At the panel in the room immediately before the director of the NSA spoke ( https://www.defcon.org/html/defcon-20/dc-20-speakers.html#DA ), the point was made that cops, prosecutors, lawyers and the press have been invited to DEFCON since DEFCON 1.

These people exist all existed before they spoke at DEFCON, and do after, too. They have plans and goals, and to the extent that they want to explain them, I'm willing to listen. If I want opposing opinions, I can get them in at least four other tracks.

I don't have to believe him, but I feel honor-bound to let him say his piece without being an asshole about it.

The NSA does some questionable stuff, but it also does some awesome stuff. The first thing that comes to mind is SELinux.

On a tangent, don't forget that we need an organization like the NSA (or at least like what the NSA should be). The more ubiquitous computing becomes, the more important that role will become. So, don't advocate chopping off a head of the Medusa; advocate fixing what you see as wrong.

For those of us who have already forgotten or have never known the reason for its necessity, could you explain why? Internationally and historically, similar levels of state communications monitoring are correlated with the need for self-preservation by authoritarian regimes. There are also many modern day states which do not possess an agency directly analogous to the NSA.

Would you be happier if I said I expect cyber-sabotage, cyber-espionage, and cyber-subversion to be important parts of future conflicts?

I'd imagine there are others like me.

I think it is a legitimate question how much of an offensive information warfare standing capability a country needs when not at war, and what level of dirty tricks intelligence agencies should pull in peacetime to monitor adversaries. Particularly due to the non financial costs of this monitoring -- losing our moral standing as a free and fair country, incidentally monitoring citizens or those present in the USA, in violation of the constitution (especially due to the tortured "five eyes" sharing agreements, which, if they weren't governments, would be viewed as a conspiracy and some kind of constructive crime), etc. I judge all of this stuff by "does it make us safer", and at some point, it clearly goes the other way. I think that point is several hundred billion dollars a year less spending than what we have now (well in excess of a trillion). Maybe 50-75% less spending.

Feds have been an integral part since DEF CON 1. They're welcome, and booing them of the stage is just childish. Again, I'm pretty sure the majority of hackers don't agree with them, and may even think they're a bunch of morons, but it's still interesting to hear what they have to say. People do get booed of the stage, but for entirely different reasons, e.g. http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9755135-7.html (and watch the video, it's hilarious).

(Also, talking about security-people-hackers on a site primarily focused on programming-startup-hackers confuses the crap out of me.)

So, "keep your friends close, and your enemies closer?" :-)

Anyway, you make a good point, and there are good reasons to let the NSA guy have his say. But when you look at the abuses perpetrated by the US government over the years, it's hard to feel good about hanging around and listening to more propaganda from their representatives. And chucking tomatoes at him would send a strong message "don't assume that we are on the same side, or that we are going to support your agenda" or whatever.

From the Hacker News Guidelines: "On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting."

The folks at DEF CON are some of the best hackers out there. Have you seen any of the presentations?

> Basically the contest goes like this: If you see some shady MIB (Men in Black) earphone penny loafer sunglass wearing Clint Eastwood to live and die in LA type lurking about, point him out. Just get my attention and claim out loud you think you have spotted a fed. The people around at the time will then (I bet) start to discuss the possibility of whether or not a real fed has been spotted. Once enough people have decided that a fed has been spotted, and the Identified Fed (I.F.) has had a say, and informal vote takes place, and if enough people think it's a true fed, or fed wanna-be, or other nefarious style character, you win a "I spotted the fed!" shirt, and the I.F. gets an "I am the fed!" shirt.

http://www.defcon.org/html/defcon-13/dc13-spotthefed.html

edit: Oops, should have read the article first, it is mentioned there :/

(Shameless advertising: go to DEF CON. Seriously. It's more fun than Disneyland!)

That's not a high bar to clear when Disneyland is so congested that you can't get on all of the rides.

(Or any without waiting an eternity in line.)

My point is that the government aren't the only people trying to fuck us. The private sector, big and small, is trying to do so as well.

I was drawing a parallel with bank security as the same institution-based priorities apply to the NSA. Their version of 'security' primarily involves securing the position of USG and its subsidiaries by monitoring everyone to gain intelligence against possible threats (including the non-criminal threats). This makes the citizens, who should be the most important, less secure.

One is responsible for their own actions.

http://www.ted.com/talks/marc_goodman_a_vision_of_crimes_in_...

What the NSA is doing is frightening. What the cartels and other criminals is doing is the stuff of nightmares. One doesn't necessairly justify the other, but it's good to think about.