What more is there? [infil/exfil]

[Anonymous Remailer (austria)]

On 01/20/2014 07:56 PM, grarpamp wrote:> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 2:57
PM, Anonymous Remailer (austria)
> <mixmaster at remailer.privacy.at> wrote:
>> > I too wish the leaks would come at a faster pace. But I don't think
>>
> The pace is ok, it keeps up the pressure. The real question is,
> is what remains? More of this same stuff we all knew was happening
> anyways? Or is there more deeper stuff we only questioned but
> shrugged off due to the hardness/fantasy of it all?
>
> - decryption of aes? cracked rsa?

Unlikely, unless it's buried deep within files that Snowden took.
Remember, during his very first few interviews, he encouraged us to
continue to use encryption and made the statement "encryption works". He
also trusted RSA enough to use it to encrypt communications with
Greenwald and Poitris (sp?).

> - automatic and global translation to stored text of all voice calls?

Very real possibility. Commercial tech is almost there. Assuming
government is 3-5 years ahead, they might well have that. But I really
don't see that as much of a threat.  It just saves analysts time.

> - gratuitous unwarranted passing of crimetips to LEA?

Likely already being done. In fact, there seems to be some evidence that
this has happened in several instances.

> - fundamental metadata knowledge of all persons/associations?

Probably possible but not really feasible. Too difficult to filter even
using selectors. But I'm sure they're close. Still, there are ways to
communicate without generating useful metadata so it might not matter.

> - political puppetstringing?

I'd say this is nearly guaranteed. In fact, I suspect this is why
Congress has been so slow to do anything about it. The NSA has them by
the balls. If you were running a large, illegal, operation, wouldn't you
first gather as much dirt on the people who could shut it down as possible?

> I suggest the answer lies in budget analysis... the possibilities
> within a well spent budget. Or a seriously conscientious leaker at
> the top who is yet to come... since so far Snowden seems limited
> to confirming lower level obviousness.

Good point. You know what I'd like to see? I'd like to see code. I'd
like someone to drop the code to one of these massive systems online for
us to analyze. But I suppose documents and program details would be just
as useful.