News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Newly Declassified Documents Show How the Surveillance St... by tokenadult on Sunday September 29, 2013 @08:04PM (#6467106)
This article is about a collection of previously classified documents spanning most of the twentieth century about advice to various United States presidents on secret surveillance programs in the interest of national security. The article was a more interesting read than I expected when I first saw it on my Google News page. President Franklin Roosevelt was advised to violate a specific Supreme Court holding about intercepting telegraph communications with persons outside the United States.[1] The history, across multiple administrations, has often been a history of security concerns trumping individual liberty concerns.

But on the whole the history is also hopeful. A key idea from the article that really connects to me is "just as the book shows how that apparatus has been built up, it also tells a second story: of how public outrage, loud and sustained, can tear it back down." Countries have been in danger from external enemies before, and countries have been in danger from their own leaders and complacent citizens before. When the people mobilize, they can still rein in the government.

[1] From the article: "In his opinion, Assistant Solicitor General Charles Fahy had little hesitation about validating the president’s authority to intercept electronic communications to parties abroad. There was just one problem: The Supreme Court had explicitly held that the Communications Act barred such a move."

Re:Newly Declassified Documents Show How the Surveillance St... by pvnick on Sunday September 29, 2013 @08:40PM (#6467203)
On the mobilization front, this rally is aiming to be a large display of support for reforming the surveillance apparatus: http://rally.stopwatching.us
Re:Newly Declassified Documents Show How the Surveillance St... by chinpokomon on Sunday September 29, 2013 @08:58PM (#6467248)
Any idea why the SSL certificate for that site would be invalid? I'd rather not connect to a site, given the nature of the content, if I can't know who maintains the site and where a valid SSL certificate is a good first step in due diligence.
Re:Newly Declassified Documents Show How the Surveillance St... by rwmj on Monday September 30, 2013 @03:27AM (#6468234)
I'm getting a valid certificate so maybe you are being MITM'd?
Re:Newly Declassified Documents Show How the Surveillance St... by randomdestructn on Sunday September 29, 2013 @11:21PM (#6467598)
I'm getting a valid cert.

http://i.imgur.com/FQ4Yb94.png

Re:Newly Declassified Documents Show How the Surveillance St... by jlgaddis on Monday September 30, 2013 @09:03PM (#6473390)
If/when this happens again, run this command and paste the output:

    $ openssl s_client -showcerts -connect rally.stopwatching.us:443
Re:Newly Declassified Documents Show How the Surveillance St... by kansface on Sunday September 29, 2013 @10:17PM (#6467450)
Why would you care about an invalid cert if you aren't handing over any credentials?
Re:Newly Declassified Documents Show How the Surveillance St... by nitrogen on Sunday September 29, 2013 @10:25PM (#6467466)
An invalid cert could indicate a MITM attack. Even if you're not sending anything down, who knows what they're sending back?
Re:Newly Declassified Documents Show How the Surveillance St... by rwmj on Monday September 30, 2013 @03:29AM (#6468237)
Because someone might alter the content, eg: changing the date of the rally (so some people don't turn up on the right day), or making the event much look more unconvincing so you don't bother going.
Re:Newly Declassified Documents Show How the Surveillance St... by jared314 on Sunday September 29, 2013 @11:37PM (#6467631)
I still don't understand how a rally will do anything beyond making the news. The effort might be better spent identifying specific senators, and representatives, and encouraging people to vote them out of office through campaigning.
Re:Newly Declassified Documents Show How the Surveillance St... by sp332 on Monday September 30, 2013 @11:18AM (#6470053)
People aren't going to vote for a congress member based on an issue they don't care about. You have to get people to care first, that's what the rally and associated media attention are for.
Re:Newly Declassified Documents Show How the Surveillance St... by ds9 on Monday September 30, 2013 @08:30AM (#6469156)
The USG actually started on its electronic surveillance career in the 1860s, when Lincoln approved routing all the telegraph connections thru the office of Secretary of War Edwin Stanton [1]. The first electronic (?) MITM, maybe.

1. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/06/opinion/lincolns-surveilla...

Re:Newly Declassified Documents Show How the Surveillance St... by devx on Monday September 30, 2013 @08:43AM (#6469221)
Maybe it would be acceptable to do something like that "in a time of war". The problem with today's government is that it seems to define everything in terms of an endless war. Cyber-attacks? "We're at cyberwar". Terrorism? "We're at war with all the nations harboring terrorists". Domestic terrorism? Well there's already the "war on drugs", so they probably don't care that much about that one, as long as they still get all the powers they need inside the country, too. 9 in 10 NSL's are used for drug cases, actually. Surprised?

Such sustained surveillance - indefinitely - is simply unacceptable, and people need to fight back against it. If the nation really is at some sort of "long term war" with multiple enemies, then maybe the nation is doing something very wrong, and should look at the root cause of what's causing those enemies to react, rather than trying to fix the problem later with surveillance.

The problem is maintaining the war status quo is so very profitable for certain people and companies.

Re:Newly Declassified Documents Show How the Surveillance St... by erikpukinskis on Sunday September 29, 2013 @08:23PM (#6467145)
I believe it said Roosevelt was advised against the wiretapping but went ahead with it anyway.
Re:Newly Declassified Documents Show How the Surveillance St... by edmccard on Monday September 30, 2013 @03:01AM (#6468177)
> I believe it said Roosevelt was advised against the wiretapping but went ahead with it anyway.

That case (wiretapping, advice against from Attorney General Robert Jackson) is different from the one tokenadult is referring to (intercepting telegrams, advice in favor from Assistant Solicitor General Charles Fahy).