NSA firing 90% of its sysadmins to eliminate potential Snowdens

The NSA is to cut 90% of its 1, 000 sysadmins in a bid to reduce the risk of leaks. NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden was a network administrator, charged with keeping the machines running on the network of vast data-centers used by the NSA to harvest, store and analyze unimaginably large quantities of data.        

View article:
NSA firing 90% of its sysadmins to eliminate potential Snowdens

Australian State Bans IBM From All Contracts After Payroll Bungle

renai42 writes “If you don’t follow Australian technology news, you’re probably not aware that over the past few years, the State of Queensland massively bungled a payroll systems upgrade in its Department of Health. The issues resulted in thousands of hospital staff being underpaid or not paid at all, and has ballooned in cost from under $10 million in budget to a projected total cost of $1.2 billion. Queensland has now banned the project’s prime contractor, IBM, comprehensively from signing any new contracts with any government department, until it addresses what the state says are IBM’s project governance issues.” Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Read the article:
Australian State Bans IBM From All Contracts After Payroll Bungle

Google experimenting with spy-resistant encrypted Google Drive

CNet’s Declan McCullagh reports on a rumor that Google is testing a system for encrypting its users’ files on Google Drive; they are reportedly considering the move as a means of making it harder for government spies to harvest user-data.        

Read More:
Google experimenting with spy-resistant encrypted Google Drive

Report: Google Wants to Make a Streaming Television Service

The Wall Street Journal reports unnamed sources that say Google has approached big media companies about licensing TV shows for a streaming television service it wants to launch. Intel and Apple have also been working on similar services. [ WSJ ] Read more…        

See the original post:
Report: Google Wants to Make a Streaming Television Service

It’s a Cinch for Hackers to Break Into Your Verizon Network

Although they probably didn’t maintain any pretense of security, Verizon customers will be bummed to know that a duo of security experts have discovered how to hack into the carrier’s network extending base stations and turn them into little spy centers. Read more…        

Taken from:
It’s a Cinch for Hackers to Break Into Your Verizon Network

To Avoid Cyber Espionage, Russia’s Switching Back to Typewriters

Hackers aren’t going anywhere any time soon, so Russian spies are wising up and taking their most sensitive intelligence offline. Not offline like off the internet. Offline like off computers altogether. Read more…        

Read this article:
To Avoid Cyber Espionage, Russia’s Switching Back to Typewriters

Snowden NSA Claims Partially Confirmed, Says Rep. Jerrold Nadler

bill_mcgonigle writes with this news from from CNET: “Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D NY) disclosed that NSA analysts eavesdrop on Americans’ domestic telephone calls without court orders during a House Judiciary hearing. After clearing with FBI director Robert Mueller that the information was not classified, Nadler revealed that during a closed-door briefing to Congress, the Legislature was informed that the spying organization had implemented and uses this capability. This appears to confirm Edward Snowden’s claim that he could, in his position at the NSA, ‘wiretap anyone from you or your accountant to a federal judge to even the president.’ Declan McCullagh writes, ‘Because the same legal standards that apply to phone calls also apply to e-mail messages, text messages, and instant messages, Nadler’s disclosure indicates the NSA analysts could also access the contents of Internet communications without going before a court and seeking approval.’ The executive branch has defended its general warrants, claiming that ‘the president had the constitutional authority, no matter what the law actually says, to order domestic spying without [constitutional] warrants,’ while Kurt Opsahl, senior staff attorney at EFF claims such government activity ‘epitomizes the problem of secret laws.'” Note that “listening in” versus “collecting metadata” is a distinction that defenders of government phone spying have been emphasizing. Tracking whom you called and when, goes the story, doesn’t impinge on expectations of privacy. Speaking of the metadata collection, though, reader Bruce66423 writes “According to the Washington Post, the Bush administration took ‘bulk metadata’ from the phone companies under voluntary agreements for more than four years after 9/11 until a court agreed they could have it compulsorily.” Related: First time accepted submitter fsagx writes that Brewster Kahle of the Internet Archive has calculated the cost to store every phone call made in the U.S. over the course of a year: “It’s surprisingly inexpensive. It puts the recent NSA stories (and reports from the Boston bombings about the FBI’s ability to listen to past phone conversions) into perspective.” Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Link:
Snowden NSA Claims Partially Confirmed, Says Rep. Jerrold Nadler

Watch 2013 Obama debate 2006 Biden on NSA surveillance

Watch then-Senator Joe Biden from 2006 directly refute each point made by his now-boss, President Barack Obama, about the NSA surveillance program at a news conference last week. Dave Maass and Trevor Timm at the Electronic Frontier Foundation write : After a leaked FISA court document revealed that the National Security Agency (NSA) is vacuuming up private data on millions of innocent Americans by collecting all the phone records of Verizon customers, President Obama responded by saying “let’s have a debate” about the scope of US surveillance powers. At EFF, we couldn’t agree more. It turns out, President Obama’s most formative debate partner over the invasiveness of NSA domestic surveillance could his Vice President Joe Biden. Back in 2006, when the NSA surveillance program was first revealed by the New York Times , then-Senator Biden was one of the program’s most articulate critics . As the FISA court order shows, the scope of NSA surveillance program has not changed much since 2006, except for the occupant in the White House. Watch this video , as Senator Biden from 2006 directly refutes each point President Obama made about the NSA surveillance program at his news conference last week.        

Read the article:
Watch 2013 Obama debate 2006 Biden on NSA surveillance

DHS on border laptop searches: we can’t tell you why this is legal, and we won’t limit searches to reasonable suspicion

The DHS has responded to a Freedom of Information Act request filed by the ACLU asking when and how it decides whose laptop to search at the border. It explained its legal rationale for conducting these searches with a blank page: On Page 18 of the 52-page document under the section entitled “First Amendment,” several paragraphs are completely blacked out. They simply end with the sentence: “The laptop border searches in the [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] and [Customs and Border Protection] do not violate travelers’ First Amendment rights as defined by the courts.” More excellence from “the most transparent administration in American history.” Also, the DHS rejected claims that it should limit searches to situations where it had reasonable grounds for suspicion, because then they would have to explain their suspicion: First, commonplace decisions to search electronic devices might be opened to litigation challenging the reasons for the search. In addition to interfering with a carefully constructed border security system, the litigation could directly undermine national security by requiring the government to produce sensitive investigative and national security information to justify some of the most critical searches. Even a policy change entirely unenforceable by courts might be problematic; we have been presented with some noteworthy CBP and ICE success stories based on hard-to-articulate intuitions or hunches based on officer experience and judgment. Under a reasonable suspicion requirement, officers might hesitate to search an individual’s device without the presence of articulable factors capable of being formally defended, despite having an intuition or hunch based on experience that justified a search. Feds say they can search your laptop at the border but won’t say why [Cyrus Farivar/Ars Technica]        

Read More:
DHS on border laptop searches: we can’t tell you why this is legal, and we won’t limit searches to reasonable suspicion