Ever since legendary British investigative journalist Duncan Campbell told the world in a 1988 magazine article about ECHELON — a massive, automated surveillance dragnet that indiscriminately intercepted phone and Internet data from communications satellites — Western intelligence officials have refused to acknowledge that it existed.
Despite sporadic continuing press reports, people who complained about the program — which, as Campbell disclosed, automatically searched text-based communications using a dictionary of keywords to flag suspicious content — were routinely dismissed as conspiracy theorists.
The only real conspiracy, it turns out, was a conspiracy of silence among the governments that benefited from the program.
As Campbell writes today, in a first-person article in The Intercept, the archive of top-secret documents provided to journalists by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden contains a stunning 2005 document that not only confirms ECHELON’s existence as “a system targeting communications satellites”– it shows how the program was kept an official secret for so long.
It describes how in 2000, the European Parliament responded to increasingly authoritative reports that ECHELON was being used to indiscriminately survey non-military targets — including governments, organizations and businesses in virtually every corner of the world — by appointing a committee to investigate the program.
Members of the committee vowed to get the truth from the NSA. What happened, according to an article in the NSA’s own in-house “Foreign Affairs Digest” was this:
Corporate NSA (FAD, SID, OGC, PAO and Policy), ensured that our interests, and our SIGINT partners’ interests, were protected throughout the ordeal; and ironically, the final report of the EU Commission [link] reflected not only that NSA played by the rules, with congressional oversight, but that those characteristics were lacking when the Commission applied its investigatory criteria to other European nations.
The initials there stand for NSA’s Foreign Affairs Directorate, Signals Intelligence, Office of the General Counsel, and Public Affairs Office.
And then, in what is possibly one of the most memorable lines to come out of the Snowden archive, the author of the article, a “foreign affairs directorate special adviser,” concluded with this observation:
In the final analysis, the “pig rule” applied when dealing with this tacky matter: “Don’t wrestle in the mud with the pigs. They like it, and you both get dirty.”
ECHELON was the precursor to today’s worldwide dragnet, which thanks to Snowden, we now know is carried out by tapping the massive fiber-optic cables that encircle the globe, in addition to the satellites that orbit it. It was the collect-it-all of its time.
As it happens, not every one of the ECHELON conspiracy theories turned out to be substantiated. On “Jam Echelon Day” in October 1999, people around the world sent a huge volume of communications over the Internet and over the phone using as many of the presumed Echelon keywords as possible.
But the Snowden archive contains no evidence that the NSA routinely scanned voice communications for keywords back then. That’s something they’ve only gotten good at recently.
The story of Campbell’s four decade long career exposing mass surveillance — including his introduction to the world of the organization known as GCHQ — is a great read. Make time for it.
Photo: The radar domes of RAF Menwith Hill in North Yorkshire in October 2007.
Naughty spy programs wouldn’t be such a big deal if you didn’t also run into problems while trying to fix some of the rights abuses that come as a result of those programs, while being completely oblivious to the programs themselves.
Rights abuses won’t generally be prevented if they’re not prevented by design. Trying to add in ‘respect for human rights’ after something’s been implemented can only at best be incremental and partial; by then it’s too late, and people balk at anything that might break something that’s already a kludge to begin with, especially if it’s profiting someone else.
Naughty??? It’s difficult to count the ways your rationalization is wrapped around the axel.
He sounds like a squeaky wheel. :(
When reading this today I couldn’t help thinking how this federal ruling might have eventual implications for whistleblowers – like Ed. So far, any claims he damaged national security with his exposures have been some hollow shit.
http://shadowproof.com/2015/08/03/federal-judge-strikes-down-idaho-ag-gag-law-defends-undercover-investigations-of-food-industry/
Hi NFJTAKFA –
Glad you posted this here! I did see elsewhere that the Idaho ag-gag law was struck down. Pray it leads to the removal of ALL the state ag-gag laws.
Will it have implications for other whistleblowers. Don’t know, but it would be great if the ruling would help them.
Good evening, feline16, and although I hope the judge’s words about First Amendment rights and even lying to conduct such activities in the public’s interest might someday be applied to Ed and Chelsea – I wouldn’t want it also granting a pass to those instead lying to the public, like the dicks committing fraud to try and shut down planned parenthood. Nobody should hold their breath this ruling will change anything in the persecution of whistleblowers anytime soon. Specifically, that alarmist hysteria alone by the Big Brother government indicates there’s still MUCH bigger secrets somewhere, and therefore the likelihood of much bigger crimes, than anything Ed’s efforts have yet revealed. We should probably all stay tuned…
May I suggest a Pinot, Mary’s Gone crackers and a fine cheese while we wait…?
When you say ”Chelsea” you mean that Jessie Bradley, right?
Oh, and you forgot to say ”bankster”.
I think the timelines are off. In 1988 the Internet was barely upgraded to T1 and was composed of just the research institutions. There may have been one T1 to CERN. All of this was cable not wireless. The statement that perhaps voice calls or data calls using other protocols may have been snooped is possible. Certainly no TCP/IP. Private entities like Alternet and PSI barely existed back then. Unless the NSA liked to snoop on itself there was nothing to snoop.
BBN switched the ARPANet over to TCP/IP on January 1, 1983.
The number of internet nodes in 1987 exceeded 20,000.
Yes, there were very few T1 nodes in 1988, but no, it’s not true there was nothing to snoop, and no TCP/IP. It just ran slower than T1, at 56Kbits.
I was thinking about PSNs like Telenet/Sprintnet and Tymnet and other x25 networks (Datapac, etc) — especially international — myself, but the truth is most of the tech just wasn’t there (and it certainly wasn’t portable, nor useable on a grand scale; one could do interesting things on packet switched networks, but it just wouldn’t have been feasible back then to do anything at the scale we have now (staffing and skill sets would have been issues too)).
This makes me nostalgic.
#WWDRD? Just imagining the reaction of Richie being approached to backdoor infrastructure is an amusing thought…
Oh, I don’t know about that. 1988 was the year of Robert Morse’s worm.
Widespread effects were obviously possible, as was widespread infection — but having any sort of centralised backbone that wasn’t on the backbone itself would have been impossible; if it were even attempted, it would have been noticed merely by looking at quality degradation on the network. So yes, I believe ‘cyberwarfare’ would have easily been possible back in ’88, if the goal were to create mass havoc — or even to backdoor things on a grand scale (and things were definitely being backdoored back then). But not surveillance on a mass scale. Even the keyword tech used at the backend had very very limited abilities, a bit later on, and the net getting sniffed in ’96 or so was quite limited — that’s a decade later.
Btw, nice code, Morris. ;)
People who were working on the internet backbone at the time were not pissed at Morris, they were pissed at USL, because the weakness he exploited was well known and they had been telling USL to fix it for, in the estimate I heard, 5 years.
There were definitely sites and people using them that could have been surveilled, and some maybe were, there was a lot of technical discussion and otherwise on usenet. Surveillance on a mass scale? For decades they recorded all trans-Atlantic and trans-Pacific traffic as a matter of course (phone traffic). That became watching the satellite traffic as well, later. That’s why Hayden thought the world was going dark when fiberoptic cable started becoming the norm. That was the real reason for the Patriot Act, most of which was already written before September 11th.
Yet the beautiful thing about fiber optics is how easily they can be spliced without signal degradation…
Being able to record things and being able to monitor things and being able to monitor all things at all times and being able to monitor all things at all times from everyone are all very different requirements, imho. And parsing them? That was the real doozy, because most of it required human beings (often ones with advanced training in language and linguistics). I’m not arguing that monitoring didn’t exist. Indeed much craft was involved in trying to get intelligence from as many means and methods and individuals as possible. But as far as I know there really was no way to USE most of the data they may have gotten because they would have had very little indication of what they were getting. Usefulness in retrospect, however, is possible. There were heavy storage and memory requirements, even before parsing came into things, and my guess is (and it’s only a guess) that mass spying on telecom did take a hit in the years between switching from electromechanical to electronic and digital switching — if only because the quantity of traffic would have increased sharply from about the 80s on. Echelon was very real (obviously) but my guess is it was mostly used for political and pure espionage purposes, not going after random people (most of the time) — and for going after people that just plain weren’t liked or were ‘suspect’, very specifically. Not looking for who to go after (which is, I believe, where we’re at now) and then drilling down into it and everyone they know and then expanding outward. I guess I’m saying the big difference is ease of automation. I’ve little doubt that all of this would have gotten much worse much sooner if it weren’t for the ramp up time to get the technology in place. But I’m rambling.
We should just give the NSA it’s own cable show like CNET or something. Bread and circuses for the masses.
“But the Snowden archive contains no evidence that the NSA routinely scanned voice communications for keywords back then. That’s something they’ve only gotten good at recently.”
I’d very much doubt that. If interested, start here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lernout_%26_Hauspie
Also, OCR technology to convert digital images (i.e. fax communication, which was basically an exchange of TIFF images) to searchable txt was mature by the early nineties. If I recall correctly, the French government complained that’s how Boeing got its hands on sensitive communications from Airbus.
I think you are correct and can stop the doubting. Speech to texts technology is decades old. Much stuff that comes to surface now was already patented in the ’50-’60-’70 and 80 ties. Good example is digital video lenses, those where already in use for a longtime in professional camera’s for broadcasters, -1970 something- but converted back to analog for recording and editing. The same lenses are found in today’s better digital camera’s. Only gotten good recently: no no, no, the world of the Flintstones is fantasy.
There’s no such thing as a digital lens.
ECHELON has been up and running since at least 1988. It seems that it has missed discovering facts about lots of terrorist plots.
There is two likely reasons.
One the program is ineffective.
Two the program is effective but British leaders have reasons to let the terrorist attacks take place. One reason would to hide the existence of ECHELON. A second reason is to justify continuing to develop a police state in response to terrorism
Just in case people aren’t aware of this and are tempted to click these ersatz commenters’ links, it’s generally a bad idea to open PDF files that are in comment sections, especially here.
G’day. :)
“Despite sporadic continuing press reports, people who complained about the program … were routinely dismissed as conspiracy theorists.
The only real conspiracy, it turns out, was a conspiracy of silence among the governments that benefited from the program.”
Finally, someone at TI who understands that ‘conspiracy theorist’ is not a pejorative, and that governmental conspiracies do exist – even those whose acknowledgement would create turmoil with our best ‘ally’…
Read this:
http://www.nickyhager.info/Secret_Power.pdf
quote”In the final analysis, the “pig rule” applied when dealing with this tacky matter: “Don’t wrestle in the mud with the pigs. They like it, and you both get dirty.””unquote
Says the chromosomally aberrant NSA pond scum while wallowing in it’s degenerate cesspool of lies and distortion. Pigs indeed.
All of these programs are not legal. Strange thing they denied its existence when there is a movie called Echlon, and Echlon determined in the movie it was a threat to the world and disabled itself. Lets not forget that now the own devices people use spy on them, for example Samsung and Windows 7 with the updates giving admin access for microsoft, as well as the windows 10. I probably left out outer windows versions as nsa key was discovered in one of the os back in the day and since then probably been there ever sense. They are in computer chips, hard drives, even the c programming language, the guy who created it put backdo o rs in it. Now these mali cous organizations instead of actually doing what they say, they actively use the internet was a weapon. These organizations and their ways must be stopped, if only to preserve the nature of a free society. Whats bad is also other countries are doing the same, with some going the route, if you can’t beat em, join em.
“All of these programs are not legal.” Relatedly, “Webcamgate”:
Robbins v. Lower Merion School District
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Webcamgate)
[Excerpt]
Robbins v. Lower Merion School District is a federal class action lawsuit, brought in February 2010 on behalf of students of two high schools in the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania suburbs.[2] In October 2010, the school district agreed to pay $610,000 to settle the Robbins and parallel Hasan lawsuits against it.[1]
The suit alleged that, in what was dubbed the “WebcamGate” scandal, the schools secretly spied on the students while they were in the privacy of their homes.[3][4] School authorities surreptitiously and remotely activated webcams embedded in school-issued laptops the students were using at home.[5][6] …
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robbins_v._Lower_Merion_School_District
We 3 people just gave 1’060 USD fine to the Swiss state as a punishment for the Swiss police buying a hacking software from Hacking Team. We took this fine away from the state tax income. #Fine #HackingTeam The software breaks into computers using attack vectors and exploits. The police admitted its use being ordered by the State Attorney in concrete investigations. http://ronja.twibright.com/fine/#example