
Ask HN: When did Snowden become the voice of reason of all things InfoSec? - chirau
Granted the guy had some access to 3 letter agencies, but honestly, most of what he did was just grant us access to that info through leaks and whistleblowing. Now it seems he is a demigod of information security.
======
dalke
I think you are asking two related questions. A "voice of reason" is "a person
who influences others to act sensibly." Bruce Schneier is a voice of reason in
information security, with frequent op-ed pieces and interviews, so Snowden is
not the only person in that role.

I'll interpret your question as: how does "a voice" become "the voice above
the rest", and thus a person become a "demigod"?

I have no exact answer, but I can suggest a few things related to how news is
organized and presented.

First is the lure of secret knowledge. Pay attention to the news and you'll
hear code phrases like "unnamed White House official". These are almost always
deliberate, officially sanctioned leaks, structured to make it sound secret,
and thus more influential. Look at the various agencies (CIA, FBI, etc.) who
declare that they have the 'real' information, which is so dangerous that they
have to keep it secret, and so dangerous that we need to give them carte
blanche.

In a related point, this is also a reason why ex-senior officials, and ex-
high-level military officers, etc. get to be on the news; they have or had
access to this secret information and get to be the gatekeepers/interpreters
for us of what's "really" going on.

Second is the news cycle. With an infodump, the news gets old. After a month
or two the official response is "that's all behind us; we need to look to the
future". Look at Wikileaks for an example.

But by stringing the document release over years, it's always fresh news -
fresh _secret_ news. Which means there may need to be a new government
response, which makes it a new news story. This keeps people like Snowden in
the news. (You wrote "just grant us access"; my distinction is that his leak
_continues to grant access_ rather than _granted access_.)

Third is the ability to sound reasonable and look normal. Public speaking is
hard. Snowden manages to make statements, answer questions, be consistent, and
keep on topic much better than most people I know. This is the sort of person
that newspeople prefer to talk to, because it makes their job much easier -
they know what they are going to get, roughly how long it will take to get it,
and it won't require extra work on their side.

The "look normal" part is important because it's an easy thing to get pidgeon-
holed as someone who only does something for the attention, and looking
different puts you part-way into that hole.

------
atmosx
IMHO it doesn't matter. Judging Snowden by his _computer skills_ is like
judging Ghandi for his ability in court[1]. Snowden is a _symbol_ for freedom
of speech, privacy and democracy worldwide, the rest are small details.

Now, to give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, his speeches and analysis on various
topics is extremely sound. I am astonished by his composure, depth and well
argued answers. He technical prowess shows-off IMNHO, I've never seen an
answer that shows lack of technical ability or understanding.

Also as another commentator pointed out he is the only one we know who comes
_from the inside_ for sure: When he says that your 6-letter password is like
having none when the NSA is after you, I take his word for it.

[1] Ghandi was a barrister-at-law.

------
staunch
Name one person with more insight and experience that is also willing to speak
publicly.

~~~
tptacek
Pretty much every reputable software security professional?

