Steven Aftergood: NSA Has Failed, Since 1976, to Protect US Commercial Communications

03 Economy, Commerce, Corruption, Government, IO Impotency, Military
Steven Aftergood

IN 1976, NSA WAS TASKED TO HELP SECURE PRIVATE COMMS

As long ago as the Gerald Ford Administration, the National Security Agency was directed to help secure non-governmental communications networks against intrusion and interception by foreign — or domestic — entities, according to a recently declassified presidential directive.

“The President is concerned about possible damage to the national security and the economy from continuing Soviet intercept of critical non-government communications, including government defense contractors and certain other key institutions in the private sector,” wrote National Security Advisor Gen. Brent Scowcroft in National Security Decision Memorandum (NSDM) 338 of September 1, 1976.

“The President further recognizes that U.S. citizens and institutions should have a reasonable expectation of privacy from foreign or domestic intercept when using the public telephone system. The President has therefore decided that communication security should be extended to government defense contractors dealing in classified or sensitive information at the earliest possible time. He has also directed that planning be undertaken to meet the longer-term need to protect other key institutions in the private sector, and, ultimately, to provide a reasonable expectation of privacy for all users of public telecommunications.”

The directive ordered that “in confirmed threat areas,” existing communications networks involving classified information should be transitioned from microwave circuits to secure cable “as soon as possible.”  A broader plan to protect non-governmental communications was also to be prepared.

“The President further directs the Director of the Office of Telecommunications Policy, with the participation and assistance of DOD and NSA, to prepare a detailed Action Plan setting forth the actions and schedule milestones necessary to achieve a wide degree of protection for private sector microwave communications. The Plan should identify needed policy and regulatory decisions, describe in detail the roles of industry and government, including management and funding considerations, and integrate the schedule for these actions with the technical development milestones.”

“The Action Plan should be based on the fundamental objective of protecting the privacy of all users of public telecommunications, as well as satisfying specific needs of the government,” the directive stated.

The 1976 directive was originally marked TOP SECRET / SENSITIVE (XGDS), where XGDS stood for “exempt from general declassification schedule.”  It was declassified on September 13, 2011.  The document had been requested through the mandatory declassification review process by Dr. John Laprise of Northwestern University.

The directive prefigures an ongoing controversy over the proper role, and the actual extent, of National Security Agency involvement in securing public communications.

In response to a FOIA lawsuit brought by the Electronic Privacy Information Center, the NSA said (and a court affirmed) that it could “neither confirm or deny” a relationship between the Agency and Google.  NSA has also refused to release the 2008 National Security Presidential Directive 54, which reportedly tasks the Agency with certain cybersecurity functions.

Phi Beta Iota:  This would be an excellent case study for the retrospective court martial, conviction, and demotion by two grades in retirement (affects pension) of every NSA director since then, with special attention to those serving after the alarm was sounded again in 1994.  NSA today does not have the public interest in mind and could care less about presidential directives.  It exists to create millionaires among NSA senior executives jumping to sweetheart “soft landings.”  NSA and the Cyber-Command are an ideal candidate for the first joint GSA-OMB deep audit of secret spending since 2001.

Mini-Me: PriceWaterHouseCoopers to Go Down?

03 Economy, 07 Other Atrocities, 08 Wild Cards, 10 Transnational Crime, 11 Society, Budgets & Funding, Civil Society, Commerce, Commercial Intelligence, Corruption, Cultural Intelligence, Ethics, Government, Money, Banks & Concentrated Wealth
Who? Mini-Me?

Robert Steele has for some time been saying that “The truth at any cost lowers all others costs.”  He has also been focusing on the importance of intelligence with integrity.  Among all governments, only Iceland appears to be serious about dealing with the financial crisis as it should be dealt with: as a criminal conspiracy enabled by all of the parties in both public and private sectors who sacrificed their integrity and betrayed the public trust.

Corporations operate under public charters.  It is difficult to police the corporations when the governments have themselves become criminalized, but the tide is turning — the public is beginning to recognize that governments  lack integrity and intelligence and cannot be trusted — in their present form — to manage the public interest.

When Goldman Sachs goes out of business the healing can begin.  Slamming PWC is a good start.

Old Landsbanki to sue PriceWaterhouseCoopers for ‘deliberate’ auditing errors

The resolution committee of the failed Icelandic bank Old Landsbanki has subpoenaed the international auditing firm PriceWaterhouseCoopers, accusing the company of creating wrong annual accounts which misled the markets. The committee’s damages claim runs to hundreds of millions of krónur.

Chuck Spinney: Is Israel on Cusp of Grand Strategic Set-Back as Universities Mobilize (Precedent South Africa)?

Academia, Corruption, Ethics, Government, IO Deeds of Peace, IO Deeds of War
Chuck Spinney

Grand strategy (described here) can be generalized as a game of interaction and isolation. Viewed from this perspective, Israel's grand strategy has been to maintain or increase its freedom of action in implementing the expansive Zionist apartheid/colonialist agenda, to include gaining control of the region's scarce water resources (see here), by —

(a) preying on the collective guilt in the west for western complicity/passivity during the Holocaust (i.e., compelling an interaction); 

(b) allying itself with a great power or combination of powers and inducing/co-opting those powers' domestic political interests into acquiescing to Israeli regional actions and ambitions, first Britain and France, and since 1967, the United States (i.e., compelling an interaction); 

Marcus Aurelius: Chinese(?) Use Fake Facebook Page for NATO Chief to Diddle His Subordinates

Advanced Cyber/IO, Cultural Intelligence, Ethics
Marcus Aurelius

Not sure I agree with NATO advice to their seniors to all start social networking sites.  I personally avoid that stuff like the plague.

How spies used Facebook to steal Nato chiefs’ details

NATO'S most senior commander was at the centre of a major security alert when a series of his colleagues fell for a fake Facebook account opened in his name – apparently by Chinese spies.

. . . . . . .

They thought they had become genuine friends of Nato's Supreme Allied Commander – but instead every personal detail on Facebook, including private email addresses, phone numbers and pictures were able to be harvested.

Read full story.

Phi Beta Iota:   In an “open everything” world, those raised in walled garden are actually retarded and pay the price.  It is not possible to be smart in isolation.  Secrecy is now a fatal cancer.  Bureaucracy is now a fatal cancer.  Governments (and all other forms of organization) in isolation are now fatal cancers.  For a tiny fraction of what is being wasted by the US Cyber Command and the US National Security Agency, an Open Source Agency under diplomatic auspices could catapult the USA into Smart Nation status.

See Also:

Yoda: Big Data Tough Love, Everyone Fails

Yoda: The Extended School – Obstacles & Possibilities

Open Source Agency: Executive Access Point

THE OPEN SOURCE EVERYTHING MANIFESTO: Transparency, Truth & Trust

Patrick Meier: Truthiness as Propability – Moving Beyond Absolutism within the Global Social Media Information Environment

Advanced Cyber/IO, Cultural Intelligence, Ethics
Patrick Meier

Truthiness as Probability: Moving Beyond the True or False Dichotomy when Verifying Social Media

I asked the following question at the Berkman Center’s recent Symposium on Truthiness in Digital Media: “Should we think of truthiness in terms of probabili-ties rather than use a True or False dichotomy?” The wording here is important. The word “truthiness” already suggests a subjective fuzziness around the term. Expressing truthiness as probabilities provides more contextual information than does a binary true or false answer.

When we set out to design the SwiftRiver platform some three years ago, it was already clear to me then that the veracity of crowdsourced information ought to be scored in terms of probabilities. For example, what is the probability that the content of a Tweet referring to the Russian elections is actually true? Why use probabilities? Because it is particularly challenging to instantaneously verify crowdsourced information in the real-time social media world we live in.

There is a common tendency to assume that all unverified information is false until proven otherwise. This is too simplistic, however. We need a fuzzy logic approach to truthiness:

Continue reading “Patrick Meier: Truthiness as Propability – Moving Beyond Absolutism within the Global Social Media Information Environment”

Theophillis Goodyear: Truth is Not a Singularity

Advanced Cyber/IO, Cultural Intelligence, Ethics
Theophillis Goodyear

Truth Is Not a Singularity

One thing I learned from Joan V. Bondurant's book The Conquest of Violence, is that Gandhi was in search of Truth with a capital T. But I eventually realized that it was SOCIAL Truth he was looking for. And there is no single social truth, because every person's experience is valid from a certain perspective; and every person experiences the world in a different way.

That means that there are 6 billion social truths out there; and there are even more than that, because those six billion individuals also experience reality as a couple, as a family, as a group of friends, as a neighborhood, as a community, as a nation, as a culture, as a religion, as Miles Davis fans . . . ad infinitum.

Gandhi was looking for a Truth that cut through all these differences. And that truth was Justice in a given social situation.

In other words, Truth with a capital T can only be discovered through our social interactions. And it's always relative. Always.

When it comes to Social Reality, there's never just one truth.

The Truth is this: when some people suffer through the actions of other people, it's never right or fair. It may be unintentional, but that doesn't alter the equation. Some people are suffering, and other people are causing their suffering. That was the Truth Gandhi was searching for—-justice between people. And he claimed that there's only one reliable road to that Truth.

Nonviolence.

But the above is just a small sliver of his philosophy. It's more complex than that. But at the same time it's simple. It reminds me of the line from Amadeus, where Salieri said:

” . . . music, finished as no music is ever finished. Displace one note and there would be diminishment. Displace one phrase and the structure would fall.”

Gandhi's satyagraha is like that. It's a continual effort to find balance in a given social situation. Once you understand the strategy and dynamics of his philosophy, it's very simple to understand and apply. But the social world is a very complex system. Satyagraha only works if it is continually adapted to changing circumstances. That's where the challenge lies.

But no one simplified that challenge like Gandhi. And no one simplified Gandhi like Bondurant. In fact, Bondurant explains Gandhi better than Gandhi explained Gandhi. It took someone of her superior intellect to untangle all of the sometimes confusing threads of Gandhi's unique wisdom.

Gandhi was a force of nature. Bondurant was like a quantum physicist who successfully analyzed and explained that force

The Conquest of Violence: The Gandhian Philosophy of Conflict, by Joan V. Bondurant

Yoda: Big Data Tough Love, Everyone Fails

Advanced Cyber/IO, Analysis, Collaboration Zones, Communities of Practice, info-graphics/data-visualization, InfoOps (IO), Intelligence (government), IO Impotency, Key Players, Officers Call, Policies, Serious Games, Standards, Strategy, Threats
Got Crowd? BE the Force!

The Three Things You Need to Know About Big Data, Right Now

Patrick Tucker

World Future Society  March 11, 2012

Institute for Ethics & Emerging Technologies

Okay. You got me. I can’t really tell you everything you need to know about big data. The one thing I discovered last week – as I joined more than 2,500 data junkies from around the world for the O’Reilly Strata conference in rainy Santa Clara California—is that nobody can, not Google, not Intel, not even IBM. All I can guarantee you is that you’ll be hearing a lot more about it.

What is big data? Roughly defined, it refers to massive data sets that can be used to predict or model future events. That can include everything from the online purchase history of millions of Americans (to predict what they’re about to buy) to where people in San Francisco are most likely to jog (according to GPS) to Facebook posts and Twitter trends and 100 year storm records.

Phi Beta Iota:   Big data is most important for what it can tell you about true cost and whole system cause and effect, inclusive of political corruption and organizational fraud.  These are past and present issues, not future issues.  We design the future based on the integrity present today.  This is why “open everything” matters.

With that in mind, here’s the three most important things you need to know about big data right now:

Continue reading “Yoda: Big Data Tough Love, Everyone Fails”