NSA Listening in on U.S. Troops' Pillow Talk

[pingnak]

Sorry, not a 'conspiracy theory', as such. Just confirmation for those of you who suspected the government was listening to U.S. citizens, even though they claimed they haven't been.

Especially troubling, listening to troops calling home to their families and sharing the salacious bits of these private calls among each other.

abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=5987804&page=1
Sorry, had to prevent the link from being recognized as such. Copy, paste into browser address box.

[PhantomWolf]

Interesting.

I like this bit:

"Both of them felt that what they were doing was illegal and improper, and immoral, and it shouldn't be done, and that's what forces whistleblowers."

And yet no one has whistleblowen on nearly 3,000 murders on 9/11......

[T.A.M.]

This report was disturbing. Not out of fear of big brother (if you are a good person with nothing to hide, should it matter), but out of disgust that the USG would condone, seemingly promote such things.

TAM:)

[LightinDarkness]

Sorry, not a 'conspiracy theory', as such. Just confirmation for those of you who suspected the government was listening to U.S. citizens, even though they claimed they haven't been.

Wow, what a way to lie about a news story. The US government has never denied that it was listening to calls outside the United States - which is what happened here.

The woos are getting desperate...

[tomwaits]

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_2141248f14920ca492.jpg

[pingnak]

They (Specifically George W. Bush) denied anyone would be listening to U.S. CITIZENS.
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4999662675840221124&hl=en

Here are the whole 44 minutes of him getting all palsy-walsy with the crowd before he says anything of substance, and when he does, all he does is lie.
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8308949635327344285&hl=en

The NSA is listening to U.S. aid workers, U.S. contractors and U.S. soldiers. Without a court order. Without their consent. Just listening to every husband tell every wife he loves her. Every whisper. Every sweet remembrance. Every word.

Because they want to. Because they can.

[JoeyDonuts]

I was overseas with the U.S. Navy for quite a bit a few years ago. Any time you jump on an unsecured government communications system - phone line, internet, whatever...you consent to monitoring. There are organizations within the services themselves that will monitor communications home. The reason for this is supposed to be enforcing OPSEC. That's very understandable. You don't want someone going over an unsecured line talking about position, capabilities, operations, etc. That's just how things are done.

However, it scares me to think that on the few opportunities I had to hear my wife's voice while we were underway - that NSA analysts were having a couple yuks at my expense. Believe me when I tell you that hearing from home gives you the fuel you need to keep doing the job day in and day out and it's reprehensible to me that someone monitoring my conversation would not have treated with the sensitivity and professionalism I expect from myself.

These people should be fired posthaste. We know we're going to be monitored and we understand why. Just don't pass my pillow talk across your cubicles.

[/soapbox]

[Skeptic Guy]

Wow, what a way to lie about a news story. The US government has never denied that it was listening to calls outside the United States - which is what happened here.

The woos are getting desperate...

No, the government has been quite clear that it would not listen to Americans oversees. Surprisingly (not), that doesn't seem to be the case.

It is an invasion of privacy and I don't think it has anything to do with whether you have something to hide or not.

[JoeyDonuts]

No, the government has been quite clear that it would not listen to Americans oversees. Surprisingly (not), that doesn't seem to be the case.

It is an invasion of privacy and I don't think it has anything to do with whether you have something to hide or not.

The thing is, though, when you're a servicemember or working in some capacity with sensitive material you are told that you can be monitored at any time.

Of course when you're hearing your family members' voices for the first time in two months or so, the farthest thing from your mind is that someone might be getting his kicks listening to you catch up with your wife when all he SHOULD be doing is just making sure that you don't violate OPSEC.

That's my beef with it, I'll g'head and shut up now.

[pingnak]

And what of the aid workers?

[snowstorm]

The NSA is listening to U.S. aid workers, U.S. contractors and U.S. soldiers. Without a court order. Without their consent. Just listening to every husband tell every wife he loves her. Every whisper. Every sweet remembrance. Every word.

Because they want to. Because they can.

because of war my friend, if terrorists talk about bomb planting and killing members of U.S.soldiers contractors or aid workers and you have couple of minutes to react, last thing to do is asking for court order,your last sequence sound like old ct

[theprestige]

Okay, so my question is, was this improper eavesdropping an official policy?

Or was it an abuse of responsibility by individuals acting without proper authority or oversight (with perhaps some unacceptable negligence in the oversight of the individuals)?

[PhantomWolf]

It seems to have been a combination. While the Govt was saying that the Offical Policy was no eavesdropping, the NSA seems to have decided to do otherwise, and the workers themselves appear to have been the ones spreading the juicy gossip about. As such the Government has failed to make sure that the NSA was doing what they said it should have been doing, and the supervises in the NSA weren't making sure their workers were acting professionally. A poor job all around, but it seems a lot of US Government departments are badly run.

[mrbaracuda]

Feind hört mit (http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/18/18604/18604_4.jpg)!

[snowstorm]

ok, in the article there is part where is clearly noted that these kind of actions are attempt to protect US and other soldiers, if we assume that two employees from NSA listen conversation between soldiers and theirs familys and afterthat talks about these coversation, should that mean that all of this work is wrong.these two persons are going to be prosecuted for theirs actions

[JoeyDonuts]

ok, in the article there is part where is clearly noted that these kind of actions are attempt to protect US and other soldiers, if we assume that two employees from NSA listen conversation between soldiers and theirs familys and afterthat talks about these coversation, should that mean that all of this work is wrong.these two persons are going to be prosecuted for theirs actions

They should be able to discuss the phone call and any relevance it might have then and there in the secure facility, and only in a professional capacity. The only question should be, is this conversation releasing information protected by OPSEC? If yes, forward to the right people. If no, move on to your next listen.

Unless they are violating OPSEC or disclosing information of a criminal nature, the details of these conversations should NEVER leave the confines of the secure facilities where intercepts/analysis take place. And I don't believe the NSA has the time or personnel to physically listen to every single conversation that takes place. I don't work there and never have, but I believe they have vocal recognition technology that scans for key words and phrases and then "flags" those intercepts that used them for further analysis. Those "flagged" ones would then most likely be audibly reviewed by their analysts to determine whether or not something's going on. But discussing details of these private conversations outside the appropriate facility in an improper manner is just reprehensible in my opinion.

As a parallel, imagine that you're picked for a random pat-down at an airport. It happens, we all accept it and for the most part understand why.
The officer patting you down notices that you happen to have a large lump on the inside of your leg. He's going to want to know what it is, just to make sure everything is on the level. It may feel invasive, but he's just doing his job. Would it be appropriate for him to then discuss in a joking manner your medical condition? Of course not.

[JoeyDonuts]

Feind hört mit (http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/18/18604/18604_4.jpg)!

Must be the Japanese WW2-era equivalent of the NSA.

[snowstorm]

But discussing details of these private conversations outside the appropriate facility in an improper manner is just reprehensible in my opinion.


I agree with this.I just want to say that if they can save one life its ok with me, and about these two guys I think its isolated case, I dont know rules in NSA but I think that they will get some kind of punishment. can someone tell me what is OPSEC, I m not from US,thanks.

[ArmillarySphere]

At a guess, it means "Operational Security". The big no-no would be talking about where you're stationed or how your buddy Jimbo the SEAL is going off on something big this weekend and can't be at your barbecue. That sort of thing.

[theprestige]

Okay, so now I have another question: How, exactly, are you supposed to maintain operational security, if not in part by monitoring communications to and from your operators?

In principle, I have no problem with this kind of eavesdropping, and I assume it would (or should, anyway) fall well within the proper authority of the Executive branch.

It seems to me that what needs to happen here is, at most, a clarification of departmental policy, and a stricter enforcement of that policy.

[pingnak]

Of course they have resources to monitor every call.

1. Finite number of lines.
2. Lines aren't all busy 24/7. Not everyone wants to call at 2:00am, and not everyone wants to place calls that will be received at 2:00am.
3. A computer system records everything, probably queuing their importance according to a list of watch-numbers that let them know 'key people' are speaking.
4. Trained listeners can listen to audio that's artificially 'sped up'. Removing/compressing quiet gaps in conversations, and speeding it up without changing the pitch of the speakers. You can understand speech that's played back several times faster than people can speak. The parts that you don't understand you can 'tweak' with an edit wheel to replay slower or get the 'original' version.
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6266643.html

So, so long as a delay in listening is acceptable, you can time-shift the workload and have far fewer people monitoring than there are physical lines to monitor, and still have 100% coverage. It only took a few minutes to slap together that system in my head. They mention a computer where they can pass around the recordings and such. Probably a fairly robust and elaborate system is in place, since they've been at this for decades.

So, yeah. Every "Goodnight princess!" is recorded and listened to, even after the president himself claimed we wouldn't be monitoring U.S. citizens.

[theprestige]

So, yeah. Every "Goodnight princess!" is recorded and listened to, even after the president himself claimed we wouldn't be monitoring U.S. citizens.
You do realize that some U.S. citizens are routinely monitored by long-established and completely legal programs, right? That what the President says about a specific program doesn't automatically apply to all programs, right?

[snowstorm]

Of course they have resources to monitor every call.
4. Trained listeners can listen to audio that's artificially 'sped up'. Removing/compressing quiet gaps in conversations, and speeding it up without changing the pitch of the speakers. You can understand speech that's played back several times faster than people can speak. The parts that you don't understand you can 'tweak' with an edit wheel to replay slower or get the 'original' version.
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6266643.html

word "patent" does not mean that there is working device.
"trained listeners", yep there is people who listen about couple of billions calls per day and analize that with special "removing/compressing quiet gaps" powers with help of coffee and of course Benson&Hedges smoke, then with help of super powers find something suspicious and then spread it with humour. you dont want to be in skin their wifes when they come home :).
anyway, good night princess, damn it this good night is definitely recorded

[pingnak]

Actually, the algorithm for 'speeding up' speech without making the speakers sound like chipmunks are long established, and so trivial and natural for this application it would be absurd to believe it is not used.

Nobody needs any 'superpower'. It ends up sounding like TV and radio commercials done by the fast-talking people, or auctioneers. You get used to hearing people talk-fast, you understand it like people speaking slowly. No problem.

You can buy the libraries to do this speech processing off the shelf, or 'reinvent' them fairly trivially. The algorithm in the cited patent is just one technique among many. It's something that has been built into high-end digital audio and video editing equipment for a long time. The most primitive/simple form of it sounds a little warbly, but with better algorithms, it sounds quite natural.

And it's not 'billions' when you're talking about lines that the troops use in Iraq to call home. It's a few thousand, tops. Something a few hundred dorks in cubicles could manage.

[snowstorm]

Actually, the algorithm for 'speeding up' speech without making the speakers sound like chipmunks are long established, and so trivial and natural for this application it would be absurd to believe it is not used.

Nobody needs any 'superpower'. It ends up sounding like TV and radio commercials done by the fast-talking people, or auctioneers. You get used to hearing people talk-fast, you understand it like people speaking slowly. No problem.

You can buy the libraries to do this speech processing off the shelf, or 'reinvent' them fairly trivially. The algorithm in the cited patent is just one technique among many. It's something that has been built into high-end digital audio and video editing equipment for a long time. The most primitive/simple form of it sounds a little warbly, but with better algorithms, it sounds quite natural.

And it's not 'billions' when you're talking about lines that the troops use in Iraq to call home. It's a few thousand, tops. Something a few hundred dorks in cubicles could manage.

if NSA is capable to produce this kind of technology and dont respect privacy, then logicaly it is working for every call in every town in USA, Earth and of course the rest part of the space, so I will say that probably it is not cuople of billions it is trillions of billions

[pingnak]

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=ultra-fast+speech

At about 5x normal speech speed, most of what's said is comprehended.

Such a system could hope for something like 40 hours of conversation to one human working an 8 hour day. Probably the content of two or three normally utilized phone lines with hundreds of conversations over a 24 hour period. The NSA system as described is centralized, so the listeners get a sampling of content from all lines as they consume and dismiss/flag conversations.

And since what you're really looking for is the 'gist' of the conversation, you could probably turn the rate up a bit higher than full comprehension would allow. It's not important to REMEMBER anything, only RECOGNIZE things.

If there are a thousand available phone lines, 300 people could easily monitor everything said on all of them.

To monitor ALL phone traffic would still take a significant portion of the Earth's population. Fortunately for the spooks (or unfortunately for everyone else) signal processing technology and speech recognition are getting better and cheaper all the time. Soon all those NSA snoops will be out of a job when the computer can do the job without them. On the plus side, the computer won't pick 'funny' conversations to 'share'. On the minus side, program it with robust search terms and you can spy on anyone. Other legitimate political parties, dissenters, the media, etc. Always know exactly what they're talking about.

[snowstorm]

pingnak: did you ever work for NSA, how do you know all this things about NSA?
and just one observation pingnak technology and science are not synonym for evil purpose they are here for benefit of humankind.
so dont be afraid NSA will not listen to all phone lines, they will not share conversation betwen husband and wife, they are here for protect and serve or serve and protect, they probably have other things to do in present time, they want to get main evil players not record every "good night princess"..

[LightinDarkness]

They (Specifically George W. Bush) denied anyone would be listening to U.S. CITIZENS.
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4999662675840221124&hl=en

Here are the whole 44 minutes of him getting all palsy-walsy with the crowd before he says anything of substance, and when he does, all he does is lie.
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8308949635327344285&hl=en

The NSA is listening to U.S. aid workers, U.S. contractors and U.S. soldiers. Without a court order. Without their consent. Just listening to every husband tell every wife he loves her. Every whisper. Every sweet remembrance. Every word.

Because they want to. Because they can.

Wrong.

Any member of the US military is told they could be monitored at any time. And this is what happened. Non-US Military members overseas did not have their calls listened to.

Furthermore, you'll probably be shocked to know lots of people with high level security clearance are also most likely monitored. Its not a infringement of rights when you agree to it as a condition of employment.

[pingnak]

Wrong.

Any member of the US military is told they could be monitored at any time. And this is what happened. Non-US Military members overseas did not have their calls listened to.

Furthermore, you'll probably be shocked to know lots of people with high level security clearance are also most likely monitored. Its not a infringement of rights when you agree to it as a condition of employment.

And the aid workers? Lots of civilian contractors on those same lines, too. Many of them the only clearance is 'get in the truck and drive'.

[INRM]

I think this government surveillance is, in general, just going too far out of hand.

They weren't just spying on soldiers, they were spying on humanitarian aid workers such as members of the ICRC. This is surveillance gone mad.

Additionally, people who go around saying "If you got nothing to hide" are only adding to the problem as such a statement is essentially consenting to what the government is doing -- the government shouldn't be spying on everybody.


INRM

[LightinDarkness]

And the aid workers? Lots of civilian contractors on those same lines, too. Many of them the only clearance is 'get in the truck and drive'.

Uhh yes, and aid workers. They are also told, in their employment or volunteer contracts, that if they work in certain areas they can be monitored.

Its not like para-military groups against the US are going to respect the sanctity of aid workers and never ever exploit such organizations.

[pingnak]

Yeah, I hear the ICRC has been plotting terror attacks to drum up business!

Nope, the administration LIED about not monitoring Americans, and now they've been caught, and now (LIKE TORTURE) people are jumping in to defend and downplay the practice.

Oh, well the President who signed the orders authorizing the shady business can be excused because he's not the one directly engaging in it!

[JoeyDonuts]

Look, it's like this. Aid workers sometimes work hand in hand with soldiers, right? They are often on the bases and know a lot of the units. If I worked for a foreign intelligence service, I would probably go after an aid worker with innocent questions. "You work with the Americans, yes?" "How often do they come and go?" "Do they bring tanks with them?" Seemingly innocuous questions, but all of them are pieces to a larger puzzle. That is where OPSEC comes into play. You have to identify all of the information you have access to that an adversary could want or use - unit composition, travel times, who's commanding what unit, etc... Now that you know what these are, you don't tell anyone about them. It may seem Machiavellian, but the end result of these wiretaps is supposed to be intercepting anyone that's putting this information out there to God knows who back in the states.

Never forget that information is far more powerful than even the most advanced weapon system, and U.S. aid workers need to protect our guys by keeping tight-lipped about anything they know about our military units. When my ship was overseas and we got within cell range of the coast, we used to have younger guys whipping out their phones and calling home telling their mom/girlfriend/wife where we were and details such as which engine was broken, etc. If I overheard that, I would snatch the cell phone right the hell out of his hand. Then I turned it in to his boss. Couple of guys wanted to swing on me for that, but I didn't care. There are off the shelf systems that can listen in on cell phones, and the world's intelligence services are sure to have that capability and much more.

This isn't a bunch of guys on a business trip that can say whatever to whoever with no consequence. These are forward deployed military units whose very survival and effectiveness in combat depends on details being kept a secret. The real trick to war is...you never give the other guy a chance. Hit him so hard that he has no choice but to lay down arms, and you make that job easier by keeping your communications back stateside proper.

That said, all of this monitoring needs to be kept to a professional basis. I don't mind if someone listens in on my pillow talk, and aid workers shouldn't either. They're in a combat zone and they need to realize that the rules are different.

[pingnak]

Of course, Allah the spy doesn't have access to these phone lines. Only the NSA does. Most likely the phone lines go into a digital switch and are encrypted and beamed straight up to a satellite to be relayed back to the U.S.

Allah the spy would approach someone local who works with the aid workers or translates for the military on the street, strike up a conversation, buy an iced coffee, chat them up, befriend them.

A lot simpler than intercepting encrypted satellite communication. More safe and secure, too.

So it's hard to say what the NSA is trying to accomplish here. Assess the amount of damage a foreign power could gain, assuming they get agents into the U.S., then track down girlfriends and wives of troops and aid workers and then get them to talk?

If they could get such agents into the U.S. in such numbers that they could find the one in a hundred 'loose lipped' wife of a 'loose lipped' soldier, they'd most likely be working on the more direct kinds of espionage, identifying and targets in the U.S. and attacking them in force.

Basically the approach assumes that your loved ones are all spies, or working with spies. So the only practical upshot of this kind of monitoring is a van with a couple of NSA or FBI spooks stopping by your home in the states and dropping off some bugs and wiretapping the phones and internet connection to monitor the family more closely to see who THEY talk to, and then, upon finding them say something to grandma, go to grandma's house and repeat.

All of which sounds like a fine chase down the rabbit hole to me.

On a related note, the War On Terror is serving the goals of the terrorists nicely. Note how prosecution of white collar crime in the U.S. is now effectively non-existant.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/19/washington/19fbi.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Between chasing 'terrorists' and putting an end to internet porn, they don't have any manpower left to enforce other laws preventing bank managers from skimming the odd billions off our accounts.

[JoeyDonuts]

Whoa, whoa. The NSA doesn't have an agenda of it's own. They monitor and report. They do not influence policy.

And how can we possibly know that the phonelines are going over satellite that only the NSA would have access to? What system are they using? "ALLAH" the spy - being Pasdaran/Hezballah/any number of former KGB cells - do have SIGINT capability. In theater, I'd say is most likely the Pasdaran. Even if this is an uplink, any transmitter creates a sidelobe and that can be exploited.

[pingnak]

Who said the NSA had an agenda of its own?

Just following orders.

From the top.

[JoeyDonuts]

So it's hard to say what the NSA is trying to accomplish here. Assess the amount of damage a foreign power could gain, assuming they get agents into the U.S., then track down girlfriends and wives of troops and aid workers and then get them to talk?

This isn't an accurate description of what the NSA does. NSA is not a law enforcement agency.

[theprestige]

Who said the NSA had an agenda of its own?

Just following orders.

From the top.
Are you seriously claiming that the President of the United States ordered the NSA to specifically record and audit U.S. troops pillow talk?

As far as I know, not even the whistleblowers are claiming this.