

N.S.A. Imposes Rules to Protect Secret Data Stored on Its Networks - clicks
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/19/us/military-to-deploy-units-devoted-to-cyber-operations.html?_r=0

======
ChuckMcM
From the article:

 _" '[The new rules] makes our job more difficult,' Gen. Keith B. Alexander,
the head of the N.S.A. and the commander of the military’s Cyber Command, told
the Aspen Security Forum, an annual meeting on security issues. "_

If nothing else this is an excellent demonstration of how leaking information
makes it harder to maintain conspiracies.

------
swombat
_“When the president first came on board, we had a huge set of mistakes that
we were working through in 2009,” he told the audience. “He said essentially,
‘I can see the value of these, but how do we ensure that we get these within
compliance and that everything is exactly right?’ ” That suggested that Mr.
Obama had questioned the execution of a program he had inherited from
President George W. Bush, but satisfied himself by having the N.S.A. set up
what the general called a “directorate of compliance,” an internal watchdog
group._

So back in 2009 they were breaking the law in a myriad ways. Now, they're
breaking the law in fewer ways. In the meantime, two things happened:

1) They set up an "internal watchdog" (the effectiveness of that is secret and
disputable)

2) They came up with secret laws to make the stuff they were doing anyway
legal.

Which of those two do you think had the biggest effect on reducing the amount
of illegal stuff they were doing?

I continue to think that government departments that commit crimes should be
eliminated by either the judiciary or the legislative branch, illico. There
can be no excuse for widespread criminality in government.

~~~
mtrimpe
Good point. Wouldn't this actually be an impeachable offense for Obama?

~~~
lukifer
Obama crossed the impeachable threshold quite some time ago. I keep waiting
for the Tea Partiers to call for impeachment based on all the horrible things
his administration is actually doing, rather than the imaginary things they
dreamed up.

~~~
DavidBradbury
Unfortunately Congress seems to be full of a bunch of ineffectual tools right
now. Even if the right were to legitimately push for impeachment, it would
turn into a clusterfuck of party loyalty and race-bating. Also, good luck
getting the votes required to knock him out in the democrat-majority Senate.

------
beloch
Cyberforces: Cheap.

Appropriate Judicial Oversight: Too freakin' expensive! Let's just change the
law so we don't need it.

------
noir_lord
Can I suggest they rename this - Operation Stable Door.

------
aspensmonster
>Gen. Keith B. Alexander, the head of the N.S.A. and the commander of the
military’s _Cyber_ Command

>Pentagon’s first units devoted to conducting _cyber_ offense and -defense
operations

>The description of the Pentagon’s new _cyber_ teams

>The administration recently conceded that it was developing _cyber_ weapons.

>Future operations run by _Cyber_ Command

>for now the _cyber_ force will be drawn from members of the armed services.

>The _cyber_ forces are inexpensive

>other nations that are justifying the creation of their own _cyber_ units

>Iran has created its own _cyber_ corps

/twitch

The amount of _cyber_ in this article is TOO DAMN HIGH.

~~~
lukifer
Funny how the term fell out favor with techies over a decade ago, yet the
general public and the press in particular seem to love it. (At least they're
no longer calling it the "information superhighway".)

