
The Intercept - r0h1n
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/
======
r0h1n
Intercept has also released free-to-use photos of the NSA, NRO and NGA here:
[https://firstlook.org/theintercept/article/2014/02/10/new-
ph...](https://firstlook.org/theintercept/article/2014/02/10/new-photos-of-
nsa-and-others/)

> Since June 2013, article after article about the NSA has been illustrated
> with a single image supplied by the agency, a photograph of its Fort Meade
> headquarters that appears to date from the 1970s.

> The photographs below – which are being published for the first time – show
> three of the largest agencies in the U.S. intelligence community. The scale
> of their operations was hidden from the public until August 2013, when their
> classified budget requests were revealed in documents provided by Snowden.
> Three months later, I rented a helicopter and shot nighttime images of the
> NSA’s headquarters. I did the same with the NRO, which designs, builds and
> operates America’s spy satellites, and with the National Geospatial-
> Intelligence Agency (NGA), which maps and analyzes imagery, connecting
> geographic information to other surveillance data. The Central Intelligence
> Agency – the largest member of the intelligence community – denied repeated
> requests for permission to take aerial photos of its headquarters in
> Langley, Virginia.

> My intention is to expand the visual vocabulary we use to “see” the U.S.
> intelligence community.

------
edent
[https://firstlook.org/theintercept/readme.html](https://firstlook.org/theintercept/readme.html)

Might want to ensure it's running on the latest version of WordPress,

~~~
glomph
eek

------
glomph
Does anyone know how they are being funded? It is all well and good claiming
they want more journalistic integrity than their old haunts, but I would like
a word or two on how they can maintain impartiality and feed their families.

Not trying to be cynical I am genuinely curious.

~~~
corin_
They haven't really talked about funding publicly, but we do know that Pierre
Omidyar is involved (there've been stories about him funding them before [1],
and on the about page of this site he is listed as "Publisher" for First Look
Media [2]).

His net worth is huge ($8.5b as of September 2013, according to Forbes [3]),
so he can give them plenty of initial funding, and he's brought in Michael
Rosen as CRO, who was previously head of online and mobile sales for AT&T
Adworks [4], so advertising seems a very likely answer to the question of how
they will make money in the future.

[1] [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/15/glenn-greenwald-
pie...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/15/glenn-greenwald-pierre-
omidyar_n_4103026.html) [2]
[https://firstlook.org/theintercept/about/](https://firstlook.org/theintercept/about/)
[3] [http://www.forbes.com/profile/pierre-
omidyar/](http://www.forbes.com/profile/pierre-omidyar/) [4]
[http://adage.com/article/media/media-names-michael-rosen-
chi...](http://adage.com/article/media/media-names-michael-rosen-chief-
revenue-officer/291478/)

~~~
glomph
Thanks!

------
r0h1n
OT, but it's interesting to note that two of the most promising new media
startups - Re/Code and The Intercept seem to have very similar design/branding
vocabulary. Both use nearly the same shade of red along with black and white
as their primary colours.

Then there's the fascination with the "/"

\- "The//Intercept" \-
[https://firstlook.org/theintercept](https://firstlook.org/theintercept)

\- "Re/code" \- [http://recode.net](http://recode.net)

~~~
hendzen
I'm guessing The Intercept uses the slashes to mimic the separators used
between different classification markers.

For example: TS // SI // NOFORN, etc.

------
jlgaddis
_> The Intercept, a publication of First Look Media, was created by Glenn
Greenwald, Laura Poitras, and Jeremy Scahill._

I also noticed that it uses HTTPS by default which is, of course, very cool.

~~~
93934994343
But it uses ajax.googleapis.com. And since it's reporting on the NSA, it's
worth being that extra bit paranoid.

~~~
f_salmon
That's that 1 thing I just don't get:

Everybody's (rightfully) complaining about mass surveillance and what do
apparently all web devs do (the people who _actually understand tech and know
what all this means_ )? They include endless scripts and background requests
(which of course track everybody) to CDNs and whatnot in every single website,
instead of simply hosting their stuff themselves and using
[http://piwik.org/](http://piwik.org/) to get their user stats.

It's really, really stupid.

~~~
DanBC
Someone on HN recently commented about how they'd use customer details (people
buying games) and check them out on Facebook. I suggested it was a bit creepy.
Other people were surprised I thought it was creepy and thought it was normal
behaviour.

I would link but search is unusably broken on mobile.

~~~
j_s
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7165109](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7165109)

------
mr_spothawk
This is a beautifully designed site. I'm happy that it works as well as it
does on my phone. I'm very glad to see more of the minimal design elements
like qz and less of the constant scrolling ... I mean 'continuous' scrolling.

Also, I'm glad this content has arrived...

(edit: not so impressed by the desktop version of the site, but I guess I can
make it beautiful by resizing my browser)

------
aspensmonster
If you're turned off by the length of the article, read it. It's worth it.
This post --itself pretty damn long-- is basically pulling out the most
appalling pieces regarding Greenwald's JSOC source and the source's statements
regarding the drone program.

Also, make sure you don't say No Such Agency or type their acronym. Wouldn't
want the article to get censored and fall off the front page. Moving on...

> _According to a former drone operator for the military’s Joint Special
> Operations Command (JSOC) who also worked with the [No Such Agency], the
> agency often identifies targets based on controversial metadata analysis and
> cell-phone tracking technologies. Rather than confirming a target’s identity
> with operatives or informants on the ground, the CIA or the U.S. military
> then orders a strike based on the activity and location of the mobile phone
> a person is believed to be using._

What could possibly go wrong? What might the enemy do upon figuring this out?
Well, it's clear that our own operatives understood the problem:

> _One problem, he explains, is that targets are increasingly aware of the [No
> Such Agency]’s reliance on geolocating, and have moved to thwart the tactic.
> Some have as many as 16 different SIM cards associated with their identity
> within the High Value Target system. Others, unaware that their mobile phone
> is being targeted, lend their phone, with the SIM card in it, to friends,
> children, spouses and family members._

So... why are we still doing it? Is there a way that this might become at
least a bit more reliable?

> _What’s more, he adds, the [No Such Agency] often locates drone targets by
> analyzing the activity of a SIM card, rather than the actual content of the
> calls. Based on his experience, he has come to believe that the drone
> program amounts to little more than death by unreliable metadata._

You've got to be shitting me. The source continues later in the article:

> _The former JSOC drone operator estimates that the overwhelming majority of
> high-value target operations he worked on in Afghanistan relied on signals
> intelligence, known as SIGINT, based on the [No Such Agency]’s phone-
> tracking technology._

> _“Everything they turned into a kinetic strike or a night raid was almost 90
> percent that,” he says. “You could tell, because you’d go back to the
> mission reports and it will say ‘this mission was triggered by SIGINT,’
> which means it was triggered by a geolocation cell.”_

And the source does at least concede that the [No Such Agency] builds a matrix
of characteristics to try and pin down a target:

> _In fact, as the former JSOC drone operator recounts, tracking people by
> metadata and then killing them by SIM card is inherently flawed. The [No
> Such Agency] “will develop a pattern,” he says, “where they understand that
> this is what this person’s voice sounds like, this is who his friends are,
> this is who his commander is, this is who his subordinates are. And they put
> them into a matrix. But it’s not always correct. There’s a lot of human
> error in that.”_

I'm sure this is what the president meant by "near-certainty" of a target's
validity:

> _In his speech at the National Defense University last May, President Obama
> declared that “before any strike is taken, there must be near-certainty that
> no civilians will be killed or injured – the highest standard we can set.”
> He added that, “by narrowly targeting our action against those who want to
> kill us and not the people they hide among, we are choosing the course of
> action least likely to result in the loss of innocent life.”_

The highest standard we can set:

> _As of May 2013, according to the former drone operator, President Obama had
> cleared 16 people in Yemen and five in Somalia for targeting in strikes.
> Before a strike is green-lit, he says, there must be at least two sources of
> intelligence. The problem is that both of those sources often involve [No
> Such Agency]-supplied data, rather than human intelligence (HUMINT)._

A high standard indeed. But don't worry! The [No Such Agency] insists that
HUMINT is involved. After the fact:

> _Hayden felt free, however, to note the role that human intelligence plays
> after a deadly strike occurs. “After any use of targeted lethal force, when
> there are indications that civilian deaths may have occurred, intelligence
> analysts draw on a large body of information – including human intelligence,
> signals intelligence, media reports, and surveillance footage – to help us
> make informed determinations about whether civilians were in fact killed or
> injured.”_

==============================================

There's also some nice tidbits about the technical manner in which this is
pulled off. The GILGAMESH program is described:

> _As the former JSOC drone operator describes – and as classified documents
> obtained from Snowden confirm – the [No Such Agency] doesn’t just locate the
> cell phones of terror suspects by intercepting communications from cell
> phone towers and Internet service providers. The agency also equips drones
> and other aircraft with devices known as “virtual base-tower transceivers” –
> creating, in effect, a fake cell phone tower that can force a targeted
> person’s device to lock onto the [No Such Agency]’s receiver without their
> knowledge._

As well as the SHENANIGANS program:

> _In addition to the GILGAMESH system used by JSOC, the CIA uses a similar
> [No Such Agency] platform known as SHENANIGANS. The operation – previously
> undisclosed – utilizes a pod on aircraft that vacuums up massive amounts of
> data from any wireless routers, computers, smart phones or other electronic
> devices that are within range._

> _VICTORYDANCE, he [different operator from an [No Such Agency] doc, not the
> JSOC source] adds, “mapped the Wi-Fi fingerprint of nearly every major town
> in Yemen.”_

~~~
mr_spothawk
>VICTORYDANCE, he [different operator from an [No Such Agency] doc, not the
JSOC source] adds, “mapped the Wi-Fi fingerprint of nearly every major town in
Yemen.”

Yeah, sounds like Google Maps wifi mapping.

~~~
actual_hacker
It's worse, because it's far more powerful.

From 4 miles in the air (so high you can't see the drone), works while the
drone is "circling" (so far more accurate due to transit and length of
sniffing), is intentionally used for "fingerprinting" entire cities (who
belongs here? what devices moved? where did they go?) without any suspicion of
individual wrongdoing, and unlike google, _IT DOESN 'T JUST TARGET WAPs_.

Think about it. They ingest every handset, every wifi device, every BSSID,
ESSID, even MACs ARPing over the air. For entire cities.

Now think ten years ahead, when solar-powered persistent drones can stay up
over a city 24/7, constantly circling, sniffing, and relaying the movements of
UUIDs from place to place around the world. Drones fly just as well in US
airspace as Yemeni airspace.

This is what Snowden warned us about. "Papers, please" is out of date: they're
no longer asking.

~~~
yohanatan
So then don't conspire to blow anyone up and you'll be a-ok.

~~~
cobrausn
Or stand near anyone conspiring to blow anything up, or buy a used phone from
someone conspiring to blow anything up... did you even read the article? 283+
civilian casualties to date, with more collateral damage than any other form
of interdiction we've tried so far.

~~~
yohanatan
You must have missed the 'fix' part of 'find, fix, & finish'. They have real-
time video feeds of the targets right up until pushing the button (aka
'finishing').

And, yes, I say it is generally not a good idea not to associate with
terrorists or go into a room with them and throw your SIM card into a pile to
be mixed. And, if you suddenly find out that your phone number has changed for
no explicable reason, it's probably best to ditch the SIM card and buy a new
one.

~~~
cobrausn
You must have missed (or willfully ignore) the part where it says this mode of
interdiction has more civilian casualties than any other we have tried. So
just _maybe_ it isn't the best way to deal with the threat at hand.

------
morkbot
Did any of the "old media" pick up the story yet? I haven't seen anything
about it on either NYT, The Post, BBC or Guardian.

~~~
kzrdude
The particular story will undoubtedly get accusations of interfering with
military operations and "making us less safe" or even "aiding terrorism", so
it's a razor-sharp balance walk to decide to publish it.

It definitely seems sufficiently ineffective, evil and inhumane to warrant
publishing in my opinion.

My guess - NYT and WP will not publish anything about the jsoc story.

------
chopin
Mmmh - reaches out to third party websites (unavoidibly with referers). And to
one of the worst offenders of internet privacy. I think its a bit hypocritical
to lament over state sponsored spying but they wish to spy on their users too.

When raising children I learned a valuable lesson: you don't educate by
telling them. You educate by living up to what you tell them.

Don't get me wrong: I am exited as the next person about this experiment. I
laud them for their effort. But I expected better.

EDIT: Spelling

------
rurounijones
Seems a bit wierd that does not have its own domain.

I mean, it does (theintercept.org) but that just redirects you to
[https://firstlook.org/theintercept/](https://firstlook.org/theintercept/)

~~~
brimtown
>...the first of what will be numerous digital magazines published by FLM
Seems like they'll be linking to subsequent magazines from that main page

------
sehr
Either they're getting flooded with views at midnight on a sunday, or the DDOS
is already on

~~~
alexcason
It's Monday morning in Europe.

~~~
sehr
And my American centric worldview is thwarted once again.

------
vonnik
this is really funny. the first 503 that offers biting commentary on the power
of intelligence agencies...
[http://imgur.com/VfJhF7E](http://imgur.com/VfJhF7E)

------
detcader
Don't sleep on this.

