Julian Sanchez joins Trevor Burrus and Matthew Feeney for a discussion on the surveillance state. If the government’s been spying on us for decades, what’s new now? Why is bulk data collection so particularly nefarious? What is metadata anyway, and what does the government do with it? Does the government actually catch terrorists through mass surveillance? Why do people treat terrorism differently from other violent crimes? The defenders of surveillance always say “if you haven’t done anything wrong, you have nothing to be afraid of” —does this justification hold water?
Julian Sanchez is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, where he studies issues at the busy intersection of technology, privacy, and civil liberties, with a particular focus on national security and intelligence surveillance.
Power exists to be used. Some wish for cyber safety, which they will not get. Others wish for cyber order, which they will not get. Some have the eye to discern cyber policies that are “the least worst thing;” may they fill the vacuum of wishful thinking.
As if it needed saying, cyber security is now a riveting concern, a top issue in many venues more important than this one. This is not to insult Black Hat; rather it is to note that every speaker, every writer, every practitioner in the field of cyber security who has wished that its topic, and us with it, were taken seriously has gotten their wish. Cyber security *is* being taken seriously, which, as you well know is not the same as being taken usefully, coherently, or lastingly. Whether we are talking about laws like the Digital Millenium Copyright Act or the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, or the non-lawmaking but perhaps even more significant actions that the Executive agencies are undertaking, “we” and the cyber security issue have never been more at the forefront of policy. And you ain’t seen nothing yet.
Not only has cybersecurity reached the highest levels of attention, it has spread into nearly every corner. If area is the product of height and width, then the footprint of cybersecurity has surpassed the grasp of any one of us.
Greer’s speech was broken down into 10 sections: Mandatory reporting, net neutrality, source code liability, strike back, fall backs and resiliency, vulnerability finding, right to be forgotten, Internet voting, abandonment, and convergence.
Papers, Please has a nice breakdown of some of the more pertinent privacy and identification issues.
Appelbaum spoke of a NSA program that allows its analysts to search through vast databases containing e-mails, IMs and the browsing histories of millions of people. Called XKeyscore, the program was designed to develop intelligence from the Internet.
Jacob Appelbaum discusses the fallacy of Americans thinking that they won’t be targeted, passive and active surveillance methods, AI and human analyst systems working together, satellite networks, deep packet inspection & injection, military contractors getting special access to surveillance programs, proprietary vs open source software, OTR messaging, hoarding exploits for self-gain.
What Appelbaum is talking about at 17:30 is the video below.
The New America Foundation held a discussion on National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance threats to cybersecurity, Internet freedom and the economy, and what can be done from both a personal and policy level to counter these threats.
Video cannot be embedded, but is worth watching.