We just published a Snowden document from 2006 about NSA successfully breaking the encryption and spying on VPNs run by Al Jazeera, the Iraqi military, airlines and reservation systems, and other "high potential" targets

@micahflee Any particular reason this took FIVE YEARS to release? I mean, other than holding on to exclusivity for profit... Seems like your fellow journalists at Al Jazeera could have used a heads-up before now... and it's not like your document hoarding hasn't already had a lot of serious implications

@donblanco @micahflee one can only wonder what documents they're still sitting on. How many lives could have been saved by not protecting the powerful.

@donblanco heh, FYI in case you don't know, Mint Press News is a conspiracy website. It's similar to trying to use Infowars as a source.

Al Jazeera did have the heads up. Der Spiegel reported this in 2013, just didn't mention VPNs.

Exclusivity for profit doesn't apply to us. TI is non-profit, doesn't have ads, etc. Also NYTimes, Guardian, Speigel, WaPo, etc have these docs too

@donblanco but the real reason it took five years is that it's a lot of work, and everyone but us have moved on from Snowden stories.

We started the SIDtoday project in May 2016 to publish a large swath of the archive, and have a team of people working on it ever since. We've published 1,861 Snowden docs through this project so far, much more than any other newsroom.

You should check it out:

@micahflee Thanks for that link, will definitely read. I think I still have a fundamental disagreement on philosophy here -- document bulk release vs long-form investigative reporting -- it seems to me that one could do both without giving away the farm. Otherwise you end up with the NSA doing something nefarious, documenting it 3 yrs later, having it leaked 7 yrs later, then tacking on an additional 5 yrs until document release. Are they even using those methods by then?

@donblanco SIDtoday is actually an attempt at responsible bulk release while still complying with the agreement with the source, which includes only publishing docs that *journalists* consider are in the public interest and doesn't put people in danger/genuinely hurt US national security, careful redaction, etc. We can't just dump all the docs, we have to do journalism on them all.

But really, most major Snowden stories have already been reported.

@micahflee Well that's what I get for doing quick searches from my phone. :(

My thoughts on TI are mostly based on writing/interviews with/from Taibbi, Silverstein and Ames/Levine. My initial enthusiasm has been dampened considerably. At the very least, the delays in publishing have *contributed* to people 'moving on' from Snowden. And yes, I do harbor some conspiracy thoughts on the whole thing, but I try to temper those :/

@micahflee I don't see any mention of OpenVPN or OpenVPN-based VPNs (like LEAP's bitmask, etc), but maybe I missed that in my quick read. Are those of us who use these types of VPNs still relatively 'safe' or should we be as equally concerned about IPSec based VPNs? Thanks

@NoMoreDon8 as far as I can tell, I haven't seen any evidence in the Snowden documents about VPNs that OpenVPN is affected. You still obviously need a strong ciphersuite, don't use a single PSK if it's shared amongst many users, etc.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The original server operated by the Mastodon gGmbH non-profit