levison of Lavabit explaining his concerns about privacy. And, certainly, you can understand why some more elderly people have avoided email, though if my late grandmother kept up her emailing well past her 90th birthday, it seems like almost anyone should be able to pick it up. But, it's somewhat disturbing to find out that nearly every Supreme Court Justice hasn't bothered to figure out email yet because they haven't "gotten to" email.

"The justices are not necessarily the most technologically sophisticated people," she said, adding that while clerks email one another, "The court hasn't really 'gotten to' email."

Kagan, at age 53 the youngest and most recently appointed justice, said communication among the justices is the same as when she clerked for the late Thurgood Marshall in 1987.

Justice write memos printed out on paper that looks like it came from the 19th century, she said. The memos are then walked around the building by someone called a "chambers aide."

She also noted that Facebook, Twitter and similar services are "a challenge for us."

Though, she does note that when they had to rule on California's law restricting violent video games, a few of the Justices did try some of the games in question, though "It was kind of hilarious."

Sure, old people playing video games, ha ha. Except, as Will Oremus points out, it's really not that funny at all when you realize these nine people are deciding a ton of cases that have a huge impact on the future of technology, innovation and communication. For them not to understand the underlying technologies, how they're used and what they mean is a serious concern:

It does sound quaint and endearing, until you remember that these are the people charged with interpreting the law of the land on issues like online privacy and digital surveillance. No wonder they decided earlier this year that the government spying on people’s emails without a warrant is no big deal. Bet they’d have some strong opinions if the NSA started eavesdropping on people’s chambers aides, though.

It's easy for some people to say that you don't have to understand social networking to rule on such cases, but it's hard to support the more you think about it. These tools are key to open and free communications these days. They are the embodiment of what the First Amendment was supposed to be about -- a free marketplace of ideas. Not understanding how they work and how they're used can really skew how they're viewed via the legal prism. And that should be worrisome. We've already seen in a variety of copyright cases before the Supreme Court that they seem to have a near total blind spot when it comes to how copyright interferes with free expression, in part because they still view it through the antiquated filter of "professional" publishers being the ones doing the speaking, rather than the general public using tools to communicate, converse, debate and express ideas.

Filed Under: email, law, social media, supreme court, technology

NSA & FBI Spied On All Emails In Salt Lake City Before & After The Olympics

from the minimization? dept

We've already written about the latest NSA bombshell, which came via an article in the Wall Street Journal (which they stupidly put behind their paywall) by reporters Siobhan Gorman and Jennifer Valentino-Devries. But I wanted to focus in on one aspect that hasn't received very much attention -- the revelation that the NSA and the FBI teamed up to read every email and text communication in the Salt Lake City area before and after the Olympics there in 2002:

For the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, officials say, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and NSA arranged with Qwest Communications International Inc. to use intercept equipment for a period of less than six months around the time of the event. It monitored the content of all email and text communications in the Salt Lake City area.

At the time, Michael Hayden was in charge of the NSA, and today he remains one of the staunchest supporters of the NSA's surveillance, calling its opponents losers who can't get laid for daring to question the level of unconstitutional surveillance of our communications. Perhaps -- just perhaps -- he'd like to explain the legal rationale for spying on every digital communication. Sure, sure, this happened soon after September 11th, and I'm sure US officials were worried about the possibility of a terrorist attack on the winter Olympics. But, I don't recall us turning off the Constitution or ripping out the 4th Amendment just for the Olympics. Perhaps General Hayden, rather than random name calling, could share with us how such a project was possibly anywhere in the vicinity of legal at the time?

Filed Under: email, fbi, michael hayden, nsa, nsa surveillance, olympics, privacy, salt lake city, utah

More NSA Spying Fallout: Groklaw Shutting Down

from the the-pain-of-being-watched dept

A few months ago, after the NSA spying stories first broke, we wrote about a bit from This American Life where the host, Ira Glass, was interviewing lawyers for prisoners detained at Guantanamo, about the impact of knowing that the government was listening in on every single phone call you made. The responses were chilling. The people talked about how it stopped them from being emotional with their children or other close friends and relatives. How they had trouble functioning in ways that many people take for granted, just because the mental stress of knowing that you have absolutely no privacy is incredibly burdensome. PJ, the dynamo behind Groklaw, has written a powerful piece explaining the similar feeling she's getting from all the revelations about government surveillance, in particular the shutting down of Lavabit by Ladar Levison, and his suggestion that if people knew what he knew about email, they wouldn't use it.

Because of this, she's shutting down Groklaw.

You really need to read the entire piece, but it clearly lays out the sort of mental anguish that you get with the realization that what you thought was private and personal, might not be any more. She compares it to the feeling of having her apartment robbed, and the creepy feeling you get that some stranger was riffing through all of your personal belongings. And, from there, she riffs on the importance of privacy and intimacy, and how the totalitarian state takes those things away, quoting a powerful passage from Janna Malamud Smith's book Private Matters. You should go read the full quotes, but it notes the psychological impact of not having privacy.

And that's how PJ feels right now. The fact that the NSA is collecting all emails in or out of the US, as well as all encrypted messages, means that it's impossible to have that privacy and intimacy that she feels is necessary to run the site:

There is now no shield from forced exposure. Nothing in that parenthetical thought list is terrorism-related, but no one can feel protected enough from forced exposure any more to say anything the least bit like that to anyone in an email, particularly from the US out or to the US in, but really anywhere. You don't expect a stranger to read your private communications to a friend. And once you know they can, what is there to say? Constricted and distracted. That's it exactly. That's how I feel.

So. There we are. The foundation of Groklaw is over. I can't do Groklaw without your input. I was never exaggerating about that when we won awards. It really was a collaborative effort, and there is now no private way, evidently, to collaborate.

I'm really sorry that it's so. I loved doing Groklaw, and I believe we really made a significant contribution. But even that turns out to be less than we thought, or less than I hoped for, anyway. My hope was always to show you that there is beauty and safety in the rule of law, that civilization actually depends on it. How quaint.

What amazes me in all of these discussions concerning the defenders of such surveillance is that they never even seem able to comprehend the psychological impact of what all of this does. The way people change their behavior when they're being watched constantly, and what that can do to a person.

The fallout from all of this NSA surveillance will take a very, very long time to measure, but it will be profound. The government, again, has put so much emphasis on the "benefit" of preventing an exceptionally low probability event, that it barely even considers the massive costs on everyone else. PJ isn't shutting down Groklaw for the same reasons as Lavabit shut down. But it is the same root cause. The power of a surveillance state to spin out of control has wide-reaching consequences. It's difficult to see how anyone can claim it's worth the costs.

My personal decision is to get off of the Internet to the degree it's possible. I'm just an ordinary person. But I really know, after all my research and some serious thinking things through, that I can't stay online personally without losing my humanness, now that I know that ensuring privacy online is impossible. I find myself unable to write. I've always been a private person. That's why I never wanted to be a celebrity and why I fought hard to maintain both my privacy and yours.

Oddly, if everyone did that, leap off the Internet, the world's economy would collapse, I suppose. I can't really hope for that. But for me, the Internet is over.

So this is the last Groklaw article. I won't turn on comments. Thank you for all you've done. I will never forget you and our work together. I hope you'll remember me too. I'm sorry I can't overcome these feelings, but I yam what I yam, and I tried, but I can't.

I find this deeply upsetting on many levels, not the least of which is that Groklaw is a needless casualty in a stupid power struggle among weak-minded, power hungry government officials who don't even seem to comprehend what a mess they've created.

Filed Under: email, groklaw, intimacy, nsa, nsa surveillance, pj, privacy, stress, surveillance