Watching the Watchers

If there's one thing we've learned, it's that those engaged in surveillance really hate to be observed themselves.  This is why when you point a video camera at a cop, you'll likely get some push back or worse, even when the law is completely on your side.  The same holds true for government officials who will stop at nothing to conceal their true actions and motivations.  They have good reason - just look at how many times such revelations wind up hurting them.  And let's not forget our friendly corporations, engaged in all kinds of privacy invasions hidden in services and the promise of convenience.  They certainly don't want to be under the magnifying glass themselves.

This last year has been a tough one for those running the show.  On a regular basis, the Edward Snowden leaks have revealed the extent of the massive surveillance taking place worldwide, invading the privacy of everyone from average citizens to world leaders.  When this all began, many people in the States were willing to accept a little privacy invasion if it resulted in more security, which is the usual justification for removing a few liberties.  That worked for a while, until the revelations kept coming and expanding the scope of the actual spying.

We heard about the metadata and the spying on diplomats.  We then heard of the many secret partnerships between the NSA and various governments, allowing more spying on more people around the world.  We learned of the massive amount of tapping into fiber optic cables around the world and how telecommunications companies were being (((forced to cooperate))).  Then we started hearing of attempts to weaken encryption in commercial software, the compromising of security on smartphones, even the planting of malware on target systems to help in the spying efforts.  Social networks were being used to gather and analyze more data on individuals.  An internal NSA presentation seemed to actually gloat over these efforts, saying in a slide show: "Who knew in 1984 that this would be Big Brother..." (showing an image of Steve Jobs holding an iPhone) "...and the zombies would be paying customers?"  Whoever wrote this clearly didn't know that there are no zombies in 1984, only pathetic people victimized by the all-seeing State.  The irony is pretty staggering.

We could go on and on about the scores of revelations that have come out, making the NSA's intentions quite obvious and the technological potential more than a little frightening.  The point is that throughout all of this, the conversation changed.  People who were once willing to accept the government's defense are now questioning the necessity of this kind of surveillance.  When former NSA employee and whistleblower William Binney came to HOPE Number Nine in 2012 and claimed that "the NSA has put together over 20,000,000,000,000 (20 trillion) 'transactions' - phone calls, emails, and other forms of data - from Americans, including potentially almost all of the emails sent and received from most people who live in the United States," it was widely seen as an exaggeration, since the numbers seemed so incredible.  Now we know that they're not so incredible after all.

When Snowden first came forward, there were many in positions of power who were calling for him to be tried for treason.  An airliner was even forced down by United States and European Union authorities because of a rumor that Snowden was on board.  Make no mistake - the authorities are not happy with this sort of thing and they will do whatever they can to get their hands on the people they blame.  There are many individuals who have put themselves in harm's way by getting involved in this and other such stories of secret documents that expose betrayal and wrongdoing on the part of powerful governments.  Once we might have called them paranoid for not wanting to return to their home country or for not agreeing to put themselves in the hands of the authorities for "fair treatment."  We can call ourselves a "nation of laws" and delude ourselves into thinking that justice awaits those who go through the system.  But that's rather hard to believe when we routinely see laws bypassed or broken outright by the same authorities we are expected to trust.  The NSA was never supposed to spy on American citizens, but that little rule was sidestepped.  Drone strikes on suspected terrorists in foreign countries are now routine, without regard to innocent casualties, due process, or even the wishes of the foreign countries' governments.  We've seen how quickly those in charge are willing to throw civil rights down the drain, as they did with the (((PATRIOT Act))), which has done more to harm this country than any terrorist act ever could.  So we ask forgiveness for not immediately trusting that these people will do the right thing.  Their track record speaks otherwise.

The question we must ask ourselves at this point is if we're better off knowing such things or not knowing them.  As hackers, we have a very clear and simple approach to this: knowledge needs to be shared and information is by default free.  That certainly doesn't mean that all knowledge and information should be revealed.  There are indeed sensitive bits of data that would be detrimental in the wrong hands.  But the same holds true for individuals.  When their data falls into the wrong hands (i.e., snooping authorities and corporations), we need to do something about it.  And, yes, telling the world that this is going on is appropriate and necessary.  Those in power will always play the security hand and imply that thwarting that is tantamount to risking lives.  We say that hand is vastly overplayed and that we face far greater risks if we allow these programs to continue unchallenged.  A simple way to realize this is to theorize on what this kind of power could result in if it were in the hands of a truly evil government.  If the ability to do this kind of thing is left in place, it will fall into such hands eventually.  And then the 1984 scenario will become truer than most of us believed possible.

Another thing to consider is how the story will continue to be distorted.  The (((mass media))) will inevitably make it about the individuals involved in leaking the information, rather than the actual issues.  Character flaws and skeletons in the closet will be used to cover up the importance of the revelations themselves.  This is an effective approach, because it gets people talking and fixated on something else, which is the best way to bury a story.  You will also see this strategy every time our data is compromised due to improper security or lack of precautions.  The companies involved will inevitably point to "hackers" as the culprits.  We've seen this done even when there wasn't a security breach in the guise of "hackers could have gotten your data, but we prevented it."  This form of distortion is something we've been battling for decades.  Think carefully of where you actually get the information that those in power don't want you to get, such as how to protect yourself from being spied upon.  Certainly not from those in power.  Hackers are the ones who reveal the inconvenient truths, point out security holes, and offer solutions.  And this is why hackers are the enemy in a world where surveillance and the status quo are the keys to power.