NSA Coworker Remembers Edward Snowden: "A Genius Among Geniuses"

http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/12/16/an-nsa-coworker-remembers-the-real-edward-snowden-a-genius-among-geniuses/?partner=yahootix

by mzarate06 • 13 years ago

372 170 13 years ago

forbes.com

salient• 13 years ago

With great power comes great responsibility. I'm glad Snowden saw it that way, too. Same goes for William Binney who was a higher-up in NSA, and also in charge of creating some of its most important/dangerous surveillance software, before he decided to become a whistleblower.

Edmond3• 13 years ago

Nothing in that piece to suggest Snowden was a "A Genius Among Geniuses"...on what basis does his genius rest? AFAIK there is no record of Snowden doing any kind of work out there that'll suggest he knew anything about computing security.

It seems people have forgotten that there are a ton of freely available computer security tools out there that any body can take and do a lot of damage with.

sp3322• 13 years ago

It doesn't mention anything about security. There's a backup system, and a web front-end. Whatever his work was, it was impressive enough to get him an invite to the Tailored Access Operations. Not all work at the NSA was cutting-edge encryption.

Edmond3• 13 years ago

How did you miss that? the whole article speaks to his supposed security prowess:

* Snowden had been brought to Hawaii as a cybersecurity expert working for Dell’s services division but due to a problem with the contract was reassigned to become an administrator for the Microsoft intranet management system known as Sharepoint.

astine• 13 years ago

That quote is apparently the opinion of one of the NSA staffers that worked with him. Apparently he was more talented than most of the other employees and contractors.

Cthulhu_• 13 years ago

Indeed; a statement like that is either reflective of Snowden's skill level, or the average skill level of his co-workers. I haven't personally seen anything out of the ordinary yet for a generic sysadmin/developer/hacker/internet freedom fighter character.

jere• 13 years ago

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

pessimizer• 13 years ago

...on what basis does his genius rest?

It rests on some of his co-workers thinking he was very smart. Is there anything wrong with that?

AFAIK there is no record of Snowden doing any kind of work out there that'll suggest he knew anything about computing security.

But how far do you know, exactly, about the work that Snowden was doing, or how good he was at it?

Zikes• 13 years ago

The basis for his genius appears to be the opinion of his colleague, which you're free to accept or reject. If his colleague's claims are to be believed, his activities and accolades within the NSA would be sufficient record of his computing security experience.

Not everyone has to publish a white paper or open a GitHub account in order to be taken seriously.

Edmond3• 13 years ago

When people are labeled geniuses, independent evidence is important, especially when they've become a cause célèbre.

Geniuses generally have a body of work to stand on, not just a friend/family/colleague opinion.

fnordfnordfnord• 13 years ago

It's a character reference from a co-worker, not a declaration of objective fact.

It seems people have forgotten that there are a ton of freely available computer security tools out there that any body can take and do a lot of damage with.

I used to think that sort of thing would be noticed pretty quickly at the NSA. Nowadays, I am not so sure.

podperson2• 13 years ago

He could configure sharepoint AND backup systems. May not seem like much but in a federal government department that's like being Jesus and, I don't know, Buddha at the same time.

vidarh• 13 years ago

Frankly, someone who knows how to wield Sharepoint qualifies more as a Marquis de Sade to me.

Pengu• 13 years ago

adds more to the hollywood story

kushti• 13 years ago

The difference between Snowden and other NSA employees is that Snowden is the real U.S. patriot, not just government worker.

skrebbel• 13 years ago

I don't understand that. Why is doing the right thing somehow "patriotic"?

You don't need to "love your country" to want to make it a better place.

k__• 13 years ago

Probably the other way around.

If you do something for the people of a country you're patriotic.

randallsquared• 13 years ago

Wanting to make your country a better place is evidence that you love your country, at least.

kordless• 13 years ago

A patriot does for his country what its government will not, or cannot.

Theodores• 13 years ago

Snowden differs from many of the whistleblower ilk in that there is nothing to dislike about his character (yet). The media have not dished any dirt, none of his friends/family/ex-lovers have came forward with anything untoward about him and he hasn't shown any signs of being deluded.

Even if you try your hardest to 'believe', a lot of whistleblowers have been deluded one way or another. They can be overly indoctrinated in their 'mission', so, whilst bringing to light useful information they have also been a bit keen to believe the propaganda that goes with The War Against Terror, e.g. Coleen Rowley. They can also be deluded in their importance, to be less than convincing, e.g. Sibel Edmonds. They can also fully jump the shark, e.g. David Shayler. Then there is Assange, 'deluded' in my opinion for thinking leaks could be monetized.

Unless I am missing something, Edward Snowden has taken a stand for truth and not allowed his character to be compromised in any way whatsoever. He has not made any mistakes, there is nothing where you could think he could have done better. Am I being deluded in thinking this?!?

hosh• 13 years ago

You're not deluded. I expect we'll see more of this kind of thing and these kind of people to appear.

samstave• 13 years ago

I'd be interested to see if they attempt to fake people who know him...

cryoshon• 13 years ago

The idea that the character of the whistleblowers themselves has anything to do with the quality or impact of the information they leak is a propaganda trick enforced by the media-- a leak with a face can be discredited if the face can be discredited, and in the 21st century, everyone has skeletons in the closet. Additionally, if your aim is to obscure, it's far easier to focus on the flaws of the person behind the leaks than the leak itself.

A discussion of the leaker is a discussion that is not entirely focused on the meaning of what they leaked.

herewego• 13 years ago

I wish I could upvote this 1000 times.

SkyMarshal• 13 years ago

That's the ad hominem fallacy - shoot the messenger, discredit the message by discrediting the messenger even though the two have no logical relation. It's a testament to our educational system that so many people fall for it. Though part of it, I'm sure, is that it simply gives many people a rationale for believing what they already want to believe.

fidotron2• 13 years ago

There is legitimacy if you assume the leaker is the only source of the information. In such cases it logically follows that trust in the contents of the leak is reliant on trust in the leaker, until other ways to authenticate the contents of the leak become available.

Once separately verified the discrediting game is utter nonsense though.

sremani• 13 years ago

Shooting the messenger is standard operating procedure by the PR/Propaganda wing of the powerful. There were attempts to malign snowden, I think some one went on Dianne Rhem Show on NPR dissing snowden for not have passed out of High school or for not getting a college degree. That I found was the lowest of the low hit at him. He is not a hero - but he sure is not a traitor - he decided to do what he did with good intentions and in alignment of his conscious.

stavrianos• 13 years ago

Propaganda tricks work, though. It follows that in order to be an effective leaker, one must be more or less impervious to muck-raking. Which is neither fair nor sane, but strikes me as plausible.

Volscio• 13 years ago

Character matters tremendously for quality or impact of information they leak. It affects the degree to which you might suspect that there is even more information being hidden, who stands to benefit or suffer from leaks, and who the power players are. This calculus doesn't change whether you're a cyber-libertarian, damage control for the govt, foreign govts, whatever. You want to ascertain the degree to which this is going to continue to be a problem for different parties.

Furthermore to assume that studying someone's character as part of investigation (both public and NSA-internal) is just mere propaganda and media smoke and mirrors seems to dismiss more mundane notions as a) curiosity about the leaker and the story, b) routine counter-intel procedure, and c) journalists having stuff to write about.

In short, you are giving far too much credit to the idea that the public is stupid and easily distracted. Come on, we all know the score here.

podperson2• 13 years ago

Probably why he has been compared pretty frequently to Daniel Ellsberg -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Ellsberg

sheetjs• 13 years ago

Snowden differs from many of the whistleblower ilk in that there is nothing to dislike about his character (yet).

... and because the leaks related to issues that outraged most people. It's easy to understand the concerns regarding spying, and most people have a visceral negative reaction. It's much more difficult to elicit that type of response to, say, human rights violations that don't directly affect most Americans.

In this case, I think that the media is siding with the people (more viewers / ad revenue). If this were any other type of leak, without the same populism, the media most likely wouldn't be as "friendly". There is dirt, but it hasn't been brought to light because it wouldn't sell well (who wants to bash the guy who told us that the NSA is spying on us?)

lhc-• 13 years ago

I'm not sure which media you are referring to as "friendly", but unless its the Guardian or some independent journalist, basically the entirely of establishment journalism is incredibly hostile towards Snowden and is siding completely with the USG. If they had dirt, they would release it immediately (notice how they parrot all the unsubstantiated claims of unnamed USG officals, for example).

lukev5• 13 years ago

I think the fact that he leaked a lot of details about NSA surveillance of foreign governments diminishes his moral high ground. That is the stated mission of the NSA and while the details are highly classified, everyone knows that they're doing it and agrees it should be done as a matter of policy. Embedding himself in the NSA specifically to find the details regarding these activities and release them looks more like espionage than it does whistleblowing.

I'm all for whistleblowing on how the NSA is abusing its powers to spy on US citizens, and I think it's extremely important that he did so. I really wish he'd constrained himself to that. Releasing everything he did hurts his credibility in everyone's eyes and prevents any part of the government from acknowledging him as a legitimate whistleblower, which would have been the best outcome to this whole scenario.

fidotron2• 13 years ago

I think that speaks more about the naivety and agendas of the journalists he leaked to than about himself. Given the apparent quantity of documents it seems unlikely he'd have had the chance to prefilter them.

Anyone remotely surprised the NSA were spying on foreign governments (including allies) is basically an idiot.

visarga• 13 years ago

That is the stated mission of the NSA and while the details are highly classified, everyone knows that they're doing it and agrees it should be done as a matter of policy.

I don't think everyone considers NSA legitimate. NSA is a bunch of people with lots of information and an agenda that is most probably not in the best interest of all Americans, just those richest and most influential 1% or 0.01%. Their track record speaks for itself.

pstuart4• 13 years ago

What moral ground does the United States have for directly invading the personal communications of the leaders of its allies?

Ostensibly this is all about protecting the itself from danger. What is the threat posed by, say, Germany?

furyofantares• 13 years ago

If everyone knows they are doing it and agrees it should be done as a matter of policy, why is it problematic that it leaked?

joshstrange2• 13 years ago

I'm interested to know what you think he could have released that would have allowed him, as you imply, to stay in the "good graces" of the NSA/USA yet provided enough information to the US public that would not have been written off as a crazy person?

jeswin• 13 years ago

I'm all for whistleblowing on how the NSA is abusing its powers to spy on US citizens, and I think it's extremely important that he did so. I really wish he'd constrained himself to that.

I can't believe you're saying this. Is your judgement so clouded by patriotism that you somehow think other people have no right to their privacy? Let me explain the consequences of what you are suggesting here, apart from the obvious loss of goodwill across the world. Countries will feel free to barricade "their internet" and control communications. There will be lesser transparency, more firewalls and more detentions. Oppressive regimes will love this, and your allies will be left confused.

In times of peace, your allegiance should be towards ideals. Like democracy, privacy and free speech.

(edit: take an upvote anyway, you are entitled to your view.)

nabla93• 13 years ago

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Snowden has not published anything really critical about NSA surveillance on China, Russia, Iran, etc.

His risk/reward calculation seems to be on line with mine. Of course his leaks do some damage to U.S. foreign policy, but that's acceptable collateral damage. His leaks help to shape the power balance between government and citizens in liberal democracies.

heed• 13 years ago

We must be on reddit because someone is complaining about early downvotes.

nitrogen2• 13 years ago

Here's an idea: let's hold a worldwide vote on NSA spying, in the true spirit of democracy. 300mil in favor, 6.7bil against.

tootie3• 13 years ago

I understand your point, but the NSA's mission is confined to cross-border communication. Eavesdropping within foreign governments should not be allowed.

RyanMcGreal• 13 years ago

I'm appalled that so many Americans who are outraged about their government's mass surveillance of Americans simultaneously seem to think it's acceptable for the US government to conduct mass surveillance on the citizens of other countries.

FedRegister• 13 years ago

Everyone knows that they're doing it and agrees it should be done as a matter of policy

First, many didn't know that they were doing it. Second, as an American citizen I surely don't agree that it should be doing it as a matter of policy. This is another situation where the government does things in my name that I disapprove of. Third, nice American Exceptionalism, bro!

mindcrime• 13 years ago

everyone knows that they're doing it and agrees it should be done as a matter of policy.

Not everyone, and especially not when you're talking about "friendly" governments (aka, our allies). And even more so when the spying is being done for industrial espionage / economic advantage purposes, and not national defense.

WettowelReactor• 13 years ago

Part of what he may be trying to get at is that the US population has no idea of just what the stated mission of the NSA is. Do we as a population think that spying on our allies is OK? This is a discussion that needs to happen publicly and not under a classified umbrella.

windexh8er• 13 years ago

I think you may have missed the entire point. "Everyone knows" is also not a very tactful or impressive way to argue your point - since, as included with "everyone", I fully disagree with your point. Bulk collection of metadata across "everyone" in the United States (and other unfortunate countries through collateral damage) is not OK in any way shape or form lest the constitution has recently been changed. The fact that this idea has direct ties to surveillance of foreign governments only exemplifies the point in it's weight and severity.

Your assertion that his credibility is somehow diminished based on his actions doesn't leave much room for your version of the correct way a whistleblower should go about his business properly. I'm not sure you fully grapple what this man has laid out on the line for everyone else here and has signed himself up for a life that will always be in question. Arm-chair NSA antics don't seem to justly appreciate the level at which someone has gone to great lengths to do the job fully and, IMHO, correctly.

tripzilch• 13 years ago

I think the fact that he leaked a lot of details about NSA surveillance of foreign governments diminishes his moral high ground. That is the stated mission of the NSA and while the details are highly classified, everyone knows that they're doing it and agrees it should be done as a matter of policy.

Er, no actually. Most people actually believe the NSA should keep their dirty fingers and prying eyes to themselves.

The only ones arguing differently are Americans somehow under the delusion that they are alone on this planet. Thankfully, taken on the whole they are a minority.

But go ahead, asserting that my private information should be free to be vacuumed up and abused for whatever purposes your shady intelligence organisations need.

For some reason you think there's an imaginary line to be drawn between US citizens and other human beings. You have a right to privacy, and the rest does not. Superiority much? Kind of a stupid thing to say, on an international forum, IMHO, showing your true colours, US vs "Them", etc. This is the 21st century, wouldn't you like to be able to look each other in the eye?

Joke's on you, however. Because don't for a moment believe that this shadowy government organisation "of yours" shares your ideas about how US citizens somehow have more rights to privacy than other human beings. "Stated mission" or not, they're in it for the power and money, and have done and will do anything they can get away with.

And if you'd have been paying attention instead of sitting back convincing yourself "hey at least they're fighting on my side", you might have noticed that this "moral high ground" is there for a reason. It's also sometimes called a "moral compass" for a reason, because you can use it to make right decisions when you can't know who to trust.

Snowden couldn't have leaked just one without the other either. Not to the same great effect. That's a hint right there. Because the imaginary line doesn't really exist, leaking just the "spying on US citizens" bit and not the rest, would have been so incredibly disingenuous--it's the whole Internet, silly!!--it could only have been done by someone with much less of a moral backbone than Snowden has. And then it wouldn't have gotten the exposure needed, coverage by the Guardian/Greenwald, a leftist UK paper, speaking ill of the US? Ridicule and ignore. No, it had to be the whole picture.

The rest of the world's outrage is actually helping you, you understand?

The NSA, they're not actually working for you, you understand that too? If there is any Us vs Them, we are in fact on the same side.

rdl• 13 years ago

I've never found anything to dislike about the actual NSA whistleblowers (Binney, Drake, Wiebe). I guess the only problem I have with Drake is that he hasn't prioritized personal and family income/wealth enough -- he lost his pension, and is now working at an Apple Store; he could have gotten a much more lucrative job.

nswanberg• 13 years ago

Arstechnica figured out that Snowden had been a commenter there (or maybe on their chat system) and had published the threads, but nothing very scandalous besides writing some swears and defending the NSA.

GeneralMayhem• 13 years ago

I agree 100%. It's very nice to have Snowden as a champion as compared to Chelsea Manning or Julian Assange; he's well-spoken, has no known mental health issues, and isn't wanted for anything other than leaking secrets. It's much easier to get a message across when the only story is the message and not the messenger's transgenderism, depression, megalomania, or sexual assault charges.

I don't have a problem with Assange's approach, really. The point was for him to personally be the lightening rod so that Wikileaks could go about its business in peace, which is a reasonable gambit. And if monetization and theatricality are the easiest way to get people to pay attention to what you have to say, so be it. He just didn't execute well enough in separating the two when it came to absorbing attacks, and WL didn't have enough interesting things to say to stay relevant.

dnautics• 13 years ago

What is your N on this observation?

"Snowden differs from many of the whistleblower ilk in that there is nothing to dislike about his character (yet)."

How do you feel about famous whistleblowers like "Deep Throat (Mark Felt)", or the various awardees of the Sam Adams award: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Adams_Award

fit2rule2• 13 years ago

If there is one thing that we should all be taking away from the Snowden episode, it is the fact that all human activities are utterly arbitrary. We decide to live in a free society, and then we do the things necessary to live in that society as we have defined it should be.

The definition keeps changing. One minute, its just not a free society unless you can keep slaves, the next minute its not a free society unless women vote, the next .. well, you get the point. Society is only as good as it declares its intentions and then carries them out; nowhere, alas, in the entire miasma of American law, is there the requirement that one has to always try their best to do well, and to operate on the principle of the greater good - in face of all opposition.

This too, is arbitrary, and the point where it becomes reality instead, is when an individual voice in the crowd stands up and says "this is how things should be!", gaining a little more volume than everyone else, and getting a bit more agreement, in the face of all the worlds cannibalism, that it might be good to cook things slightly differently.

Snowden, and others out there working in their own, utterly non-arbitrary ways, are always going to be necessary to remind us that just when you think you are safe, because status quo, the new safe realm is the as-yet completely unexplored ..

soulrain2• 13 years ago

This is true but you have to admit over time the means of oppression have become more nuanced and complicated.

Few people realize that most companies are little more than intellectual property, a network to collaborate on expand said IP and the corp's ability to secure information.

Large corps and govt's not only understand this, they are defined by it, thus the need for whistle blowers more now than ever as the foot on your throat is not as apparent.

fit2rule2• 13 years ago

Education always will be, and currently is, the tip of the spear. If you can deem to educate someone, you can deem to educate another. Once you gain a mass, education becomes lesser than the whole. This is why: we humans constantly need new means by which we can enlighten ourselves. Within a generation, todays enlightenment becomes de rigeur, de jour, de jure. This is the nature of the trap we find ourselves; escaping it requires one abandon the dialectic of our masters, and embrace the constant new.

For as long as we have hackers, we are safe.

kriro• 13 years ago

Seems like the source for this article was male.

ww520• 13 years ago

It's sad that keeping a copy of the constitution is seen as a sign of eccentricity.

talmand• 13 years ago

I find it particularly sad since I have a copy sitting on my desk at this moment. It's an interesting read, I would suggest it to anyone that hasn't yet.

It also has the Declaration of Independence at the end as well. Doubly eccentric?

theandrewbailey• 13 years ago

People might think I was eccentric if I kept toilet paper on my desk, too.

tootie3• 13 years ago

The fact that the NSA needed help to setup Sharepoint fills me with confidence that they have no idea what they're doing. I'm guessing the password to the call log metadata is on a post-it note somewhere.

pmorici• 13 years ago

The government's workforce is made of of a very large percentage of contractors 50%+. The article makes it seem like he was a unicorn but that probably wasn't the case. Contractor employees often get paid more than a government counter part doing the same job[0]. If I had to venture a guess as to why this is I'd say it is because those contractors turn around and make political donations where as many government employees are limited in their political activity, especially in the defense sector.

[0] http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/3311:guess-what-it-is-che...

jsumrall• 13 years ago

I think its more because their contract has an expiration date. They get paid more because there is a "risk" that they could be unemployed for some time before they find a new contract (not likely for programming jobs, but speaking about contractors in general...) whereas a gov't employee has a huge amount of job security. Its a choice of Money vs. Job security.

tootie3• 13 years ago

Government hires contractors for the same reason private companies do. They can easily ramp up headcount then ramp it back down. It's doubly valuable when your full-time workforce are protected by numerous legal and union regulations. When a project needs 100 technical resources asap, recruiting that many people is very difficult and expensive. Even for a private company without regulations on pay and hours. There are only a handful of IT services companies out there capable of staffing that many people at once, so bidding is less than competitive. If funding is cut for that project, just fire the contractor and you're free and clear.

gogras• 13 years ago

That also means IE is the primary browser they're using.

winslow• 13 years ago

Yes and mostly still on XP. At least CIA was when they came to my university (2 years ago).

rev_null• 13 years ago

I have to laugh at the "genius among geniuses" quote. How come all of the NSA geniuses were so dependent on a contractor to keep everything running? Why did none of those geniuses see the danger in employing a person with an anti-NSA hoodie who was constantly questioning the legality of spying?

mathattack• 13 years ago

Remember that they're still just a big office somewhere. They need janitors, network help, have copy machines that break, and all of that.

bonemachine• 13 years ago

Or that their other people with more specific skills were too busy doing other things. Like, you know, pretty much any other tech shop.

herbig• 13 years ago

I like how they say he "cheated" on the entrance exam to the NSA by stealing the questions and answers from their servers, as if that doesn't just make him more qualified for the job..

daned• 13 years ago

Yes, this cracks me up. He was joining an organization of cheats and snitches and they got mad when he cheated.

sliverstorm15• 13 years ago

as if that doesn't just make him more qualified for the job

Maybe. Maybe not. Do we want the NSA to be rule-breaking cowboys that get the job done, or do we want them to have a rigid code of ethics?

I honestly don't know. Rigid ethics impair their effectiveness; cowboyism gives us what we have now.

dragonwriter3• 13 years ago

Rigid ethics impair their effectiveness

Does it? How, specifically?

cowboyism gives us what we have now.

Which also impairs effectiveness at doing anything that is legitimate role of any component of the US government, which necessary includes adhering to rather than subverting the Constitution of the United States.

nexttimer• 13 years ago

“I won’t call him a hero, but he’s sure as hell no traitor.”

No hero? What does it take for you then?

Actually, he's not a hero, he's more like Jesus of our times, giving away his (perfect) life for us (who - of course - don't even appreciate his sacrifice, let alone act).

eplanit• 13 years ago

You should paint a new rendition of the Last Supper with Snowden as your Jesus, and you can have Assange, Manning, ..., (choose 10 more of those types) as his disciples. Have fun.

siliconc0w• 13 years ago

The problem with this article is the author has no idea what is actually a genius security/cryto/computery act. Lazy reporting.

soulrain2• 13 years ago

If you can't put the veracity of the revelations of Snowden on trial I guess you attack his character and/or means.

The NSA is in a lose, lose situation. They are painting Snowden to be an idiot...an idiot they were dumb enough to hire and allow to revamp major system. Oh but he cheated on their test to get hired! If the NSA cannot secure a test what can they secure? Oh but a comp sci guy was quirky and eccentric! Ya well maybe tell ole' Keith not to recruit at DefCon what kind of people are you trying to hire?

The idea that there is mass data store somewhere and it will not be utilized for say insider trading or blackmail is naive to say the least. If Snowden had access so do many, many others and I am sure they tell themselves they are good people but human nature is what it is... What weapon, and mass info is indeed a weapon, has ever been created and never used especially a stealthy tool which can always be denied being used hidden behind secrecy and patriotism?

tamersalama• 13 years ago

Something tells me that due to Snowden's leaks - nothing will ever get accomplished at the NSA. Not anymore. Imagine of all the additional security and authorization measures that they will add. Imagine how this would be a hurdle in both day-to-day and new projects.

simoncion8• 13 years ago

You have an overactive imagination. ;)

eruditely• 13 years ago

Maybe not overactive enough to warrant such tasteless tongue in cheek though.

lafar6502• 13 years ago

I suppose they're trying to persuade us that Snowden is a superhuman, and only his superpowers allowed him to get access to all the information. It has nothing to do with incompetence of his coworkers and bosses, nobody could have prevented that and it's nobody's fault.

batgaijin• 13 years ago

I bet he knew more acronyms than anyone

NSA Coworker Remembers Edward Snowden: "A Genius Among Geniuses"

Related Stories