Dont distract COAS, Buratai over Buharis NSA/Chief of Staff face-off, former CP cautions – Vanguard

Chief of Army Staff, Gen. Tukur Buratai

Following a much-celebrated report, online newspaper, Premium Times, has been warned against dragging Chief of Army Staff (COAS), Lieutenant General Tukur Buratai, into the middle of an alleged feud between National Security Adviser (NSA) Gen. Babagana Monguno (rtd) and the Chief of Staff (CoS) to the President, Alhaji Abba Kyari.

Former Commissioner Public Complaints Commission, CP Abubakar Tsav (rtd), gave this warning in an open letter to Premium Times Editor on Sunday.

After initially claiming that Monguno accused Abba Kyari of undue interference on matters bordering on national security, the online portal went further to allege that the COAS took sides with the latter.

Tsav said this is only well-crafted mischief with highly inciting contents, provocative to the sensibilities of Nigerians, and bears elements of compromising national security.

According to the ex-CP, issues of redeployment and postings of Army personnel are routine administrative procedures exclusively at the discretion of the Army leadership guided by the service needs of personnel in specific areas.

Unlike claimed, Tsav added that the Army Chief does not take directives from the office of NSA but the President.

Even though the COAS may not be aware of this artificial war of attrition, Tsav cautioned Premium Times and other mischief makers to allow him fully concentrate on his giant strides in the counter-insurgency campaign.

Read full letter below:

Please, do not drag the Chief of Army Staff into your campaign of attrition:

An open letter.

I send you affectionate greetings together with members of your editorial team. May God continue to bless and guide all of you on the path of truth and accuracy as watchdogs and the true conscience of society.

May you kindly refer to your online publication dated February 21, 2020; which had the screaming caption: Exclusive: Abba Kyari-Monguno War: Army Chief Buratai Moves Against NSA.

In the said publication, your medium perniciously dragged the office, duties and personality of the COAS and leader of counter-insurgency operations in Nigeria, Lt.Gen. TY Buratai into the imaginary feud, between the office of the National Security Adviser (NSA) Gen. Babagana Monguno (rtd) and the Chief of Staff (CoS) to the President, Alhaji Abba Kyari, which is widely celebrated on social media platforms.

I was fascinated by its mendacity and carefully crafted mischief. Its contents are also highly inciting, provocative to the sensibilities of Nigerians, and bears elements of compromising national security.

I elect upon myself to dispel or denounce explicitly the baseless, disjointed, malicious and provocative gerrymandering as reflected by the medium targeted at the top echelon of Nigerias security leadership solely based on conjecture. But it is more significant to draw your attention to its resistant link to the COAS in a presumed altercation, which he is not aware and has no nexus to it whatsoever.

In the desperation to smoothen the campaigns of this agenda, the publication delved into puerile arguments and recanted itself at several points. Let me clear your doubts that the issues of redeployment and postings of Army personnel are routine administrative procedures exclusively at the discretion of the Army leadership guided by the service needs of personnel in specific areas.

And your report cannot admit that all the agencies attached to the NSA have the powers to make changes to their respective personnel serving there, and simultaneously, scrub extraneous reasons to deny the Nigerian Army such lawful institutional powers. This is after it is also submitted to the cumbersome process of selecting and posting Army personnel to the office of the NSA as deemed fit by the Army leadership.

For the sake of records, the Army Chief does not take directives from the office of NSA, as the report carelessly insinuated. The COAS strictly takes directives from the President and Commander-in-Chief of the Nigerian Armed Forces who wields the final authority on all national security Heads.

I have absolute trust in Lt. Gen TY Buratai as a professional soldier, loyal and patriotic leader to his country. And by his antecedents known to me over the years, the Gen. Buratai I know; and Nigerians can vouch for his integrity and sterling leadership qualities, he is very busy in the trenches, coordinating troops in the war against insurgency, angling and itching for results.

Let the campaigners of the fabricated and incipient animosity in the ranks of top government appointees spare him of the orchestrated campaigns of widening the imaginary lines of attrition between the NSA and CoS to the President.

The COAS is neither involved in this artificial war of attrition nor has any knowledge of it. The COAS is more concerned and devotes attention to deliver excellent results on the duties assigned to him and his office by Mr President. He will not compromise his official responsibilities for any personal interest and should not be distracted now.

Nigerians who are celebrating the imaginary animosity and perhaps, fervently praying for a crack in Mr Presidents national security leadership, should redirect their idle selves elsewhere, but certainly not in the direction of Lt. Gen. Buratai. He is a soldier with impeccable credentials and a leader per excellence.

Vanguard

Related

More here:

Dont distract COAS, Buratai over Buharis NSA/Chief of Staff face-off, former CP cautions - Vanguard

Posted in NSA

Advice crucial, but not the only source of truth: NSA – Professional Planner

Retirees primarily use financial advisers as their source of information but look at a wide range of sources for their financial management needs, according to the 130,000-strong National Seniors Australia group.

In a 2017 study involving over 5,000 NSA members, Seniors more savvy about retirement income, 59 per cent reported getting information on retirement from their financial adviser but only 12 per cent used it as a single source, with the complexity of the retirement system forcing people to use their super fund, Centrelink, their bank or family and friends for guidance.

Advisers need to be far more aware of how their advice is part of an ecosystem, says NSA chief advocate Ian Henschke.

In its recent submission to the Retirement Income Review, the NSA referred to their earlier report to highlight the complexity of the retirement system and the value of financial advice to retirees.

National Seniors believes most people would not have sufficient knowledge and understanding of the retirement income system without some form of help, the submissions stated, before noting that retirees would be unlikely to achieve desired outcomes without formal financial advice.

Yet advisers are rarely seen as the single source of truth by retirees.

Sites like ours, government information sites such as Centrelink, their super funds, as well as family and friends all were cited as sources used to inform their decisions, Henschke says.

The NSA argue in its submission that third party expertise is particularly important in Australia because our retirement system privatises responsibility. As the superannuation system matures, this reliance will only grow, hence the importance of advisers working together with other information providers cater to these needs.

Nine per cent of respondents in the 2017 report said they didnt need financial information for retirement, and 25 per cent said they only used a single source of information. The majority of those that only used a single source used a financial adviser.

The average age among member participants was 68. Most were retirees, Henschke explains, but retirement is not a pre-requisite for NSA membership, which costs $45 annually.

Only a handful of respondents relied on any one of the other sources as their sole source of financial information about retirement, indicating that older Australians are weighing their options and doing research before making major decisions, the report stated.

It went on to compare financial advisers to medical professionals, saying NSA members chose these types of authoritative intermediaries as sources of health and lifestyle information.

The use of financial advisers remains high and their ability to deal with changing retirement benefits and rules is critical, not just in finance matters but in care choices which are also complex and dependent on good financial advice, it states.

A separate January 2020 NSA report, Retirement income worry: Who worries and why, took a deeper look into the mindset of retirees in terms of their retirement income. Comments on financial advice were mixed, the report states, but indicated broad satisfaction.

Looking closer at the impact of the sources and sufficiency of advice, we can see that respondents thought that financial advisers made a positive impact.

*To register for the 2020 Retirement Conference in Sydney on March 31, presented by Investment Magazine, Professional Planner and the Financial Planning Association of Australia, visit here.

Tahn Sharpe is a Sydney-based financial services journalist with a background in financial planning. He writes on advice, superannuation, investment, banking and insurance issues, is a certified SMSF Adviser and holds an Advanced Diploma of Financial Planning.

More here:

Advice crucial, but not the only source of truth: NSA - Professional Planner

Posted in NSA

Congress set for clash over surveillance reforms | TheHill – The Hill

Congress is gearing up for a high-profile fight over reauthorizing a handful of controversial surveillance programs months before the 2020 election.

After punting late last year to give themselves more time to negotiate, lawmakers now have 15 working days to figure out whether and how to reauthorize expiring provisions of the USA Freedom Act by the March 15 deadline.

The policy battle comes as tensions are already running high in Washington after a weeks-long firefight emanating from the Justice Department which will also be at the center of the surveillance discussion and with the November election injecting a higher dose of politics into any discussion involving Congress and President TrumpDonald John TrumpSchiff blasts Trump for making 'false claims' about Russia intel: 'You've betrayed America. Again.' Poll: Sanders leads 2020 Democratic field with 28 percent, followed by Warren and Biden More than 6 in 10 expect Trump to be reelected: poll MORE.

Attorney GeneralWilliam BarrWilliam Pelham BarrBill Barr is trying his best to be Trump's Roy Cohn Hillicon Valley: Facebook, Twitter split on Bloomberg video | Sanders briefed on Russian efforts to help campaign | Barr to meet with Republicans ahead of surveillance fight Sanders says he was briefed on Russian effort to help campaign MORE will meet with Senate Republicans during a closed-door policy lunch on Tuesday, his first face-to-face with most senators since the controversy over the departments handling of the case involving Trump associate Roger StoneRoger Jason StoneBill Barr is trying his best to be Trump's Roy Cohn Roger Stone moves to disqualify judge Roger Stone deserves a new trial MORE.

But two sources confirmed to The Hill that the lunch was planned weeks before the current flare-up between the Justice Department and the White House. The topic, according to the two sources, is expected to be expiring surveillance provisions.

Reauthorization of these certain programs is a priority for both Leader [Mitch] McConnell and AG Barr, a source said.

Among the expiring provisions that Congress needs to make decisions on is a controversial records program, known as Section 215, that gathered metadata on domestic text messages and phone calls.

They'll also need to make decisions on two other provisions one authorizing roving wiretaps and the other on lone wolf surveillance authority.

The biggest sticking point will be the metadata program that will put a spotlight on divisions between privacy hawks and leadership, the House and Senate and even GOP lawmakers and the White House.

Though the National Security Agency (NSA) shuttered the program, and advised the White House to officially end it, then-director of National Intelligence Dan CoatsDaniel (Dan) Ray CoatsTrump's Intel moves spark Democratic fury Russian interference reports rock Capitol Hill Hillicon Valley: Facebook, Twitter split on Bloomberg video | Sanders briefed on Russian efforts to help campaign | Barr to meet with Republicans ahead of surveillance fight MORE urged Congress to reauthorize it.Barr is expected to stick with that position when he speaks with senators.

Coats noted that the NSA had suspended the program and deleted call records, saying the decision was made after balancing the programs relative intelligence value, associated costs, and compliance and data integrity concerns."

"However, as technology changes, our adversaries tradecraft and communications habits will continue to evolve and adapt," he added. "In light of this dynamic environment, the Administration supports reauthorization of this provision."

But Sens. Richard BurrRichard Mauze BurrTrump's new intel chief makes immediate changes, ousts top official Intel officials warned House lawmakers Russia is interfering to get Trump reelected: NYT Pelosi joins pressure campaign on Huawei MORE (R-N.C.) and Mark WarnerMark Robert WarnerTrump's Intel moves spark Democratic fury Where do we go from here? Conservation can show the way Hillicon Valley: Facebook, Twitter split on Bloomberg video | Sanders briefed on Russian efforts to help campaign | Barr to meet with Republicans ahead of surveillance fight MORE (D-Va.), the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, quietly introduced legislation that would end the phone metadata program going against the administrations request.

In addition to terminating that program as soon as the bill is enacted it would provide an eight-year reauthorization of the other two programs.

The bill was sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee, where Chairman Lindsey GrahamLindsey Olin GrahamSunday shows preview: 2020 candidates look to South Carolina Where do we go from here? Conservation can show the way Barr to attend Senate GOP lunch on Tuesday MORE (R-S.C.) has described himself as torn on whether or not to reauthorize Section 215.

A Democratic aide, asked if they had gotten guidance on if Judiciary or leadership would move the Burr-Warner bill in committee or on the floor by March 15, told The Hill: Not really.

The panel includes privacy hawks like Sen. Mike LeeMichael (Mike) Shumway LeeThe Hill's Morning Report AG Barr, GOP senators try to rein Trump in Overnight Defense: Senate votes to rein in Trump war powers on Iran | Pentagon shifting .8B to border wall | US, Taliban negotiate seven-day 'reduction in violence' The 8 Republicans who voted to curb Trump's Iran war powers MORE (R-Utah). Lee and Leahy are working on reforms related to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). A spokesman for Lee said that ideally their forthcoming ideas could be included as part of the debate over reauthorizing the USA Freedom provisions.

Surveillance debates have spotlighted fierce clashes among Senate Republicans in recent years.

When the Senate debated the USA Freedom Act, and the Patriot Act measures that pre-dated it, in 2015, Sen. Rand PaulRandal (Rand) Howard PaulSenate braces for fight over impeachment whistleblower testimony Pelosi names first-ever House whistleblower ombudsman director The Hill's Morning Report AG Barr, GOP senators try to rein Trump in MORE (R-Ky.) used the chambers procedural levers to force a brief lapse of the surveillance programs.

He also successfully blocked multiple efforts by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellSanders is a risk, not a winner Buttigieg sounds alarm after Sanders wins Nevada Where do we go from here? Conservation can show the way MORE (R-Ky.) to clear a short-term extension of the Patriot Act, a tactic Paulquickly used to rack in fundraising cashfor his 2016 presidential bid. McConnell has not yet taken a public position on the upcoming USA Freedom debate, something hes likely to be quizzed on after Tuesdays lunch.

As Republicans are set to meet with Barr, the House Judiciary Committee has put reauthorization of the USA Freedom provisions on its business meeting agenda for Wednesday.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold NadlerJerrold (Jerry) Lewis NadlerTrump adviser presses House investigators to make Bezos testify Nadler demands answers from Barr on 'new channel' for receiving Ukraine info from Giuliani Trump predicts Ocasio-Cortez will launch primary bid against Schumer MORE (D-N.Y.) hasnt yet unveiled what the committee will be voting on, and spokesmen didn't respond to multiple requests for comment. But a House Intelligence Committee aide noted that staff on the two panels are continuing to work on potential legislation.

The aide declined to say if the forthcoming legislation would end the metadata program, even as leadership is under pressure from progressives to take a hard line.

Twenty House progressives sent a letter to Nadler last year warning that they would oppose a reauthorization measure that does not completely repeal the call records program and also called for additional civil liberties protections to be built into the law.

"Any meaningful reform must repeal the [call detail records] program, which is an unnecessary violation of the rights of people in the United States and a threat to our democracy," the lawmakers wrote.

Further complicating calculations for passing a bill in roughly two weeks, some Republicans are saying they want to use the reauthorization debate to work in changes to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) courts.

The FISA court, authorized under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, is made up of 11 judges who serve seven-year terms and are selected by the chief justice of the Supreme Court. The judges are responsible for signing off on or rejecting warrant applications submitted as part of intelligence gathering and national security operations.

The courts jumped into the spotlight late last year when Justice Department inspector general Michael Horowitz found a total of 17 "significant inaccuracies and omissions" in the applications to monitor Trump campaign aide Carter Page, taking particular issue with applications to renew the FISA warrant and chastising the FBI for a lack of satisfactory explanations for those mistakes.

Reps. Doug CollinsDouglas (Doug) Allen CollinsSunday shows preview: 2020 candidates look to South Carolina Overnight Defense: Seven day 'reduction in violence' starts in Afghanistan | US, Taliban plan to sign peace deal Feb. 29 | Trump says top intel job has four candidates Trump says he is considering four candidates for intelligence chief MORE (R-Ga.) and Devin NunesDevin Gerald NunesJudge dismisses Nunes' lawsuit against Fusion GPS Trump's new intel chief makes immediate changes, ousts top official Overnight Energy: EPA moves to limit financial pressure on 'forever chemical' manufacturers | California sues Trump over water order| Buttigieg expands on climate plan MORE (R-Calif.) the top Republicans on the Judiciary and Intelligence Committees, respectively sent a letter to Nadler over the recess pitching the USA Freedom debate as a vehicle for making FISA changes.

Any legislation devoid of necessary reforms to address the abuse of the intelligence community against a presidential campaign and even our sitting president, including lies and fraud engaged in by top-level FBI officials, misses that mark, they wrote.

There have been bipartisan calls for FISA reformsafter the Horowitz report, but inserting it into the middle of the surveillance debate could inject another political angle into what will already be a contentious debate.

But Collins and Nunes argued that FISA reforms should be a bipartisan line in the sand, and urged Nadler to not ignore historic abuses directed against the campaign of a president you don't support.

Read the original here:

Congress set for clash over surveillance reforms | TheHill - The Hill

Posted in NSA

PSA to honor ABAP as NSA of the Year – ABS-CBN Sports

The Association of Boxing Alliances in the Philippines will be honored as the National Sports Association of the Year during the annual PSA Awards.

The Association of Boxing Alliances in the Philippines (ABAP) punched its way to the honor roll list of the SMC-PSA (Philippine Sportswriters Association) Annual Awards Night, claiming the title National Sports Association of the Year.

Led by Nesthy Petecio, the Filipino pugs stamped their class everywhere in 2019 which saw them winning golds from the Asian to the world levels.

The feat earned for ABAP yet another NSA of the Year award from the countrys oldest media organization, which will honor and recognize the top sports personalities and entities from last year during its annual gala night on March 6 at the Centennial Hall of the Manila Hotel.

Team Philippines is going to be accorded with the coveted Athlete of the Year honor in the event presented by the Philippine Sports Commission, MILO, the Philippine Basketball Association, AirAsia, and Rain or Shine.

Petecio, 27, was at the forefront of ABAPs successful campaign, finally scoring a breakthrough gold medal in the AIBA Womens World Boxing Championships in Ulan-Ude, Russia after beating hometown bet Liudmila Vorontsova by split decision in ruling the featherweight division.

Eumir Felix Marcial just fell short of matching Petecios gold medal feat as he settled for the silver in the same world tournament for men held in Yekaterinburg, Russia. Nonetheless, the 24-year-old native of Lunzuran, Zamboanga City became just the third Filipino who finished runner-up in the prestigious award after light-flyweight Roel Velasco (1997) and Harry Taamor (2007).

Not to be left out was former world champion Josie Gabuco.

The 32-year-old veteran fighter went home with the gold in the ASBC (Asian Boxing Confederation) Elite Boxing Championships held in Bangkok, Thailand, defeating North Koreas Kim Hyang Mi in the finals of the womens light-flyweight category.

Before Petecio, Gabuco was an AIBA world womens champion back in 2012.

The three would later banner the Filipinos productive stint in the 30th Southeast Asian Games in which the Philippine boxing team emerged overall champion.

Petecio, Gabuco, and Marcial made up part of the seven gold medals the national team won to beat perennial rival Thailand for the sports overall title.

Incidentally, the Philippine team failed to win a medal in just one of the 13 boxing events competed in the SEA Games.

Like in the world meet, the gold Petecio won was his first ever in the biennial meet after previously ending up with just a silver medal from 2011 to 2015.

For Marcial, it was his third SEA Games gold medal, while Gabuco now has a record five gold medals.

View post:

PSA to honor ABAP as NSA of the Year - ABS-CBN Sports

Posted in NSA

Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner and NSA among Trump`s high-level delegation to India – WION

US President Donald Trump will head to India for a two-day visit with a high-level delegation that will include his senior advisors - daughter Ivanka Trump and son-in-law Jared Kushner.

Sources say US National Security Advisor Robert O' Brien, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, Secretary of Energy Dan Brouillette and Secretary of the Treasury Steve Mnuchin will also be part of the delegation. However, US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer who skipped his meeting with the Indian Commerce Minister Piyush Goel last week will not be visiting.

Also read: Trump in India - Hiding the poor and shantytown of Ahmedabad for US president's visit

Although neither side expects a trade deal to be signed, 5 Memorandum of Understandings (MOUs) will be signed during the US president's visit. Nuclear cooperation, homeland security, intellectual property, trade facilitation, space and science technology are likely to be on the agenda.

The government yesterday said that the relationship had to be seen not just in the context of immediate deliverables from this visit. Adding, ''Over the years, the canvas of our relationship has expanded to include several new areas. We enjoy a broad level of support from the executive branch as well as bipartisan support by the Congress.''

Also read: From Namaste Trump event to visit to Agra - Trump's jam-packed India schedule

The two sides have expanded their defence ties signing agreements like Logistics Exchange Memorandum of Agreement (LEMOA), Communications Compatibility and Security Agreement or COMCASA as well as initiating a joint tri-services HADR exercise named Tiger Triumph as an Annual exercise. The US is Indias largest trading partner in goods and service. We have bought 18 billion dollars worth of defence equipment from the US.

Also read: Focus on reviewing bilateral ties, strengthening global partnership - MEA on Trump's visit

Reports say, ahead of the visit, the cabinet committee on security(CCS) has approved a deal to procure a batch of 24 Lockheed Martin MH60 Romeo helicopters - this will boost India's naval capacity.

This is the eighth meeting between the two leaders since 2017 and the fifth this year alone. Donald Trump, like President Obama, is making a standalone visit to India, skipping neighbour Pakistan.

More here:

Ivanka Trump, Jared Kushner and NSA among Trump`s high-level delegation to India - WION

Posted in NSA

Statement on the Firing of Oakland Police Chief Kirkpatrick – SF Bay Area Indymedia

Oakland Police Commission Fires the Chief

Passage of Measure LL in 2016 with an 83% support of Oakland residents, resulted in creation of one of the most powerful police oversight bodies in the US. Since its inception, Oaklands Police Commission has had a profound positive impact on increasing transparency and accountability within the Oakland Police Department (OPD).

Among its notable accomplishments is a revision of the stop and search policy that requires evidence of criminal activity-not just the probation/parole status of the driver-which had often resulted in harassment of law abiding residents. And remarkably, the Commission disagreed with the Police Chiefs findings and fired four officers involved in the police officer involved shooting of Mr. Joshua Pawlik who was found asleep in an alley and aroused, only to be killed by OPDs use of lethal force.

However, it is the Police Commissions most recent action of terminating Chief Kirkpatrick that has focused a bright light on the commissions crucial role in holding the City of Oakland accountable for its failure to bring OPD into compliance with the terms of the Negotiated Settlement Agreement (NSA) that went into effect over 17 years ago. In fact, when questioned by Judge Orrick about the set-backs in compliance, and asked about her greatest challenge, she responded that is was, the narrative!

Those who question the reason for the firing should know that, had the Commission taken this action, the cause would have had to be publicly disclosed. But because the Mayor joined (she has the ability to fire at will) and declared the firing as not for cause it allows her to conceal the failures of the Chiefs leadership. From Fox on 2

During her tenure, it became abundantly clear that Chief Kirkpatrick was unable to correct OPDs deficiencies which have prolonged federal oversight for so long. In fact, OPDs own Inspector Generals report cited numerous problems-and the plaintiffs attorneys-Burris and Chanin have issued repeated citations of the failures of Kirkpatricks leadership.

Unfortunately, the Oakland Police Officers Association (OPOA) President, Sgt. Barry Donelans claim that OPD is lauded for professionalism and innovation outside of Oakland, ignores the fact that OPD is the only police department in the country that has remained under federal oversight for 17 years.

But, instead of embracing the need to complete the NSA tasks, he continues to deflect responsibility for problems to the elected City leaders, in effect disputing voters awareness, judgment, and intelligence. Mr. Donelan should consider attending Police Commission meetings to gain a firsthand knowledge of the concerns expressed by the people of Oakland and work closely with City Council to formulate viable, enduring, and measurable steps to end OPDs racially biased practices and bring NSA to a rapid end.

The Coalition for Police Accountability (CPA), working with City Council members, will offer a ballot measure in November to ensure that the Police Commission has independent legal counsel as well as staff that reports to them, not the city administrator.

This body needs the resources it has been denied thus far to carry out its duties and ensure that OPD, whose expenses represent nearly half of the Citys general fund, begins to practice equitable and constitutional policing that utilizes current best practices and earns the trust of all of Oaklands residents.

Go here to see the original:

Statement on the Firing of Oakland Police Chief Kirkpatrick - SF Bay Area Indymedia

Posted in NSA

National Storage Affiliates Trust (NSA) overbought Stock to Bite? We have reviewed it – News Welcome

The stock now we are analyzing at is National Storage Affiliates Trust (NSA) which is now in overbought queue as the Relative Strength Index has been observed at 73.3. As commonly stock is overbought when RSI goes above 70 (look further in the section of technical indicators).

There are a lot of factors to determine whether trading of National Storage Affiliates Trust (NSA) stock is going to end in profit or not but one of the most commonly known important factors has remained the overbought and oversold conditions. So, identifying oversold and overbought stocks is an important skill for every investor or trader. Commonly, traders use technical indicators for oversold and overbought stocks while investors use fundamental factors. Most common Technical indicator that is used to identify overbought and oversold stocks is the Relative Strength Index or called RSI. While most common fundamental indicator that Investors cognize to identify overbought and oversold stocks is P/E Ratio.

How much NSA Stocks is Volatile?

Now we will look for the boiling points and excitability of NSA stock. Last weeks volatility stood at 1.65% and last months volatility marked at 1.51%. Volatility of a stock indicates how tightly the price of a stock is constellated around the mean or moving average. A Stocks volatility is generally associated with investment risk; however, traders can also use it to lock in superior returns. Volatility is also measured by ATR which is an exponential moving average (14-days) of the True Ranges. The stocks ATR value pointed at 0.55.

At this moment, Stocks beta measure is 0.3. Beta is also one of the most popular indicators to measure risk of stock trading. It is a measure of a stocks volatility in relation to the market. Analysts also use it often when they need to determine risk profile of a stock. If beta is higher than 1 then risk is higher and if beta is lower than 1, then risk will be low.

Now here, we will be looking at the trend of NSA stocks performance for different time intervals in order to evaluate the companys share value step by step.

National Storage Affiliates Trust Stock Performance:

Traders shown interest in National Storage Affiliates Trust (NSA) as it recorded negotiations of 284168 shares while stock maintained an average volume of 356.05K shares. It has a market capitalization of $2.16B. NSA stock recognized return of 4.50% over last weekly trading activity and showed performance of 7.08% over monthly period. Shares are now at 12.81% for the quarter and 13.26% for the last six months. The company is driving a 24.78% of return over the course of past one year and is now with performance of 8.45% so far this year. National Storage Affiliates Trust traded with move of 1.39% at $36.46 per share on Tuesday trading session. Shares of company positioned at 0.83% from its 52-week high price while it has been noted 34.24% away from low price over the last 52-weeks.

National Storage Affiliates Trust Stock Look at Technical Side:

Most commonly used indicator to identify overbought and oversold conditions is Relative Strength Index (RSI). RSI is actually a range bound oscillator which is scaled mainly from 0 to 100. RSI from 30 to 70 are considered as a normal state but a RSI indicates the oversold situation when it comes below 30 and If RSI of a stock goes above 70 then it indicates the overbought situation. So as Currently Relative Strength Index (RSI-14) reading of National Storage Affiliates Trust (NSA) stock is 73.3, technically its an overbought stock.

Though, occasionally stocks can indicate an opposite short-term movement then it becomes important to look for trades in direction of a bigger trend. Like when bigger trend of prices stayed down when RSI was over 70 and bigger trend of stock price stayed up while RSI is below 30 then a 14-day RSI can be considered as a short-term indicator. So, in that situation a Simple Moving Average (SMA) can be crucial to look.

Simple Moving Average calculated as an average of the last N-periods (20-Day, 50-Day, 200-Day). A Simple Moving Average is one of the most flexible as well as most-commonly used technical analysis indicators. It is highly popular among traders, mostly because of its simplicity. It works best in a trending environment. Any type of moving average can be used to generate buy or sell signals and this process is very simple. National Storage Affiliates Trust (NSA) stock price is above from its 20 days moving average with 4.37% and trading above from 50 days moving average with 7.14%. The stock price is performing along above from its 200 days moving average with 13.20%.

NSA Stock Under Profitability Spotlight

Net profit margin of the company is -7.30% that shows how much the company is profiting by every dollar of sales. Operating Margin is noted at 32.10%.

Return on Assets (ROA) shows that how much the company is profitable as compared to its total assets which is -0.90% for stock. On the other hand, Return on Equity (ROE) is -3.80%. ROE actually measures financial performance and could be thought of as the return on net assets. It is considered a measure of how effectively management is using a companys assets to create profits. Return on Investment (ROI) is 5.00%. ROI measures the efficiency of investments. It helps to directly evaluate the amount of return on a specific investment, relative to the total investments cost.

Forward price to earnings ratio of 87.02.

Analysts Estimation:

Now at last but not the least, we will review what the Analysts are buzzing about this Stock. Looking for Analysts opinion is also important to understand where the stock is heading. Analyst has some hope that stock may be reaching the Target Price value of $34.88 in coming one year period. The Target Price expected by analysts that is achievable in short term period (1 year). Analysts Mean Recommendation of the stock is now at 2.3 (1.0 Strong Buy, 2.0 Buy, 3.0 Hold, 4.0 Sell, 5.0 Strong Sell). EPS growth for the next year is expected to be 59.92% and projected to gain growth of 391.40% for this year. Earnings per share EPS is one of the most important variables in determining a shares intrinsic value. EPS (ttm) is reported at -0.47. Analysts have some long term expectations that stock could hit EPS growth of 11.00% in next 5 years period while EPS growth seen at 34.10% for past 5 years period.

See original here:

National Storage Affiliates Trust (NSA) overbought Stock to Bite? We have reviewed it - News Welcome

Posted in NSA

Remember the Clipper chip? NSA’s botched backdoor-for-Feds from 1993 still influences today’s encryption debates – The Register

Enigma More than a quarter century after its introduction, the failed rollout of hardware deliberately backdoored by the NSA is still having an impact on the modern encryption debate.

Known as Clipper, the encryption chipset developed and championed by the US government only lasted a few years, from 1993 to 1996. However, the project remains a cautionary tale for security professionals and some policy-makers. In the latter case, however, the lessons appear to have been forgotten, Matt Blaze, McDevitt Professor of Computer Science and Law at Georgetown University in the US, told the USENIX Enigma security conference today in San Francisco.

In short, Clipper was an effort by the NSA to create a secure encryption system, aimed at telephones and other gear, that could be cracked by investigators if needed. It boiled down to a microchip that contained an 80-bit key burned in during fabrication, with a copy of the key held in escrow for g-men to use with proper clearance. Thus, any data encrypted by the chip could be decrypted as needed by the government. The Diffie-Hellman key exchange algorithm was used to exchange data securely between devices.

Any key escrow mechanism is going to be designed from the same position of ignorance that Clipper was designed with in the 1990s

Not surprisingly, the project met stiff resistance from security and privacy advocates who, even in the early days of the worldwide web, saw the massive risk posed by the chipset: for one thing, if someone outside the US government was able to get hold of the keys or deduce them, Clipper-secured devices would be vulnerable to eavesdropping. The implementation was also buggy and lacking. Some of the people on the Clipper team were so alarmed they secretly briefed opponents of the project, alerting them to insecurities in the design, The Register understands.

Blaze, meanwhile, recounted how Clipper was doomed from the start, in part because of a hardware-based approach that was expensive and inconvenient to implement, and because technical vulnerabilities in the encryption and escrow method would be difficult to fix. Each chip cost about $30 when programmed, we note, and the relatively short keys could be broken by future computers.

In the years following Clipper's unveiling, a period dubbed the "first crypto wars," Blaze said, the chipset was snubbed and faded into obscurity while software-based encryption rose and led to the loosening of government restrictions on its sale and use. It helped that Blaze revealed in 1994 a major vulnerability [PDF] in the design of Clipper's escrow design, sealing its fate.

It is important to note, said Blaze, that the pace of innovation and unpredictability of how technologies will develop makes it incredibly difficult to legislate an approach to encryption and backdoors. In other words, security mechanisms made mandatory today, such as another escrow system, could be broken within a few years, by force or by exploiting flaws, leading to disaster.

This unpredictability in technological development, said Blaze, thus undercuts the entire concept of backdoors and key escrow. The FBI and Trump administration (and the Obama one before that) pushed hard for such a system but need to learn the lessons of history, Blaze opined.

"The FBI is the only organization on Earth complaining that computer security is too good," the Georgetown prof quipped.

"Any key escrow mechanism is going to be designed from the same position of ignorance that Clipper was designed with in the 1990s. We are going to be looking back at those engineering decisions ten years from now as being equally laughably wrong."

Daniel Weitzner, founding director of the MIT Internet Policy Research Initiative, said this problem is not lost on all governments trying to work out new encryption laws and policies in the 21st century. He sees a number of administrations trying to address the issue by bringing developers and telcos in on the process.

"What the legislators hear is a complicated problem that they don't know how to resolve," Weitzner noted. "Moving the debate to experts on one hand gets you down to details, but it is not necessarily easy."

Sponsored: Detecting cyber attacks as a small to medium business

See more here:

Remember the Clipper chip? NSA's botched backdoor-for-Feds from 1993 still influences today's encryption debates - The Register

Posted in NSA

Unclear NSA CIO Role Puts the Agency’s IT at Risk, IG Says – Nextgov

The National Security Agencys chief information officer may be unsure of what theyre supposed to be doing with attention being pulled disproportionately toward cybersecurity issues, according to the agencys inspector general.

The Agencys CIO role is ambiguous, without clearly defined authorities and responsibilities, the OIG wrote in the semi-annual report released Thursday, which otherwise gives NSA a pat on the back for implementing its recommendations.

The IG audited the agency for compliance with Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 and an Office of Management and Budget memorandum, documents that describe the CIO role and responsibilities for budget, program and workforce management as well as overseeing information security.

Examining the implementation of an enterprise IT architecture program and the CIOs placement within the NSAs management structure, the IG said the agency and the CIO made substantial progress, but there were a few attention-grabbing reasons they noted as contributing to shortfalls.

These were dual hatting the functions of the CIO with those of an NSA Directorate, a lack of documentation for the delegation of authorities, failure to include the CIO role in agencyorganization charts, and agency communications that reinforced the CIOs authorities primarily for the information security component.

The CIO has the requisite oversight of and decision rights for all Agency IT, the IG explains, noting, The issues identified in this audit increase the risk that the agency ...may not be maximizing its effectiveness and efficiency in designing, investing in, acquiring, managing, and maintaining the full range of its IT.

The report said the IG made four recommendations to address the issue, and that the NSA has sufficiently addressed one of those, with actions planned to implement the other three.

In general, though, the IG reports the NSAs overdue recommendations for the period of April through September represented 59% of the total number of open recommendations, which was the lowest percentage of open recommendations that were overdue over the past four semi-annual reports.

This reflects significant progress, but there is still substantial work to be done, according to the latest report.

The OIG is now evaluating NSAs implementation of the Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014. That audit will focus specifically on assessing the agencys information security practices.

Read more from the original source:

Unclear NSA CIO Role Puts the Agency's IT at Risk, IG Says - Nextgov

Posted in NSA

Powerful lawmakers join effort to kill surveillance program protected by Trump administration – POLITICO

But a newfound appetite for curtailing U.S. surveillance practices has emerged among Republicans who have criticized the FBIs eavesdropping of former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page, making them willing to buck the Trump administrations demands that the program be permanently extended.

And intelligence officials arent making the case to keep to phone records program, either. Theyve previously admitted it has become too technically complex a burden to maintain.

Longtime privacy advocates on the Hill are seizing on this momentum to kill the program theyve argued is ineffective and violates Americans rights before the statute authorizing it expires on March 15.

This is a big moment for reformers, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), a senior member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, who is looking to push for greater surveillance changes given this new climate in Congress, told POLITICO this month.

Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr (R-N.C.) and Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, the panels top Democrat, introduced legislation that would render the program essentially inoperable while renewing the laws other surveillance authorities predominantly used by the FBI for another eight years.

I plan to propose to leadership that we move, in some fashion, [our] bill, Burr said.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), whose panel held a contentious public hearing with an NSA official who couldnt offer examples of the program helping in terror probes, said the proposed legislation works for him.

Meanwhile, in the Democrat-controlled House, the Judiciary and Intelligence committees have been working together for months on a bill that would pull the plug on the surveillance tool once and for all.

The panels are writing a proposal that will both renew authorities necessary to the protection of national security, while also bolstering additional privacy and transparency safeguards where appropriate, a senior Democratic House Intelligence Committee official told POLITICO.

Obviously, time is of the essence, and we hope to come to [a] consensus in the coming month or so, the official added.

A House Democratic aide said the program was built to address an adversary and a technological gap that existed 25 years ago, but times have changed. Bad guys don't use landlines to talk to each other anymore The technology is different. It is less valuable to us today than it was than it would have been in 2001 when they needed it.

But a critical player is Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who has yet to indicate he would buck the White House over the intelligence tool. A McConnell spokesperson declined to comment, and a spokesperson for the National Security Council did not respond to a request for comment from POLITICO about the broad resistance from Congress.

The NSA gained the ability to access and analyze Americans domestic calling records shortly after 9/11. Established in secret, the program was designed to vacuum up metadata the numbers and time stamps for calls or text messages but not the actual content so the agency could sift for links among possible associates of terror suspects.

The Snowden leaks eventually forced the Obama administration and Congress to settle on a new law, the USA Freedom Act, that ended NSAs bulk phone collection but allowed the records to be retained by telephone companies and accessed by the federal government with court approval.

Problems with the revised system began to emerge publicly in 2018 when the NSA announced it had uncovered technical irregularities that caused it to collect more phone records than it had legal authority to gather. The agency dumped its entire collection of phone records. However, the problem soon resurfaced, according to an inspector general report.

The recurring compliance headaches around the program, its negative association with Snowden and an inability by intelligence leaders to offer concrete examples of its value in fighting terrorism led a spectrum of observers including former and current intelligence officials to question if the scaled down system was worth keeping at all.

The administration had been quiet about its intentions for the future of the program. Thats a contrast to 2017 when the White House and the intelligence community successfully pressed lawmakers to renew a separate set of warrantless programs that intercept digital traffic of foreign targets while collecting personal information on Americans.

In March, a senior congressional aide revealed that the NSA had deactivated the domestic surveillance program. Then-Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats confirmed that fact in a letter to Congress in August, which acknowledged that the system has been indefinitely shut down but still asked lawmakers to extend its legal basis.

On Capitol Hill, the urge to strike the program from the books only grew. But in December, lawmakers were forced to include language in a stopgap government funding bill that punted the deadline for the surveillance programs by 90 days, until March 15.

The move was made, in part, because the House impeachment inquiry dominated much of the congressional calendar and to wait for potentially consider additional surveillance reforms, some of which were highlighted by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitzs review of the FBIs handling of its investigation of the Trump campaign in 2016.

A lot of very smart people had a notion that it would be a bad idea for us to pass a bill the first week of December and to have an IG report detailing the inner depths of the FISA process come out the second week of December and then look foolish, the House Democratic aide told POLITICO.

The aide said that on big ticket questions there isnt a lot of daylight between the existing Senate bill and the one that will be produced by the House Judiciary and Intelligence panels, though an eight-year extension of the other authorities isnt likely to pass the lower chamber.

Other issues could also complicate the short window left for lawmakers to take up the surveillance law.

This week, Wyden and a bipartisan group of House and Senate lawmakers introduced a bill that would end the program, codify an intelligence community decision to stop location-tracking surveillance activities, and change the process for obtaining court approval for surveillance, while proposing additional transparency measures.

To pass a bill where everybody says the thing doesn't work and we're just going to write into law what they're already doing and then call it a day, I think, would be very unfortunate because there's a lot more to do, Wyden said.

But additional changes appear to be a non-starter for Burr, who advised Wyden and others to introduce legislation if they want to see them enacted.

Elizabeth Goitein, a privacy advocate and co-director of the Liberty & National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, said offing the program should be the bare minimum lawmakers try to achieve.

When you have a surveillance program that has collected more than a billion records of Americans some of them without legal authorization, and all of them without any significant benefit its a no-brainer that the program should be terminated, she said.

The House aide said the expectation is for legislation to be introduced and voted on, at least by the Judiciary Committee, before going to the full chamber before the March 15 deadline. An overwhelmingly bipartisan House vote could send a message to the Senate to get on board with its bill.

Burr suggested that any extension would have to be hitched to another must-pass bill something in short supply this time of year. Such a move would prevent the legislation from being jammed on the floor by privacy hawks like Wyden and Republican Sens. Rand Paul (Ky.) and Mike Lee (Utah).

Burr didnt rule out another short-term extension, either.

Im not going to rule out that we may have an effort by leadership to extend the authorization another 90 days or 60 days or something, Burr said.

We still have to do it. This is a must do.

See the article here:

Powerful lawmakers join effort to kill surveillance program protected by Trump administration - POLITICO

Posted in NSA

What we discussed with Buhari at security meeting NSA – The News

President Muhammadu and Nigerias security chiefs at the meeting

The National Security Adviser (NSA), retired Maj.-Gen. Babagana Monguno, has dismissed speculation in some quarters that Thursdays meeting of the National Security Council discussed the fate of the countrys service chiefs.

President Muhammadu Buhari had on Thursday presided over the 2020 maiden meeting of the National Security Council with Vice-President Yemi Osinbajo, Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Boss Mustapha and the security chiefs in attendance.

The meeting came amidst calls in some quarters for the removal of the service chiefs due to the ongoing security challenges in some parts of the country.

The House of Representatives had on Wednesday called on the service chiefs to either resign or be sacked in view of their inability to proffer solutions to the nation security challenges.

Monguno, however, told State House correspondents at the end of the security meeting that the council which is the highest security body in the country chaired by the President, did not discuss the issue of the service chiefs.

The issue of the National Assembly resolution did not come up at the meeting, he said.

The NSA said the quarterly meeting focused on appraisal of the security situation across the country with a view to finding lasting solutions to the problem.

He said: The meeting basically made an appraisal of the current security situation in the country and took a look at the possibilities, the opportunities available to government in addressing most of the recent challenges.

There were discussions and at the end of the day, the most important thing that we came up with is the need for collaboration, both between governmental agencies and the larger Nigerian society because of the type of the insurgencies we are faced with, the complexities, the multiplicity of all kinds of issues.

There is a need for both parties, governmental agencies on one hand and the larger society to collaborate more vigorously. There is a need for us to deal with these problems in a comprehensive manner.

Therefore, council has decided to take a closer look at issues that will help us not just at the federal level or at the state level, but right down to the local government level.

But this is going to be done after due consultations with the relevant stakeholders, the NSA said.

Read more:

What we discussed with Buhari at security meeting NSA - The News

Posted in NSA

Home Prices Rose in All 20 Metro Areas Reported by S&P – Professional Builder

Demand is up, inventory is down, and home prices are on the rise. According to the Case-Shiller U.S. National Home Price Index, home prices experienced the highest gain in November since February 2018. This trend is not limited to any region: All 20 metro areas measured by the S&P experienced an increase in the median price of a home with Seattle and Charlotte, North Carolina, leading the pack in home price appreciation. And with no end to the affordable housing shortage in sight, experts expect prices to continue increasing.

The Case-Shiller U.S. National Home Price Index, reported by S&P Dow Jones Indices, rose at a seasonally adjusted annual growth rate of 6.2% in November, following a 5.1% increase in October. It was the highest gain since February 2018. On a year-over-year basis, the Case-Shiller U.S. National Home Price NSA Index posted a 3.5% annual gain in November, up from 3.2% in October. After the slowdown in the early of 2019, home price appreciation has accelerated in the last two months due to tight inventory and strong demand. Home prices are expected to continue rising as tight inventory remains a concern.

Meanwhile, the Home Price Index, released by the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), rose at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 2.7% in November, following a 4.3% increase in October. On a year-over-year basis, the FHFA Home Price NSA Index rose by 4.9% in November, after an increase of 5.2% in October, marking a slowdown from the previous month.

Read More

More:

Home Prices Rose in All 20 Metro Areas Reported by S&P - Professional Builder

Posted in NSA

Edward Snowden warns that Assange and Greenwald prosecutions mark new stage in assault on press freedom – World Socialist Web Site

Edward Snowden warns that Assange and Greenwald prosecutions mark new stage in assault on press freedom By Oscar Grenfell 30 January 2020

In an opinion piece published in the Washington Post on Sunday, National Security Agency (NSA) whistleblower Edward Snowden warned that US charges against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and a Brazilian prosecution of Intercept journalist Glenn Greenwald are the spearhead of a campaign by governments around the world to abolish press freedom.

Calling for all supporters of democratic rights to rally to the defence of both Assange and Greenwald, Snowden wrote: The most essential journalism of every era is precisely that which a government attempts to silence. These prosecutions demonstrate that they are ready to stop the pressesif they can.

Snowdens voice carries the weight and authority of a courageous individual who risked everything to alert the population to government crimes. In 2013, Snowden revealed mass NSA spying on the American and world population, as well as on the political rivals of US imperialism, including its own formal allies, in violation of the US constitution and international law.

For these actions, he has been relentlessly hounded by the US government and its intelligence agencies. His successful flight to Russia and bid for political asylum was carried out with assistance from WikiLeaks.

Snowdens appeal comes at a crucial stage in the fight to free Assange. British court hearings for the WikiLeaks founders extradition to the US, where he faces Espionage Act charges and the prospect of life imprisonment, begin on February 24. If extradited, Assange would be prosecuted over his role in WikiLeaks publishing activities, including its exposures of war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan and human rights abuses at the US military prison at Guantnamo Bay.

The British judiciary, and all of the official political parties, have already greenlighted what can only be termed an extraordinary rendition operation. The US Department of Justice has made clear Assange would be denied the First Amendment protections for freedom of the press and free speech, despite the fact that he has been charged under domestic US law.

Glenn Greenwald was charged last week in Brazil with conspiracy and hacking offences for his role in exposing how Brazilian officials used an anti-corruption probe to railroad political opponents of the countrys fascistic president Jair Bolsonaro in the lead-up to the countrys 2018 national election. Snowden described the prosecution of Greenwald as a straightforward attempt to intimidate and retaliate against Greenwald and the Intercept for their critical reporting on the Brazilian government.

In his article, headlined Trump Has Created a Global Playbook to Attack Those Revealing Uncomfortable Truths, Snowden noted that this attack was a direct application of the Assange precedent.

The NSA whistleblower wrote: The legal theory used by the Brazilian prosecutorsthat journalists who publish leaked documents are engaged in a criminal conspiracy with the sources who provide those documentsis virtually identical to the one advanced in the Trump administrations indictment of [Assange] in a new application of the historically dubious Espionage Act.

The arrest and unveiling of a US indictment against Assange last year has also been followed by police raids against journalists in Australia, and threats by the French government to prosecute journalists for exposing its complicity in the Saudi-led war on Yemen.

The connection between the US attacks on Assange and Brazils move against Greenwald is likely even more direct. In comments this week, the Intercept journalist noted that the Bolsonaro government would not have initiated a prosecution without receiving the go-ahead from the Trump administration. The US State Department has said nothing about the charges against Greenwald. In other words, the same political forces are spearheading the persecution of both Assange and Greenwald.

Snowden pointed to the way in which the Trump administration has accelerated a protracted government assault on press freedom.

The NSA whistleblower commented that while former US President Barack Obama initiated the US-led vendetta against Assange, his administration did not publicly-unveil charges against the WikiLeaks founder over his publishing activities, for fear of triggering a constitutional crisis. Instead, the Obama administration used US allies, including Sweden and Britain, to concoct a sexual misconduct frame-up against Assange that was used to blacken his name and deprive him of his liberty.

The attempt to prosecute Greenwald similarly represented a rapid escalation, after an August 2019 order from a Brazilian Supreme Court judge banned the police from even investigating the journalist.

Snowdens article followed an opinion piece in the New York Times by Intercept reporter James Risen, who warned that the cases against Julian Assange and Glenn Greenwald may be models for a crackdown. It noted that the charges against Greenwald were eerily similar to those contained in the US Espionage Act indictment of Assange.

Risen wrote: Both cases are based in part on a new prosecutorial conceptthat journalism can be proved to be a crime through a focus on interactions between reporters and their sources. Prosecutors are now scrutinizing the processes by which sources obtain classified or private information and then provide it to journalists. Since those interactions today are largely electronic, prosecutors are seeking to criminalize journalism by turning to anti-hacking laws to implicate reporters in the purported criminal activity of their sources in gaining access to data on computers or cellphones without authorization.

He noted that if this model were successful, it would provide the government with a detour around the First Amendment protections of the US constitution and would imperil journalists everywhere.

The publication of articles defending Assange in two of the largest daily newspapers in the US underscores the fears of the major media corporations that this campaign could disrupt their decades-long collaboration with governments and state authorities and their lucrative business models.

For years, the New York Times, the Washington Post and other mainstream publications have aided the assault on press freedom, including by repeating the official smears used to discredit Assange. Both publications promoted the bogus Swedish sexual-misconduct allegations against him.

The Times collaborated with Assange in 2010 on the very publications over which Assange has been charged. By 2011, however, they had thrown the WikiLeaks founder to the wolves and undermined his First Amendment protections by falsely claiming that he had functioned as a source and not a co-publisher.

Risens piece, even as it warned against the implications of Assanges persecution, gave succour to the unsubstantiated assertions of the Democratic Party and the intelligence agencies that he functioned as an agent of the Russian government in 2016.

In reality, WikiLeaks 2016 publications proved that the Democratic National Committee had sought to rig the Democratic Party primaries against Bernie Sanders in favour of Hillary Clinton, in violation of its own rules. They demonstrated that Clinton had promised multi-billionaire bankers that she would govern in their interests and support more predatory US military interventions.

Risen has long promoted the discredited Russiagate conspiracy theory, including by slandering Assange. This underscores the fact that there will be no genuine defence of the WikiLeaks founder, or of democratic rights, from the corporate press, which is thoroughly integrated into the state apparatus. It demonstrates that the fight to free Assange and all class war prisoners, and to defend Greenwald, requires the development of an independent political movement of the working class.

2019 has been a year of mass social upheaval. We need you to help the WSWS and ICFI make 2020 the year of international socialist revival. We must expand our work and our influence in the international working class. If you agree, donate today. Thank you.

Read more here:

Edward Snowden warns that Assange and Greenwald prosecutions mark new stage in assault on press freedom - World Socialist Web Site

Posted in NSA

Sheep farmers invited to the NI NSA AGM – Farming Life

Published: 08:52 Tuesday 28 January 2020

The Northern Ireland Region of National Sheep Association is offering an open invitation to its members and any sheep farmer to the Annual Regional Members Meeting.

The venue is The Ross Park Hotel, Kells, Ballymena on Thursday 6th February with ARMM at 7.30pm and open meeting at 8.00pm.

Katie James from NSA headquarters will be giving a quick overview of current NSA work and involvement with UK government. Since the UK voted to leave the UK the NSA has been working tirelessly to represent sheep farmers and make sure they were not forgotten in any negotiations. There is less talk or urgency about Brexit at present but now more than ever we need to keep the pressure on to ensure a suitable outcome. The new Agriculture Bill is now on the table and NSA will be keeping a close eye on the interpretations of the content.

CEO Phil Stocker said: The aspiration to create a fairer supply chain is commendable but we would like to see commitments to protect our farmers from products of lower standards, particularly if we see a strong drive to increase environmental and welfare standards.

The main speaker for the evening is a young farmer from Wales.

Rhys Edwards manages the family farm with his parents in the South Wales valleys. Now 225 acres, Hendre Ifan Goch farm is in an SDA Region. Ranging from approximately 600-1300ft above sea level and rainfall is over 2m annually. The farm is currently running 600 ewes and 150 ewe lambs running dry. Of the 600 ewes, 400 are Texel mules/Aberfields that are used for the ram compare project, with the remaining 200 mainly welsh mules are used for breeding ewe lamb replacements. Ewes are lambed in doors .

The NI Region expect Rhys to give an inspiring and interesting presentation and he will be available for questions from those present.

More here:

Sheep farmers invited to the NI NSA AGM - Farming Life

Posted in NSA

Explaining why Reality Winner is still in prison with Kerry Howley: podcast and transcript – NBC News

In the summer of 2017, a 25-year-old government contractor exposed detailed evidence of Russian interference in the 2016 election. Reality Winner printed out classified U.S. Intelligence documents, hid the papers in her pantyhose as she left work and then put them in the mail to The Intercept. The report they published was the first piece of concrete evidence shared with the public proving that the United States possessed tangible evidence that Russians hackers attacked American voting systems.

After The Intercept published the story complete with scans of the original papers authorities immediately traced the leak back to Reality Winner. She was arrested, denied bail and is now serving five years in a federal prison. Kerry Howley wrote an in-depth profile of Reality Winner for New York Magazine and joins to share the compelling story of who Winner is, why she did it and the severe treatment she's received at the hands of the United States government.

KERRY HOWLEY: It's about, in the wake of 9/11, this massive secret state that we build that's outside of democratic processes. It's not accountable to anyone. We don't even know what it costs necessarily. That's massively geographically distributed and involves 100,000 of our fellow Americans who go to work every day and can't tell their families what they do. And it's like, who are those people, right? And we picture 60-year-old white men who are grim in suits. But no, there are people like Reality Winner. There are young people, people who have been pulled into this world that's completely hidden.

CHRIS HAYES: Hello and welcome to Why Is This Happening? with me, your host, Chris Hayes.

So, there's basically three prongs to Russian interference in the 2016 election two of which we basically have comprehensive knowledge about (or a lot of knowledge about), and one of which remains somewhat murky and occluded.

The first is the hacking of emails, right? They hacked the DNC server, they hacked John Podesta's email who's the campaign chair, I think, for the Hillary Clinton campaign. Those emails then were distributed via WikiLeaks and they drove huge amounts of press coverage, were very damaging to the Clinton campaign. We know about that thanks to both forensic reports from private firms, from statements put up by the intelligence agencies, and also most comprehensively the Mueller indictments that walk through the hacking operation.

There's also the kind of bot network, the Internet Research Agency, which was doing all this stuff on social media, trolling and running Facebook ads, and even in some crazy cases organizing groups of demonstrators, like of Americans from their headquarters in St. Petersburg, I believe. So, that's one

And then the third is in some ways like the most ominous but also the one that's been the least transparently discussed and that is Russian hackers probing various U.S. elections systems. We have some information about that. Some has been made public, some has been made sort of half-public. There's this thing that keeps happening in which the government will say that [the Russians] attempted to penetrate certain election systems, and then not tell us which ones or to what extent.facet.

And the first time that we really learned about the attempts by Russian hackers to get into election software which, let's just keep in mind that this is real kind of apocalyptic stuff, right? I mean, a foreign intelligence apparatus penetrating the software upon which U.S. votes are registered is really scary stuff. I mean, you could imagine them deleting and mass voter registrations causing chaos. You could imagine them in the most extreme setting, changing vote tallies.

None of that happened as far as we know, evidence that any of that happened but they were rooting around those systems, and the degree to which they were able to penetrate them remains somewhat unclear. And in the summer of 2017, June 2017, there was an article about this effort. It was sort of the first big published article, and it appeared in a publication called The Intercept.

The Intercept was an interesting place for it to appear. The Intercept was founded in 2014. It was bankrolled by Pierre Omidyar, who is the billionaire who made a bunch of money in eBay, and its of first three big flagship founders were Laura Poitras, who's a filmmaker who documented Edward Snowden's time in that Hong Kong hotel room. If you've ever seen a movie about that, it's incredible. Glenn Greenwald, who was the person who got the Snowden documents. And Jeremy Scahill, longtime reporter and writer who worked for The Nation, among other places.

And the sort of editorial perspective of the publication has always been deeply skeptical of the intelligence apparatus, intelligence officials, the U.S. military industrial complex has championed whistleblowers folks like Edward Snowden. That term is obviously loaded when you're talking about Edward Snowden, but from their perspective, he's a whistleblower.

And there had also been, I think, sort of prominent editorial voices there: Greenwald chief among them, had been very skeptical of stories about Russian election interference and manipulation, that that should be taken with a grain of salt, that perhaps it was being overstated and manipulated. And so when this story appeared in The Intercept, it was both a huge scoop.

The story had actual U.S. intelligence documents that showed that Russian hackers had attempted this spear phishing which is the way they got into Podesta's email against a variety of American election software firms. Again, big deal, and it was the first, if I'm not mistaken, first time that we really had concrete evidence that there was tangible intelligence info that the U.S. government had possession of that showed the scope of the ambitions of what Russian hackers were doing in 2016.

That story was published. It was very notable and interesting. It appeared in The Intercept when what it demonstrated seemed to be in some tension with the kind of posture of some of the most prominent editorial voices there. And then a few days later, the person who leaked this information, a contractor with the NSA, a woman by the name Reality Winner, was arrested by the FBI. She was denied bail and ultimately sentenced to five years in federal prison.

Now, what she did was a violation of law. It was classified information that she leaked. That's illegal, but the treatment of her has been honestly insane. There is no credible evidence that the publishing of this information harm national security in any way. In fact, a lot of it hasn't been made public subsequently. In fact, there's a good case to be made it's information we should know as an informed public.

She is serving a five year sentence in federal prison and she is a really interesting case because she's the kind of person that you could imagine being kind of cause clbre as happens often with whistleblowers. People who come forward to distribute information they feel the government is hiding that the public should know about. But she's a strange case because she doesn't have a kind of natural ideological cohort backing her.

The folks on the left, who are very skeptical of intelligence agencies, and the so-called deep state, fit awkwardly with what she was trying to demonstrate in her leak, which was to convince the folks at The Intercept that the Russia thing is real. It's really happening. They really, really did do some gnarly stuff and you should take this seriously. So, there's not this sort of like built-in kind of base to support Reality Winner on the elements on the left ideological spectrum, that have been the sort of base for support of intelligence, whistleblowers and leakers.

And on the right, she was showing that Russia really was putting it some on the scale on behalf of Donald Trump. And there's no ideological appetite on that side either.

And so her case, I think, has been caught in this kind of shameful limbo. And what's been done to her is just to my mind, insane. I mean, what she did was rash. It was impulsive, it was a violation of both the law and what the oath she had taken in her job. All of that is unquestionably true, but five years in federal prison for what she did is just an unbelievable penalty.

And the government's treatment of her, as you'll hear in this conversation, has been just relentlessly punitive at every single turn. And the human story of who she is and why she did what she did is a super compelling one. I first kind of came upon the full human story in this fantastic profile that was written about her back in 2017 by a phenomenal nonfiction writer named Kerry Howley. It's called Who Is Reality Winner? And subsequently Kerry wrote a screenplay about Reality Winner that has now been acquired, and I think it's going to go into production. It can be an upcoming film called Winner.

And I had been wanting for a while to take a deep dive on Reality Winner's case, because it's stands at the nexus of so many of the issues that kind of run through our discourse right now about who to trust, about the so-called deep state, about the ways in which career government officials are wrestling with the Trump era and the Trump moment and when to go against their bosses and when to make information public and what we know and don't know and what secrets lurk out there. All of which kind of hangs over the entirety of our political discourse in the moment of Trump, particularly in the wake of the manipulation of the 2016 election and the criminal sabotage conducted by a foreign intelligence agency in Russia.

So, Kerry Howley very kindly agreed to come on the podcast and talk about who Reality Winner is, what happened to her, what her story is and I think it is both an incredible story about the moment we're in in this country and also just a really, I think, moving human story about the complex motives that go into a person who decides to take a risk like Reality Winner did.

I want to just start at the most basic level with the story because I think the details of it are not very well known despite the fact they are fascinating and unnerving in many ways. Maybe just tell me: Who is Reality Winner?

KERRY HOWLEY: Right. Reality Winner was a 25-year-old NSA contractor working in Iranian aerospace at NSA, Georgia in Augusta. One day she walked into her job and she had come across a document that detailed Russian election interference at a level of detail that we hadn't yet seen publicly at that point.

She prints it out, that document, folds it up, put it in her pantyhose and walked out, and sometime later mailed it to The Intercept, where it was subsequently published and she's currently serving a sentence of 63 months in a maximum security in Fort Worth for that crime.

CHRIS HAYES: That is a pretty long sentence.

KERRY HOWLEY: It's the longest sentence ever for a leak prosecution...

CHRIS HAYES: The longest ever?

KERRY HOWLEY: Yes.

CHRIS HAYES: Let's go back. I mean, the first thing when I heard about this story, and this is a dumb surface thing, but her name. The first thought was like, "Who is the kind of person who's named Reality and to which household does a baby come that then gets named Reality?"

KERRY HOWLEY: I think that has actually been a problem for raising awareness of Reality's case and the analysis does tend to stop there. Like, really? In this age in which everything seems so absurd we're going to add the name Reality Winner to the pile? But another hilarious aspect of this is that she has a sister named Brittany. Brittany and Reality. Her father gave her that name. Her parents had decided that her mother would get to name the first and her father would name the second.

The larger question of who is Reality Winner is a fascinating character study. I mean, as soon as I started researching this, I was hit with just how hilarious this person is. The legal documents that I was accessing just to begin the story, to begin the process of telling the story, involved her FBI interrogation. She's hilarious in her FBI interrogation. Her Facebook messages, which were brought up in court with her sister are very funny.

She's a vegan, she's a social justice activist. She is a gun rights supporter. She's just one of these millennials who crosses lines, right? She doesn't fit easily into any particular box. That made her really fun to write about.

CHRIS HAYES: How did she end up working as a contractor for the NSA?

KERRY HOWLEY: That's a really good question. And it's really the animating question, I think, of the profile and in some ways the film. How does this person who is so invested in social justice, thinks of herself as someone who raises awareness about all these causes, about what she has great anxiety, like global warming and Syrian War orphans and African elephants? How does this person end up, not just at the NSA, but a contractor for the NSA?

It's a very complicated question to answer. It starts with her joining up with the Air Force, which is something that I think she saw as a humanitarian act. She didn't see the goals of her idealistic humanitarianism and joining up with the military to be intention at all. And I don't think many people in Kingsville, Texas, where she's from necessarily do.

And so she signs up and she ends up actually in the drone program. She's trying to go abroad. She ends up a linguist. So, the Air Force trains her as a linguist. She's fluent in Farsi, Dari, and Pashto...

CHRIS HAYES: Wait, let me just stop you there. I mean, the armed services always need more people who speak languages like those. It's very hard to train people to speak them because those languages are difficult to learn if you're a native English speaker, and the world of people that can train and learn Dari and Pashto is fairly small. It's not like learning Spanish. She must have some considerable aptitude if she's able to acquire some level of mastery or competence in those.

KERRY HOWLEY: Absolutely. I mean, I think she was very good at her job. All of this is classified. It's very hard to get people to talk about their participation in the drone program. But those who would talk to me said things like, "She was excellent and very professional," and she clearly had an aptitude for languages and she had this job where all day long she's listening to communications and she knows she's eavesdropping on people in Pakistan, transcribing. And those translations were used for military actions, right? People, it seems, would have died due to her translations. It's a very serious, troubling job that I think caused her a lot of anxiety and guilt.

CHRIS HAYES: She goes into the air force with this kind of... She's someone who's very animated by social justice, really cares about global causes particularly, she goes into the Air Force with a kind of view that this would be a means to that end. She ends up training as a linguist and then she's surveilling folks in Pakistan and using the product of that surveillance to target people that will then be blown up by airstrikes.

KERRY HOWLEY: Yes, and I think her vision had been, "Okay, I'm going to go in for a little while. I'm going to learn these languages and then I'm not going to use these languages to eavesdrop. I'm going to use them to go over to Pakistan and work in a refugee camp," or some direct kind of helping.

CHRIS HAYES: She saw this as sort of a step on the way and then she has these language skills and she can go help these folks directly.

KERRY HOWLEY: I think so, and she's constantly trying to deploy. She's trying to go abroad, but there just isn't that opportunity. When she finally gets out, she's searching, and this later it comes up in her trial. When the DOJ attempts to characterize her as some nefarious terrorist sympathizer, she's searching for jobs in Afghanistan and Pakistan with nonprofits, but she doesn't have a college degree because she's gone straight into the Air Force.

KERRY HOWLEY: And there is this pipeline from the military into these contractor jobs because these military contractors are always desperate for people who have security clearance. When she cannot find a job that she wants, she ends up at this contractor, which was never, I don't think, the future she envisioned herself.

CHRIS HAYES: Wow. That's fascinating. She gets these language skills. She's on the drone program. She wants to go do nonprofit working. She ends up sort of through this kind of inertia.

KERRY HOWLEY: Right, this conveyor belt, this machine. Yeah.

CHRIS HAYES: Because they need people that are already... have clearance, and she finds herself doing... What is the work that she does for the NSA contractor?

KERRY HOWLEY: What we know is that she was working in the field of Iranian aerospace. I don't know more than that or really what even that means.

CHRIS HAYES: She's there. At this point, do we know what her sort of feelings are about, I don't know, the war on terror, the American state, the American military industrial complex, her role in all of it? Does she have kind of... in the case of, say, Edward Snowden, there's this kind of trajectory of a kind of dawning awareness in which he starts out thinking like, "I'm gung-ho about this," and then being, "There's serious abuses and this is too much." And kind of having this sort of crisis of conscience. Does she have an arc like that here?

KERRY HOWLEY: It's not so clear. I mean, I think it's complicated. I think that she was deeply troubled by atrocities that she was listening to and hearing about that were committed by ISIS. In some way she saw herself as protecting the vulnerable when she was at the NSA... or in the drone program, excuse me. But she also... she was no fan of Donald Trump. She mostly had very progressive politics. She has this compulsion to help. She's one of these people who is constantly trying to improve everywhere she is.

She's not great at compartmentalizing. She, like many 25-year-olds, believes very strongly in her own capacity to see right from wrong. And that is really... it's a great character to write because if you are determined to improve everyone you meet and every situation you find yourself in, that's a recipe for conflict. And it's like a disaster for the NSA, which depends on conformity and compartmentalization.

CHRIS HAYES: Yeah. The whole point is you do what you're told and you do it competently and quietly, but you're not like... no one's looking for Joan of Arc, right?

KERRY HOWLEY: Right.

CHRIS HAYES: ... in those situations, that's not what you're looking for.

KERRY HOWLEY: I think one of the things that attracted me to this story is ... I can remember being 25 and the intellectual rigidity of that time. It's a time, I think, of great intellectual fulfillment and certainty, and to confront a 25-year-old with a question of, "Are you going to respect the oath you made to this federal agency or an obligation you think you have to the American electorate?" I think that's a great burden to put on an intellectually engaged 25-year-old.

CHRIS HAYES: Why is that the question she faces?

KERRY HOWLEY: The document she came across detailed a spear phishing attack on a provider of election software which had been successful. The Russian intelligence had attained login credentials and was then able to email a bunch of state level election officials. And this was a time we forget that this ever happened but this was a time when people on the left and the right were saying things like, "There is no hard evidence that the Russians attempted to interfere in our election." She was hearing that on Fox News, which was played consistently at her job at NSA Augusta, to the point where she actually filed a formal complaint asking them to change the channel.

CHRIS HAYES: Are you serious?

KERRY HOWLEY: Yes. This is her, right? She gets to a place and she's like, "Things need to change."

CHRIS HAYES: Like, for instance, "You need to shut off the Trump TV on my television."

KERRY HOWLEY: Yeah. She's also hearing it at The Intercept, which is a publication that she was following. She asked for a transcript of a podcast that The Intercept had done in which someone states, "Literally there's no hard evidence that the Russians have attempted to interfere in our election." And so you can see one way to tell this story is that she was responding to that statement.

CHRIS HAYES: Around what time is this, that this is happening?

KERRY HOWLEY: This was May 2017.

CHRIS HAYES: Right. What's frustrating about that is that it had been pretty well established by May 2017. You've got the intelligence agencies saying back in 2016 that that's their determination, but I can understand people being skeptical of them. But you also have private security actors who say pretty quickly, "Look, we've done a forensic review and the Russians were in these systems, they were definitely in the DNC." There's a fair amount of evidence by May 2017, but it's an important point I just want to stay on, which is that there are lots of people denying that for a very long period of time, on the left and on the right.

KERRY HOWLEY: Right. And the Obama administration I think was... they were worried about being too loud about this, because they didn't want to be seen as sewing paranoia about the election in a way that looked like they were trying to rig things for Hillary Clinton. And so they would send out these very vague notices to state level election officials, "Be on high alert," the kind of thing where it's like you're getting a notification to change your password, but what really didn't came across was a level of specificity that was new.

And, in fact, after the document appeared, the Election Assistance Commission which is the federal agency whose job it is to communicate with state level election officials sent out an alert saying, Hey, look at this. This is new to us. State level election officials were upset, they said, No one told us about this attack and we would've like to have known about it.

CHRIS HAYES: So her specifically, you're saying she's watching Fox News and she's listening to The Intercept podcast, and The Intercept had some folks who are skeptical about Russian interference. She gets a transcript of a podcast in which someone is saying there is no hard evidence, and then she comes across this not just hard evidence, but truly astoundingly unnerving hard evidence which is like, they didn't just get into the inbox of a dude named John Podesta (which itself was massively destructive to the entire election) but a log in into an election software company. It's pretty scary stuff.

Get the think newsletter.

KERRY HOWLEY: Yeah. The potential to change voter rolls is scary, and I think she felt... What she said during her FBI interrogation was, "I can't believe this wasn't already out there, that someone else hadn't already leaked it."

CHRIS HAYES: And it's funny because subsequently there's been reporting on precisely this, independent of her leak. Right? It has sort of come out through different reporting, that it's been the subject of tremendous controversy. You have a situation in Florida in which Bill Nelson was running for Senate and sort of said... mentioned offhandedly that their state election system had been penetrated, or at least attempted to be penetrated, and people were like, What are you talking about crazy old man? And then it turned out that he was right.

KERRY HOWLEY: Yeah. Yeah. If you talk to election security experts, they'll say, This is precisely the kind of thing we've been worrying about publicly for a long time, but nobody listens because who wants to talk about election... people get bored immediately when you say the words "election security." But this idea of the vulnerability of vendors apparently had been a weakness that people knew about, and now those experts can say, Look, it's actually happened, here's the evidence.

CHRIS HAYES: Is it an impulsive situation where she prints this thing out? Is it a plant? Is it, she's like, I'm going to set these people right ? Because what's so crazy to me about this leak is that she is trying to correct the false sense of media figures that she trusts. She's like, No, you guys, I like you and you're right about so many things, but you're wrong about this and I want to just show you that you're wrong.

KERRY HOWLEY: Yeah. My impression and something that she does say in a jailhouse phone call is that it was impulsive, but I think we can say it was impulsive and came from good intentions.

CHRIS HAYES: Right. I guess my point is that she's a strange sort of figure because this is not whistle blowing, in the sense she's not like, Oh, look at this abuse that's happening in the surveillance agency I live in. Or like, Look at these civilians that we the U.S. government killed. It's, No, actually the attack against the Americans by the Russians is a real thing, you skeptics of Russian interference.

KERRY HOWLEY: Right. And I think it's been really frustrating to her family that not only other leakers like say, Petraeus, or the president has also shared classified information, have not been punished in the same way.

CHRIS HAYES: Yeah. We should say the president is different constitutionally because all classification authority flows from him, so he can declassify anything he wants to.

KERRY HOWLEY: Sure. But take the example of Petraeus. He was charged with a misdemeanor and never did any jail time. Other people, like say, Michael Cohen or Maria Butina people who did not have the best of intentions have done less jail time or been sentenced to less jail time, and I think that's been of great frustration to her and her family.

CHRIS HAYES: I want to get into the chain of events that led to her arrest and sentencing and we'll do that after this break.

So she prints this out, she smuggles it out and what does she do with the printout?

KERRY HOWLEY: She snail mails it to The Intercept.

CHRIS HAYES: And they get it and they write a story based on it?

KERRY HOWLEY: They get it, and this becomes quite murky, we've never gotten a full accounting of what happened and why, but... I'm not an investigative reporter but my understanding is when you get a leaked document, you never share the image of that document with the agency from which it was leaked, because that has traceable information.

CHRIS HAYES: Right.

KERRY HOWLEY: That someone at The Intercept sent an image of the document to a contractor who was then legally obligated to show it to the NSA, which then immediately located Reality. Only a few people had printed this out. Only one of those people had downloaded a transcript from The Intercept. And...

CHRIS HAYES: She did that on her government account, on her contractor account?

KERRY HOWLEY: I believe so.

CHRIS HAYES: Oh, God. There's traceable information because there's actually... My understanding is there's a security system on the printer. That it's built in. That there's traceable signals embedded in the document that say who printed out the thing.

KERRY HOWLEY: Yeah, that's my impression too. So it's not entirely clear why that happened from a publication that prides itself on supporting whistleblowers, and of course was founded with the intention of disseminating information that Snowden had acquired, but she was basically immediately apprehended after that.

CHRIS HAYES: So in the course of reporting, they share the document; the document makes its way back to the NSA. The NSA does not have a very tough detective trail to trace down until they find that this contractor who's working for them in Augusta, Georgia printed this out and apparently leaked it. What's the timing between... from how long The Intercept gets it to her being arrested?

KERRY HOWLEY: I think it's a while before The Intercept publishes it because they think it's probably fake, because it's postmarked Augusta. I think it took them a while to trust that this was legitimate. But once they published it, it was a matter of hours before [the authorities] were at her house.

CHRIS HAYES: Oh wow. So it gets published and they're there in a matter of hours.

KERRY HOWLEY: I think so.

CHRIS HAYES: What is the government... what do they charge her with and what's the case like that they build against her?

KERRY HOWLEY: They charge her with willful retention and transmission of national defense information, which is under the Espionage Act which is, of course, an act intended to punish spies, but which really the Obama administration used very zealously to punish whistleblowers and leakers. And so she has almost no opportunity to mount a defense because, under this act, intention doesn't matter. She's already confessed in her laundry room to the FBI...

CHRIS HAYES: Wait

Kerry Howley and all they have to do is... She confessed.

CHRIS HAYES: Wait. OK, let's step back. She confesses in her laundry room? Take me through that.

KERRY HOWLEY: They show up at her door... It's a riveting transcript, which has actually been turned into a stage play in which she's really charming, and funny and intelligent and vulnerable, but she deflects for a while and then she says basically, I felt helpless. I wanted to know why this information hadn't already been leaked.

And so, when it comes time to mount a defense, there's very little available to her defense team. And every motion they made to kind of broaden the case to questions of the First Amendment was rejected, so she basically had to take a plea deal because they were seeking a full 10 years.

Read this article:

Explaining why Reality Winner is still in prison with Kerry Howley: podcast and transcript - NBC News

Posted in NSA

New Maryland Bill Will Make Possession of Ransomware Illegal – CryptoVibes

A new bill introduced in the Maryland Senate aims to make the possession of ransomware illegal in the state.

In May 2019, the city of Baltimore experienced its biggest run-in with ransomware. One of the largest municipalities in the city was attacked by ransomware and malicious actors asked for 13 Bitcoins to release their systems. They held the data of the city hostage for about 3 weeks after which the authorities had to pay the cryptocurrency amount and regain access to their systems. This was the second time in one year that the citys IT infrastructure was attacked.

Now, Democratic State Senator Susan Lee has introduced a new bill that would make the possession of ransomware a crime. However, to protect cybersecurity researchers who may have access to such software, Lee wrote that the crime would be applicable only when a person holds the ransomware with an intent to harm another computer, system or database. Though the bill isnt enough to stop cryptojacking, it gives legal backing to the prosecutors and law enforcement who get hold of such malicious actors.

Even though cryptojacking and ransomware are two of the biggest threats to computer systems these days, there are very few states in the US that have adequate legislation to deal with them. The growing number of criminal activities in these two sectors has created big problems IT infrastructure operators.

Cybersecurity research firm Proofpoint recently reported that about half of US organizations were victims of phishing and ransomware in 2019. Even though the FBI is trying to ramp up its preparedness to handle cybercrime, they is yet to catch up with the consistently increasing number of victims.

Security researchers pointed out a large number of malware that are being used to operate ransomware attacks. Even the NSA was attacked by hackers called Shadow Brokers who then sold the hacking tools used by the government agency on the dark web. A malware called Robinhood targeted Baltimore. Other prominent malicious software on the market are Wannacry, Ryuk, and Eternal Blue, the NSAs own tool.

Go here to read the rest:

New Maryland Bill Will Make Possession of Ransomware Illegal - CryptoVibes

Posted in NSA

Microsoft patches Windows 10 after NSA finds vulnerability

Satya Nadella, chief executive officer of Microsoft Corp., pauses while speaking during a Microsoft product event in New York, U.S., on Wednesday, Oct. 2, 2019.

Mark Kauzlarich | Bloomberg | Getty Images

The National Security Agency alerted Microsoft in recent weeks to a significant issue affecting its Windows 10 operating system, ubiquitous within corporations and among consumers, two senior federal cybersecurity officials told CNBC.

The flaw affected encryption of digital signatures used to authenticate content, including software or files. If exploited, the flaw could allow criminals to send malicious content with fake signatures that make it appear safe. The finding was reported earlier by The Washington Post.

"Patching like this, in general, should always be important, but the fact that the NSA is the one that disclosed this to Microsoft as well gave it some more importance," said Satnam Narang, a senior research engineer with cybersecurity company Tenable. Attackers often will steal security certificates in order to send a victim a malicious file that appears to be trustworthy, but with this flaw, the attacker can simply spoof the Microsoft certificate, making the process much easier, Narang said.

It is unclear how long the NSA knew about the flaw before reporting it to Microsoft. The cooperation, however, is a departure from past interactions between the NSA and major software developers such as Microsoft. In the past, the top security agency has kept some major vulnerabilities secret in order to use them as part of the U.S. tech arsenal.

In a statement, Microsoft declined to confirm or offer further details. "We follow the principles of coordinated vulnerability disclosure as the industry best practice to protect our customers from reported security vulnerabilities. To prevent unnecessary risk to customers, security researchers and vendors do not discuss the details of reported vulnerabilities before an update is available."

Jeff Jones, a senior director at Microsoft said in a statement Tuesday: "Customers who have already applied the update, or have automatic updates enabled, are already protected. As always we encourage customers to install all security updates as soon as possible." Microsoft told CNBC that it had not seen any exploitation of the flaw "in the wild," which means outside a lab testing environment.

"I do want to stress that this information just dropped in the last hour, and it is still pretty fresh. So we are trying to fully grasp how this plays into the grand scheme of things," said Narang at Tenable, who wrote further about the flaw in a blog post today. "In the grand scheme of things, this is just another tool in the toolbox for attackers."

Follow @CNBCtech on Twitter for the latest tech industry news.

See more here:

Microsoft patches Windows 10 after NSA finds vulnerability

Posted in NSA

NSA tips off Microsoft to security flaw | TheHill – The Hill

The National Security Agency (NSA) found and notified Microsoft of what it called a serious vulnerability inthe company's Windows 10 operating system that could potentially expose computer users to significant breaches, surveillance or disruption, officials announced Tuesday.

The public disclosure is unlike the NSA's usual approach of using such flaws to build hacking toolsthat allow the agency to spy on adversaries networks, according to The Washington Post. Rather, officials released a fix.

This is ... a change in approach ... by NSA of working to share, working to lean forward, and then working to really share the data as part of building trust, Anne Neuberger, director of the NSAs Cybersecurity Directorate, which was launched in October, told the Post.

The NSA discovered an error in the Microsoft code that verifies digital signatures, which could enable a hacker to forge the signature and breach a computer.

The patch is the only comprehensive means to mitigate the risk, the NSA's statement read. While means exist to detect or prevent some forms of exploitation, none of them are complete or fully reliable.

Microsoft said it addressed the flaw promptly andreleased a security updateTuesday. Customers who have already applied the update, or have automatic updates enabled, should be protected.

Microsoft told the Post that it has seen no active exploitation of the flaw.

Link:

NSA tips off Microsoft to security flaw | TheHill - The Hill

Posted in NSA

NSA goes public with Windows security vulnerability – Technical.ly DC

The Fort Meade, Maryland-based National Security Agencys cybersecurity work typically operates out of view. After all, it famously earned the nickname No Such Agency.

But this week, the NSA went public with a security flaw it found. The serious vulnerability was flagged in Microsoft products including Windows 10 and Server 16. The bug traces to a weakness in a cryptography function that verifies whether a system is downloading software that is legitimately from Microsoft.

You can use that weakness to make Windows [10] systems download and install software that appears to be coming from Microsoft that is not, said Edward Stanford, CTO of Columbia-based Zuul, which works with customers on certificate management and cryptography management for industrial controls and Internet of Things systems.

This could lead attackers to develop new exploits that take control of systems. The NSA alerted Microsoft to the vulnerability, and the company released a patch to fix systems. NSA then went public with a key message: Update systems with a patch.

This is bad, Stanford said. If you do it right then you can take over most networks or computers that are Windows-based. The faster they get patched, the less true that statement will be.

This could affect a broad group of systems, from personal laptops to corporate servers. But installing a patch on a home laptop is a fix on a different scale from making sure an entire companys network is protected.

Now that its a widely known exploit, everyones got to defend against it. Most home systems have an easy button, most corporate systems dont, Stanford said. However, he said of the company systems, that doesnt mean it cant be done.

Plenty of companies have been taking action, as well, including Columbia-based cybersecurity company Tenable,which works with released plugins to identify the vulnerability.

This vulnerability, and the attention its received from various government agencies, is unprecedented. It calls into question our very trust in todays digital world the trust that our encoded communications are secure, said Renaud Deraison, cofounder and CTO of Tenable, in a statement. We implore organizations to patch their systems immediately.

For NSA, the public announcement isnt unprecedented, but its also not a move thats made often. For one, that indicates the severity of the threat posed by the vulnerability. At the same time, Wired noted that its distinct from how the NSA approached a hacking tool known as EternalBlue, which also centered on a Microsoft vulnerability. In that case, NSA did not disclose the flaw publicly. This squares with actions of an intelligence agency looking to gain an edge on the cyber battlefield. But it was later leaked online, and used in attacks. Going forward, NSA Cybersecurity Directorate head Anne Neuberger told reporters this week that the agency will disclose more findings to the public.

Stanford said this weeks public disclosure shows a willingness by NSA to embrace another part of its mission: protecting the countrys infrastructure.

Im really glad they stepped up, saw a problem and helped everyone fix it, he said.

See original here:

NSA goes public with Windows security vulnerability - Technical.ly DC

Posted in NSA

Edward Snowden – Wikipedia

American whistleblower and former National Security Agency contractor

Edward Joseph Snowden (born June 21, 1983) is an American whistleblower who copied and leaked highly classified information from the National Security Agency (NSA) in 2013 when he was a Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) employee and subcontractor. His disclosures revealed numerous global surveillance programs, many run by the NSA and the Five Eyes Intelligence Alliance with the cooperation of telecommunication companies and European governments, and prompted a cultural discussion about national security and individual privacy.

In 2013, Snowden was hired by an NSA contractor, Booz Allen Hamilton, after previous employment with Dell and the CIA.[1] Snowden says he gradually became disillusioned with the programs with which he was involved and that he tried to raise his ethical concerns through internal channels but was ignored. On May 20, 2013, Snowden flew to Hong Kong after leaving his job at an NSA facility in Hawaii, and in early June he revealed thousands of classified NSA documents to journalists Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras, and Ewen MacAskill. Snowden came to international attention after stories based on the material appeared in The Guardian and The Washington Post. Further disclosures were made by other publications including Der Spiegel and The New York Times.

On Snowden's 30th birthday, June 21, 2013, the United States Department of Justice unsealed charges against Snowden of two counts of violating the Espionage Act of 1917 and theft of government property,[2] following which the Department of State revoked his passport.[3] Two days later, he flew into Moscow's Sheremetyevo Airport, where Russian authorities noted that his U.S. passport had been cancelled, and he was restricted to the airport terminal for over one month. Russia later granted Snowden the right of asylum with an initial visa for residence for one year, and repeated extensions have permitted him to stay at least until 2020. In early 2016, he became the president of the Freedom of the Press Foundation, a San Francisco-based organization that states its purpose is to protect journalists from hacking and government surveillance.[4] As of 2017 he is married and living in Moscow.[5][6]

On September 17, 2019, his memoir Permanent Record was published.[7] On the first day of publication, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a civil lawsuit against Snowden over publication of his memoir, alleging he had breached nondisclosure agreements signed with the U.S. federal government.[8] Former The Guardian national security reporter Ewen MacAskill called the civil lawsuit a "huge mistake", noting that the "UK ban of Spycatcher 30 years ago created huge demand".[9][10] The memoir was listed as no. 1 on Amazon's bestseller list that same day.[11] In an interview with Amy Goodman on Democracy Now! on September 26, 2019, Snowden clarified he considers himself a "whistleblower" as opposed to a "leaker" as he considers "a leaker only distributes information for personal gain".[12]

Edward Joseph Snowden was born on June 21, 1983,[13] in Elizabeth City, North Carolina.[14] His maternal grandfather, Edward J. Barrett,[15][16] a rear admiral in the U.S. Coast Guard, became a senior official with the FBI and was at the Pentagon in 2001 during the September 11 attacks.[17] Snowden's father, Lonnie, was also an officer in the Coast Guard,[18] and his mother, Elizabeth, is a clerk at the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland.[19][20][21][22][23] His older sister, Jessica, was a lawyer at the Federal Judicial Center in Washington, D.C. Edward Snowden said that he had expected to work for the federal government, as had the rest of his family.[24] His parents divorced in 2001,[25] and his father remarried.[26] Snowden scored above 145 on two separate IQ tests.[24]

In the early 1990s, while still in grade school, Snowden moved with his family to the area of Fort Meade, Maryland.[27] Mononucleosis caused him to miss high school for almost nine months.[24] Rather than returning to school, he passed the GED test[28] and took classes at Anne Arundel Community College.[21] Although Snowden had no undergraduate college degree,[29] he worked online toward a master's degree at the University of Liverpool, England, in 2011.[30] He was interested in Japanese popular culture, had studied the Japanese language,[31] and worked for an anime company that had a resident office in the U.S.[32][33] He also said he had a basic understanding of Mandarin Chinese and was deeply interested in martial arts. At age 20, he listed Buddhism as his religion on a military recruitment form, noting that the choice of agnostic was "strangely absent."[34] In September 2019, as part of interviews relating to the release of his memoir Permanent Record, Snowden revealed to The Guardian that he married Lindsay Mills in a courthouse in Moscow.[7]

Snowden has said that, in the 2008 presidential election, he voted for a third-party candidate, though he "believed in Obama's promises." Following the election, he believed President Barack Obama was continuing policies espoused by George W. Bush.[35]

In accounts published in June 2013, interviewers noted that Snowden's laptop displayed stickers supporting Internet freedom organizations including the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the Tor Project.[28] A week after publication of his leaks began, Ars Technica confirmed that Snowden had been an active participant at the site's online forum from 2001 through May 2012, discussing a variety of topics under the pseudonym "TheTrueHOOHA."[36] In a January 2009 entry, TheTrueHOOHA exhibited strong support for the U.S. security state apparatus and said leakers of classified information "should be shot in the balls."[37] However, Snowden disliked Obama's CIA director appointment of Leon Panetta, saying "Obama just named a fucking politician to run the CIA."[38] Snowden was also offended by a possible ban on assault weapons, writing "Me and all my lunatic, gun-toting NRA compatriots would be on the steps of Congress before the C-Span feed finished."[38] Snowden disliked Obama's economic policies, was against Social Security, and favored Ron Paul's call for a return to the gold standard.[38] In 2014, Snowden supported a basic income.[39]

Feeling a duty to fight in the Iraq War to help free oppressed people,[28] Snowden enlisted in the United States Army Reserve on May 7, 2004, and became a Special Forces candidate through its 18X enlistment option.[40] He did not complete the training[13] because he broke both legs in a training accident,[41] and was discharged on September 28, 2004.[42]

Snowden was then employed for less than a year in 2005 as a security guard at the University of Maryland's Center for Advanced Study of Language, a research center sponsored by the National Security Agency (NSA).[43] According to the University, this is not a classified facility,[44] though it is heavily guarded.[45] In June 2014, Snowden told Wired that his job as a security guard required a high-level security clearance, for which he passed a polygraph exam and underwent a stringent background check.[24]

After attending a 2006 job-fair focused on intelligence agencies, Snowden accepted an offer for a position at the CIA.[24][46] The Agency assigned him to the global communications division at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.[24]

In May 2006, Snowden wrote in Ars Technica that he had no trouble getting work because he was a "computer wizard".[34] After distinguishing himself as a junior employee on the top computer team, Snowden was sent to the CIA's secret school for technology specialists, where he lived in a hotel for six months while studying and training full-time.[24]

In March 2007, the CIA stationed Snowden with diplomatic cover in Geneva, Switzerland, where he was responsible for maintaining computer-network security.[24][47] Assigned to the U.S. Permanent Mission to the United Nations, a diplomatic mission representing U.S. interests before the UN and other international organizations, Snowden received a diplomatic passport and a four-bedroom apartment near Lake Geneva.[24] According to Greenwald, while there Snowden was "considered the top technical and cybersecurity expert" in that country and "was hand-picked by the CIA to support the president at the 2008 NATO summit in Romania".[48] Snowden described his CIA experience in Geneva as formative, stating that the CIA deliberately got a Swiss banker drunk and encouraged him to drive home. Snowden said that when the latter was arrested, a CIA operative offered to help in exchange for the banker becoming an informant.[49] Ueli Maurer, President of the Swiss Confederation for the year 2013, in June of that year publicly disputed Snowden's claims. "This would mean that the CIA successfully bribed the Geneva police and judiciary. With all due respect, I just can't imagine it," said Maurer.[50] In February 2009, Snowden resigned from the CIA.[51]

In 2009, Snowden began work as a contractee for Dell,[52] which manages computer systems for multiple government agencies. Assigned to an NSA facility at Yokota Air Base near Tokyo, Snowden instructed top officials and military officers on how to defend their networks from Chinese hackers.[24] Snowden looked into Mass surveillance in China prompted him to investigate and then expose Washington's mass surveillance programme after he was asked in 2009 to brief a conference in Tokyo.[53] During his four years with Dell, he rose from supervising NSA computer system upgrades to working as what his rsum termed a "cyberstrategist" and an "expert in cyber counterintelligence" at several U.S. locations.[54] In 2011, he returned to Maryland, where he spent a year as lead technologist on Dell's CIA account. In that capacity, he was consulted by the chiefs of the CIA's technical branches, including the agency's chief information officer and its chief technology officer.[24] U.S. officials and other sources familiar with the investigation said Snowden began downloading documents describing the government's electronic spying programs while working for Dell in April 2012.[52] Investigators estimated that of the 50,000 to 200,000 documents Snowden gave to Greenwald and Poitras, most were copied by Snowden while working at Dell.[1]

In March 2012, Dell reassigned Snowden to Hawaii as lead technologist for the NSA's information-sharing office.[24] At the time of his departure from the U.S. in May 2013, he had been employed for 15 months inside the NSA's Hawaii regional operations center, which focuses on the electronic monitoring of China and North Korea,[1] the last three of which were with consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton.[55] While intelligence officials have described his position there as a system administrator, Snowden has said he was an infrastructure analyst, which meant that his job was to look for new ways to break into Internet and telephone traffic around the world.[56] On March 15, 2013 three days after what he later called his "breaking point" of "seeing the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, directly lie under oath to Congress"[57] Snowden quit his job at Dell.[58] Although he has said his career high annual salary was $200,000,[59] Snowden said he took a pay cut to work at Booz Allen,[59] where he sought employment in order to gather data and then release details of the NSA's worldwide surveillance activity.[60] An anonymous source told Reuters that, while in Hawaii, Snowden may have persuaded 2025 co-workers to give him their login credentials by telling them he needed them to do his job.[61] The NSA sent a memo to Congress saying that Snowden had tricked a fellow employee into sharing his personal public key infrastructure certificate to gain greater access to the NSA's computer system.[62][63] Snowden disputed the memo,[64] saying in January 2014, "I never stole any passwords, nor did I trick an army of co-workers."[65][66] Booz Allen terminated Snowden's employment on June 10, 2013, one month after he had left the country.[67]

A former NSA co-worker said that although the NSA was full of smart people, Snowden was a "genius among geniuses" who created a widely implemented backup system for the NSA and often pointed out security flaws to the agency. The former colleague said Snowden was given full administrator privileges with virtually unlimited access to NSA data. Snowden was offered a position on the NSA's elite team of hackers, Tailored Access Operations, but turned it down to join Booz Allen.[64] An anonymous source later said that Booz Allen's hiring screeners found possible discrepancies in Snowden's resume but still decided to hire him.[29] Snowden's rsum stated that he attended computer-related classes at Johns Hopkins University. A spokeswoman for Johns Hopkins said that the university did not find records to show that Snowden attended the university, and suggested that he may instead have attended Advanced Career Technologies, a private for-profit organization that operated as the Computer Career Institute at Johns Hopkins University.[29] The University of Maryland University College acknowledged that Snowden had attended a summer session at a UM campus in Asia. Snowden's rsum stated that he estimated that he would receive a University of Liverpool computer security master's degree in 2013. The university said that Snowden registered for an online master's degree program in computer security in 2011 but was inactive as a student and had not completed the program.[29]

Snowden has said that he had told multiple employees and two supervisors about his concerns, but the NSA disputes his claim.[68] Snowden elaborated in January 2014, saying "[I] made tremendous efforts to report these programs to co-workers, supervisors, and anyone with the proper clearance who would listen. The reactions of those I told about the scale of the constitutional violations ranged from deeply concerned to appalled, but no one was willing to risk their jobs, families, and possibly even freedom to go through what [Thomas Andrews] Drake did."[66][69] In March 2014, during testimony to the European Parliament, Snowden wrote that before revealing classified information he had reported "clearly problematic programs" to ten officials, who he said did nothing in response.[70] In a May 2014 interview, Snowden told NBC News that after bringing his concerns about the legality of the NSA spying programs to officials, he was told to stay silent on the matter. He asserted that the NSA had copies of emails he sent to their Office of General Counsel, oversight and compliance personnel broaching "concerns about the NSA's interpretations of its legal authorities. I had raised these complaints not just officially in writing through email, but to my supervisors, to my colleagues, in more than one office."[17]

In May 2014, U.S. officials released a single email that Snowden had written in April 2013 inquiring about legal authorities but said that they had found no other evidence that Snowden had expressed his concerns to someone in an oversight position.[71] In June 2014, the NSA said it had not been able to find any records of Snowden raising internal complaints about the agency's operations.[72] That same month, Snowden explained that he himself has not produced the communiqus in question because of the ongoing nature of the dispute, disclosing for the first time that "I am working with the NSA in regard to these records and we're going back and forth, so I don't want to reveal everything that will come out."[73]

In his May 2014 interview with NBC News, Snowden accused the U.S. government of trying to use one position here or there in his career to distract from the totality of his experience, downplaying him as a "low level analyst." In his words, he was "trained as a spy in the traditional sense of the word in that I lived and worked undercover overseaspretending to work in a job that I'm notand even being assigned a name that was not mine." He said he'd worked for the NSA undercover overseas, and for the DIA had developed sources and methods to keep information and people secure "in the most hostile and dangerous environments around the world. So when they say I'm a low-level systems administrator, that I don't know what I'm talking about, I'd say it's somewhat misleading."[17] In a June interview with Globo TV, Snowden reiterated that he "was actually functioning at a very senior level."[74] In a July interview with The Guardian, Snowden explained that, during his NSA career, "I began to move from merely overseeing these systems to actively directing their use. Many people dont understand that I was actually an analyst and I designated individuals and groups for targeting."[75] Snowden subsequently told Wired that while at Dell in 2011, "I would sit down with the CIO of the CIA, the CTO of the CIA, the chiefs of all the technical branches. They would tell me their hardest technology problems, and it was my job to come up with a way to fix them."[24]

Of his time as an NSA analyst, directing the work of others, Snowden recalled a moment when he and his colleagues began to have severe ethical doubts. Snowden said 18 to 22-year-old analysts were suddenly

"thrust into a position of extraordinary responsibility, where they now have access to all your private records. In the course of their daily work, they stumble across something that is completely unrelated in any sort of necessary sensefor example, an intimate nude photo of someone in a sexually compromising situation. But they're extremely attractive. So what do they do? They turn around in their chair and they show a co-worker ... and sooner or later this person's whole life has been seen by all of these other people."

As Snowden observed it, this behavior happened routinely every two months but was never reported, being considered one of the "fringe benefits" of the work.[76]

The exact size of Snowden's disclosure is unknown,[77] but Australian officials have estimated 15,000 or more Australian intelligence files[78] and British officials estimate at least 58,000 British intelligence files.[79] NSA Director Keith Alexander initially estimated that Snowden had copied anywhere from 50,000 to 200,000 NSA documents.[80] Later estimates provided by U.S. officials were on the order of 1.7 million,[81] a number that originally came from Department of Defense talking points.[82] In July 2014, The Washington Post reported on a cache previously provided by Snowden from domestic NSA operations consisting of "roughly 160,000 intercepted e-mail and instant-message conversations, some of them hundreds of pages long, and 7,900 documents taken from more than 11,000 online accounts."[83] A U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency report declassified in June 2015 said that Snowden took 900,000 Department of Defense files, more than he downloaded from the NSA.[82]

In March 2014, Army General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the House Armed Services Committee, "The vast majority of the documents that Snowden ... exfiltrated from our highest levels of security ... had nothing to do with exposing government oversight of domestic activities. The vast majority of those were related to our military capabilities, operations, tactics, techniques and procedures."[84] When asked in a May 2014 interview to quantify the number of documents Snowden stole, retired NSA director Keith Alexander said there was no accurate way of counting what he took, but Snowden may have downloaded more than a million documents.[85]

According to Snowden, he did not indiscriminately turn over documents to journalists, stating that "I carefully evaluated every single document I disclosed to ensure that each was legitimately in the public interest. There are all sorts of documents that would have made a big impact that I didn't turn over"[28] and that "I have to screen everything before releasing it to journalists ... If I have time to go through this information, I would like to make it available to journalists in each country."[60] Despite these measures, the improper redaction of a document by the New York Times resulted in the exposure of intelligence activity against al-Qaeda.[86]

In June 2014, the NSA's recently installed director, U.S. Navy Admiral Michael S. Rogers, said that while some terrorist groups had altered their communications to avoid surveillance techniques revealed by Snowden, the damage done was not significant enough to conclude that "the sky is falling."[87] Nevertheless, in February 2015, Rogers said that Snowden's disclosures had a material impact on the NSA's detection and evaluation of terrorist activities worldwide.[88]

On June 14, 2015, UK's Sunday Times reported that Russian and Chinese intelligence services had decrypted more than 1 million classified files in the Snowden cache, forcing the UK's MI6 intelligence agency to move agents out of live operations in hostile countries. Sir David Omand, a former director of the UK's GCHQ intelligence gathering agency, described it as a huge strategic setback that was harming Britain, America, and their NATO allies. The Sunday Times said it was not clear whether Russia and China stole Snowden's data or whether Snowden voluntarily handed it over to remain at liberty in Hong Kong and Moscow.[89][90] In April 2015 the Henry Jackson Society, a British neoconservative think tank, published a report claiming that Snowden's intelligence leaks negatively impacted Britain's ability to fight terrorism and organized crime.[91] Gus Hosein, executive director of Privacy International, criticized the report for, in his opinion, presuming that the public became concerned about privacy only after Snowden's disclosures.[92]

Snowden's decision to leak NSA documents developed gradually following his March 2007 posting as a technician to the Geneva CIA station.[93] Snowden first made contact with Glenn Greenwald, a journalist working at The Guardian, on December 1, 2012.[94][95] He contacted Greenwald anonymously as "Cincinnatus"[96] and said he had sensitive documents that he would like to share.[97] Greenwald found the measures that the source asked him to take to secure their communications, such as encrypting email, too annoying to employ. Snowden then contacted documentary filmmaker Laura Poitras in January 2013.[98] According to Poitras, Snowden chose to contact her after seeing her New York Times article about NSA whistleblower William Binney.[99] What originally attracted Snowden to both Greenwald and Poitras was a Salon article written by Greenwald detailing how Poitras's controversial films had made her a target of the government.[97]

Greenwald began working with Snowden in either February[100] or April 2013, after Poitras asked Greenwald to meet her in New York City, at which point Snowden began providing documents to them.[94] Barton Gellman, writing for The Washington Post, says his first direct contact was on May 16, 2013.[101] According to Gellman, Snowden approached Greenwald after the Post declined to guarantee publication within 72 hours of all 41 PowerPoint slides that Snowden had leaked exposing the PRISM electronic data mining program, and to publish online an encrypted code allowing Snowden to later prove that he was the source.[101]

Snowden communicated using encrypted email,[98] and going by the codename "Verax". He asked not to be quoted at length for fear of identification by stylometry.[101]

According to Gellman, prior to their first meeting in person, Snowden wrote, "I understand that I will be made to suffer for my actions, and that the return of this information to the public marks my end."[101] Snowden also told Gellman that until the articles were published, the journalists working with him would also be at mortal risk from the United States Intelligence Community "if they think you are the single point of failure that could stop this disclosure and make them the sole owner of this information."[101]

In May 2013, Snowden was permitted temporary leave from his position at the NSA in Hawaii, on the pretext of receiving treatment for his epilepsy.[28] In mid-May, Snowden gave an electronic interview to Poitras and Jacob Appelbaum which was published weeks later by Der Spiegel.[102]

After disclosing the copied documents, Snowden promised that nothing would stop subsequent disclosures. In June 2013, he said, "All I can say right now is the US government is not going to be able to cover this up by jailing or murdering me. Truth is coming, and it cannot be stopped."[103]

On May 20, 2013, Snowden flew to Hong Kong,[104] where he was staying when the initial articles based on the leaked documents were published,[105] beginning with The Guardian on June 5.[106] Greenwald later said Snowden disclosed 9,000 to 10,000 documents.[107]

Within months, documents had been obtained and published by media outlets worldwide, most notably The Guardian (Britain), Der Spiegel (Germany), The Washington Post and The New York Times (U.S.), O Globo (Brazil), Le Monde (France), and similar outlets in Sweden, Canada, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Spain, and Australia.[108] In 2014, NBC broke its first story based on the leaked documents.[109] In February 2014, for reporting based on Snowden's leaks, journalists Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras, Barton Gellman and The Guardians Ewen MacAskill were honored as co-recipients of the 2013 George Polk Award, which they dedicated to Snowden.[110] The NSA reporting by these journalists also earned The Guardian and The Washington Post the 2014 Pulitzer Prize for Public Service[111] for exposing the "widespread surveillance" and for helping to spark a "huge public debate about the extent of the government's spying". The Guardian's chief editor, Alan Rusbridger, credited Snowden for having performed a public service.[112]

The ongoing publication of leaked documents has revealed previously unknown details of a global surveillance apparatus run by the United States' NSA[115] in close cooperation with three of its four Five Eyes partners: Australia's ASD,[116] the UK's GCHQ,[117] and Canada's CSEC.[118]

On June 5, 2013, media reports documenting the existence and functions of classified surveillance programs and their scope began and continued throughout the entire year. The first program to be revealed was PRISM, which allows for court-approved direct access to Americans' Google and Yahoo accounts, reported from both The Washington Post and The Guardian published one hour apart.[113][119][120] Barton Gellman of The Washington Post was the first journalist to report on Snowden's documents. He said the U.S. government urged him not to specify by name which companies were involved, but Gellman decided that to name them "would make it real to Americans."[121] Reports also revealed details of Tempora, a British black-ops surveillance program run by the NSA's British partner, GCHQ.[119][122] The initial reports included details about NSA call database, Boundless Informant, and of a secret court order requiring Verizon to hand the NSA millions of Americans' phone records daily,[123] the surveillance of French citizens' phone and Internet records, and those of "high-profile individuals from the world of business or politics."[124][125][126] XKeyscore, an analytical tool that allows for collection of "almost anything done on the internet," was described by The Guardian as a program that shed light on one of Snowden's most controversial statements: "I, sitting at my desk [could] wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant, to a federal judge or even the president, if I had a personal email."[127]

The NSA's top-secret black budget, obtained from Snowden by The Washington Post, exposed the successes and failures of the 16 spy agencies comprising the U.S. intelligence community,[128] and revealed that the NSA was paying U.S. private tech companies for clandestine access to their communications networks.[129] The agencies were allotted $52 billion for the 2013 fiscal year.[130]

It was revealed that the NSA was harvesting millions of email and instant messaging contact lists,[131] searching email content,[132] tracking and mapping the location of cell phones,[133] undermining attempts at encryption via Bullrun[134][135] and that the agency was using cookies to piggyback on the same tools used by Internet advertisers "to pinpoint targets for government hacking and to bolster surveillance."[136] The NSA was shown to be secretly accessing Yahoo and Google data centers to collect information from hundreds of millions of account holders worldwide by tapping undersea cables using the MUSCULAR surveillance program.[113][114]

The NSA, the CIA and GCHQ spied on users of Second Life, Xbox Live and World of Warcraft, and attempted to recruit would-be informants from the sites, according to documents revealed in December 2013.[137][138] Leaked documents showed NSA agents also spied on their own "love interests," a practice NSA employees termed LOVEINT.[139][140] The NSA was shown to be tracking the online sexual activity of people they termed "radicalizers" in order to discredit them.[141] Following the revelation of Black Pearl, a program targeting private networks, the NSA was accused of extending beyond its primary mission of national security. The agency's intelligence-gathering operations had targeted, among others, oil giant Petrobras, Brazil's largest company.[142] The NSA and the GCHQ were also shown to be surveilling charities including UNICEF and Mdecins du Monde, as well as allies such as European Commissioner Joaqun Almunia and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.[143]

In October 2013, Glenn Greenwald said "the most shocking and significant stories are the ones we are still working on, and have yet to publish."[144] In November, The Guardian's editor-in-chief Alan Rusbridger said that only one percent of the documents had been published.[145] In December, Australia's Minister for Defence David Johnston said his government assumed the worst was yet to come.[146]

By October 2013, Snowden's disclosures had created tensions[147][148] between the U.S. and some of its close allies after they revealed that the U.S. had spied on Brazil, France, Mexico,[149] Britain,[150] China,[151] Germany,[152] and Spain,[153] as well as 35 world leaders,[154] most notably German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who said "spying among friends" was unacceptable[155][156] and compared the NSA with the Stasi.[157] Leaked documents published by Der Spiegel in 2014 appeared to show that the NSA had targeted 122 high-ranking leaders.[158]

An NSA mission statement titled "SIGINT Strategy 2012-2016" affirmed that the NSA had plans for continued expansion of surveillance activities. Their stated goal was to "dramatically increase mastery of the global network" and to acquire adversaries' data from "anyone, anytime, anywhere."[159] Leaked slides revealed in Greenwald's book No Place to Hide, released in May 2014, showed that the NSA's stated objective was to "Collect it All," "Process it All," "Exploit it All," "Partner it All," "Sniff it All" and "Know it All."[160]

Snowden said in a January 2014 interview with German television that the NSA does not limit its data collection to national security issues, accusing the agency of conducting industrial espionage. Using the example of German company Siemens, he said, "If there's information at Siemens that's beneficial to US national interestseven if it doesn't have anything to do with national securitythen they'll take that information nevertheless."[161] In the wake of Snowden's revelations and in response to an inquiry from the Left Party, Germany's domestic security agency Bundesamt fr Verfassungsschutz (BfV) investigated and found no concrete evidence that the U.S. conducted economic or industrial espionage in Germany.[162]

In February 2014, during testimony to the European Union, Snowden said of the remaining undisclosed programs, "I will leave the public interest determinations as to which of these may be safely disclosed to responsible journalists in coordination with government stakeholders."[163]

In March 2014, documents disclosed by Glenn Greenwald writing for The Intercept showed the NSA, in cooperation with the GCHQ, has plans to infect millions of computers with malware using a program called TURBINE.[164] Revelations included information about QUANTUMHAND, a program through which the NSA set up a fake Facebook server to intercept connections.[164]

According to a report in The Washington Post in July 2014, relying on information furnished by Snowden, 90% of those placed under surveillance in the U.S. are ordinary Americans, and are not the intended targets. The newspaper said it had examined documents including emails, message texts, and online accounts, that support the claim.[165]

In an August 2014 interview, Snowden for the first time disclosed a cyberwarfare program in the works, codenamed MonsterMind, that would automate detection of a foreign cyberattack as it began and automatically fire back. "These attacks can be spoofed," said Snowden. "You could have someone sitting in China, for example, making it appear that one of these attacks is originating in Russia. And then we end up shooting back at a Russian hospital. What happens next?"[24]

Snowden first contemplated leaking confidential documents around 2008 but held back, partly because he believed the newly elected Barack Obama might introduce reforms.[1] After the disclosures, his identity was made public by The Guardian at his request on June 9, 2013.[100] "I do not want to live in a world where everything I do and say is recorded," he said. "My sole motive is to inform the public as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them."[104]

Snowden said he wanted to "embolden others to step forward" by demonstrating that "they can win."[101] He also said that the system for reporting problems did not work. "You have to report wrongdoing to those most responsible for it." He cited a lack of whistleblower protection for government contractors, the use of the Espionage Act of 1917 to prosecute leakers, and his belief that had he used internal mechanisms to "sound the alarm," his revelations "would have been buried forever."[93][166]

In December 2013, upon learning that a U.S. federal judge had ruled the collection of U.S. phone metadata conducted by the NSA as likely unconstitutional, Snowden said, "I acted on my belief that the NSA's mass surveillance programs would not withstand a constitutional challenge, and that the American public deserved a chance to see these issues determined by open courts ... today, a secret program authorized by a secret court was, when exposed to the light of day, found to violate Americans' rights."[167]

In January 2014, Snowden said his "breaking point" was "seeing the Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, directly lie under oath to Congress."[57] This referred to testimony on March 12, 2013three months after Snowden first sought to share thousands of NSA documents with Greenwald,[94] and nine months after the NSA says Snowden made his first illegal downloads during the summer of 2012[1]in which Clapper denied to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that the NSA wittingly collects data on millions of Americans.[168] Snowden said, "There's no saving an intelligence community that believes it can lie to the public and the legislators who need to be able to trust it and regulate its actions. Seeing that really meant for me there was no going back. Beyond that, it was the creeping realization that no one else was going to do this. The public had a right to know about these programs."[169] In March 2014, Snowden said he had reported policy or legal issues related to spying programs to more than ten officials, but as a contractor had no legal avenue to pursue further whistleblowing.[70]

In May 2013, Snowden took a leave of absence, telling his supervisors he was returning to the mainland for epilepsy treatment, but instead left Hawaii for Hong Kong[170] where he arrived on May 20. Snowden told Guardian reporters in June that he had been in his room at the Mira Hotel since his arrival in the city, rarely going out. On June 10, correspondent Ewen MacAskill said Snowden had left his hotel only briefly three times since May 20.[171]

Snowden vowed to challenge any extradition attempt by the U.S. government, and engaged a Hong Kong-based Canadian human rights lawyer Robert Tibbo as a legal adviser.[1][172][173] Snowden told the South China Morning Post that he planned to remain in Hong Kong for as long as its government would permit.[174][175] Snowden also told the Post that "the United States government has committed a tremendous number of crimes against Hong Kong [and] the PRC as well,"[176] going on to identify Chinese Internet Protocol addresses that the NSA monitored and stating that the NSA collected text-message data for Hong Kong residents. Glenn Greenwald said Snowden was motivated by a need to "ingratiate himself to the people of Hong Kong and China."[177]

After leaving the Mira Hotel, Snowden was housed for two weeks in a number of apartments by other refugees seeking asylum in Hong Kong, an arrangement set up by Tibbo to hide from the US authorities.[178][179]The Russian newspaper Kommersant nevertheless reported that Snowden was living at the Russian consulate shortly before his departure from Hong Kong to Moscow.[180] Ben Wizner, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and legal adviser to Snowden, said in January 2014, "Every news organization in the world has been trying to confirm that story. They haven't been able to, because it's false."[181] Likewise rejecting the Kommersant story was Anatoly Kucherena, who became Snowden's lawyer in July 2013 when Snowden asked him for help in seeking temporary asylum in Russia.[182] Kucherena said Snowden did not communicate with Russian diplomats while he was in Hong Kong.[183][184] In early September 2013, however, Russian president Vladimir Putin said that, a few days before boarding a plane to Moscow, Snowden met in Hong Kong with Russian diplomatic representatives.[185]

On June 22, 18 days after publication of Snowden's NSA documents began, officials revoked his U.S. passport.[186] On June 23, Snowden boarded the commercial Aeroflot flight SU213 to Moscow, accompanied by Sarah Harrison of WikiLeaks.[187][188] Hong Kong authorities said that Snowden had not been detained for the U.S. because the request had not fully complied with Hong Kong law,[189][190] and there was no legal basis to prevent Snowden from leaving.[191][192][Notes 1] On June 24, a U.S. State Department spokesman rejected the explanation of technical noncompliance, accusing the Hong Kong government of deliberately releasing a fugitive despite a valid arrest warrant and after having sufficient time to prohibit his travel.[195] That same day, Julian Assange said that WikiLeaks had paid for Snowden's lodging in Hong Kong and his flight out.[196]

In October 2013, Snowden said that before flying to Moscow, he gave all the classified documents he had obtained to journalists he met in Hong Kong, and kept no copies for himself.[93] In January 2014, he told a German TV interviewer that he gave all of his information to American journalists reporting on American issues.[57] During his first American TV interview, in May 2014, Snowden said he had protected himself from Russian leverage by destroying the material he had been holding before landing in Moscow.[17]

In January 2019, Vanessa Rodel, one of the refugees who had housed Snowden in Hong Kong, and her 7-year-old daughter were granted asylum by Canada. Five other people who helped Snowden still remain in Hong Kong awaiting a response to their asylum request.[197]

On June 23, 2013, Snowden landed at Moscow's Sheremetyevo Airport.[198] WikiLeaks said he was on a circuitous but safe route to asylum in Ecuador.[199] Snowden had a seat reserved to continue to Cuba[200] but did not board that onward flight, saying in a January 2014 interview that he intended to transit through Russia but was stopped en route. He asserted "a planeload of reporters documented the seat I was supposed to be in" when he was ticketed for Havana, but the U.S. cancelled his passport.[181] He said the U.S. wanted him to stay in Moscow so "they could say, 'He's a Russian spy.'"[74] Greenwald's account differed on the point of Snowden being already ticketed. According to Greenwald, Snowden's passport was valid when he departed Hong Kong but was revoked during the hours he was in transit to Moscow, preventing him from obtaining a ticket to leave Russia. Greenwald said Snowden was thus forced to stay in Moscow and seek asylum.[201]

According to one Russian report, Snowden planned to fly from Moscow through Havana to Latin America; however, Cuba told Moscow it would not allow the Aeroflot plane carrying Snowden to land.[183] Russian newspaper Kommersant reported that Cuba had a change of heart after receiving pressure from U.S. officials,[202] leaving him stuck in the transit zone because at the last minute Havana told officials in Moscow not to allow him on the flight.[203] The Washington Post contrasted this version with what it called "widespread speculation" that Russia never intended to let Snowden proceed.[204] Fidel Castro called claims that Cuba would have blocked Snowden's entry a "lie" and a "libel."[200] Describing Snowden's arrival in Moscow as a surprise and likening it to "an unwanted Christmas gift,"[205] Russian president Putin said that Snowden remained in the transit area of Sheremetyevo Airport, had committed no crime in Russia, was free to leave and should do so.[206] Putin denied that Russia's intelligence agencies had worked or were working with Snowden.[205]

Following Snowden's arrival in Moscow, the White House expressed disappointment in Hong Kong's decision to allow him to leave.[207][208][195] An anonymous U.S. official not authorized to discuss the matter told AP Snowden's passport had been revoked before he left Hong Kong, but that a senior official in a country or airline could order subordinates to overlook the withdrawn passport.[209] U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said that Snowden's passport was cancelled "within two hours" of the charges against Snowden being made public[3] which was Friday, June 21.[2] In a July 1 statement, Snowden said, "Although I am convicted of nothing, [the U.S. government] has unilaterally revoked my passport, leaving me a stateless person. Without any judicial order, the administration now seeks to stop me exercising a basic right. A right that belongs to everybody. The right to seek asylum."[210]

Four countries offered Snowden permanent asylum: Ecuador, Nicaragua, Bolivia, and Venezuela.[211] No direct flights between Moscow and Venezuela, Bolivia or Nicaragua existed, however, and the U.S. pressured countries along his route to hand him over. Snowden said in July 2013 that he decided to bid for asylum in Russia because he felt there was no safe way to reach Latin America.[212] Snowden said he remained in Russia because "when we were talking about possibilities for asylum in Latin America, the United States forced down the Bolivian President's plane", citing the Morales plane incident. On the issue, he said "some governments in Western European and North American states have demonstrated a willingness to act outside the law, and this behavior persists today. This unlawful threat makes it impossible for me to travel to Latin America and enjoy the asylum granted there in accordance with our shared rights."[213] He said that he would travel from Russia if there was no interference from the U.S. government.[181]

Four months after Snowden received asylum in Russia, Julian Assange commented, "While Venezuela and Ecuador could protect him in the short term, over the long term there could be a change in government. In Russia, he's safe, he's well-regarded, and that is not likely to change. That was my advice to Snowden, that he would be physically safest in Russia."[170] According to Snowden, "the CIA has a very powerful presence [in Latin America] and the governments and the security services there are relatively much less capable than, say, Russia.... they could have basically snatched me...."[214]

In an October 2014 interview with The Nation magazine, Snowden reiterated that he had originally intended to travel to Latin America: "A lot of people are still unaware that I never intended to end up in Russia." According to Snowden, the U.S. government "waited until I departed Hong Kong to cancel my passport in order to trap me in Russia." Snowden added, "If they really wanted to capture me, they would've allowed me to travel to Latin America, because the CIA can operate with impunity down there. They did not want that; they chose to keep me in Russia."[215]

On July 1, 2013, president Evo Morales of Bolivia, who had been attending a conference in Russia, suggested during an interview with Russia Today that he would consider a request by Snowden for asylum.[216] The following day, Morales's plane, en route to Bolivia, was rerouted to Austria and landed there, after France, Spain, and Italy denied access to their airspace. While the plane was parked in Vienna, the Spanish ambassador to Austria arrived with two embassy personnel and asked to search the plane but they were denied permission by Morales himself.[217] U.S. officials had raised suspicions that Snowden may have been on board.[218] Morales blamed the U.S. for putting pressure on European countries, and said that the grounding of his plane was a violation of international law.[219]

In April 2015, Bolivia's ambassador to Russia, Mara Luisa Ramos Urzagaste, accused Julian Assange of inadvertently putting Morales's life at risk by intentionally providing to the U.S. false rumors that Snowden was on Morales's plane. Assange responded that "we weren't expecting this outcome. The result was caused by the United States' intervention. We can only regret what happened."[220][221]

Snowden applied for political asylum to 21 countries.[222][223] A statement attributed to him contended that the U.S. administration, and specifically Vice President Joe Biden, had pressured the governments to refuse his asylum petitions. Biden had telephoned President Rafael Correa days prior to Snowden's remarks, asking the Ecuadorian leader not to grant Snowden asylum.[224] Ecuador had initially offered Snowden a temporary travel document but later withdrew it,[225] and Correa later called the offer a mistake.[226]

In a July 1 statement published by WikiLeaks, Snowden accused the U.S. government of "using citizenship as a weapon" and using what he described as "old, bad tools of political aggression." Citing Obama's promise to not allow "wheeling and dealing" over the case, Snowden commented, "This kind of deception from a world leader is not justice, and neither is the extralegal penalty of exile."[227] Several days later, WikiLeaks announced that Snowden had applied for asylum in six additional countries, but declined to name them, alleging attempted U.S. interference.[228]

After evaluating the law and Snowden's situation, the French interior ministry rejected his request for asylum.[229] Poland refused to process his application because it did not conform to legal procedure.[230] Brazil's Foreign Ministry said the government planned no response to Snowden's asylum request. Germany and India rejected Snowden's application outright, while Austria, Ecuador, Finland, Norway, Italy, the Netherlands, and Spain said he must be on their territory to apply.[231][232][233] In November 2014, Germany announced that Snowden had not renewed his previously denied request and was not being considered for asylum.[234] Glenn Greenwald later reported that Sigmar Gabriel, Vice-Chancellor of Germany, told him the U.S. government had threatened to stop sharing intelligence if Germany offered Snowden asylum or arranged for his travel there.[235]

Putin said on July 1, 2013, that if Snowden wanted to be granted asylum in Russia, he would be required to "stop his work aimed at harming our American partners."[236] A spokesman for Putin subsequently said that Snowden had withdrawn his asylum application upon learning of the conditions.[237]

In a July 12 meeting at Sheremetyevo Airport with representatives of human rights organizations and lawyers, organized in part by the Russian government,[238] Snowden said he was accepting all offers of asylum that he had already received or would receive. He added that Venezuela's grant of asylum formalized his asylee status, removing any basis for state interference with his right to asylum.[239] He also said he would request asylum in Russia until he resolved his travel problems.[240]Russian Federal Migration Service officials confirmed on July 16 that Snowden had submitted an application for temporary asylum.[241] On July 24, Kucherena said his client wanted to find work in Russia, travel and create a life for himself, and had already begun learning Russian.[242]

Amid media reports in early July 2013 attributed to U.S. administration sources that Obama's one-on-one meeting with Putin, ahead of a G20 meeting in St Petersburg scheduled for September, was in doubt due to Snowden's protracted sojourn in Russia,[243] top U.S. officials repeatedly made it clear to Moscow that Snowden should immediately be returned to the United States to face charges for the unauthorized leaking of classified information.[244][245][246] His Russian lawyer said Snowden needed asylum because he faced persecution by the U.S. government and feared "that he could be subjected to torture and capital punishment."[247]

In a letter to Russian Minister of Justice Aleksandr Konovalov dated July 23, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder repudiated Snowden's claim to refugee status, and offered a limited validity passport good for direct return to the U.S.[248] He further asserted that Snowden would not be subject to torture or the death penalty, and would receive trial in a civilian court with proper legal counsel.[249] The same day, the Russian president's spokesman reiterated that his government would not hand over Snowden, noting that Putin was not personally involved in the matter and that it was being handled through talks between the FBI and Russia's FSB.[250]

On June 14, 2013, United States federal prosecutors filed a criminal complaint against Snowden, charging him with theft of government property and two counts of violating the Espionage Act of 1917 through unauthorized communication of national defense information and willful communication of classified communications intelligence information to an unauthorized person.[2][248] Each of the three charges carries a maximum possible prison term of ten years. The charge was initially secret and was unsealed a week later.

Snowden was asked in a January 2014 interview about returning to the U.S. to face the charges in court, as Obama had suggested a few days prior. Snowden explained why he rejected the request:

What he doesn't say are that the crimes that he's charged me with are crimes that don't allow me to make my case. They don't allow me to defend myself in an open court to the public and convince a jury that what I did was to their benefit. ... So it's, I would say, illustrative that the President would choose to say someone should face the music when he knows the music is a show trial.[57][251]

Snowden's legal representative, Jesselyn Radack, wrote that "the Espionage Act effectively hinders a person from defending himself before a jury in an open court." She said that the "arcane World War I law" was never meant to prosecute whistleblowers, but rather spies who betrayed their trust by selling secrets to enemies for profit. Non-profit betrayals were not considered.[252]

On September 17, 2019, the United States filed a lawsuit against Snowden for alleged violations of non-disclosure agreements with the CIA and NSA.[253] The complaint alleges that Snowden violated prepublication obligations related to the publication of his memoir Permanent Record. The complaint lists the publishers Macmillan and Holtzbrink as relief-defendants.[254]

On June 23, 2013, Snowden landed at Moscow's Sheremetyevo Airport aboard a commercial Aeroflot flight from Hong Kong.[255][187][256] On August 1, after 39 days in the transit section, he left the airport and was granted temporary asylum in Russia for one year.[257] A year later, his temporary asylum having expired, Snowden received a three-year residency permit allowing him to travel freely within Russia and to go abroad for up to three months. He was not granted permanent political asylum.[258] In January 2017, a spokesperson for the Russian foreign ministry wrote on Facebook that Snowden's asylum, which was due to expire in 2017, was extended by "a couple more years".[259][260] Snowden's lawyer Anatoly Kucherena said the extension was valid until 2020.[261]

As of October 2019, Snowden had been granted permanent residency in Russia, which is renewed every three years. He secretly married Lindsay Mills in 2017. By 2019 he no longer felt the need to be disguised in public and lived what was described as a "more or less normal life", able to travel around Russia and make a living from speaking arrangements (locally and over the internet). His memoir Permanent Record was released internationally, and while U.S. royalties were expected to be seized, he was able to receive the advance.[6] According to Snowden, "One of the things that is lost in all the problematic politics of the Russian government is the fact this is one of the most beautiful countries in the world" with "friendly" and "warm" people.[6] In another interview, Snowden went on to say: "There's a way to criticize the Russian government's policies without criticizing the Russian people who are ordinary people, who just want to have a happy life; they just want to do better. They want the same things that you do."[262]

A subject of controversy, Snowden has been variously called a hero,[263][264][265] a whistleblower,[266][267][268][269] a dissident,[270] a patriot,[271][272][273] and a traitor.[274][275][276][277] Pentagon Papers leaker Daniel Ellsberg called Snowden's release of NSA material the most significant leak in U.S. history.[278][279]

Numerous high-ranking current or former U.S. government officials reacted publicly to Snowden's disclosures.

In the U.S., Snowden's actions precipitated an intense debate on privacy and warrantless domestic surveillance.[294][295] President Obama was initially dismissive of Snowden, saying "I'm not going to be scrambling jets to get a 29-year-old hacker."[296][297][298] In August 2013, Obama rejected the suggestion that Snowden was a patriot,[299] and in November said that "the benefit of the debate he generated was not worth the damage done, because there was another way of doing it."[300]

In June 2013, U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont shared a "must read" news story on his blog by Ron Fournier, stating "Love him or hate him, we all owe Snowden our thanks for forcing upon the nation an important debate. But the debate shouldn't be about him. It should be about the gnawing questions his actions raised from the shadows."[301] In 2015, Sanders stated that "Snowden played a very important role in educating the American public" and that although Snowden should not go unpunished for breaking the law, "that education should be taken into consideration before the sentencing."[302]

Snowden said in December 2013 that he was "inspired by the global debate" ignited by the leaks and that NSA's "culture of indiscriminate global espionage ... is collapsing."[303]

At the end of 2013, however, The Washington Post noted that the public debate and its offshoots had produced no meaningful change in policy, with the status quo continuing.[139]

In 2016, on The Axe Files podcast, former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said that Snowden "performed a public service by raising the debate that we engaged in and by the changes that we made." Holder nevertheless said that Snowden's actions were inappropriate and illegal.[304]

In September 2016, the bipartisan U.S. House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence completed a review of the Snowden disclosures and said that the federal government would have to spend millions of dollars responding to the fallout from Snowden's disclosures.[305] The report also said that "the public narrative popularized by Snowden and his allies is rife with falsehoods, exaggerations, and crucial omissions."[306] The report was denounced by Washington Post reporter Barton Gellman, who called it "aggressively dishonest" and "contemptuous of fact."[307]

In August 2013, President Obama said that he had called for a review of U.S. surveillance activities before Snowden had begun revealing details of the NSA's operations,[299] and announced that he was directing DNI James Clapper "to establish a review group on intelligence and communications technologies."[308][309] In December, the task force issued 46 recommendations that, if adopted, would subject the NSA to additional scrutiny by the courts, Congress, and the president, and would strip the NSA of the authority to infiltrate American computer systems using backdoors in hardware or software.[310] Panel member Geoffrey R. Stone said there was no evidence that the bulk collection of phone data had stopped any terror attacks.[311]

On June 6, 2013, in the wake of Snowden's leaks, conservative public interest lawyer and Judicial Watch founder Larry Klayman filed a lawsuit claiming that the federal government had unlawfully collected metadata for his telephone calls and was harassing him. In Klayman v. Obama, Judge Richard J. Leon referred to the NSA's "almost-Orwellian technology" and ruled the bulk telephone metadata program to be probably unconstitutional.[312] Snowden later described Judge Leon's decision as vindication.[313]

On June 11, the ACLU filed a lawsuit against James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, alleging that the NSA's phone records program was unconstitutional. In December 2013, ten days after Judge Leon's ruling, Judge William H. Pauley III came to the opposite conclusion. In ACLU v. Clapper, although acknowledging that privacy concerns are not trivial, Pauley found that the potential benefits of surveillance outweigh these considerations and ruled that the NSA's collection of phone data is legal.[314]

Gary Schmitt, former staff director of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, wrote that "The two decisions have generated public confusion over the constitutionality of the NSA's data collection programa kind of judicial 'he-said, she-said' standoff."[315]

On May 7, 2015, in the case of ACLU v. Clapper, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit said that Section 215 of the Patriot Act did not authorize the NSA to collect Americans' calling records in bulk, as exposed by Snowden in 2013. The decision voided U.S. District Judge William Pauley's December 2013 finding that the NSA program was lawful, and remanded the case to him for further review. The appeals court did not rule on the constitutionality of the bulk surveillance, and declined to enjoin the program, noting the pending expiration of relevant parts of the Patriot Act. Circuit Judge Gerard E. Lynch wrote that, given the national security interests at stake, it was prudent to give Congress an opportunity to debate and decide the matter.[316]

On June 2, 2015, the U.S. Senate passed, and President Obama signed, the USA Freedom Act which restored in modified form several provisions of the Patriot Act that had expired the day before, while for the first time imposing some limits on the bulk collection of telecommunication data on U.S. citizens by American intelligence agencies. The new restrictions were widely seen as stemming from Snowden's revelations.[317][318]

Hans-Georg Maaen, head of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, Germany's domestic security agency, speculated that Snowden could have been working for the Russian government.[319][320] Snowden rejected this insinuation,[321] speculating on Twitter in German that "it cannot be proven if Maaen is an agent of the SVR or FSB."[322]

Crediting the Snowden leaks, the United Nations General Assembly unanimously adopted Resolution 68/167 in December 2013. The non-binding resolution denounced unwarranted digital surveillance and included a symbolic declaration of the right of all individuals to online privacy.[323][324][325]

Support for Snowden came from Latin American leaders including the Argentinian President Cristina Fernndez de Kirchner, Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa, Bolivian President Evo Morales, Venezuelan President Nicols Maduro, and Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega.[326][327]

In an official report published in October 2015, the United Nations special rapporteur for the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of speech, Professor David Kaye, criticized the U.S. government's harsh treatment of, and bringing criminal charges against, whistleblowers, including Edward Snowden. The report found that Snowden's revelations were important for people everywhere and made "a deep and lasting impact on law, policy and politics."[328][329] The European Parliament invited Snowden to make a pre-recorded video appearance to aid their NSA investigation.[330][331] Snowden gave written testimony in which he said that he was seeking asylum in the EU, but that he was told by European Parliamentarians that the U.S. would not allow EU partners to make such an offer.[332] He told the Parliament that the NSA was working with the security agencies of EU states to "get access to as much data of EU citizens as possible."[333] The NSA's Foreign Affairs Division, he claimed, lobbies the EU and other countries to change their laws, allowing for "everyone in the country" to be spied on legally.[334]

In July 2014, Navi Pillay, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, told a news conference in Geneva that the U.S. should abandon its efforts to prosecute Snowden, since his leaks were in the public interest.[335]

More:

Edward Snowden - Wikipedia

Posted in NSA