
After Snowden, the NSA Faces Recruitment Challenge - jgrahamc
http://www.npr.org/2015/03/31/395829446/after-snowden-the-nsa-faces-recruitment-challenge
======
schoen
I think people often underestimate it, but one of the biggest influences you
can have -- I mean you, the HN reader! -- may be _cultural_.

People who work on building surveillance, people who have done it, people who
may do it in the future, are your classmates in your CS program, your
colleagues in your startup, your neighbors, your fellow conference attendees,
_you_.

Folks who work at NSA (and all the other places that don't get so much press)
read xkcd religiously, they go to DEF CON, they have Linux and math t-shirts,
they read HN, they are reading this thread right now, and all the other
threads.

If people like you in the cultures that you're part of decide that
surveillance is cool and exciting, that's more talent to take the billions of
dollars and vast intellectual challenges of figuring out how to eliminate the
vestiges of privacy. If they decide it's uncool and sketchy, that's more
talent that goes elsewhere and does something else.

There are many overlapping subcultures in technology and they don't all
understand or talk to each other that much, and plenty of technology employers
are recruiting out of many different subcultures, so you can't assume that the
culture you create in your circles will _control_ the path of technology. But
the cultural attitudes of people in the tech world can have a powerful effect
on what people decide is worth working on.

~~~
ethanbond
Serious question: Do you include those working at Google and Facebook under
this group? Or equivalently ad-driven services? Those two companies (and their
siblings) are certainly the most fruitful of trees for surveillance
organizations (government or otherwise) to pluck information from.

Further, they're not collecting this data for any purpose – vague,
questionable, and slippery though it may be – of doing "good" or "protecting
our country." They're doing it, solely and without an attempt at
justification, for ad revenues. And they're taking tens of thousands (if not
hundreds?) of some of the brightest minds in tech away from things like drug
discovery, climate change, energy research, etc.

Not trying to start a flame war, nor am I drawing equivalencies between
Facebook and the NSA. I'm actually just legitimately curious how you think we
can segment this spectrum.

~~~
nostrademons
Ex-Googler here, worked with a lot of user data, including a project to
collect more of it.

Within Google, data's collected primarily to _build better products_. Or at
least that's what the majority of the rank & file believe, and personally I
believe the executives believe it too. This has the effect of widening the
moat between them and competitors, but it also has real, tangible convenience
benefits for users. I can guarantee that the majority of folks are thinking of
those benefits, not the additional ad revenue, when building new products. I
worked in Search for 5 years and was explicitly told by executives to ignore
Ads when making decisions; they have plenty of their own engineers whose job
is to optimize revenue.

This may seem hard to believe for someone who's never worked at a place that
improved a product based on data, but it's a really fundamental part of the
culture. You see the headlines about the NSA or Google's threat to privacy;
you rarely see any news story about the A/B test they're running or the new
feature in Android/Gmail/Chrome/Search that you get to use because usage logs
showed that it took you too long to accomplish your task and some engineer
decided to fix it.

~~~
pdkl95
> data's collected primarily to build better products

That's may be true _today_ , but one of features that distinguishes modern
forms of surveillance from what was possible in the past is that truly massive
amounts of data can now be stored "forever"[1].

Google itself may change what it wants to do with its data in the future.
Worse, the fact that data was captured at all means it will be available for a
subpoena or "national security letter" and Google will have little say in what
happens to the data.

[1] the value of "forever" generally varies by the size of the available
budget, which is "large enough" in the case of nation-states and companies the
size of Google (or Apple)

~~~
nostrademons
So I'm not here to say whether or not people's fears are justified. I don't
know; I can't predict the future either. There have certainly been ample cases
where a belief that was true of Google management once was not true the next
year.

The original question posed, though, was "Why do people at Google/Facebook/NSA
continue to collect all this data? What's their purpose?", which I think I
answered. While it may not be true in 10 years, it's true _now_.

Also, I think that the sheer pace of change today may insulate a lot of people
from the consequences of having data available on them. The data may be out
there - but by the time it gets into the wrong hands, it no longer reflects
reality, which makes it largely useless. That guy who talks about having his
dick sucked by sororisluts [1] may, in a couple years, be the guy with 200
million users whose company you desperately want to invest in.

[1] [http://techcrunch.com/2014/05/28/confirmed-snapchats-evan-
sp...](http://techcrunch.com/2014/05/28/confirmed-snapchats-evan-spiegel-is-
kind-of-an-ass/)

~~~
jacquesm
Combine google profiles, facebook and 23andme and I think that the data will
have repercussions even beyond the lives of those directly addressed by it.

------
bazillion
The article doesn't truly address such a large claim -- it basically could be
titled "After Snowden, the NSA Faces Recruitment Challenge from 3 College
Students".

The NSA has nearly unlimited hiring potential with just the pool of military
folks alone that work there. There are constant hiring freezes for a year at a
time, because a lot of buildings are over capacity.

If one of these college students were to apply to the NSA through NSA.gov
(mandated as the only way someone is allowed into the agency), they would have
to apply a minimum of 2-4 times, because the application stays good for about
90 days, and the average applicant waits 6 months to a year to get accepted.
This is assuming they're applying straight through without having someone with
hiring power pull their application from the queue. After that, the process to
get a clearance could take anywhere from another 6 months to 2 years (possibly
more in some exceptional cases) and costs the agency about 250k.

So, it goes without saying that bringing onboard a fresh college student who
isn't going to even get to walk through the door at least a year after
applying, can pale in comparison to bringing on someone who already has a
clearance and training. The article assumes that the NSA relies heavily on its
external recruitment, but the vast majority of folks working there just change
out of a uniform into jeans and a shirt.

~~~
drzaiusapelord
Salaries and pensions are no joke either. I was reading about how recruitment
works. It seems they have a relationship with many CS and Math professors who
recommend bright students directly to NSA headhunters. I imagine working on
some of the problems they do can be very exciting. Not everyone feels this
need to publish publicly.

I find it hard to believe there's any sort of recruitment shortage. The NSA
does today what it did 5, 10, 15, etc years ago. People interviewing for those
positions know exactly what they're getting into then the same way they know
what they're getting into today. The whole "OMGZ SPYING ON MY MAY-MAYS" sells
on here on reddit, but apparantly lots of people don't take that view and
instead see sigint as a legitimate need, like having a standing military with
nuclear weapons or intervening into foreign countries. Arguably, good sigint
means less conflicts and more wins. Hitler's Germany was damaged greatly by
sigint hero Alan Turing. Funny how we celebrate Turing, but a modern Turing
today would be vilified instantly. The world, if anything, is much more
dangerous today than in the 30s considering how many nations have nuclear
weapons. Honestly, if I had the choice I'd rather work there than find new
ways to deliver annoying click-bait ads at a place like Facebook or get kids
hooked on some milquetoast WoW-clone.

The Chinese, Iranian, and Russian sigint guys aren't taking some moral stand
either. They're just getting their assess to work the same way we do.

~~~
gurkendoktor
> Funny how we celebrate Turing, but a modern Turing today would be vilified
> instantly.

For that comparison to work, we would need a modern Third Reich or World War
as well. Tapping into European email in 201x is hardly the same as spying on
the Nazis.

~~~
LLWM
The point of omnipresent surveillance is to be proactive and prevent threats
before they arise. There is no way to measure its success. If you oppose it,
pick a better reason to base your argument on.

~~~
jacquesm
I have this banana in my ear...

Threats to what?

> There is no way to measure its success.

Convenient

> If you oppose it, pick a better reason to base your argument on.

If you support it, pick a better reason to base your argument on.

If success can't be measured then there is no success.

~~~
LLWM
Unlike you, I don't believe success, or really anything, is necessary to
justify the existence of the NSA or what they do. Realistically, that boat
sailed the first time necessary and proper was invoked.

~~~
Cyther606
How considerate. As if the legal system matters at all to the existence of the
NSA. Wikimedia's case notwithstanding, it's abundantly clear the spy agencies
can only be peacefully resisted with privacy enhancing technology. It's
obvious why they've been degrading public cryptographic standards and pushing
for back doors.

~~~
LLWM
It's abundantly clear that they can't, for exactly the reasons you mention.

------
q7
History has shown that if you join an intelligence service, you basically
forfeit your right to a fair trial if anything ever goes wrong.

Your potential future opponent can make anything secret and off-bounds that
you want to present in court, has unlimited funds and no qualms to invade your
private life and present anything bad about you, has unlimited funds to haunt
you for the rest of your life, and has no conscience except to preserve
itself, even if it was in the wrong. I've also got a hunch that their culture
is not "let's all chill and find the truth" but has more of a clan-like
"you're either with us or against us" vibe. And this organization has guns,
lots of guns.

So in effect, it's a bit like joining the Mafia.

Considering this, one has to wonder why anybody would ever join such a
service.

~~~
Taek
> History has shown

I'm not well educated in this regard, but my general understanding is that
such agencies tend to protect their own. Police men will protect other police
men. The CIA will protect employees against crimes they may have committed.

In general, you're only going to have a problem like this if you do something
to piss off the rest of your organization. But as long as you conform they are
more likely to protect you than turn against you.

~~~
logfromblammo
Again, exactly like the Mafia.

Don't snitch. Give unconditional respect to everyone that's a made man or
higher in the organization. Follow orders. Don't snitch. Pay your superior
their cut of your business. Don't step on anyone else's toes [without getting
permission first]. Don't snitch.

The unwritten rules for any corrupt organization are pretty simple. "Keep your
mouth shut," is always one of them, and possibly the only unforgivable
offense.

------
tsunamifury
There is a feedback problem people don't realize when a moral filter is added
to an organization.

I observed in Financial Tech that when the world judged bankers as bad... it
attracted self-identified bad people to become bankers. People who desired to
do good filtered themselves out of the industry, leaving a really horrible
selection of individuals running our national financial institutions.

Its really hard to digest, but I think self-identified good people MUST work
at 'bad' places. Or else those places will become even worse as they become
lost in a sea of real evil.

~~~
blueprint
Places turn "bad" as-such when they are beyond repair. Do you believe that's
it's possible to make the groups in power reform? If not, then it's impossible
to make such a bad organization into a good one again, and we must start from
scratch by cutting off the sections which have gone bad.

Moreover, it is wrong for anyone to rationalize complicity in injustices. It
doesn't matter what our intentions or level of prior ignorance are. If you
make your money off things connected to something wrong, your way of life
becomes wrong by connection.

Perhaps these bitters truths are even more difficult to accept, and perhaps
that is why people more commonly choose the more comfortable route of
believing that they bear no responsibility for the company they keep.

------
bhauer
> _" there are some of them ... that puts them off or they have doubts." On
> the other hand, Ziring says, the Snowden leaks have sparked other students'
> interest. "[They say], 'I actually know some of what you do now, and that's
> really cool and I want to come do that."_

I don't buy this. I find it just short of impossible that anyone is looking at
the leaks and saying, "Yes, I want to be part of your wholesale abrogation of
the Fourth Amendment. I used to think you were just a spy agency, but now I
know you're the Information Nomenklatura and I want in!"

~~~
rdtsc
This is not to be underestimated.

Obviously patriotism devotion to country and Constitution was very much
desirable for recruits. The problem is a few of those patriots actually
believe in the Constitution which at this point would make them quite
dangerous. They would need to be filtered out and/or continuously brainwashed
and monitored.

"We want you to be patriotic, but not too much, just enough to swallow our
brainwashing".

The problem is it attracts undesirable people. They already have tons of
polygraphs which accept either extremely honest people, or psychopaths. This
will attract people who would have been happy working for the Stasi, SS or KGB
-- particularly vile authoritarian types.

Remember that even during the unpopular wars the military attracted people who
just wanted to play with guns and kill other people. Same with police force.
Bullies from high-school grow up want to keep bullying but they can do it
within the law.

~~~
pluma
So they want redneck patriotism, basically?

~~~
shitlord
Yeah, pretty much. The two guys I know who worked at the NSA were both
rednecks.

------
chinathrow
Good. And to the folks still there: how about walking away? You should be one
of the brightest minds anyway - find a better job!

Thank you.

~~~
jonlucc
Sometimes I wonder how hard it would be to find a new job if you can't talk
about much, if any, of your work for the past 5+ years.

~~~
vonmoltke
As someone who has had to do it: even in a supposed talent shortage, really
fucking hard. Even in the rare instances I could get an interview I probably
sounded like an idiot giving generic and slightly evasive answers.

~~~
jonknee
To be honest I'd be leery of hiring a former intelligence agent regardless of
technical ability. I'm sure if they wanted to plant someone it wouldn't be
someone with NSA on his/her resume, but the thought would be hard to shake.

~~~
vonmoltke
Interesting perspective. For the record, I was doing radar signal processing
for a contractor for the Navy. While there I bumped into plenty of people who
were in the Order of Secret Squirrels, and got the definite impression that
once you join you never really leave.

------
tribaal
It's funny how before the whole scandal was public (or at least, before I
personally became aware of it), the NSA sounded like a hip place to work: for
example, their keynote here was quite cool:

[https://www.openstack.org/summit/portland-2013/session-
video...](https://www.openstack.org/summit/portland-2013/session-
videos/presentation/keynote-openstack-at-the-national-security-agency-nsa)

EDIT: I mean just look at that guy!

~~~
LLWM
I'd say a lot of the things that have become known since then, like Regin or
the ANT exploit catalog, have only intensified that image.

------
adaml_623
Imagine being a mathematician at the NSA and working there for 10 years and
then wanting to go to work in Academia.

And realise that you can't publish most of the things you've been working on
for years because it's classified.

~~~
ISL
There's a flip side to this. Academia's hiring practices inherently prevent
talented people from returning to academia. Hiring is slow (it takes at least
six months), and it is absolutely contingent upon the candidate having a great
publication record.

When you leave for more than a year or so, it's a one-way ticket out. As an
academic, I would _love_ to have greater liquidity in the industry/academia
job market.

~~~
logfromblammo
I have occasionally applied for (non-academia) software development jobs at
universities, usually in relation to the health care sector.

It takes all of them at least a month to even set up an initial phone screen,
and some can't even manage that. Also, they tend to pay way below market
wages.

It's not just the hiring practices for researchers and professors. That idiocy
likely extends all the way down to the part-time gardeners. You can't afford
to endure the process unless you already have a job.

The only reason universities can get away with this is because they are
largely protected from competition, and are usually the largest single
employer in whatever city they may be in.

~~~
burger_moon
I work at a university as a software dev. I got offered the job, interviewed,
and started working in a couple weeks. It was actually a very seamless
process. The pay for my area is comparable to private jobs, but I don't get
all the startups benefits like pingpong and snacks. It's just a basic office
job. The good part though is that there is no bureaucracy and I have free roam
to develop in any environment I want.

I'm not an academic but I work for one. If that makes sense.

------
suprgeek
Good!

(Even though the article is as close as it gets to a fluff piece. No solid
data beyond a couple of stories)

There has been Zero meaningful change after Snowden's leaks. This means
essentially that that NSA routinely spies on all Americans, scoops up all
communications Worldwide, runs various programs to undermine the Security of
computer & Internet systems and acts like a massive advanced persistent
threat.

Imagine the same story with "After Snowden, the <biggest illegal hacker club
worldwide> Faces Recruitment Challenge" Not surprising if you think that most
bright people have a somewhat evolved moral compass.

------
FredericJ
Edward Snowden had predicted a radicalization of a class of professionals.
We're coming to the point where, similarly to nuclear physicists after
Hiroshima, we decide as a community to not let our skills be used for
unethical purposes.

~~~
briandear
One could argue that those skills actually prevent far worse unethical
actions. Without Hiroshima, how might World War II have ended? How would the
Chinese and Koreans feel if Japan weren't defeated? Spend a few minutes at the
Nanking museum or perhaps read about Bataan or Korean comfort women and then
the moral high ground gets a bit slippery. One might, if one were so inclined,
make an argument that nuclear weapons prevented World War III due to the
mutually assured destruction concept. The Cold War would have become very hot
if the politicians of both the Soviet Union and the U.S. didn't have to fear
for their own annihilation.

War and politics is dirty and not as academic as many people would like to
think. It never is black and white. For example, if we take the moral high
ground, our enemies won't. Pacifism sounds good until it's your sister getting
raped in your living room or your parents being shot out of the sky.

~~~
pluma
The theory that Japan wouldn't have been defeated without the Bomb is
contended, at best. A far more likely outcome would have been A) the Soviets
invading Japan (leading to Japan surrendering to the Allies to maintain their
territorial integrity) or B) massive depopulation as a result of the ongoing
firebombing. Basically, they'd either have surrendered, or become mostly
irrelevant (like North Korea if it weren't for China).

Yes, Japan committed atrocities in WW2, but the US wasn't the Good Guy either.

There are no good guys in war. It's all just propaganda. And the thing with
propaganda is that in order to claim any moral high ground after the war you
have to abandon your propaganda and deal with the facts. The US never did
that. Instead it dragged itself from one war to the next while pretending to
be at peace.

The US is at war. It has been for a long time. Only it has outgrown the need
of having an enemy. There's probably a clever 1984 reference in here.

The US has become a servant to its warfare, sustaining a state of war
perpetually, moving from one "enemy" to the next, churning out propaganda for
itself and for its allies. Except the propaganda has shaped its culture so
much its citizens not only barely notice it anymore, they unknowingly
perpetuate it themselves. And our advancements in technology allow the warfare
itself to become less and less noticeable to them, too. Instead of scared men
in tanks, we are demanding casual suits behind joysticks -- because it makes
the warfare so much cleaner and easier, for us.

The US isn't a mighty eagle. It's quickly becoming a scared canary in a cage,
pecking at buttons to make the scary people go away.

~~~
nostrademons
I think you're proving his point, which IIUC wasn't that the Bomb was
necessary to end WW2, it was that _there are differing opinions_ on whether
the Bomb was necessary to end WW2.

The U.S. has always been highly morally questionable - after all, it's one of
a few nations founded by a _successful_ genocidal campaign, which we called
Manifest Destiny. The perks of being successful with genocide is that you get
to define the story as you wish, since there's nobody to call you out on it.

We're not the only country in that boat either, as I think the grandparent
post was trying to point out. Japan, if left unchecked, would've happily raped
and pillaged all of Korea - they were well on their way already. Russia was
just waiting to come in and crush Japan, payback for the Russo-Japanese war 40
years earlier. Germany, of course, started to war in an attempt to exterminate
the Jews.

~~~
pluma
While we're at it, let's not forget about the Armenian genocide (which Turkey
still denies), and the recurring genocides in Africa (in particular the Tutsi
genocide in Rwanda) in more recent history.

What you seem to gloss over is that Germany's crimes still play a strong role
in the politics and culture of present-day Germany (to the point of obsessive
paranoia about any expression of patriotism).

Even Japan -- which compulsively avoids admitting any wrongdoing -- is
regularly facing the crimes of its past.

The US is not just built on the successful genocide of Native Americans. There
is also the slavery and racial segregation (which _still_ reverberates
throughout American culture and politics though everyone seems to pretend it's
no longer an issue). Then there's the religious fundamentalism (resulting in
the Prohibition, the Red Scare, the War on Drugs, homophobia, Creationism and
all kinds of other systemic problems). The internment of Japanese Americans
during WW2. The McCarthy era (which likely re-enforced the underlying causes
of the social problems we still see today by persecuting left-wing activists).
The various CIA assassinations and coups, especially in South America. The
gaming of Middle Eastern countries (including funding Islamist extremists
until 2001). Agent Orange and other crimes in Vietnam. The mass seizure of
communication data of its allies (both political and civilian). The
mistreatment of Muslim or Arabian-looking Americans after 9/11\. The blanket
Authorization for Use of Military Force that cemented the US's permanent state
of quasi-war. Drone strikes, including those against its own citizens abroad.
Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and black sites. Detention of citizens and foreign
nationals without any process or trial. Extraordinary rendition and enhanced
interrogation (i.e. torture). Systemic police brutality (Occupy, Ferguson,
etc). Interfering with Ukraine prior to the secession of the Crimean peninsula
("Fuck the EU", right?). And so on and so forth.

The US is not just morally questionable. It is morally reprehensible. And it's
chock-full of itself. The only reason everybody else is tolerating this
behaviour is that the US is armed to the teeth and willing to go down
fighting. The US isn't on top because it's good. The US is on top because it
is holding the world at gun point.

Here's hoping that when the American economy is eventually overshadowed by
whatever powerhouse comes next (my bet is still on China or India) it won't do
something incredibly stupid and hurt us all.

------
mindcrime
Good. My fondest wish is that no computer science or math graduate ever
chooses to go to work for the NSA again, ever. Screw those assholes. I don't
care how much they cry "oooh, sigint is needed for national security" \- I'm
more scared of our government than I am of any foreign (or domestic, as far as
that goes) "terrorist" group.

The way I see it, these guys have created and are fighting an undeclared war
on the American people... they've decided that "if you're not one of us,
you're a bad guy". Fuck that.

------
jgrowl
The NSA essentially had a recruiting office on campus at the University of
Kentucky. Even being Pre-Snowden, I remember everyone having a general feeling
that the NSA was probably doing bad things, yet a lot of people still went to
interview with them. Hell, even I did.

It seems like that for some, the idea that the NSA was spying on everything
was a big draw for them to join. They also liked the prestige, money, and
benefits.

I am not convinced that the NSA is facing a huge recruitment challenge. If
anything it might just mean that more bad people get recruited.

------
borgia
I've a tough time believing they're having difficulties recruiting. Nothing
has come from the Snowden leaks. Half of America has been very effectively
turned against the guy. The rest don't care.

There's also no shortage of the morally bankrupt or patriotically brainwashed.

I don't know how those working with these entities can sleep at night knowing
they're working to wreak havoc on their fellow American and further condemn
their children and their children's children to a life under an oligarchy that
listens to their every word.

------
devonkim
It's funny to me that even before Snowden NSA (like literally every other
federal agency) was facing a monumental challenge because you can hardly find
anyone with decent qualifications to accept the middling salaries and hard cap
on potential compensation as a government worker. Why go to NSA as a GG-9
(there's other schedules than GS, guys) out of college when you could go to
Google for maybe similar... and maybe actually get to share your work
possibly?

The other part of the equation is that cost of living in the DC area has risen
quite a lot and tech salaries in private sector have met the tide when most
federal workers can't keep up with it. When it takes two federal workers at
about $70k / yr each to have a chance at a comfortable living in the suburbs
it's pretty sickening. Median house price in Fairfax County hit $700k the
other year, and up in Anne Arundel County in Maryland it's maybe $550k last I
saw years ago).

------
dataker
Although I'm not American and disapprove many NSA privacy concerns, I can't
blame their technical employees: they are choosing a stable high-paying job.

Articles like this try to put an ethical burden on analysts while ignoring the
real actors and influences behind an ethical issue. Analysts are just doing
their job and one certainly can't blame them.

~~~
pluma
One certainly can. Not to invoke Godwin's law, but you're relying on the
Nuremberg defence (which was ruled invalid).

~~~
milspec
Yes, it was ruled invalid. That doesn't make it invalid. That ruling was pure
evil. The trials were a sham, existing only so that a democracy could
participate in dishing out victor's justice. It's revenge, pure and simple,
coldly ignoring the pressure that people were under.

~~~
jacquesm
The whole idea is that no matter what pressure you are under there are some
things that you can not get away with.

Following orders is not a 'get out of jail free' level excuse, though it might
be used for mitigation.

So no, that ruling was not 'pure evil', it established a basic level of
responsibility that applies even when acting under orders.

~~~
milspec
Damned if you do and damned if you don't. Nice. You'll change your tune if you
ever find yourself in that situation.

~~~
jacquesm
I've already been in a situation where I could choose between serious jail
time and refusing orders I did not agree with so I'm pretty sure which side I
would come down on.

So, with all respect mr. Anonymous Coward you haven't a clue what you're
talking about.

Principles come at a price, that's for sure.

I can see why you have a problem with this worldview.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8469353](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8469353)

~~~
milspec
Unless refusing orders would mean somebody else jails you, no you haven't been
in that situation. The deal is that you follow orders and maybe get
jailed/executed after losing a war, or you disobey orders and definitely get
jailed/executed right away.

~~~
jacquesm
Having principles isn't free.

Quite a few German soldiers _did_ refuse orders and indeed some of them got
executed or jailed. Those are the real heros.

And as I said before _yes, that is exactly the situation I 've been in_. So I
don't give a rats ass what your excuse is but I know where I stand on this.

You don't get to escape from your responsibilities.

------
Old_Thrashbarg
If anyone at the NSA is reading this, I urge you to consider following
Snowden's example and help to further weaken the NSA and protect our
constitution.

(case in point: I was slightly nervous writing this, but hopefully my VPN will
keep me anonymous)

------
rdl
I wonder which is true -- this, or tptacek's assertion that this would be
irrelevant to NSA recruiting, 2+ years ago.

I'm pretty amazed at how much the NSA story has remained in popular press and
thinking. I really didn't expect it. That probably accounts for the recruiting
problems.

~~~
tptacek
You mean this comment, right?

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6185322](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6185322)

Think about it this way: other countries have no apparent problem feeding
high-caliber talent into _overtly, unmistakably evil_ applications of
offensive security. Look at China, for instance.

I don't think the Snowden saga had _zero_ impact on recruiting at NSA; I just
think the long-term marginal impact to NSA staffing is negligible.

Worth adding: this article and my comment can't really falsify each other;
they're somewhat orthogonal.

~~~
rdl
Yes.

I guess I mainly think about IA/defense. NSA blowback is keeping good
IA/defense (and in particular, people building IA/defense tools) people from
joining USG. Instead, those people join private companies to build tools to
protect companies from, among other threats, USG, or work on actual privacy
tools for end users directly aimed at defeating governments.

I don't know the people in the pipeline into TAO/offensive side well enough to
speculate much about recruiting efforts. All the more kinetic offense people I
know are there because 1) they believe deeply in the US/constitution/etc. 2)
view the world in black/white 3) enjoy kicking in doors, so I assume the same
is true in the TAO world.

------
a2tech
I think the only thing I can say about this is..

Good.

------
oneplease
" On the other hand, Ziring says, the Snowden leaks have sparked other
students' interest. "[They say], 'I actually know some of what you do now, and
that's really cool and I want to come do that," he says."

These students scare me.

------
wtbob
That would be a true pity, because NSA serves a great and legitimate purpose.
They do a wonderful job for our nation. Sure, some of that work is not what
some folks would like—frankly, there's one allegation which, while neither
illegal nor unconstitutional, _I_ don't like[1]—but that doesn't really
matter: to the extent that the courts have deliberated, NSA has the national
security of the United States of America at heart.

What really makes me sad, though, is not its putative recruitment challenge,
but the unpatriotic attitude of so many folks. The NSA do good and important
work; it is good and important to labour in the service of one's nation. You
can't blame them for acting within the outer limits (but still within the
limits) of the law, because that's how nation-states _work_. That's not even a
bad thing: if you wish to reduce the power of the NSA, reduce the power of the
State, _period_.

There's a very good chance that I'll be hell-banned for this post; if so, I've
really enjoyed conversing with all of you, and hopefully I'll be able to
converse with you again.

[1] I have neither seen nor heard any allegations of activity which is
actually illegal or unconstitutional; everything I've seen has been stuff
someone _wishes_ were such. Well, I wish some things illegal were legal, and
some things legal were illegal. You can wish in one hand and spit in the
other, and see which fills up first.

------
joshstrange
All I can say is: GOOD!

If the government will not act then a talent drain might be the next best
thing. The NSA has clearly strayed from it's intended goal (or at least the
one they present publically) and is a black organization that answers to
seemingly no one. I'd rather that talent go to companies I use daily to
protect me against not only my own government but other governments. It's
clear to me that our government doesn't care about securing it's citizens but
rather weakening crypto so that they can monitor everything we do. I see the
NSA as a hugely corrupt and frankly evil organization that I wouldn't consider
joining in a million years. Any organization that can outright lie to congress
(and the American people) without repercussions is one we should burn to the
ground (figuratively).

I understand the need for secrets but there is difference between keeping
secrets and monitoring every American citizen (and many people around the
globe) without a warrant or cause.

Here is to hoping that NSA becomes a graveyard of talent that eventually
crumbles in on itself or is just so woefully equipped to compete with the
private sector that we just do away with it. I cannot for the life of me come
up with a single redeeming quality of the NSA in my life (I'm 24 so they may
have done some good in the past but I seriously doubt it and even if they have
the bad has FAR outweighed the good in my eyes).

~~~
enraged_camel
>>If the government will not act then a talent drain might be the next best
thing.

Is it? While the NSA conducts unconstitutional mass surveillance and has
played a huge role in eroding privacy, it also performs a lot of legitimate
duties. I personally don't want the country's primary intelligence agency to
be populated with a bunch of mediocre people.

~~~
joshstrange
> it also performs a lot of legitimate duties

Does it? I'd be very interested in what duties it performs that are considered
legitimate that are not part of larger system that erodes privacy. As is a
program that does not target American citizens in illegal (illegal by
everyone's but the NSA and their team of dirty lawyers) that serves a real
need.

> I personally don't want the country's primary intelligence agency to be
> populated with a bunch of mediocre people.

I'd rather that happen and the talent go to the private sector (Commercial and
OS) because at least I have a say in which of those I support. As it is now a
portion of my taxes fund this machine that infringes on our rights in the name
of security.

------
patcon
> the Snowden leaks have sparked other students' interest. NSA computer
> scientist Ziring also helps lead academic outreach for the agency.
> "[Students say], 'I actually know some of what you do now, and that's really
> cool and I want to come do that," he says.

That's crazy. I'm inclined to believe they're just trying to avoid an awkward
conversation with a grown man about how shitty his life choices have been

~~~
LLWM
As someone who feels the same way, I don't understand how someone who cares
about technology can dismiss that point of view so casually. Every single
developer I know can at least admit that the NSA's malware is technically
impressive.

~~~
jacquesm
Letting your fascination for technology lead you like this is a very dangerous
thing.

More than anything such a fascination or simply the lure of money allows one
to be controlled in ways that could easily lead to serious regret in the
longer term.

~~~
LLWM
How is it leading me anywhere? If anything, it's probably my belief in the
obsolescence of privacy that makes it easier for me to appreciate what the NSA
is capable of, rather than the other way around.

~~~
jacquesm
It's the same kind of fascination that gets people to work on bio-weapons and
other singularly negative items.

I'm a bit less cynical than you by the looks of it and I definitely do not
believe in the 'obsolescence of privacy', in fact I think that privacy is one
of the most important rights that we have.

Appreciating what the NSA is capable of technologically whilst at the same
time despising them for what they do to the world at large is entirely
possible.

To me it is very clear that all these politicians and their plans would go
nowhere without enablers.

~~~
LLWM
I don't see your point. Most large projects require the combined effort of
many people, especially if you want to be confident in their quality and get
them shipped on time, as I'm sure the NSA does. Is that supposed to be a bad
thing? Or did you just want to have fun by calling people enablers because
they do something you disagree with?

As for your views on privacy, I don't expect that most people can change their
fundamental beliefs like what constitutes a human right. Especially not as the
result of anonymous internet comments. As always, progress depends on people
with outdated views dying out naturally.

~~~
jacquesm
> I don't see your point.

That's fine.

> Most large projects require the combined effort of many people, especially
> if you want to be confident in their quality and get them shipped on time,
> as I'm sure the NSA does. Is that supposed to be a bad thing?

Not in and of itself, it all depends on the goals and the side effects.

> Or did you just want to have fun by calling people enablers because they do
> something you disagree with?

No, I call them enablers because by themselves politicians typically can't do
much. They _need_ others to do the work for them.

> As for your views on privacy, I don't expect that most people can change
> their fundamental beliefs like what constitutes a human right.

Maybe they don't have to. Maybe we could set up a universal declaration of
such rights. And maybe we could give it a sexy name, such as 'Universal
Declaration of Human Rights'.

Oh wait:

[http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/](http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/)

See article 12.

> Especially not as the result of anonymous internet comments.

Mine aren't anonymous.

> As always, progress depends on people with outdated views dying out
> naturally.

I'm pretty happy with my 'outdated views' on such trifle details as privacy,
and I plan on sticking around for a while still.

~~~
LLWM
Wow, someone who actually takes the UDHR seriously. I didn't think people like
that actually existed.

------
Old_Thrashbarg
This makes me very happy to hear that people are steering clear of the NSA. It
often surprises me how easy it is to find people to do whatever you want them
to do, regardless of the ethics of it.

How come there's so many people willing to work at a cigarette company? What
kind of programmers are willing to help their government attack Github? How
can so many smart people join the NSA and essentially attack the internet?

~~~
jacquesm
> How come there's so many people willing to work at a cigarette company?

\- Money

> What kind of programmers are willing to help their government attack Github?

People misguided by propaganda.

> How can so many smart people join the NSA and essentially attack the
> internet?

\- Fascination with technology

\- Xenophobia

\- Patriotism

------
c0nsumer
To be completely honest, I still think that the work done in the Tailored
Access Operations group sounds like really, really interesting stuff.

~~~
pwnna
Just because something is interesting doesn't mean you should be doing it.

To put it another way, far off in the future, will you be satisfied with what
you have done with your life?

~~~
c0nsumer
...which is one of the major reasons why I haven't pursued this option. But
it's still darn interesting, and I do believe that many of the NSA's missions
are upstanding and moral.

------
TallGuyShort
I spoke to an NSA employee recruiting on campus a few years ago, well before
the Snowden leaks. I asked him if he genuinely felt like he was defending
America or if sometimes he felt like he was just a tool in someone's political
agenda. His answer was, "no - I wouldn't say it _always_ about some political
agenda". Conversation ended pretty abruptly...

------
zby
RMS now prefixes all his public emails with:

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]]

[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]

[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

~~~
schoen
Not just his public e-mails. :-)

------
a3n
> Ever since the Snowden leaks, cybersecurity has been hot in Silicon Valley.
> In part that's because the industry no longer trusts the government as much
> as it once did. Companies want to develop their own security, and they're
> willing to pay top dollar to get the same people the NSA is trying to
> recruit.

And that's one way to fight back. Starve or own the talent pipeline. Buy them
away from the NSA's front door. Similar to how Apple controls much of the
manufacturing capacity for smart phones.

Until the NSA starts drafting people.

------
usefulcat
On the plus side (for the NSA), this effect may filter out some of the people
whose moral/ethical orientation would prove to be a liability in that
organization.

------
georgemcbay
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrOZllbNarw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrOZllbNarw)

How Do You Like Them Apples?

------
drussell
Snowden and the fact that two people tried to attack the NSA yesterday. NSA
does not seem to be a very popular choice at the moment.

~~~
a3n
Two people did not try to attack the NSA yesterday. Three people met in a
hotel room overnight, two of them stole the third's car in the morning, and as
they were escaping they took a wrong turn into the NSA. The driver's decision
or panic to ram the police car was one more bad decision; I doubt they even
knew they were taking the NSA exit, and I _seriously_ doubt that attacking the
NSA was their premeditated _plan_. But it's early days.

------
jackmaney
Back in 2007-8, I went through the lengthy interview process to join the NSA.
In the end, it didn't work out, and although I was devastated at the time, I'm
glad the job offer was pulled.

When news of Snowden first broke out, the first thing I said was "there but
for the grace of the gods go I".

------
wyclif
_The NSA 's tactics, which include retaining data from American citizens..._

What a fascinating choice of words.

------
Hydraulix989
Why Shouldn't I Work for the NSA? (Good Will Hunting) - YouTube
[http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UrOZllbNarw](http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UrOZllbNarw)

------
beamatronic
I imagine if they opened a Bay Area office they wouldn't have a problem.

------
gadders
I wonder if they will still sponsor all the Top Coder competitions?

------
newman8r
And he wasn't even an NSA employee. I'm surprised Booz Allen Hamilton isn't
yet mentioned in this thread. The NSA uses(or used) a ton of contractors. If
they're giving top secret access to BAH employees, I highly doubt they're as
sophisticated as they say (which I doubt anyway)

------
kyledrake
"After Snowden, the NSA Faces Recruitment Challenge"

Good.

------
CyberDildonics
I would rather be part of the solution.

------
lectrick
Sorry, but what a fucking surprise.

------
lechevalierd3on
I wish companies like Google would systematically over-bid NSA offers to make
it even harder for them to recruit.

------
Datsundere
maybe they should stop with unscientific tests (polygraphs)

------
jugbee
oh, it fills my heart with joy reading this

------
happyscrappy
Well there had to be some fallout from the leaks, tech companies seem to be
making more money than ever.

------
cowardlydragon
I wish them mediocrity.

Hm, but maybe mediocrity led them to where they are now.

~~~
tribaal
While I agree with the first half of that (I wish them mediocrity as well),
Snowden's revelations make it pretty clear that they are not mediocre at what
they do.

It takes some skill to deploy and run such a large-scale and pervasive
operation.

