
NSA Spying: Are Americans Now the Enemy? - ekm2
http://anewdomain.net/2013/09/06/john-c-dvorak-nsa-spying-americans-now-enemy/
======
mshron
Ehhh... the term "adversary" is the standard term in any crypto paper or book
for people who you are designing your system to be safe against. I'm very
concerned about NSA overreach, but this is normal crypto terminology. It's
true that this isn't quite algorithm design, but it's the most natural word I
could imagine for such a scenario.

~~~
Bartweiss
This was my first reaction. It's disconcerting to see in a nontechnical
document, but for all that these leaks disturb me, "adversary" amounts to no
more than "the people who might be trying to find out what you're doing."

~~~
unreal37
No, the NSA document clearly states "consumers and other adversaries".

The adversaries are not the people trying to find out what you are doing. The
adversaries are the people trying to password-protect their private files. We
are the adversaries.

------
anologwintermut
Adversary is a term of art in both intelligence and cryptographic circles: it
means an attacker trying to get your information/thwart your goals. . The NSA
does not consider normal people adversaries in that sense. Targets and
potential terrorists, possibly, but actively capable of screwing with the NSA,
no.

If the sentence was written by a cryptographer, it most likely reads as the
NSA is an adversary in the context of the cryptographic system(since they are
braking it) and they want to make sure that only they and not the consumer or
another intelligence service knows of their exploit.

~~~
Zigurd
Your interpretation depends entirely on "normal people" continuing to be
sitting ducks for pervasive detailed surveillance.

If you want data security and privacy, you are an "adversary."

------
smtddr
I think if one spent time talking politics with people outside of America,
especially 3rd-world countries, this question would have come up a long time
ago. The difference today is that now Americans are starting to wonder even
without influence from foreigners.

------
beloch
If you declare war on an abstract concept, it shouldn't surprise you when your
people start looking for tangible targets that fit the abstract concept, even
if most of your soldiers are home.

------
Qantourisc
Nope they are not the enemy, they are perverts. This just makes them very
naughty, and should be punished for it. It's happening in small scale: some
people are avoiding US products.

At this point we can probably trust China better, even though the US feared
them saying. We have a saying in Belgium: Zoals de waard is, vertrouwt hij
zijn gasten. (Like the inkeeper is, he trusts his quests.) Meaning, if you are
spying you suspect the others to spy to. Guess the saying IS actually true!

------
wavefunction
My government has declared war on me, heaven help them..

They shall find no succor nor shall their works persist.

------
goombastic
America spies on the rest of the world, while it's partners spy on americans.
The agencies of all participating countries then collaborate to exchange
"insight." So, America ends up spying on itself as well but without the legal
implications(?).

All this to get around laws.

The workarounds, extensive bureaucratic support structures, and concomitant
costs remind me of Oracle's enterprise product licensing terms, conditions,
and caveats.

------
DavideNL
"But the NSA showing an apparent deep hatred and resentment of the American
public as a whole? That is not only a surprise. It’s inexcusable. And
perverse."

For me, as a European citizen, the thing that really strikes me is how many
American people react to this entire 'NSA mass surveillance' situation:

Average European interpretation: Mass Surveillance is evil, no matter who's
doing it and no matter who's being monitored.

Average American interpretation: Monitoring non-Americans is okay. What, wait,
the NSA is now monitoring Americans? Monitoring Americans is evil!

To me it feels like Americans, like the author of this article, seem to think
of themselves as something 'better than other human beings/world citizens'. I
find this very repulsive.

------
cbhl
> _To the consumer and other adversaries_

This sounds like bullshit to me. It's implied that the consumer is an
adversary from the way this quote is written, but it's probably just poorly
ordered. Perhaps it would have been more precise if they had written it "To
adversaries and the consumer".

~~~
unreal37
But it wasn't written that way. The word "other" has a specific meaning in
that context, which means it isn't an ordering problem.

------
narrator
The real question is who exactly is now _not_ the enemy as far as they are
concerned?

------
Sagat
Americans are extremely dangerous from the point of view of non-Americans.

------
motters
Also see "who is not an adversary?"

[https://soundcloud.com/madiha-1/students-question-the-nsa-
at](https://soundcloud.com/madiha-1/students-question-the-nsa-at)

------
frank_boyd
> So now you wonder about the most-outspoken apologists for the agency, guys
> like Ruppersberger. You wonder if some blackmailing is going on or whether
> these folks just hate the country they serve.

There's another possibility:

Getting money or power (and ultimately money) out of this.

It's probably the most widespread motivation of "representatives" in DC
nowadays.

