NSA surveillance program reaches ‘into the past’ to retrieve, replay phone calls

[jsr]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-surveillance-program-reaches-into-the-past-to-retrieve-replay-phone-calls/2014/03/18/226d2646-ade9-11e3-a49e-76adc9210f19_story.html

NSA surveillance program reaches ‘into the past’ to retrieve, replay phone calls
By Barton Gellman and Ashkan Soltani, Tuesday, March 18, 10:37 AM

The National Security Agency has built a surveillance system capable of recording “100 percent” of a foreign country’s telephone calls, enabling the agency to rewind and review conversations as long as a month after they take place, according to people with direct knowledge of the effort and documents supplied by former contractor Edward Snowden.

A senior manager for the program compares it to a time machine — one that can replay the voices from any call without requiring that a person be identified in advance for surveillance.

The voice interception program, called MYSTIC, began in 2009. Its RETRO tool, short for “retrospective retrieval,” and related projects reached full capacity against the first target nation in 2011. Planning documents two years later anticipated similar operations elsewhere.

In the initial deployment, collection systems are recording “every single” conversation nationwide, storing billions of them in a 30-day rolling buffer that clears the oldest calls as new ones arrive, according to a classified summary.

[Glassunion]

1. Proof!

I will have undeniable proof the the pizzeria fucked up my order!

[djean111]

2. Oh, I thought I was assured that the NSA only collected metadata......

Yes, they collect conversations, and there is software that can search the conversations for key words.

[randome]

4. This relates to spying on other countries, which has always been in style.

Headlines like this should state 'Foreign Surveillance'. But they don't want you to make the distinction. They want you to be afraid so they can capture more eyeballs.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

[Rumold]

8. 'Foreign Surveillance'

as in, the GCHQ records all americans phone communications.

foreign like that?

[randome]

28. If they do, that would be a revelation.

Something to get up in arms about. But that's not what this article is about.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[Rumold]

30. and then there is this

In other words, according to this former FBI agent and well respected expert, every single conversation made by an American via wired or wireless phone signals is being recorded - See more at:


http://www.dailytech.com/Former+FBI+Agent+All+Your+Communications+are+Recorded+Government+Accessible/article31486.htm#sthash.mxY9zqJZ.dpuf

[Savannahmann]

10. As I recall

You were one of the voices swearing this wasn't happening, and that there wasn't enough computer space.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022993108#post57

[randome]

22. Which is why they don't store it longer than 30 days, I would assume.

And this is foreign surveillance, not domestic. So far as we know, neither the NSA nor anyone else is recording domestic phone calls.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]

[Savannahmann]

25. Well that's nice to see

You've gone from impossible to the idea being unknown.

As far as we know. Never would have seen that last year before Snowden would we?

[randome]

27. I've never claimed to be an expert on anything. I only offer my opinion from the IT industry.

And knowing that the NSA has the 'capability' of doing this for foreign surveillance means what, exactly? I still see no end-game for all these 'revelations'.

Are we going to protest in the streets to stop the NSA from monitoring foreign phone conversations? I honestly don't see that happening.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[mindwalker_i]

11. Questioning whether this is limited to spying on other countries

is reasonable, especially given the revelations so far.

What isn't immediately clear is whether this is just phone calls to or from other countries from the US. I would think that it would be highly difficult for the US to intercept calls between other countries, although given the nature of how networks work, not impossible. If, however, all calls between the US and elsewhere are recorded, it would be a simple step to record all calls with either or both ends in the US.

[randome]

24. A simple step, granted.

We should have more unambiguous statements from the NSA about what they do and don't do.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers. It's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[Nuclear Unicorn]

3. It's all very "Gee whiz!" but are they ever planning on doing anything practical and effective?

So far they haven't stopped 1 terrorist attack and we've been caught flat-footed on Ukraine and other events. When will these sclubs actually give the President something useful?

[jeff47]

5. Well, announcing "our secret program caught this guy"

is a good way to make your secret program public. Not to mention it is unlikely that we are authorized to arrest in the country where said terrorist is located.

But more importantly, terrorism may be the way they sell funding to the public, but they're spying on a hell of a lot of non-terrorists.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

6. When you catch someone you have to annunce how it was done as part of the discovery process.

Not to mention it is unlikely that we are authorized to arrest in the country where said terrorist is located.

Which is probably why most of them get the drone treatment.

But more importantly, terrorism may be the way they sell funding to the public, but they're spying on a hell of a lot of non-terrorists.

Yeah, that's kind of my whole problem with this. They're spending plenty of time and resources spying on the people they supposedly protect while ignoring the people they're supposed to be protecting us from.

[jeff47]

7. No, they're not.

They're spending plenty of time and resources spying on the people they supposedly protect while ignoring the people they're supposed to be protecting us from.

No, they're not.

Coverage of the NSA always implies that the programs are being used on Americans, since that sells papers. But the actual documents that have been leaked do not back that up. So far, only one program has collected data on US persons, the phone metadata program. Which is a fairly trivial effort.

All the other stuff that gets the majority of the media coverage is pointed outside the country. But only part of it is pointed at terrorists. Large parts of it are pointed at non-terrorist countries in order to figure out what they're doing. We know we spied on Germany. It's likely we spied on China and Russia. We're probably watching North Korea pretty closely. And lots of other "non-terrorist" countries.

But when marketing the funding of these programs, it's a lot more awkward to say "we want to spy on China" than "we want to spy on evildoing terrorists".

[Savannahmann]

9. Wait a minute.

Wait one damned minute. When this entire Snowden thing began, we were assured that the collection of all the phone calls was an impossibility. We had several people here who did the math and showed that to collect the actual voice call would require more server space than existed on the planet.

Whew, found one. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022993108

Several people mock the statement and say that it's impossible, or say that it would be stored at the FEMA camps or AREA 51. I'm glad i found that, otherwise I wouldn't know it was impossible to store billions of phone calls.

Another thread where they say it's impossible. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023125853

I'm so glad I know that this story is impossible. Thanks again to all the users who pointed out how impossible this was. I am certain there were other threads, but now I've made myself happy knowing that it is impossible to record all the phone calls because there simply isn't enough computer space in the world.

[mindwalker_i]

12. It was impossible then

Now it's old news. So stop talking about it!

[Blue_Tires]

13. Something I've been wondering but never gotten an answer for:

Do newspapers independently research potential NSA stories and then approach Snowden's handlers for proof or verification? Or do they just sit back and run with whatever Snowden feels like pitching to them for this week?

What conditions, if any, are in place when Snowden disseminates information to news outlets, and what do specific news organizations need to do to get on his "list?"

[Rumold]

14. snowden gave the journalists what he had

the journalists are the ones who determine what they are publishing.

snowden isn't "pitching" anything

[Blue_Tires]

15. He isn't pitching anything now? or are you saying he hasn't ever?

[Rumold]

16. he gave all the documents he had to greenwald and others

they are the one publishing their stories.

he isn't the one deciding what is being published.

you said - "Or do they just sit back and run with whatever Snowden feels like pitching to them for this week?"

he is not in control of what the various journalists are publishing

[Blue_Tires]

21. Ok...So how does Greenwald decide who

Last edited Wed Mar 19, 2014, 05:16 PM - Edit history (1)

he does or doesn't share with?

And isn't it a conflict of interest, given that Greenwald is at the helm of his own media outlet now?

EDIT: That "Snowden gave all the files to Greenwald and is holding nothing" -thing doesn't really jibe...Because if he gave everything away, he has nothing to bargain with in his clemency/asylum pleas, and there is NO reason whatsoever for the Russian government to give him housing, food, clothing, and 24/7 armed protection...

And then there's this: http://www.businessinsider.com/snowden-and-military-information-2014-3

[LondonReign2]

29. So you're saying Greenwald wants to get paid for his profession?

The nerve of him!

I wonder about his garage..and boxes...

[Rumold]

31. why would greenwald share with anyone?

he can publish his own stories.

do you think that journalists are somehow obligated to share their info with their competition?

[Savannahmann]

17. What this proves is that paranoid CT nonsense

Doesn't go far enough compared to the reality. I mentioned above that this theory was floated as a possibility and those who could imagine such things were dismissed as kooks and accused of spreading FUD. Even now the usual suspects are running around trying to show this was started under Bush.

True. But according to the article and the slides made available it went online in 2009 and was expanded in 2011. Bush conceived this abomination, but the Democratic Administration did not shut it down.

Bush is bad for starting it, what does it say about us?

[BlueCheese]

18. Feinstein alluded to this a while ago.

When she said that if the government decides a phone call is interesting, they can then go "collect" (NSA-speak for listen to) that call. Some people wondered at the time how one could collect a call that happened in the past, and whether that meant they were already storing phone calls.

I've been waiting for this revelation since then.

Apologies for the self-reference, but here's one link to a discussion on DU:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023377468

[BlueCheese]

19. Kick.

[Jesus Malverde]

20. Metadata....they only have that and its innocuous

Stop confusing me.

What's interesting about this is the government remembers more about you than you do when it comes to calls. You might remember making a call and the outline of the content. No way you'd remember it word for word like the perverts at the NSA.

[snooper2]

23. That's pretty cool, I'm going to "reach into the past"

and watch a video of my daughter I recorded

[Puzzledtraveller]

26. k&r

[woo me with science]

32. K&R