NSA: The "big stick" of the Executive Branch and how this really affects US security worldwide

***As a former employee (US Navy analyst at NSA), I must say up front "I can neither confirm nor deny any comments made for or against NSA and their collection efforts both internal and external to the US. All questions should be directed to the Public Affairs Office at Ft. Meade, MD."***

Now that I have parroted the official party line, lets talk.

Today I read an very well written, but sad, article in the Wall Street Journal entitled "Missteps Doomed Civilians As Chemical Attack Loomed." The article outlines a series of steps leading up to the mass chemical attacks in Syria on August 21st. Due to efforts of the US collection system (probably NSA and/or CIA), Syrian troops were know to be using chemical weapons on the population prior to this occasion. These attacks led to the death of a small number of civilians, but were unconfirmed by independent sources. Then on the 21st, an order was giving by a senior level person to perform a mass attack on rebel held locations and the civilian population in the area.

"Sources" stated that the communications intercept (the order) was not immediately translated and reported because these attack had become commonplace. It was not until the death toll kept climbing up that the full weight of the intercepted order came to light.

I do not blame the analysts who intercepted, translated, and reported this occurrence. I blame the the 3 branches of the govarnment for this. You see, it was Congress who voted in the shambles of a law known as USA PATRIOT ACT. It was President Bush who approved the law with his signature. It is President Obama who has taken the collection requests to an absurdly high level (the number of collection requests on US citizens met a "critical mass" before the administration decided to stop reporting the numbers.) I also blame the Judicial Branch for slowly eroding the power of the Constitution and Bill of Rights over the years.

I mostly blame the Executive Branch of the government for endangering the US. You see, NSA has a military commander who receives collection orders from the Executive Branch. I don not advocate replacing DIRNSA with a civilian because a civilian would still receive orders from the same source. When orders are given, resources in the already strapped NSA are stretched further. This is simple supply and demand. You have a set number of resources. When you add tasking, something else has to stop being collected and analyzed. In this case, it appears that the Executive branch ramped up tasking on the US populace in a vane attempt to prevent terrorism at home. This left us with fewer resources to stop terrorism abroad.

***Side note - We homeschool. My wife spends a lot of time discussing the law of unintended consequences and their effect on our country. I am beginning to understand the value of this approach.***

Could the mass slaughter of a civilian population have been avoided in Syria? The simple answer is probably not. The long answer is that the Executive Branch already had knowledge of "low level" use of chemical weapons in Syria and did nothing about it. Worse, the Secretary of State opened the door for Russia to step in and solve the chemical weapons dilemma. Finally, the Presidents inability to lead the World (much less the country) in this matter is abysmal.

This leads me to the discussion of what many people are asking of the US government. Many are calling for the dismantling of the NSA and its collection methods. These people don't usually stop there. They often times complain that we monitor (spy) on other countries, including our partners. I say this is the direction we need to move in. The charter of the NSA was to collect on foreign communications and, at one time, were forbidden to spy on US persons. The collection of US persons was not actually forbidden, but the burden of proof and the need to collect on US persons was heavy.

Anyone who says we should NOT be spying on other countries is naive. Just because you are our friends today does not mean you will be our friend tomorrow. Not only this, you will NEVER have a utopian society in which all peoples are friendly to each other. The reason for this is human nature. Ask my 7 year old why communism is such a bad idea and he will tell you it is a great idea until you introduce the human element. After all, if we can't overcome racism, how do you ever think we will reach utopia?

In conclusion, the current "policy" on spying on US persons is stretching already thin resources to a breaking point. This does not allow the NSA to effectively perform its chartered mandates in the collection and analysis of signals from non-US persons. This endangers US interests and persons by requiring poor asset management.

Please feel free to comment.

ACLU - A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing: But they got this one right!

     In my recent presentations at Hack3rCon^4 and SkyDogCon 2013, I spoke about the fact that NSA wiretaps are legal (according to current interpretation of many laws). In addition, I highlighted some programs that push the envelope on constitutionality. One such program is the Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting (SAR) Initiative (NSI). I talked about how this program violates our First Amendment and (possibly) Fourth Amendment rights.

     Yesterday, program details came to light after many years when the ACLU published the findings of its Freedom Of Information Act request. Years ago, the ACLU submitted a FOIA request that  was summarily denied by the government. They quickly followed this denial with a lawsuit against the FBI. Well, they won.

     Just as I suspected, the ACLU determined that the program did not have adequate checks to ensure citizen's rights were being honored. This is not their interpretation of the data. You see, they received volumes of internal  emails and reports that stated this as fact. Several State level "fusion centers" complained about the handling of private citizen's data, the lack of a privacy policy, and storage of data in the eGuardian system.

     I still stand by the premises I stated in my presentation. NSA warrantless wiretaps are legal (albeit, unconstitutional), blame rests equally on the 3 branches of the government, and the ACLU is a den of hypocrisy! I base the latter on the fact that they claim that they have

"been the nation's guardian of liberty, working daily in courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and civil liberties that the Constitution, Bill of Rights and laws of the United States guarantee everyone in this country."  

Why am I so critical? The ACLU pushes hard for the Bill of Rights on a national level with the exception of the Second Amendment. When I questioned an ACLU lawyer about this at DEFCON XXI, I was summarily dismissed just as the government dismissed their FOIA request. When I asked again for a reason, this time at their vendor table, I was told that it was a state-by-state issue, not a national issue. 

***Apparently, rather than being a guardian of you rights, they see fit to pick and choose what rights you should have!***

I once again submit to you that you should NOT support the ACLU but you should support organizations that believe the entire Constitution and Bill of Rights is worthy of being defended.

Also, before you try and interpret the Bill of Rights, you must read what the authors and original supporters of this great document said on the issue.

If you would like to know more see the following sites:

NSA wiretaps are legal (and other annoying facts) presentation http://www.irongeek.com

Quotes by founding Fathers (public domain) http://cap-n-ball.com/fathers.htm

ACLU article and reports on SAR/NSI www.aclu.com

"Stop Watching Us Rally" - How I wish I could be there!

     I recently gave a presentation entitled "NSA Wiretaps are Legal and other Annoying Facts." I am not a lawyer and maybe I got some things wrong. I am ok with this since my point was to get the community talking. The basis of my talk was that the NSA is performing many surveillance actions at the direction of the President, under the guise of crappy law written by incompetent lawmakers in Congress, and with the aid of a Supreme Court and a legal framework that couldn't care less about the Constitution. I made mention of the rally put on by Stop Watching Us. My only regret is that I cannot be there in person. That is why I am writing this. I want to get the word out!
     Please use the link to check out Stop Watching Us and sign their petition (571,000 have signed so far). Also, sign up for their rally. If you cannot go to DC on such short notice, fine, you can attend online. After you do this, please use these 2 links to find you Representative and Senator. When you find them, send them an email AND fax. Then call them! This has to STOP!
     Don't stop there. Think long and hard about supporting the EFF and their Constitutional campaign.

I will leave you with a quote from one of our founding fathers. Keep in mind that these guys were in the midst of throwing off the yoke of tyranny and the blood was still in their mouths from the fight.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
US author, diplomat, inventor, physicist, politician, & printer (1706 - 1790)

Hack3rCon^4: Notes and slide deck "NSA wiretaps are legal and other annoying facts"

I have had several people request my slide deck from Hack3rCon^4. Because of bandwidth and email issues, I have uploaded it and my notes here. Dropbox

The video of my presentation can be found on IronGeek's site.

Have fun and don't forget to speak with your elected officials often!

*****Note: I got a couple of things wrong in my presentation.
1) The coauthor of the 2nd Amendment that I was referring to is George Mason. Some really good quotes on the 2nd Amendment can be found here and here. Before discussing what the founders "intended," read what they actually said!
2) I eluded to the 17th Amendment as a joke but got the timeframe wrong. The 17th amendment forced States to hold direct elections for Senators in 1913. Prior to this, some States still allowed  Senators to be appointed by those State's governors. This intent of the 17th Amendment was to stop the corruption of Senators at the State level. This worked! However, Senators are now corrupted at the national level.

Hack3rCon^4 - Eye of the Storm

Drum roll please!!!

I have been selected to present at Hack3rCon^4. This will be my second time presenting at what is one of my favorite cons. What is the topic you ask?

NSA wiretaps are legal and other annoying facts

I debated whether I wanted to display my outline here but, to be honest, my presentation grows with every day of research.

As usual, I will write a blog post about the con and will provide a link to the video provided by IronGeek.