Live on C-SPAN now: NSA Chief Testifies at Cybersecurity Hearing

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/event/220078

by gravitronic • 13 years ago

147 98 13 years ago

c-spanvideo.org

cinquemb2• 13 years ago

This is pretty much a circle jerk…

mtgx2• 13 years ago

Yeah. They probably made it before the one against NSA starts, to show that what NSA is doing is useful.

cinquemb2• 13 years ago

"We want the nation to know that we are being transparent. For example, We don't look into what is going into Wall St." - Gen. Alexander

Note to "Terrorists": go IPO :P

eightyone2• 13 years ago

I love how Gen. Alexander and friends are like, "We're so vulnerable!", and see no problem with storing mass amounts of information that is begging to be hacked.

eightyone2• 13 years ago

In this hearing there has been so much smearing in reguards to Snowden's educational background. There are plenty of smart people who didn't graduate from high school.

jacoblyles2• 13 years ago

It may be true that people without traditional education credentials are likely to be less conformist/more likely to cause trouble.

zxcdw2• 13 years ago

Whether that so-called "trouble" is good or bad and for whom is another thing, which can be quite subjective even.

Problems at school aren't necessarily an indicator of a failure. There are many examples of bad school performance which doesn't result in bad performance in whatever the person pursues. As far as I am aware, even Einstein didn't really like being in school and had problems concentrating, yet his scientific achievements are undeniabe.

Hence the problem with focusing on educational background is that it gives the false impression that bad background -> bad person. What Snowden did is, as far as I am aware, considered an extremely good thing when it comes to privacy of US and non-US citizens alike. So again, Snowdens lack of educational background could be viewed in similar light that of those others who haven't been hindered by the lack of school performance in the past(and in the future).

I claim that school and educational performance doesn't mean a shit in individual basis(as in case of Snowden, he's an individual after all), although it might mean when one evaluates people collectively as a group. And even then exceptional individuals come up.

samolang• 13 years ago

And the intelligence community actively recruits high school graduates because allowing them to go to college decreases the chances they can recruit them later.

ceejayoz• 13 years ago

Plus, Congress serves as evidence that you can have plenty of college graduates who are complete morons.

jemka• 13 years ago

"Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain." -Wizard of Oz

macmac2• 13 years ago

I find it deeply disturbing that Sen Mikulski clearly does not understand the meaning of the words she is reading.

mtgx2• 13 years ago

I noticed the same thing. I wonder if someone from NSA wrote all of that for her to read.

ry0ohki• 13 years ago

The NSA is a huge employer in her state of Maryland.

Zirro• 13 years ago

Since I am unable to access the stream at this time, in which way is her lack of understanding noticeable?

darxius• 13 years ago

Mostly the words she's using and how she seems to stumble over them. Every single noun has been affixed with "cyber" and I keep hearing the word "technoboondoggle". I have no clue what that is.

MichaelGG• 13 years ago

"Protect our domains .gov .mil .com" -- so it's all about DNS attacks?

whiddershins3• 13 years ago

Mikulski has no idea what she's saying.

macmac2• 13 years ago

Nope. Oddly enough it comes across as even more bizarre because she appears reach a level of semi consciousness during the passages where she talks about her apparently highly competent colleagues.

deletes• 13 years ago

Quote:

>Preventing criminals and hackers from...<<

Ugh....

polarix• 13 years ago

Every time she says "protect the american people from" I keep filling in "the NSA and other overreaching government agencies" in my head.

This is really an incredible spectacle of audacity.

milin• 13 years ago

Facepalm! Does she even know what she is talking about?

whiddershins3• 13 years ago

Keith Alexander is a true politician, regardless of his title. When asked a question "could these powers be used in this way" answered the question he wanted to answer "we only use the power in this way."

asperous3• 13 years ago

He also dodged the question "can you get Google contacts?" by rambling off. And then he apologized and said he was afraid he'd reveal something important and that he'd answer the question in a private non-public meeting.

whiddershins3• 13 years ago

Oh, this is awesome: Keith Alexander explaining how what we really should do is let the NSA have a database that stores absolutely everything, and then they promise only to search through it when it is "reasonable."

jsonne• 13 years ago

See, I'm personally of the same opinion. I couldn't figure it out, but then it hit me. It's the same line of logic that the military uses in their security clearances. Back in the day I used to work for a JAG lawyer, and have several friends that are/were in the military. So I do have some knowledge of the matter.

The way they do things is this. There's clearance and then there's need to know. So for instance one of my friends worked in network IT for the military. So had access to computers with "top secret" information on them. However, he wasn't allowed to access any of the information on the computers. Simply to use them for his job. Sound familiar to what the NSA is saying?

If there's other people on here that are closer to the military than I was please correct me, but it all starts to make "sense" when you think about it that way. I'm not saying it's right, in fact I think this system is likely problematic in a non military setting (and perhaps even within one as well)

ismarc• 13 years ago

I was in the military, with a clearance. You describe it reasonably well. A clearance means you can have access, if needed. I am completely against collection of information as they are doing because of time. A warrant gives them access to data from all time. This is a departure from current warrants that allow them to collect and examine data starting now (or as far back as it was stored by external parties). It's the difference between getting a warrant to wiretap a phone and getting a warrant to listen to every phone call ever made with a phone. In my mind, a warrant says we have have reasonable suspicion to collect more information as it stands right now, not reasonable suspicion to examine past behavior. Then again, I believe that the U.S.'s definition of rights are great and should be extended to all humans by the U.S., not just citizens or those on U.S. soil.

btbuilder• 13 years ago

This is pretty basic stuff for those in the security industry. Read about mandatory access control if you are more familiar with discretionary access control (what happens in most off-the-shelf operating systems) as an interesting example of how things are done differently.

Access control is one thing but:

1) How can we guarantee that the control cannot be bypassed when everything is secret? 2) How can we guarantee that someone with clearance is not selling information to criminals?

staccatomeasure5• 13 years ago

Here's something I've been thinking about, let me know your thoughts: I'm thinking of the nuclear bomb analog. Other people have nukes, so we need nukes, and we have to trust the government not to turn nukes against us. Is it possible this is a similar example...and what we really should be doing is having oversight on the analogous launch codes...etc?

Note: this is not saying what they did was legal.

corin_3• 13 years ago

Problem with that comparison is that while a government could make and store nukes without people knowing, it's hard to start exploding them without attracting attention. Accessing a database, on the other hand..

defen• 13 years ago

It would be so much more difficult to detect unauthorized searching vs unauthorized nuke use that you can't really compare them.

julespitt• 13 years ago

Hope someone out there will post a Youtube link once it's over, or something comparable - can't seem to access it at all.

WestCoastJustin3• 13 years ago

Mikulski keeps calling "identity theft" war. This is a crime, it is not an act of war!

laumars3• 13 years ago

They're talking about their battle against cyber-crime as war - which is a reasonable statement to make. It's just the same as when governments and new agencies talk about the "war on drugs" etc.

WestCoastJustin3• 13 years ago

Exactly, that is what scares me!

venomsnake• 13 years ago

That kinda makes me want to see everyone that uses that rhetoric from the president downwards sent to base camp and then few tours of duty to Afghanistan to see exactly what war is.

Then they probably would use something softer.

darkarmani• 13 years ago

War on privacy?

plainhold• 13 years ago

The conclusion seems to be that in order for the NSA chief to answer any interesting questions they have to declassify information. Which the NSA chief believes is a good idea as long as it doesn't harm the american people. What pieces of information they should declassify and make available to the public will be discussed in the closed hearing.

Edit: Spelling

MarkHarmon• 13 years ago

What the heck is a techno boondoggle? What a hillbilly sounding term that only makes me cringe at what kind things the US government is going to cook up for us cyber pros, lol.

JackpotDen2• 13 years ago

techno boondoggle

A government organisation that wastes money making a piece of technology.

ihsw• 13 years ago

Sounds like we're going to see CISPA and CALEA-2 pass, especially with such a large emphasis on public-private partnerships and 'embedding' security methodologies/frameworks into products and services.

WestCoastJustin3• 13 years ago

FYI: interesting discussions happening at 45:00+ minutes. Talking about Snowden's education and training, phone tapping and investigation, various authorities, etc. Interesting that they keep asking Alexander about what he thinks he is allowed to do or is doing?!

cwilson• 13 years ago

This is like watching a super awkward scene in a movie or TV show that just won't end.

The word "cyber" has been applied to every noun, and I've apparently been out of the loop on terms like "techno-boondoggle".

This is just a little terrifying.

sliverstorm• 13 years ago

What about cybernouns? Do we have those yet?

benjamincburns• 13 years ago

#yeswedo

pvnick• 13 years ago

Cyberhope, cyberchange, etc

jlgreco2• 13 years ago

It is like "verbing", but infinitely more annoying.

jmomo• 13 years ago

Since about 2001 I've considered anyone who used the word "cyber" to either be internet-illiterate or a politician (usually both).

alex_doom• 13 years ago

It always makes me think of the Cybermen from Doctor Who. Fits perfectly.

asperous3• 13 years ago

I honestly cringed at "Cyber-warriors"

ollysb2• 13 years ago

[1]The term arose from a 1935 New York Times report that more than $3 million had been spent on recreational activities for the jobless as part of the New Deal. Among these activities were crafts classes, where the production of "boon doggles[2],"

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boondoggle_(project) [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scoubidou

narrator• 13 years ago

It's as if all the important decisions have already been made and they are just going through the motions.

gasull• 13 years ago

That's exactly it.

willurd6• 13 years ago

Yeah. They are all reading from scripts. "This is something that we take looks down at script very seriously." Also, it appears that they were all privy to what each other was going to say before the hearing. "looks down at script As you said ..." Does that disturb anyone else?

betterunix3• 13 years ago

It is already known that the NSA chief received the questions Sen. Wyden planned to ask him in advance, to give him time to prepare a response, a few months ago. This is said as if it is business as usual (and used to paint him in a worse light, since he lied before Congress after being given time to plan his answers), and I have no reason to think it is not.

Yet another reason to vote third party.

asperous3• 13 years ago

If you notice, many of the papers were passed to him as he read, so it's possible one of his advisers had many prepared answers or simply wrote them down as the senator asked him questions.

ollysb2• 13 years ago

The delivery was a bit weak though, maybe they should get some professional actors in.

rdl5• 13 years ago

I guess I intellectually knew, but didn't fully appreciate, just how old all of those people are. Working in Silicon Valley, I'm used to seeing 20-45 year olds in lots of useful roles. Everyone in that room seemed to be late-40s or older (the military people were the youngest).

bilbo0s• 13 years ago

Well...

No offense...

but I wouldn't want the younger crowd sitting around deciding when to launch a nuke.

It's fine to put us in charge of the "like" buttons, Farmville tractors, or a web pages like Yahoo or Facebook. But some things are a bit more important.

It's fine to have younger aids or advisers. Probably good to have youthful energy INFORM certain decisions. Not so sure it's a good idea, however, to have youthful energy MAKING certain decisions.

And I say that, I guess, as part of what's considered the "younger crowd".

nullc• 13 years ago

There is also a difference between not having younger people (like, ahem, '30') in charge vs not even having them as part of the discussion at all. Experience has value, so does a diversity of backgrounds.

WalterSear• 13 years ago

Having the old farts make all the decisions about technology is what got us into this situation in the first place.

betterunix3• 13 years ago

A bit of life experience helps in governing a country. That being said, it is unfortunate that as people age, their minds tend to "solidify" and they have trouble understanding new things. The problem (which is evident over and over) is that Congress, while full of useful experience and wisdom accumulated with age, is also 20+ years behind the times on many issues.

rdl5• 13 years ago

Most of the good IT/security people I know are in the 30s/40s. That seems fine for judgment; I just don't want all of our legislators in their 60s+.

dmead• 13 years ago

"oh woops, NIST has never seen 215 billion. thats' the defense guys"

is this real life?

rdl5• 13 years ago

The depressing thing is Durbin wasn't smart enough to articulate it, but when he tried to ask "do you collect metadata or other data about non-telephone communications", GEN Alexander did a great job of misdirecting to being about court orders and getting access to a specific individual's information.

Knowing if metadata is collected broadly, and what metadata is collected, is key. There's probably no chance of that in unclassified congressional hearings; only via leaks.

We know they collect credit cards and some other records (air travel and customs/immigration for sure, and probably hotels and DMV and other government records, what else).

rdl5• 13 years ago

Oregon's senators are far better than I reasonably would have expected. Watch Senator Merkley question at 1:21 "exactly how did you get from these restrictions to collecting EVERYTHING, including my god-damn cellphone right here" (or something more polite, possibly). GEN Alexander decides to defer to the Feinstein classified hearing; i.e. not answering, by saying, "let me make sure I get this exactly right, because it is a complex area."

masoninthesis• 13 years ago

A 65 year old lady starts using words like Techno-boondoggles, and everyone bought it. It's worse than I thought.

contingencies• 13 years ago

Key quotes: "Techno-boondoggles" "The government is very good at spending money" "Protect our domains: .mil, .gov and .com" "This is a committee that is loaded with talent!" "Rarely has a committee had so much talent!" "We are in a cyberwar every day. Every time someone steals our identity." "...continue to warn us against 'cyber', as a continuous threat." "I bring to your attention, the President's budget document" "The President has asked congress for 13 billion dollars in order to execute the cybersecurity strategy" "Protecting the taxpayer, in their role as both citizen and taxpayer." General Alexander introduced @ 8:00. General Alexander begins @ 13:30. General Alexander quotes: "So this is a bright future that we have! But it's complicated by cyberespionage, by cyberhacking..." Interesting @ 18:30 .. General Alexander mentions operating lawfully and the chairwoman's evil knowing grin is filmed.

willurd6• 13 years ago

I was wondering if anyone else noticed the chairwoman's grin when General Alexander talked about operating lawfully. Made me sick. The whole charade made me sick...

xegroeg• 13 years ago

Who is the woman behind Keith Alexander passing him notes?

willurd6• 13 years ago

A notable quote from our public servants:

"The executive order, as you know, is this administration's effort after an attempt to get legislation last year."

Let that soak in for a bit.

davemaya• 13 years ago

Grand-ma Milkuski seems to have a good understanding of what she is talking about...

Live on C-SPAN now: NSA Chief Testifies at Cybersecurity Hearing

Related Stories