
NSA Looking to Exploit Internet of Things, Including Biomedical Devices - uptown
https://theintercept.com/2016/06/10/nsa-looking-to-exploit-internet-of-things-including-biomedical-devices-official-says/
======
raldu
It is ridiculously amazing they can go to such an extent to literally say that
it is their job to "penetrate other people's networks", and it feels so
"good". (Actual quotes of the spokesperson)

Some parts from the text reads like a prank article from The Onion. They
openly say that they are invading (sorry, "penetrating") the privacy of
everyone in the world, and still manage to get away with it. How? Misuse and
abuse of the concept of "terror".

It is high time for American public to realize that this "terror" rhetoric is
just an abusive device to legitimatize the violation of very fundamental human
rights. The NSA can just do whatever they want, because it is "terrors that
made them do it", right?

Violating the privacy rights of potentially everyone in the world? No problem,
just drop "terrors", "terrorists" here and there, then everyone will shut up
and not care.

We do not need to be political scientists or experts in discourse analysis to
spot the difference: just subtract the b.s. about "terror" and see the actual
picture.

~~~
ams6110
The charter of the NSA is international signals intelligence. It is _exactly_
their job to penetrate/eavesdrop on other people's networks.

Every other first world country has a similar agency/bureau. Perhaps not as
capable.

~~~
raldu
Obviously the point is not about questioning whether it is the job of a spy
agency to spy on other people.

Following the same reasoning, it would similarly be _exactly_ military's job
to kill people, with every other world country having a similar military with
various capabilities... This is just semantics.

It is about questioning the very legitimacy of the _exact_ jobs of those
institutions, along with their very existence. What makes their activities so
_normal_ that we even respond, "it is their job, everybody knows that", based
on definitions?

So my answer to this question of legitimacy was that, "they just legitimize it
themselves, with their rhetoric on 'terrors'".

~~~
jonnybgood
> So my answer to this question of legitimacy was that, "they just legitimize
> it themselves, with their rhetoric on 'terrors'".

That answer would work if NSA was created after 9/11 or as part of the PATRIOT
act or whatever. What was the NSA doing before? And don't you think NSA would
still be doing that? My point is that NSA doesn't need terrorism to legitimize
their operations. The reasons NSA came in to existence in the first place is
still relevant and enough to legitimize itself.

~~~
thatcat
Obviously they're doing similar stuff, the scope got considerably wider, the
purse got deeper, and memory/cpu has scaled to make it all feasible. They're
penetrating BC they can, but it also helps things scale if everyone has a
default reason to agree that they should.

------
brobinson
I am willing to bet a lot of money that we will see the first software-based
assassination in the next 5-10 years. Someone will have their pacemaker
disabled or their car commandeered and driven off of a bridge remotely.

~~~
mr_overalls
I'd be extremely surprised if it hasn't happened already, honestly.

~~~
pdkl95
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hastings_%28journalist...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hastings_%28journalist%29#Death)

~~~
engx
His family thinks it was an accident. According to his brother, he was
extremely stressed and had been smoking a (natural) psychedelic drug. That
particular drug is such a powerful experience, that combined with the unusual
circumstances of his life and the likely threats, intimidation or paranoia
could cause someone to drive erratically.

~~~
dd9990
Source? The Guardian reports:

"Coroner's investigators said the drugs likely did not contribute to the June
crash, which they classified as an accident. "

"Hastings had been using the hallucinogenic DMT recently, though the drug was
not detected in a blood test after the crash." [1]

[1] [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/21/michael-
hastin...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/21/michael-hastings-
buzzfeed-autopsy-drugs)

~~~
pdkl95
DMT? That only lasts 15-ish minutes. It's also notorious for being so intense
that most people have a hard time _moving_ ; complex tasks like driving just
aren't going to happen.

This sounds like a story made up by someone who doesn't know how DMT works.

~~~
jakeogh
Typical plausible deniability story.

Somewhere in my archive is a declassified doc from I believe the CIA about
putting a dead man in a car and then (RC) crashing it. Just tried to find
it... maybe someone else has the link. Either way, it's painfully obvious that
was a hit. He emailed close confidants right before about needing to go off
the radar because of a dangerous story.

------
jakeogh
2030: NSA: we need access to your brain chip and pacemaker. Don't worry, it's
for the children. If you do worry, we will fix that.

------
nickysielicki
Anyone remember this, from last year?

[https://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/detail?vulnId=CVE-2015-34...](https://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/detail?vulnId=CVE-2015-3459)

For some reason, I feel like the NSA is going to succeed.

------
niels_olson
So now the cardiothoracic surgeons don't just have to worry about device reps,
they have to wonder if the device rep is an NSA vector. They're scrubbed in
for the procedures, for pete's sake. How do defend against _this_!?

Trust. It's turtles all the way down.

------
pnathan
Well, I'm shocked. Shocked, I tell you. No one could ever believe that the
SIGINT org of the United States government would stoop to hacking biomedical
devices for their aims.

------
arca_vorago
If we just make all of the devices closed source and proprietary with drm it
wont be an issue because of hackers, and what have you got to worry about if
youve done nothing wrong?

/s

~~~
yompers888
I recognize both your tone and your sarcasm tag, but having more closed source
and proprietary technology actually would reduce the risk of government
snooping, at least once there's enough of it. Paying smart, educated people to
do this stuff is only feasible because it scales, and it only scales because
there's so much standardization. It's the same concept as "Macs don't get
viruses" (at least back in the early 2000s when their market share was much
smaller.)

------
dantiberian
I couldn't find any reports saying that NSA employees aren't allowed
cellphones. Does anyone have a link for more information on that?

~~~
FrightHorse
When I worked there (2012-2014), we were certainly allowed cellphones, and
friends that are still in the IC all still have such devices, so I don't think
that's changed. We just (obviously) couldn't bring any electronic devices into
the SCIF without specific approval.

Anything with an antenna would pretty much never be approved, but if you
wanted to bring, say, a Discman or somesuch, you could check it in, it would
be torn apart and checked for anything foreign in the device, and then would
be tagged for use in the SCIF. Typically, if something goes in, it's never
allowed to leave the building except shredded, mulched, and burned.

~~~
nul_byte
They are not allowed at GCHQ. I once visited CESG , and was told to leave
laptop and phone in the car or at the desk. I spoke to one of the guys working
there about 'how did he find it without having a mobile', and he replied that
it was actually quite nice as they did not get disturbed too much. They do
have pagers that allow them to be reached, to then find a desk phone and call
back.

~~~
FrightHorse
Ah, sorry, that's what I meant to imply. NSA has the same policy. I took the
poster's meaning to be no phones at all. I always left any electronic devices
at home.

------
cloudjacker
This is the plot of Homeland

~~~
raddad
Homeland is a good read IMO. So is Little Brother.

