
A Former CIA Agent Talks Spycraft - lemonberry
http://pursuitmag.com/lindsay-moran-former-cia-agent-talks-spycraft/
======
eliteraspberrie
An operative is not an agent, i.e. case officer. The original articles in
Pursuit Magazine (listed below) correctly describe her as a former agent.
Whoever wrote this summary doesn't understand the distinction.

[http://pursuitmag.com/lindsay-moran-former-cia-agent-
talks-s...](http://pursuitmag.com/lindsay-moran-former-cia-agent-talks-
spycraft/)

[http://pursuitmag.com/lindsay-moran-former-cia-operative-
why...](http://pursuitmag.com/lindsay-moran-former-cia-operative-why-became-
spy/)

In any case, you won't find anything published in the US that the CIA would
not agree to. Everything written by current or former agents is screened by
the CIA's Publications Review Board.

------
w_t_payne
I am slightly bothered by the notion that "blending in" has any chance of
working in the modern era.

Certainly, in the past, the entity carrying out the surveillance was likely to
have a limited budget of time-and-attention, a limitation that could be gamed
to evade analysis and pursuit as described.

However, computerisation and data analytics change the game significantly. The
cost of "attention" is reduced to such a significant extent that practically
everybody's behaviour can be analysed, albeit superficially.

It is a relatively trivial matter for the entity carrying out the surveillance
to build a dossier on large swathes of the population: to identify and
categorise their beliefs, their behaviours and their weaknesses. To score them
according to how much of a threat they represent, or according to whatever
other factors may be useful.

The information-dominance landscape has shifted considerably over the past 10
years. I am greatly interested in seeing how our newfound industrial-scale-
information-dominance is translated into real-world power: Presumably also by
automated means and on an industrial scale.

I imagine that this can be done subtly, by targeting specific influencers,
inhibiting some selected communications and inserting or promoting others,
thereby shaping discourse and the formation of political belief in a larger
section of the population.

Emerging geopolitical crises (Ukraine/Crimea, anyone?) provide an ideal petri-
dish to see if the competing factions are deploying this sort of technology,
and for assessing the effectiveness of these techniques.

~~~
gcb0
but then the terrorists would have won, etc, etc.

also in the end it all boils down to someone taking money from the spy, and as
far as i know every country already has some IRS keeping tab on the entire
population...

------
Theodores
Weird how there is a culture of seeing spies and their craft as special. They
are at best Peeping-Toms and stalkers.

Also, keeping secrets is no big deal. Every family has them. Every school has
'secrets' that they don't tell the children. Every company board has 'secrets'
they don't share with the staff or the outside world.

As for personalities and the need to keep different persona, who really is the
same person at work as they are in their private life? It is not hard to
compartmentalise your life and be a different person for work.

However, ultimately, what these agencies are up to is quite sick and twisted.
They are not out for the common good. Some of the psychology behind that could
be a better basis for an article.

~~~
Nrsolis
I LOL'ed.

Once you realize that the USA is probably behind in terms of "spying" when
compared to the Soviets, you'd be a _fool_ to accept that without a response.

It is the _height_ of narrowmindedness to think that Nation-States operate
within the same plane as ordinary individuals.

~~~
frandroid
<i>USA is probably behind in terms of "spying" when compared to the
Soviets</i>

From hypothesis to demonstration in less than 10 words.

~~~
Nrsolis
I say probably because I have little direct knowledge of what the Soviets are
capable of.

But I do know that the Soviets have been caught doing some impressively sneaky
stuff. One thing that sticks in my mind is the placement of a (completely
passive) eavesdropping device in the _Oval Office_. Said device was unpowered,
and missed during a comprehensive check for bugging devices.

So I'm making an assumption here: namely, that they have only refined their
techniques in the areas of statecraft and espionage.

~~~
frandroid
My point is that they're not "Soviets" anymore...

------
etiam
Interesting for some insight to certain facets of life as a CIA agent, but I
find the articles the post discusses to be one-sided.

I think "cute" human interest stories like this, while not necessarily bad in
themselves, are particularly suspect at a time like this, when the CIA is in
the process of being charged with remarkable crimes against their own nation's
democratic system (see e.g.
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7351710](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7351710)),
not to mention the continuing distasteful matter of torture and related
practices.

I aim no criticism at the post but find that the material that led up to it
has a light scent of media damage control.

