Second in a series. Part 1 here.
The sheer quantity of communications that XKEYSCORE processes, filters and queries is stunning. Around the world, when a person gets online to do anything — write an email, post to a social network, browse the web or play a video game — there’s a decent chance that the Internet traffic her device sends and receives is getting collected and processed by one of XKEYSCORE’s hundreds of servers scattered across the globe.
In order to make sense of such a massive and steady flow of information, analysts working for the National Security Agency, as well as partner spy agencies, have written thousands of snippets of code to detect different types of traffic and extract useful information from each type, according to documents dating up to 2013. For example, the system automatically detects if a given piece of traffic is an email. If it is, the system tags if it’s from Yahoo or Gmail, if it contains an airline itinerary, if it’s encrypted with PGP, or if the sender’s language is set to Arabic, along with myriad other details.
This global Internet surveillance network is powered by a somewhat clunky piece of software running on clusters of Linux servers. Analysts access XKEYSCORE’s web interface to search its wealth of private information, similar to how ordinary people can search Google for public information.
Based on documents provided by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, The Intercept is shedding light on the inner workings of XKEYSCORE, one of the most extensive programs of mass surveillance in human history.
It is tempting to assume that expensive, proprietary operating systems and software must power XKEYSCORE, but it actually relies on an entirely open source stack. In fact, according to an analysis of an XKEYSCORE manual for new systems administrators from the end of 2012, the system may have design deficiencies that could leave it vulnerable to attack by an intelligence agency insider.
XKEYSCORE is a piece of Linux software that is typically deployed on Red Hat servers. It uses the Apache web server and stores collected data in MySQL databases. File systems in a cluster are handled by the NFS distributed file system and the autofs service, and scheduled tasks are handled by the cron scheduling service. Systems administrators who maintain XKEYSCORE servers use SSH to connect to them, and they use tools such as rsync and vim, as well as a comprehensive command-line tool, to manage the software.
John Adams, former security lead and senior operations engineer for Twitter, says that one of the most interesting things about XKEYSCORE’s architecture is “that they were able to achieve so much success with such a poorly designed system. Data ingest, day-to-day operations, and searching is all poorly designed. There are many open source offerings that would function far better than this design with very little work. Their operations team must be extremely unhappy.”
Analysts connect to XKEYSCORE over HTTPS using standard web browsers such as Firefox. Internet Explorer is not supported. Analysts can log into the system with either a user ID and password or by using public key authentication.
As of 2009, XKEYSCORE servers were located at more than 100 field sites all over the world. Each field site consists of a cluster of servers; the exact number differs depending on how much information is being collected at that site. Sites with relatively low traffic can get by with fewer servers, but sites that spy on larger amounts of traffic require more servers to filter and parse it all. XKEYSCORE has been engineered to scale in both processing power and storage by adding more servers to a cluster. According to a 2009 document, some field sites receive over 20 terrabytes of data per day. This is the equivalent of 5.7 million songs, or over 13 thousand full-length films.

This map from a 2009 top-secret presentation does not show all of XKEYSCORE’s field sites.
When data is collected at an XKEYSCORE field site, it is processed locally and ultimately stored in MySQL databases at that site. XKEYSCORE supports a federated query system, which means that an analyst can conduct a single query from the central XKEYSCORE website, and it will communicate over the Internet to all of the field sites, running the query everywhere at once.
There might be security issues with the XKEYSCORE system itself as well. As hard as software developers may try, it’s nearly impossible to write bug-free source code. To compensate for this, developers often rely on multiple layers of security; if attackers can get through one layer, they may still be thwarted by other layers. XKEYSCORE appears to do a bad job of this.
When systems administrators log into XKEYSCORE servers to configure them, they appear to use a shared account, under the name “oper.” Adams notes, “That means that changes made by an administrator cannot be logged.” If one administrator does something malicious on an XKEYSCORE server using the “oper” user, it’s possible that the digital trail of what was done wouldn’t lead back to the administrator, since multiple operators use the account.
There appears to be another way an ill-intentioned systems administrator may be able to cover their tracks. Analysts wishing to query XKEYSCORE sign in via a web browser, and their searches are logged. This creates an audit trail, on which the system relies to assure that users aren’t doing overly broad searches that would pull up U.S. citizens’ web traffic. Systems administrators, however, are able to run MySQL queries. The documents indicate that administrators have the ability to directly query the MySQL databases, where the collected data is stored, apparently bypassing the audit trail.
Collecting massive amounts of raw data is not very useful unless it is collated and organized in a way that can be searched. To deal with this problem, XKEYSCORE extracts and tags metadata and content from the raw data so that analysts can easily search it.
This is done by using dictionaries of rules called appIDs, fingerprints and microplugins that are written in a custom programming language called GENESIS. Each of these can be identified by a unique name that resembles a directory tree, such as “mail/webmail/gmail,” “chat/yahoo,” or “botnet/blackenergybot/command/flood.”
One document detailing XKEYSCORE appIDs and fingerprints lists several revealing examples. Windows Update requests appear to fall under the “update_service/windows” appID, and normal web requests fall under the “http/get” appID. XKEYSCORE can automatically detect Airblue travel itineraries with the “travel/airblue” fingerprint, and iPhone web browser traffic with the “browser/cellphone/iphone” fingerprint.
PGP-encrypted messages are detected with the “encryption/pgp/message” fingerprint, and messages encrypted with Mojahedeen Secrets 2 (a type of encryption popular among supporters of al Qaeda) are detected with the “encryption/mojaheden2” fingerprint.
When new traffic flows into an XKEYSCORE cluster, the system tests the intercepted data against each of these rules and stores whether the traffic matches the pattern. A slideshow presentation from 2010 says that XKEYSCORE contains almost 10,000 appIDs and fingerprints.

AppIDs are used to identify the protocol of traffic being intercepted, while fingerprints detect a specific type of content. Each intercepted stream of traffic gets assigned up to one appID and any number of fingerprints. You can think of appIDs as categories and fingerprints as tags.
If multiple appIDs match a single stream of traffic, the appID with the lowest “level” is selected (appIDs with lower levels are more specific than appIDs with higher levels). For example, when XKEYSCORE is assessing a file attachment from Yahoo mail, all of the appIDs in the following slide will apply, however only “mail/webmail/yahoo/attachment” will be associated with this stream of traffic.

To tie it all together, when an Arabic speaker logs into a Yahoo email address, XKEYSCORE will store “mail/yahoo/login” as the associated appID. This stream of traffic will match the “mail/arabic” fingerprint (denoting language settings), as well as the “mail/yahoo/ymbm” fingerprint (which detects Yahoo browser cookies).

Sometimes the GENESIS programming language, which largely relies on Boolean logic, regular expressions and a set of simple functions, isn’t powerful enough to do the complex pattern-matching required to detect certain types of traffic. In these cases, as one slide puts it, “Power users can drop in to C++ to express themselves.” AppIDs or fingerprints that are written in C++ are called microplugins.
Here’s an example of a microplugin fingerprint for “botnet/conficker_p2p_udp_data,” which is tricky botnet traffic that can’t be identified without complicated logic. A botnet is a collection of hacked computers, sometimes millions of them, that are controlled from a single point.

Here’s another microplugin that uses C++ to inspect intercepted Facebook chat messages and pull out details like the associated email address and body of the chat message.

One document from 2009 describes in detail four generations of appIDs and fingerprints, which begin with only the ability to scan intercepted traffic for keywords, and end with the ability to write complex microplugins that can be deployed to field sites around the world in hours.
If XKEYSCORE development has continued at a similar pace over the last six years, it’s likely considerably more powerful today.
—
Illustration for The Intercept by Blue Delliquanti
Documents published with this article:
We know they are capturing all the e-mail and messages and how we connect across websites and social media. And they must be evaluating trends.
So … they must know how many more know about the uncontrolled disaster at Fukushima than a year or two ago.
My question is how long can government bodies continue to pretend it isn’t happening when so many on the North American west coast are unexpectedly dying, having pregnancy ‘complications’, stillbirths and worse, and livestock dying?
The whole Pacific Ocean is churning up whale and fish corpses and fishermen are coming up with nets fill of jellyfish in traditional fishing grounds.
Internet ‘chatter’ on the topic is doing an end-run around the happy face the energy industry propaganda machine (the news biz) has put out.
They all know we know. The fallout has moved across the continent and is already affecting the Atlantic.
Gamma-Spectroscopy Results of Colorado Radioactive Freak Rain: Fukushima’s Fissioning Mini-Sun on the Edge of the Pacific Ocean is COMPLETELY OUT OF CONTROL
http://allegedlyapparent.wordpress.com/2015/07/06/gamma-spectroscopy-colorado-radioactive-rain-june-14-2015-fukushima/
Will they soon block us from communication like they are doing in Japan?
Or – will they restate their mantra there is no fallout?
2011 was the time to look into renting any California coastal property and buy a farm in the California mountains near six sources of water and start fishing upstream. Check.
Most of the flow made landfall in Alaska and been working its way south. Is it true that the California central valley (agriculture) radiation detectors have been unusually tempermental or unteliable the last four years? Is it true the nuclear regulatory commission rsised the “safe exposure level” in the US because of Fukushima as has been reported here?
You can get lots of current info on the west coast situation at
ENE-News – http://enenews.com/
Many diligent readers post good additional urls. Be aware of mist-borne radiation in buckyballs –
Journal: Unprecedented phenomenon from using saltwater in Fukushima reactors — Forming new uranium compounds able to travel long distances… “like carbon buckyballs”
http://tinyurl.com/mp3qsbh
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2014/1
You have to seek to get around the censorship!
See Dana’s work – http://www.youtube.com/user/BeautifulGirlByDana/videos
and his British Columbia coastal survey results – http://www.thenuclearproctologist.org/
… he is a former commercial diver and expert on the coastal ecology there. He is photographing the demise of the B.C. coastal life.
Um, that’s kind of standard evolution for querying tools to progress from simple queries to embedding code.
What really seems like powerful stuff is the choice of 3 steganography plug-ins (Ciphers,…) and the little warning in the explanation of how to get things ready for TAO:
Obviously, TAO can access an email account in a way that an ordinary analyst cannot — most likely the ordinary analyst could be detected and TAO can’t.
Who did the redactions? Do you know you gave everyone an IP address to test their own homespun versions of XKS with?
Yeah, that part about the logins and TAO seemed so obvious to me I don’t think I even realised they didn’t make an issue of it — but they don’t really have to have a way around, just a way to clean up (and/or both). Wonder what not even really processing that’d mean anything to most people says about me? ;)
As to the URL (and obviously I have nothing to do with this site or those redactions) I noticed all that too, but I’d certainly hope that that wasn’t accessible externally. I wasn’t about to find out.
It didn’t mean something to most people.
There’s enough information in these docs for somebody with a history in metadata to write their own system. It wouldn’t have all the resources, but it would have a lot of the capability. A good way to test it would be to do what the docs say to do with a known address to a known internal server. DDoS it and be the first to try to log in as “oper” after it crashes. I guess that was my point about the IP addresses, even though it’s clearly an internal address. If you make it in, it “DDoS”‘s the whole system since repeated calls randomized over keywords of interest to TrafficThief will ping every analyst on the system and force all the clusters into operation.
Mostly, my reaction to the sum total of what’s in these docs was to marvel at what a search engine could have been were it not locked up in monopoly capitalism and a desire to sell advertisement. None of what they’ve done couldn’t be polished up with a better interface, and none of what they’ve done wouldn’t be useful applied to completely public documents for those who think of the internet as a source of information, instead of a combo of an opiate and an elevator speech for the masses. It’s such a shame when it still takes many days to search out some topics on all the available commercial engines.
This is kind of O/T but I’ve been thinking about the cabling issues in Utah. Fiber optics are interesting. Probably thinking about it because you were talking about DoS and accessing internal systems. Not a great line of thought to work through, though, and I won’t. It does definitely act as a reminder that it’s far easier to think of ways to break things than it is to think of ways to fix them (from everything that could go wrong). Everything’s vulnerable somewhere, somehow. And fear of that gets us to this place, too — it’s all just slightly out of lockstep enough to spur the other thing on.
At any rate, I agree (to some extent) with regards to the metadata design issue — but I think you’re probably oversimplifying the development needs and underestimating peoples’ apparently endless desire to game the results. Probably part of the reason search results have gone to crap has less to do with outright advertisements and more to do with SEO in general — the ‘better’ that gets, the more quality in general comes to suffer.
Today I did some searches that should have easily given me pretty explicit results and I didn’t get anything like what I searched for. Not uncommon. Brings up the question of how much Balkanization of the net might be necessary to actually get better results. I don’t know if I should go into my thoughts in more detail on that subject and I don’t want to get more unnecessarily rambly in my commenting than I have in the past day or two (sorry), so I’ll leave the question out there instead and ask if you’ve considered the subject?
In general the net’s always been about who’s willing to shout the loudest. I’m not sure technology can fix the problem — even with, say, good natural language processing. As much as I hate the term ‘wetware’, it *is*, near as I can tell, a wetware problem. The closest I *remember* seeing (and honestly I could be remembering wrong, it’s been a while) was AskJeeves and altavista — so yeah, that was a long time ago. Google was pretty neat at first, but to blame it on Google (or Bing or Yahoo, etc) is to sort of ignore the fact that these sites don’t just index and search data that’s out there — they’re doing it to data that is manipulated specifically to feed back into the search process.
When it comes to surveillance, I don’t think that model is appropriate for *all* of the things XKS is used to ‘process’ online — and I’d very much doubt it is the only tool in this vein they’d be using. Maybe a good question would be how do the other tools, and XKS, influence the development of one another? Sort of like suggesting how, say, Google and Bing and the other search engines do things differently but inform one another’s methodologies, I guess.
One might also, because as I’ve said before, it’s easier to break things than to fix them, ask oneself how they might be gamed… not in the ‘use these dangerous keywords!’ way you’d see people doing 10 or so years ago for sport, but *really* gamed. One might ask, after that, what They might be willing to do to ‘fight’ that gaming, too.
I think maybe I was talking about advertising because that changes the nature of search. If you interview at any of the search companies for R&D, they will tell you up front that they don’t care about your ideas for expanding or improving search, that they are at heart an advertising firm. That changes things a lot, because nobody cares if a search that cannot be monetized is ever improved.
As for balkanization, it isn’t completely clear, but reversing the search engine bias would flesh out a lot of information gaps and darknesses on the net. One thing I’ve thought of playing with is to reverse the blog process: Build an initial article, allow the readers to create the links, and then append the article with comments which would then be food for creating further links.
The most impressive part about the XKS is what looks like it’s file system, which it looks like is how the “context” is implemented. Being able to run code inside the search is also extremely impressive. One test of metadata search is to allow description more complex than that allowed by keywords/fingerprints. Code inside the search would allow for “search apps” to take the place of some of the balkanization you were talking about. Context imposed before running such searches would make all the difference.
ondelette, if I understand you correctly, re:
“As for balkanization, it isn’t completely clear, but reversing the search engine bias would flesh out a lot of information gaps and darknesses on the net. One thing I’ve thought of playing with is to reverse the blog process: Build an initial article, allow the readers to create the links, and then append the article with comments which would then be food for creating further links.”
… Are you talking about something like Everything/Everything2 that had some traction as a site back in the early 2000s or so (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everything2)? It still exists but I have no idea if it’s active anymore. It could get pretty crazily tangential. People often have a tendency to overlink when they can. I suspect one of the only reasons Wikipedia hasn’t totally gone to hell for this reason is because there’s so much moderation going on — it takes a lot of tenacity for the loudest voices not to overwhelm the other voices. I think it is a character/culture/biology issue, and I’m not sure there’s a technological fix for something that people approach so emotionally. Heck, even scientific journals can’t keep their biases out, and biases don’t have to be standpoints. So I’m not sure how you’d really structure that sort of search engine.
Agreed on the search companies/R&D (I’ve had the pleasure), btw. It’s just a bunch of rackets (sans scruple).
‘Context imposed before running searches’ is why I brought up natural language processing. I’m not really sure how that could be implemented well on a large scale; it would seem to me that the bottleneck would grow massive fast, given the limitations of the pipe, for anything remotely realtime (which I’d argue is where the real value would be, especially given how dangerous storage of historical data can be if used incorrectly (or sometimes, just plain used at all)… I suspect you’d need limiters before imposing context — or maybe that XKS itself is what gives analysts those limiters, and the context comes after the filtering through another program. Either way, the more I think about it the more sure I am that XKS is just part of something, not the end-all be-all it seems to be made out to be.
Their database architects must be excellent at their jobs, though.
You can get keystroke logger free with every copy of Windows 10.
And an annual upgrade for $100.
Or no virus protection.
Chinese operating system out in September 2015
One additional note on the badly written PowerPoints… In the Email Address vs User Activity doc it actually says, “you guessed it” when attempting to underline a procedural point…
At the end of the doc, the last slide is even titled, “The Moral of the Story”
The author sounds like someone who is on the right side of 25. Could they not have at least had a more seasoned individual clean up the execution a bit? Put my tax dollars there please.
Aside from the appalling breach of privacy and overt attempts at obfuscation toward the public, I must say that I am also dismayed at how very badly written the NSA PowerPoint presentations are. They seem to have quite an affinity for exclamation points and rogue capitalizations… Wonder if that speaks to their intended audience.
Actually the quality and linguistic tone of the slides do a pretty good job of depicting the people behind them.
I wholeheartedly agree.
Test test test
After attempting to post a comment more than a half dozen times, you let ‘test test test’ through. Cute!
So, you’re going to make Glenn ban this account as well? Fucking asshole — can’t take a hint.
????
Mona doesn’t like others to arrange the furnishings. Why she can’t accept some of us beneath her station have a right to subsist gets my goat. Startling when a stranger hears it, might she see why some of us find her grinding? She’s wise, no cracks, but meaner than owl shite.
…….
!!!!!!
Having been stuffed into a silo of dissed content likely due to Mona’s whining to authors about their permission slips, I recommend you lay off the Mona, or she may have you sent to a silo, too. This is her domain, pardner. But she can’t stop me from stoppering Watson’s arteries with cloggings of mind bogglings. Even if wiped, I know GCHQ swipes ALL of US, even the siloed. For thee I write, fuckheads, not Mona.
Those are a whole lot of Homers, Simpson! Bet they like to fuck up folks’ data for grins and snickers. I like the one where I’m black, like my ghost brother. I don’t know where he’s hiding officer, but thanks for checking your source’s shortcomings before blowing me away with another off target home invasion!!
abbadabba: “Why she can’t accept some of us beneath her station have a right to subsist gets my goat.”
Mona’s not allowing you to subsist? Are you reliant on this site for the income, food, shelter and the clothes on your back and shoes on your feet in order to survive?!?
Actually, Glenn, Cora Currier and Micah Lee — all authors here — have deleted and/or banned Stan and others of his “Targeted Individual” gang — Glenn many times now. Stan will be banned again. Eventually management will have to finagle something permanent that these assholes can’t work around.
So, it ain’t me arranging anything. But like a number of other readers here who’ve made their disgust with these “Targeted individuals” known both here publicly and to Glenn, I do appreciate when the staff of The Intercept try to arrange a crapflood-free comments section.
BTW, abbadabba, I have never complained about you nor sought your being banned. Others may have, or Glenn may have moved sua sponte. I have no idea.
Mona, you most definitely demanded I be banned and just forgot. You are forgiven. The fact you just poured a pound of dwell dimes down an argument over same with Stan stands as mine. You got a chain to swing those keys, jailer?
@abbadabba: “Those are a whole lot of Homers, Simpson! Bet they like to fuck up folks’ data for grins and snickers. I like the one where I’m black, like my ghost brother. I don’t know where he’s hiding officer, but thanks for checking your source’s shortcomings before blowing me away with another off target home invasion!!”
To those who own the toybox it’s all Play. Doh.
Mona, you said I was already banned. You lied . And I also recall being accused of using multiple accounts, which can easily be determined by TI’s DBA to be another lie.. Did you also make that false accusation?
And why would anyone take hints from you?
You’ve been banned — which is why you had to do your “testing, testing, testing.” And you are going to make Glenn **AGAIN** take the time to go into the administrative set-up and deal with you. Most of you fucking “Targeted Individuals” have made him do that over and over — but you won’t stop making new accounts with different addresses.
He/we doesn’t want your “Targeted Individual” crap flooding the comments here. Micah Lee and Cora Currier have also rid you all from their space at least once each, deleting and/or banning.
You people are incredibly rude — you persist in returning where your voluminous lamentations about your being tortured, stalked, ignored by Intercept reporters & etc. is NOT WANTED.
You. Are. Rude.
The Emails, being tracked. On 07/01/2015, around 9 AM CST, I had the eeriest experience of all. I was talking to a CSR, at my bank’s 800 number. The representative, tried transferring my call, from her Queue to another area in the bank. There were clicks and dead air sounds. And a person answered Business Office. I thought, I was in the bank phone system having been transferred there. Dah, I asked the female individual, in BUSINESS OFFICE, if I may share my checking account number, so she can assist me further. She said something like “NO”, I asked her, if she was in OH, where the bank call center is located. she said she was in VA. I paused, then it occurred to me, how i ended up in the NSA business office? I told the lady in an aimiable tone , I will not ask, where my call has landed. She said, prudently, “you do not want to know”! Well, I knew.
I am certain, in Holocaust literature, I have seen, similar situations described, when the victim and victimizer, come face to face. My only reservation is how the history will judge us? Myself a Jew, and my nation USA?
@ Moshe: Well, I had a quite similar experience as yours in Geneva, Switzerland (where Snowden was located). I am also Jew and I am also (but not only) American. Got hacked several times in a really professional manners, British and US neighbors setup in flat next to mine and above mine, started their harassment, like making huge noise until 4 in the morning each days,etc. I also started to received crazy emails with Trojan attached from hydraulic companies from the German part of Switzerland (how did my email adress ended up in their database ? I never dealt with any hydraulic company), and the list goes on.
i guess, all of this was the result of never have made a US tax declaration, having inherited from a US grandmother and being the only one who didn’t get in touch with US authorities, as I used to work in the financial sector (I never help tax evasion, anyway I worked in operation so no contact with clients), and I used softwares like VPNs, TOR and Jondonym just for IT curiosity, I didn’t use them for any criminal activities. Take in addition that I also worked into journalism and I interviewed and knew people with high ranks withing Geneva authorities (mayor, president of government and chancellor of Geneva).
I guess all these factors taken altogether made me a target for US and UK secret services. They certainly wanted to break me in some way and obtain something from me.
Well, they ran out of luck, they didn’t my other side, the psycho anarcho-punk. In the end, they got so scared from me that they ran to the Geneva police to ask from protection.
All this happened a few months before Snowden revelations.
Impersonating call centers and getting caught at it are on my “list”. But remember folks everyone has a different room 101 so the methods (a number) whomever uses to surveil you are are (wherever possible, automated) but nonetheless can beTailor Made to say…trigger your amygdala (flight or fight response). You know like your Facebook feed proved using their customers in those recent studies
Well call center spoofing is ON my list. Wells Fargo and Comcast to name Two (2). Legitmate cases both complete with case numbers and the added benefit of legit respective call center reps being on line one AND their illegitimate counterparts being on line 2. In comcasts case a Consumer Security Services Supervisor was working with me evertime we reached the “issue” seven times in all. Workaround? At the beginning of the 7th call I told the rep to call me back on my cell as soon as the call dropped. He did. We filed my case. The rep suggested he call me back on the landline to see if we coould reproduce the anomaly. We could not. At our homes in San Francisco CA and Nevada City CA (2 networks, 2 comcast accounts, 2 PGE bills etc.) anomalies (those with 2nd if not 3rd party confirmation) are entered on index card and put in a stack. So many of them have come up in so many technical forums as to make our families experience unremarkable as Im sure some of you will agree.
i’m not sure, but this article probably gave several thousand pentesters a collective vulngasm. yowza.
Roelof Temming pretty much was getting a similar ball rolling in that sector right around the same time XKS was gaining ground. And now, lucky for everyone (/sarcasm) tons of places like CrowdStrike exist too, to protect you, with feats of OSINT and systemic infiltration. Pentesters have too many freaking vulngasms — and they create more skiddies by the day with crap like Metasploit.
Sorry, Temmingh, actually is how he spells his last name, I believe (no search engine handy atm).
Ulricht was arrested in a public library which strongly suggests ALL his Coms were being monitored. Have had similar experiences in libraries where stuff I’ve typed has been interfered with AS I TYPE. Its a real time system.
Bullshit. They’d been doing surveillance on him physically for months. Existence of A and existence of B doesn’t mean A and B are related, and it certainly doesn’t equal C.
I wonder why would they use Arabic as an example in their slides? To reinforce the idea in the minds of new hires and the public that they are only tracking Arabs? Or they doing all of this for the purpose of war-on-terror? I can understand in 80s all of these slide would have Soviet examples but were we in war with them at that time? I am not talking of in-the-box perception of American where we preserve every outsider an enemy and inferior to us but the only reason we had issues with Russia because they were in our way of controlling the whole world and become the biggest empire. Is it not what happening today? Are we really in war against terror or that is our excuse so money keep flowing and people keep voting and nobody bothers us. If you watch the news you ISIS all over the screen, why are not they talking about Myanamer where thousand of Muslim been killed by “peaceful’ monks? I remember in 2001 when American plane were flying toward Afganistan thousand of Muslim were being burned alive, there Women being raped and children being killed in India. I went through the media from that time and could not find any satisfactory reporting of that incident. Never mind the person who was in control of that area at that time is the current prime minister of India. Look at Nigeria where Boko Haram is operating, there was a real uprising against the government policies and it was Muslim who were being oppressed but Army steped in and killed the main leader and his 6500 ‘followers’. Out of the ashes you had Boko Haram. In Iraq, we actually paid for Saddam’s Election campaign. We supported him for three decades and help him do everything that we later hanged him for. In 2003 when new government took power it created Death Squad to go into Sunni areas and kill everybody with impunity. They carpet bomb the Sunni area for two years. Out of ashes you have ISIS which now we are provided 100% support because in an Irony every Muslim ‘Terror’ group chooses Muslims as its victims. I remember when Boko Harm kidnapped school girl there were news of “force conversion” to Islam. Never mind that it is a physically impossible to “force” convert to Islam, right as we speak 182 Million people of Pakistan are being forced into accepting Secularism as their Ideology not Islam. I wanred people there in 2005 by nobody listened. When Mubariq was over thown i told my Egyptian friend do not trust millatry because it is owned, operated and fed by the USA. Couple of protesters died in Egypt and Morsi was overthrown by Army at the same time in very next week Army killed thousands and Our government just danced around the issue.
I could go on and on.
Question that i am asking is what is reality? and are we really free? I watched a documentary the other day about a teacher who went “under cover” in North Korea and taught in a school that was for the elites. She describes the deception and propaganda that is used by the government to control its people. I ask the question how our society any different?
Yah we have Media like intercept so we can know what our government is doing, so what? What can we do about it? Call our congressman? Vote for a different guy? Rather then voting for a Bush we will Vote for a Clinton? I remember in 2001 i red a news story about Caralal group which said in their secret meeting that they would have their guy in the government no matter who get elected (Bush or Gore). Yes, Cheney is bad. But do you know how bad the Lieberman was/is? Read through his voting history. He is a Trojan Horse of the Israel government, need i say more? He was so bad that Democrats had to kick him out so he ran as a Independent.
All i am asking is yes we can have discussions abut the information we know today that we did not know yesterday what does it means? How does it help us if we are not doing anything about it? And i would argue that we are so blocked off from all sides we can not do anything about it. Even if every single american knew about this information and what if there was another 911? Would we still be rational? Would we still remember how we have been deceived by our own government? I would argue that none of these NSA programs have anything to do with the “them” but they are for “us” For me and you. It is not a war on terror it is a war on us, and our minds. Yes Intercept will publish more and we will have more information tomorrow and we will discuses it as well. I personally do not believe this information is coming from Snowden anymore but what ever the source is that is a good thing. And i love Glenn that he is trying to Empower us but we are being enslaved by our selves and our ideas and judgement. There could be millions of Glenn and Millions of Snowden i don’t not think situation will change in reality. Because unless we change our own situation even God can not help us. Please do not respond just think and evaluate. If you are happy with the state of the world we all live in then move on and have fun while it lasts. As i always say a black slave from 200 years ago was trillion times better then us because at lease he knew he was a slave. In my understanding we are being used the same way Alien in Matrix used Humans. We with our delusions provide Power to people who rule us. Once in a while this “Battery” will go bad because of people like Glenn but they will find another ten to replace it. TV is still, so they are never out of resources that help them stay in power.
Just think.
(Sorry could be proof read or edit because of lake of time)
Whoa, if that isn’t a paranoid’s nightmare, I don’t know what is. From now on, I’ll have to PGP-encrypt every single e-mail I send, only chat via Threema (goodbye to all you WhatsApp users), and browse with TOR all the time!
Um, good decision. PGP and TOR are what the experts have been urgently recommending for the last two years.
Kali Linux is terrific. You can crack wifi’s of your neighbours, log into their routers and then remotely view their desktops. Great tool for catching terrorists.
It’s like the teacher in the Peanuts cartoons when you talk sometimes, GenH.
In my spare time I freelance for NSA.
@GenH, I knew the NSA capacity for decoding and decrypting was pretty phenomenally advanced, but I had no idea they were advanced enough to make sense of your mumbling.
Tor was developed by the US military, AFAIK. Of course, it must be safe if the *experts* recommend it.
Rather that make snarky know-nothing remarks about Tor and its development, why not do a little research? Unless you’re just here to muddy the waters?
Try this article: https://hacked.com/debunking-mostly-torgate/ By Neal Rauhauser
Followed by this article: https://pando.com/2014/12/09/clearing-the-air-around-tor/ By Quinn Norton
I’m not claiming to know the ins and outs of all of this to come to absolute conclusions, but I do know much of Quinn Norton’s writings have been top grade, she has earned trust due to her record and history.
Yes, the military wants it for the same reasons many others do: anonymous communication.
Or so I’ve read.
So was The Internet.
Well, they did promise us greater transparency :-)
My smart phone doesn’t seem to have a listing for the XKeyscore app. Did the marketing department rebrand it again?
It is in the accessibility section.
Get a Chinese smartphone that has a hack for XKS. Use that to install your XKS with authentication details.
“Privacy under attack:the NSA files revealed new threats to democracy” The Guardian
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/may/27/-sp-privacy-under-attack-nsa-files-revealed-new-threats-democracy
The linked article is one of the finest evaluations of why the pervasive surveillance U.S. citizens (and others) face from the NSA etc. is destructive (mid to long term) to our democratic form of government and why it needs to be dismantled.
As we approach July 4th here in the U.S. (Independence day, when the citizens of the U.S. declared independence from secret courts, general warrants and unrestrained searches – all back in various forms thanks to this stuff) I encourage everyone to take some time (its a beefy analysis) and read through the article Anon has linked here, so worth it. Thanks for posting Anon.
XKeyscore Suffers from Same Giant Oversight Loophole as Phone Dragnet and SIGDEV: No Tech Audits.
https://www.emptywheel.net/2015/07/02/xkeyscore-suffers-from-same-giant-oversight-loophole-as-phone-dragnet-and-sigdev-no-tech-audits/
Do you know of a system where there are automated audits (a high level monitoring function) for all activities one needs to perform as root, on the same machine?
Something like remote syslog combined with acl’s, and selinux or the like could easily be modified without too much trouble to do full auditing to a separate box (preferably with immutable storage of accesses). I’m sure someone’s already commercialised this but frankly I have no desire to provide any advertising or support any corporation that’d make their stuff closed-source. A decent coder could churn something out in a week or two with what’s already out there.
In impressive article for those who speak “geek speak”…suggest the article would have more impact if it where to be boiled down to the essence..
Believe that the majority do not really understand the impact the that loss of privacy has on our lives… This is not a casual event in our civilization..John Dean – for those old enough, or informed enough to remember the Watergate players – once wrote that what we should be most afraid of is the loss of privacy….a hint of what was to come…
dollyme, the essence is that they can watch you and they probably are watching you from time to time. They save up stuff for the times when they think there is some point in watching you. For myself, I like seeing the more in-depth explanation that is provided in this article and the accompanying documents. It’s not really geek speak. I’m not a geek.
Our focus on electronic surveillance has been at the cost of plain and simple traditional surveillance. The fact is, those who need to be surveilled avoid electronic communication. So in the end our effective surveillance is a lot inferior to what it was twenty years back. We need to employ more boots on the ground. For starters, we can round up all the Muslim informers here and send them into ISIS territory for traditional spying. The Arabic language users of the internet are the few innocent folks that exist in that part of the globe. Anybody with an ounce of guilt and a pinch of sense would be hard to track by the current technology.
From the lack of support for Internet explorer to the audit-free searches by unaccountable system administrators, a lot of the things you call ‘bugs’ here sound a lot more like features to me.
Linux does not have “Internet Explorer”, which is proprietary to Microsoft and is the worst browser on this planet. Linux distros have their own browsers, the primary one being Firefox. You could still run IE in Linux through some Windows emulator or a virtual machine, but who would want to use a discarded piece of trash?
Most Linux distros do not have tracking enabled. Those that have audit trails enabled need to have their apps like apport, zeitgeist, tracker, etc., removed and rendered harmless.
If it is accessed through a web interface, it is not obvious why the user would have to on a Linux machine.
This may be the first article on the leaks that really makes sense to me.
I’ve seen so much that is obfuscated, often beyond incomprehensibility, by the standard dumbing down.
Great relief. Can’t thank you enough.
Seeing what was recently actually there is, in some ways, much less frightening than just about everything that I’ve seen to date.
Once the technical folk have got past the ROFL stage, there’s a chance to think what this means.
1) A system like this will have major false positive and false negative proportions. It just isn’t very good (as described here).
2) Thinking about what they’re checking for, and how, reveals the lie of “only metadata”.
3) Imagine what the, often unmentionable, surveillance of Facebook, Google, Twitter, Data-Brokers… is able to do, and is doing. Now that’s scary.
4) This stuff will leak. Don’t know how much has already but it’s smart to assume all of it.
5) The sabotaging of computer technologies by the surveillance states, will has surely damaged the surveillocracy too. If we’re lucky some of our overseers will notice.
6) …
2) Thinking about what they’re checking for, and how, reveals the lie of “only metadata”.
Absolutely. Maybe they have redefined “only” or “metadata” in the same way that they have redefined “collect” to mean something entirely different from normal English.
William Binney: The Future of Freedom. 2 1/2 hours of questions and answers. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3owk7vEEOvs
4 yrs now and counting. Neither a criminal nor a terrorist.
Concluded FBI involvement.
Great questions Obvious, see below:
Thanks Stalked562. Three years & counting — aware for only two — and YES electronically harassed.
Not competing with you, but for me, it’s at least twelve years and counting.
One advantage I had: not being in the US for most of it. I did not have to look at malicious Americans who deliberately enable and fund the criminals. The downside of that advantage is being in Latin America for most of it, where no-touch torture regulations do not apply (fortunately, offset to a significant degree by living with honorable, trustworthy people).
Glenn, I am deeply concerned, as a geek who fully understands the scope of the documents that you have exposed far too many intricitate details (server names/ports/technical platform info/operating system/db type) that may expose the whole system to exploitation. You redact names but completely fail to protect the whole project from threats which in itself could do more damage than releasing just 1 persons name. Your lack of technical acumen clearly translates here as oversight and in future I think wider consultation with the technical community on redacting some detail is needed. Fail.
Morgan Marquis-Boire and Micah Lee – who worked on these documents for months and co-write both articles – are two of the leading experts in the world in these fields.
On all tech stories, we consult not only with them but also several other leading tech experts.
Other than that, though: great point.
@concerned geek
When I think of technical acumen, I think of security by obscurity.
Maybe the government should at a least stop introducing vulnerabilities into software that they themselves are using.
Blah blah blah.
Where are the victims’ voices? Who are the targeted, why are they being targeted, how? How common is video surveillance? What criteria was used to make someone a target? How long are they targeted? Are they ever removed from the target list once being placed on it? Who puts someone on the target list? Are there specific terms? If so, what are they. Is there a vetting process by which the decision to surveil someone is reviewed by a supervisor? Is there evidence of political targeting beyond politicians? Do you see evidence of ‘enemies lists?’ Do you see evidence that political donors or tech CEOs specifically, or friends of the president have nomination rights for targets? How much intimate behavior, or ordinary human habit is witnessed and recorded? Are there notations kept on the collections? Are they professional or do you see observations made that slip into crudeness, disrespect, mocking? Two years in we still only know the broad outlines of these programs that track and invade the privacy of millions. Yet what is missing from any of your Snowden coverage (w/ exception of five men) are the faces and names of people. It’s like they’re ghosts, or don’t really matter in stories about the greatest mass surveillance in history. Do the actual people even matter? We continue to get a litany of details that are devoid of any context. Please, please, start populating these reports with real people.
THE TWO LINKS BELOW SHOULD PROVIDE SOME PERSPECTIVE ON THE EXPANSIVE NATURE OF THE SURVEILLANCE INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX
THE INTELLIGENCE AND NATIONAL SECURITY ALLIANCE: http://www.insaonline.org/Default.aspx
NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYSIS CENTER: http://sultanakhan.kinja.com/foreign-terrorist-tracking-task-force-contractors-1707146131
Where are the victims’ voices? EVERYWHERE. WE ALL HAVE STANDING NOW.
Who are the targeted, why are they being targeted, how? EVERYONES BEING TARGETED. HOW? DIFFERENTLY. EVERYONE HAS A DIFFERENT ROOM 101.
How common is video surveillance? UBIQUITOUS AND AUTOMATED.
What criteria was used to make someone a target? ANY CRITERIA REAL OR IMAGINED.
How long are they targeted? EVERYONES TARGETED. FOREVER (COLLECT IT ALL).
Are they ever removed from the target list once being placed on it? THERE ARE AS MANY TARGET LISTS AS THOSE WHO ASSEMBLE THEM. SEE LINKS ABOVE. YOU MAY BE TAKEN OFF ONE LIST AND PUT ON ANOTHER. YOU MAY BE ON ONE LIST AND LATER ADDED TO A DOZEN MORE. BY WAY OF EXAMPLE YOU MAY BE PUT ON THE TERRORIST WATCH LIST BY ONE (1) AGENCY BUT YOUR REMOVAL MAY REQUIRE THE CONSENT BE OF ALL SEVENTEEN (17) AGENCIES.
Who puts someone on the target list? ANYONE WITH A CLEARANCE. THE EX GIRLFRIEND OF A COUSIN OF THE FORMER WIFE OF THE NARCOTICS ANONYMOUS SPONSOR OF THE ADULT CHILD OF ANYONE WITH A CLEARANCE. ANYONE BEING BLACKMAILED WITH THEIR OPM SS 86 DATA.
Is there a vetting process by which the decision to surveil someone is reviewed by a supervisor? OCCASIONALLY. IF YOU’RE LUCKY.
Is there evidence of political targeting beyond politicians? ACLU. AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL. OCCUPY ACTIVISTS. BLACK LIVE MATTER ACTIVISTS. WIKILEAKS USERS. LINUX USERS. TOR USERS. TAR SANDS ACTIVISTS. ANTIWAR ACTIVISTS. GOVERNMENT TRANSPARENCY ACTIVISTS. ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVISTS. ANIMAL RIGHTS ACTIVISTS. ETC. ETC.
Do you see evidence of ‘enemies lists? WE’RE ALL DOMESTIC TERRORISTS NOW. CHECK LINKS ABOVE FOR LISTS OF CONTRACTORS WHO MAKE LISTS.
Do you see evidence that political donors or tech CEOs specifically, or friends of the president have nomination rights for targets? MOST OF THE ELITE HAVE FRIENDS ASSOCIATES OR EMPLOYEES WITH CLEARANCES.
How much intimate behavior, or ordinary human habit is witnessed and recorded? COLLECT IT ALL MEANS COLLECT IT ALL.
Are there notations kept on the collections? NO DOUBT. SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY REPORTS. LIES. FABRICATIONS. THE TRUTH. YOU NAME IT.
Are they professional or do you see observations made that slip into crudeness, disrespect, mocking? PROFESSIONAL and UNPROFESSIONAL TO BE SURE.
Two years in we still only know the broad outlines of these programs that track and invade the privacy of millions. Yet what is missing from any of your Snowden coverage (w/ exception of five men) are the faces and names of people. It’s like they’re ghosts, or don’t really matter in stories about the greatest mass surveillance in history. Do the actual people even matter? YES. WE THE PEOPLE ARE THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PROFIT CENTERS OF THE SURVEILLANCE INDUSTRY
Q Mark — this is an interesting page. Maybe I can buy my way off the ‘list.’
http://www.insaonline.org/i/M/a/i/b/membership_levels.aspx?hkey=24b15fc4-13d3-467e-87ee-4193787e12f3
Oh, that list of contractors is woefully incomplete. I know of four who are involved in the actual or enabling of torture: Huron Consulting, Pathstone Partners and Lakewood Advisors and Reuters.
So… Why can’t anyone write this story revealing these details and realities together? In story fashion? Two years after Snowden, all we still get are talking points but no real insight into the targeted masses’ lives. Come on.
Not only you are asking those unasked questions:
https://contrarianopinion.wordpress.com/2015/01/06/snowden-affair-unasked-questions/
wtf
Please, please, start populating these reports with real people.
Not going to happen.
Maybe their definition of human being is too narrow to consider targets’ experiences interesting enough. American journalists are famous for their ability to differentiate between real people and poseurs.
XKeyscore sounds like a bit of a kludge, but that’s probably because the NSA does not value it very much. It does a job and that’s all. Eventually the volume of useful content will diminish as more traffic becomes encrypted.
So I’m sure the NSA places much more stock in its next generation of information gathering tools which will directly control all the world’s individual smart devices. These tools will be fully scalable and queries can be sent, not to a mere several hundred XKeyscore servers, but to several hundred million devices, which will each search their own memories to find the information being requested. The NSA will not have to wait for individual users to press ‘send’ and then intercept and make copies of the data. These new tools will index all the data directly on each user’s device and then send instructions to retrieve it or to simply record and monitor the users actions in real time. Modifying the records, blocking communications or sending subtly modified messages will be child’s play. Encryption will have no effect, since the NSA can watch in real time as the encryption and decryption takes place on the user’s machine.
The NSA will, in other words, own the internet and every device connected to it. So I urge those who are downcast because XKeyscore does not measure up to their expectations to lift up their spirits. XKeyscore is merely a first generation spying tool, which is already obsolete. The second generation tools under development by the NSA will be worthy of admiration. Perhaps the NSA will even stop being ashamed of its own software and no longer feel the need to cloak itself in total secrecy. They will be able to proudly announce what they are doing, because nobody will have the power to stop them.
quote”They will be able to proudly announce what they are doing, because nobody will have the power to stop them.”unquote
Says one who has an acquired taste for human beings. Unfortunately, like his adopted moniker underestimated, once they understand a universal threat to the whole of mankind, the power of collective HUMAN repulsion of evil remains the most powerful force on the planet. Deal with it..asshole.
No. There are actually only four forces on the planet: gravity, electro-magnetism, the weak nuclear force and the strong nuclear force. The most powerful of these is the strong nuclear force.
Basically, each newborn baby is really just a set of new datanodes — hosted on commodity hardware — added to the distributed database cluster as soon as an infant learns to watch approved, animated content on his or her nodes. Every new baby represents N new data partitions, where N represents the number of devices attached to the baby.
The system is also configured to automatically replicate data blocks across the cluster for resiliency; when a human/device crashes, no data is lost. There is nothing novel about the implementation, easily coded with popular open-source frameworks.
They should be able to rubbish the old, unmaintainable kludge with better designed open source based systems, and focus on doing the optimization work they find so difficult to do with the old pig.
” will directly control all the world’s individual smart devices.”
I’m pretty certain they do already, or at least heavily working on it. Remember the recent sim card hacking scandal ?
Finnish, Swedish Telecoms May Be Compromised in SIM Card Hacking Scandal
sputniknews.com/military/20150220/1018552067.html
Would it be possible to also add a link for all documents used in this article bundled in one nice 7-zip archive or a list of direct links I can just point my download manager at and cue up the lot. This would be most helpful for my simple reading pleasure, so I don’t have to tediously open 3 dozen links, clicking each subsequent link one after another, just so I can read through all the documents.
I like to analyse each document and sort them into department, category and chronological order so I can link together a picture in mind similar to an explosion chart.
I have a similar system and a zip archive of searchable pdfs xls ppts would be fabulous.
And then? What will you do once you understand the reality of Big Brother is real? I suggest your next step is to understand your alternatives.
Hellfire
Well to be fair I’ve always thought President Obama was really more of a MEDIUM Sized Brother.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that…
Next Steps. Celebrate Independence Day. Exercise Inalienable Rights Full Cardio. Be a Patriot. Resist, Educate and Inform. Work On Your Jacob Appelbaum Impersonation. Are You With Us?
This article is way beyond the technical savvy of the average tech user which doesn’t bode well for educating the people on just how vast and intrusive the surveillance state(s) has(have) become. Most people I encounter could care little about the inner workings of their devices or apps, just that they work. And of course now that we have the wildly praised USA Freedom Act protecting us, we have nothing to fear, right? Please excuse the snide tone of the last remark. It wasn’t meant as a criticism but more as a reality check. When seeing the forces arrayed against privacy and freedom that this article attempts to illuminate, it’s no small wonder that we see so much apathy in the populace, including myself. It’s human nature to suffer under obtrusive authority as so eloquently elucidated in the Declaration of Independence over two hundred years ago, so my question is are we approaching, or have we arrived at another such pivotal moment? Where do we go from here?
This follow-up piece to yesterday’s article has been billed as the tech-heavy one. Don’t see why that should be a problem.
That in itself is not a problem. The problem, as I see it, is that without public outcry, and sustained opposition to the surveillance state, the chance of reform with teeth, legislatively or judicially, is remote. We didn’t get into this predicament last tuesday and if we’re to have any hope of living to see freedom from it, we need the people, most of them at least. The thoughts expressed in my comment above are virtually the same thoughts I had after reading the first tech lite version. I’ll stand by my comment unless you can show me the error.
There will never be a hue. And cry until the names and reactions of actual people populate these stories. They read like dry corporate reports. They aren’t ‘relatable’ to the average reader. They don’t tell the stories of Mrs. X and Sgt. Y whose pictures were stolen while engaged in some lobgdistance phone sex. Or John Q. Public who’s on the target list because he queried the names of Al Queda leaders for a term paper. No one’s going to get outraged until the abuses are ‘relatable’ to them.
quote”There will never be a hue”unquote
Maybe in your parallel universe.
This is for you hellfire:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQSNhk5ICTI
@jgreen7801
My only interest was in countering your statement thus:
This article does not have to educate “the average tech user” to be valuable and appropriate.
Consistently for the past two years there has been a stream of non-technical articles. The vast majority I would say belong to this category.
People like myself have been clamoring for more technical articles. It’s not merely awareness that must be spread, we also need to spread actionable information which can be used by the tech savvy to protect the innocent from illegal eavesdropping.
For whatever the reason is the revelation of PRISM didn’t stop people from using NSAbook or NSAmail, why is that? Whether the masses do anything themselves or not may not be as impactful as if the developers begin using stronger security measures, better security tools, etc. . We need more technical articles and we need them faster.
The problem is that surveillance for the most part is invisible, and this generation has the attention span of someone who spent the last ten years glued to a smartphone.
“The problem is that surveillance for the most part is invisible, and this generation has the attention span of someone who spent the last ten years glued to a smartphone”
I think you nailed my thoughts better than I did. Expecting the freedom loving tech savvy amongst us to protect the innocent from the surveillance state grates against some of my control issues and raises my hackles. It’s good to know not all techies have been swept up to work for the govt.
I agree, luda. I’m not a computer-techie person myself, but I do understand that knowledge is power in any endeavor. I like this article and the documents that accompany it.
Crowdsourcing detailed technical specifications allows those with greater technical acumen to discuss how to diminish XKeyscores strengths, exploit its weaknesses and (over time) diminish its effectiveness as one (1) tool of oppression. I always take the time to read other takes on these more technical stories as they are revealed. This has really helped me do what we’ve all been doing – explaining these things to our fellow citizens many of whom don’t know (and just need to be educated) or don’t want to know (and need to be convinced).
I think the article *is* within the grasp of an average user who wants to learn something about how surveillance is done. I opened “email address vs user activity” and I was amazed at the very basic level of this training document. Knowledge is power, dude/dudette.
Fulminating about the outrageous actions of the government is all very well, but in addition there is a need for basic info about the system. You don’t just exhort people to vote for Joe Blow. You tell people where the voting center is. You show them what a ballot looks like. You circle the office for which Joe Blow is a candidate and you circle Joe Blow’s name on the ballot. You show a hand holding a marking pencil and filling in the bullet next to Joe Blow’s name, or a hand holding a punch pushing out the chad, or a finger pressing the screen next to Joe Blow’s name. Voting is mysterious if you have never done it before. It’s simple once you are introduced to the specifics. So get yourself introduced to the specifics of surveillance and you’ll be surprised at how you begin to understand how it is done. Again, knowledge is power. Don’t sit around helplessly whining. Learn.
UN Secretary xks? Whoa…
I know this isn’t a Q&A forum, but I’ll pose this anyway: does XKS collect XKS query traffic? Can the spies spy on one another’s queries? Use of https was mentioned, but that’s traffic to servers they have the keys to.
If the NSA internal https traffic uses [strong] Diffie-Hellman key exchange then, actually, the NSA does not have the keys to decrypt those transmissions.
But I wondered that too. They must have some fingerprint to identify XKeystore usage, maybe just to blackhole the records.
That’d make it harder, but they own the client too. That’s both ends of the line. Part of me thinks they’d get rid of those records, part of me thinks they wouldn’t given that they seem to want to “collect it all”.
But the article did mention they use standard browsers, so perhaps they don’t really own the client.
I do not think the require the keys as encryption no longer really works, given their operational expertise in place:
http://arstechnica.com/security/2015/02/how-omnipotent-hackers-tied-to-the-nsa-hid-for-14-years-and-were-found-at-last/
https://securelist.com/files/2015/02/Equation_group_questions_and_answers.pdf
https://securelist.com/blog/research/68750/equation-the-death-star-of-malware-galaxy/
http://blogs.technet.com/b/askcore/archive/2010/08/25/ntfs-file-attributes.aspx
http://www.wired.com/2015/04/researchers-uncover-method-detect-nsa-quantum-insert-hacks/
http://www.symantec.com/content/en/us/enterprise/media/security_response/whitepapers/w32_stuxnet_dossier.pdf
http://www.dslreports.com/r0/download/2006296~552b409fd96380bee2d2ac53b7e465bd/Silicon_scan_draft.pdf
The one thing the State surveillance complex wants from the citizens is apathy. As revealed in the Snowden documents some things are no problem for the NSA (VPN’s, SSL etc.) but there are others that are problems for them (GPG for email although the address to/from and subject is in the clear with e-mail, TrueCrypt for hard drive encryption & other alternatives for newer computers, and encrypted text messaging protocols).
To paraphrase the Once-ler, unless people like us care a whole awful lot (and do what we can do) things will not change, they will not. But as we can see, people do care and things are starting to change (the Supreme Court ruling on the privacy of smart phone searches as an example), its going to be excruciatingly slow, but it will happen. On this Independence Day weekend for the U.S., it is good to reflect on what we can do and do some of that. One thing people can do is start using encrypted messaging for their smartphones so they have private messages (iPhone to iPhone message is encrypted by default – blue messages as an FYI).
/security/2015/03/now-you-can-easily-send-free-encrypted-messages-between-android-ios/
Regarding Windows hard drive encryption, TrueCrypt doesn’t work well with the newer BIOS versions extra security capabilities (you have to turn them off to full disk encrypt with TrueCrypt, which some may not be confortable doing), so here is an article by an encryption expert on what he’s using (the comments are as valuable as the article) where he gives a recommendation at the end of the article for a current product that he uses:
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2015/06/encrypting_wind.html
Luda, not to disagree, per se, but it’d behoove us all to remember that once the endpoints are known man-on-the-side and mitm attacks are very possible, including such things as wild card spoofable ssl certs (such as those used by many corporate servers — just on an individual user scale, and occasionally used on much larger scale like the recent telecom stories). I’m also not really sure it’s safe to say that SSL is ‘safe'; I suspect there are still exploitable flaws (not talking about the recent ssl 3.0 gigglefail) in ssl itself, just not ones which are worth the risk of burning often. We had stuff like sslstrip years ago (still do) so it seems safe to assume there’s still some room for trickery — and that’s not at all including the possibilities of owning the servers, the backend, or the customer machine (in which case you don’t even need to find an ssl weakness, just get to the data before or after the encrypt/decrypt process takes place. Just a few examples, not at all most, nor exhaustive.
Great stuff. Thank you for both articles.
Bringing out the fireworks, eh?! =]
My take away is that all of our harvested data is floating over common protocols that have many attack points… kinda make me think twice about posting this very comment. :[
@Micah: I think that’s what Snowden, and many others, were getting at when they advocate the use of robust encryption so to make the cost of mass-surveillance and bulk collection so resource intensive that they become “limited” to conducting targeted investigations. That’s the beauty of the latest crypto tech is that it is being designed for frictionless use therefore fostering better adoption than what we’ve observed to date, and thanks for reporting from the leading edge and under the hood; excellent report!!
Why don’t they use PostgreSQL??? They must have some serious legacy code, I would hate to work there…
You almost spooked me out, there — I was writing a comment on that before and I didn’t hit ‘Post’ but changed my mind and moved along then came back to see yours. ;)
Let’s be realistic, the true choice of a surveillance state’d have to be NoSQL-based.
Speaking as an American taxpayer…………… I’m just glad they’re not using MS Access.
Pretty much all of this pattern recognition relies on a transmission in the clear. I wonder what the increasing use of encryption (HTTPS, TLS) does to the effectiveness of XKS.
I think it makes it far less effective.
I think that’s the point. A lot of the services mentioned are encrypted today. And new protocols like HTTP/2 can’t even be deployed without it. Fun times.
Hi Peter, hope you don’t mind me just duplicating my response to luda’s comment (above):
It’d behoove us all to remember that once the endpoints are known man-on-the-side and mitm attacks are very possible, including such things as wild card spoofable ssl certs (such as those used by many corporate servers — just on an individual user scale, and occasionally used on much larger scale like the recent telecom stories). I’m also not really sure it’s safe to say that SSL is ‘safe'; I suspect there are still exploitable flaws (not talking about the recent ssl 3.0 gigglefail) in ssl itself, just not ones which are worth the risk of burning often. We had stuff like sslstrip years ago (still do) so it seems safe to assume there’s still some room for trickery — and that’s not at all including the possibilities of owning the servers, the backend, or the customer machine (in which case you don’t even need to find an ssl weakness, just get to the data before or after the encrypt/decrypt process takes place. Just a few examples, not at all most, nor exhaustive.
Dear Useful Idiots:
Thanks for pointing all this out. Yes, TLS/SSL can be subverted, servers can be hacked, etc. But it doesn’t scale well and it isn’t passive, i.e. it can and will be discovered. Just think about all the sophisticated spyware that surfaced in the last couple of years.
Sure, you can try MITM attacks with forged certificates and compromise servers and individual computers, but you cannot do it to everybody all of the time. Plus, do you really want to risk burning a piece because you can? Think about the recently leaked summary of Chancelor Merkel’s phone call. Not much information you couldn’t have aquired by reading a newspaper. It was done because it was a passive attack. If you have to attack actively, you weight whether it is worth risking your new super secret spyware tool.
Also, it will be much harder identifying individual machines to attack, if data is encrypted in traffic.
They’ve proven themselves quite capable of getting access before encrypt and after decrypt, but it’s not that I don’t see your point. I would like to suggest, however, that since most of the forums they are monitoring are what they call ‘extremist’ (note, I’m not weighing in on if they are or not because frankly I wouldn’t know), they don’t *have* to exploit the servers. They just have to get access to the data center, mosey on in, et voila. Once on the server, they have webserver logs (and they can easily just attach a sniffer). With those, they can get as many identifiers as they want or need. From there they just work outwards.
And since I assume they have access to DNS lookups and as much transactional data as they want, it’s really not THAT hard to connect the dots, it’s just an excuse to expand their program and backdoor more stuff. They may want to own it all but they’re more concerned with seeming like they do. The program doesn’t work for what they say it’s for and it never has — the program ‘works’ retroactively, and it ‘works’ in the sense of herding people and attempting to enforce social control and the idea of omniscience and power.
XKS is just part of a much much much much bigger picture, anyway.
I think we can all agree that ubiquitous won’t make SIGINT impossible, but it won’t be so incredibly easy. The whole scandal with all the tapped foreign politicians and civil servants just shows one thing: If it isn’t encrypted, collecting it is just one keystroke away. I don’t see that tapping Merkel’s phone has brought any real insight, but it was done anway. Now imagine, most communications were encrypted. Sure, you might be able to break TLS/SSL either by hacking. Depending on your adversary or how widespread you do it, it can and it certainly will be discovered. Ergo, you will prioritize your targets and there will be a threshold.
Maybe there is a flaw in TLS/SSL that reduces the computer power or time neeeded for decryption. I doubt that this will be possible to do in realtime for every TLS/SSL encryption out there, especially if you throw in perfect forward secrecy.
In short, if it’s unencrypted, one can scan and analyze pretty much all the traffic. Once you throw encryption in the mix, it becomes much more resource intensive. This means, attacks will have to become much more targeted.
Hi Peter,
Again, I think you are placing far far too much import on the value of ‘content’. Yes, they’d like content, but ultimately they don’t need it, and frankly it’s not as relevant as it might seem. Most people aren’t opsec geniuses, in the first place, so timing correlation is extraordinarily helpful. Any access as a regular user (and most of these ‘forums’ are pretty open, and/or easy enough to infiltrate — in fact, most forums involving anything of even a semi-dubious nature are infiltrated by LEOs/LEAs and their corporate partners. So much of ‘cyber intelligence’ is done this way that I think it’s easy to underestimate the ‘value’ of such data. Once you can do the most basic correlation, the vistas are pretty wide open to take things much much further.
As I was saying before, and I think other people are finally seeing, this has never been effective to *stop* terrorism; what it’s best at is monitoring swathes of data and identifying patterns — and then, after ‘terrorism’ happens, trip-hopping your way backwards to make the connections you want to make (because even though the brain often doesn’t know it, it does have ideas in mind for desired correlations; sometimes they’re correct, and more often they’re not, but technology will only be able to give you what you’re willing to look for and get, and that’s one of the fundamental flaws of these sorts of systems, even looking past all of the threats to liberty, privacy, and so forth). Our guts often tell us what we want to believe. This is true for investigators, and it’s true for ‘spies’ just as true as it is for any other human being (and actually more-so, in most cases, because iterations of patterns tend to reinforce them as being proper patterns, even though focus gets narrowed — but that’s straying too far off-topic probably to be worth going further into. As a small example, I’d point to the depersonalisation of ‘other’ as ‘enemy’ by the military; once you can label people easily based on world-view it’s virtually impossible to see past those labels, and that feeds directly into a system that only ‘works’ due to labels (and keywords)).
You’d probably be surprised (or disgusted?) to find out how much systems such as XKS are used though for recruiting, and for monitoring, and most of that can easily be picked out from forum correlation, metadata, and other data people don’t even know they’re creating; aside from the data that’s encrypted, all the other stuff’s pretty much out in the open and traveling over the very pipes that NSA and other agencies do very much ‘own'; lacking the content is somewhat inconvenient, but the metadata is what lets them build out cases and GET the content. Some may say that makes it less of a dragnet, and perhaps it does, but only if your concept of dragnet isn’t informed by having ever been ‘interesting’ to them.
The contact chaining, especially, is important. Again, you only have to establish someone is ‘interesting’ to be able to ‘target’ him/her and in that regard most people are painfully sloppy — and if a target themselves is practically virginal in their opsec, most people around them exhibit far less discipline. I could run through a step by step of how this operates but I may save that for another comment thread at another time, if that’s okay with you. I can also point you to some documents and presentations from a few years ago (and these primarily because they post-date these XKS docs and still don’t tell half the story about what’s going on NOW).
You might want to start by thinking about how easy it is to not have to think about SSL when you own certain aspects of the infrastructure (especially if you think of things in terms of clouds). An example that’s been publicly disclosed for a while now might be to remember those infamous Google slides. Now consider if, say, the underlying technology that cloud systems like Amazon run on were vulnerable (and deliberately so). Or, say, kvm and qemu and other virtualisation software were vuln and breakoutable.
XKS isn’t the only tool in the toolshed.
Incidentally, I apologise if my replies have been less than totally intelligible. Been feeling lackadaisical and that combined with trying to obfuscate style by destructuring my normal writing style, and blah blah blah, plus being ready for a vacation, has led me to care less than one ought about actually speaking clearly and tersely. I’d be lying if I said there wasn’t also an element of frustration involved, too. These are topics that need more than a paragraph or two of comments and which would require more time than I’m willing or able to spend on them — and I’m never quite sure how technical it’s worth trying to be.
(PS: Nor is XKS anything like ‘state of the art'; these docs are all first gen or just barely post-first gen and date back 4-6+ years; it’s not current information on how things are done now, really (one imagines!)).
As an example of one way SSL can be bypassed (but easier, because (a) you’ll have the power to own the middle hops and redirect certs in snazzier ways, and (b) no need to deal with the tor aspect this was written about, and (c), (d), (e), (f), etc left out because I’m about ready to stop for the day), the recent Hack[ing,ed]Team hack produced this powerpoint (which I’d only open in a sandbox/vm without network connectivity to be safe, probably): https://ht.transparencytoolkit.org/rcs-dev%5cshare/HOME/Naga/httpX/Presentation.pptx ).
Looks like Micah’s been pulling double duty.
I love the Adams quote that criticizes and pities the poor NSA geeks.
But the vulnerabilities that make a joke of both oversight and security are troubling.
Oversight? Check!
I bet they’re picky tho about who gets admin privileges …
The webserver performs straight MySQL queries (just there are programatic hooks which perform the audit logging pre/post-query) so the webserver must have MySQL credentials. Conceivably other client applications may require the MySQL credentials as well.
Even for a non-administrator it may be trivial to perform the MySQL queries if:
a) the MySQL server is not firewalled to the connecting user’s computer (if client software requires access then it won’t be)
b) the MySQL credential is located in a place accessible to the user (version control, config files, post-it note, etc.)
Those are two big conditions, but I would not be surprised if an analyst at Fort Meed had a line to the MySQL servers. It is conceivable there is client software running on an analyst’s machine which requires MySQL access. If that is the case then it would be trivial to connect and issue queries.
Yup, I think, from keeping current on the stuff from the Snowden leaks, WikiLeaks, Kaspersky Labs and Symantec, that there’s a lot more going on than just XKEYSCORE.
Nice follow-up.
Tangential but I wanted to say the artist(s) (especially in part one) also did a good job on this story, as I haven’t seen anybody else comment on this. Tasteful, accessible and well-done.
Holy shit, one of the best Snowden doc leaks yet. My only complaint is this article could have been five times as long!
Congrats and thank you!