Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
FBI was able to figure it out because they had at least one of Malik's phones.
There are probably programs that allow you to input a person's name and possible alisases, friends, other links etc. The program simultaneosly runs that name and other inputted data through Face Book, My Space, and the myrid of other sites.
Quote:
Originally Posted by elan
They don't have to search anyone's home, there are programs that can scan social media. Even when using an alias troublesome stuff can be traced back.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvoc
No. Not if the user is knowledgeable. And to penetrate even simple aliases means you are using significant resources.
The crux of the issue is "focused resources". My bet is that even the most knowledgable users can be traced back if the effort is deemed to be a national priority and sufficient resources are assigned to the tracing effort.
The national priority cases aside, there are the thousands of ordinary applicants who are simply being screened for potential problems. As Ivoc mentioned, even low level precautions taken by these people greatly complicates casual, or even moderately focused screening efforts.
In short, there is probably a huge efficiency difference between "We have identified a national priority level need to trace this person" and "We are screening this person along with 10,000 others for possible problems".
There are probably programs that allow you to input a person's name and possible alisases, friends, other links etc. The program simultaneosly runs that name and other inputted data through Face Book, My Space, and the myrid of other sites.
The crux of the issue is "focused resources". My bet is that even the most knowledgable users can be traced back if the effort is deemed to be a national priority and sufficient resources are assigned to the tracing effort.
The national priority cases aside, there are the thousands of ordinary applicants who are simply being screened for potential problems. As Ivoc mentioned, even low level precautions taken by these people greatly complicates casual, or even moderately focused screening efforts.
In short, there is probably a huge efficiency difference between "We have identified a national priority level need to trace this person" and "We are screening this person along with 10,000 others for possible problems".
The NSA can do all that and more. The phones have GPS as well.
Snowden uncovered all those spying programs the NSA does.
And they keep all that data in Utah and are building a second huge data center in MD.
The NSA can do all that and more. The phones have GPS as well.
Snowden uncovered all those spying programs the NSA does.
And they keep all that data in Utah and are building a second huge data center in MD.
Not really. NSA had an ability to track a gigantic amount of stuff and can extract from it much information about the connections between people. But there is still no good way to break a one use cipher and others can withstand a significant assault. There are relatively simple means to make a persona that is not track able back to you. And the effort needed to track any large part of social media across language and cultures would probably require the expansion of NSA by an order of magnitude or even more.
Practically NSA would need trap door access to virtually everything. But it is also practically impossible to keep such mechanisms secret over a long period...so if NSA can get in so will the Chechen hackers in a year or so.
Not really. NSA had an ability to track a gigantic amount of stuff and can extract from it much information about the connections between people. But there is still no good way to break a one use cipher and others can withstand a significant assault. There are relatively simple means to make a persona that is not track able back to you. And the effort needed to track any large part of social media across language and cultures would probably require the expansion of NSA by an order of magnitude or even more.
Practically NSA would need trap door access to virtually everything. But it is also practically impossible to keep such mechanisms secret over a long period...so if NSA can get in so will the Chechen hackers in a year or so.
She didn't use any ciphers. The FBI found her alias after the fact.
FB shuts down pages for racist remarks in the blink of an eyelash so you betcha they have scanners.
And FB has access to all the data..both public and private.
The NSA is directly hooked into the backbone; they have direct access to anything traveling the fiber.
Not really. NSA had an ability to track a gigantic amount of stuff and can extract from it much information about the connections between people. But there is still no good way to break a one use cipher and others can withstand a significant assault.
This source here explains how one time use ciphers work and boasts that they are unbreakable via brute force attempts. They are probably right.
But.... brute force attempts use short cuts. For example, the effort against the German enigma code used a two prong approach where brute force was combined with lingustical and logic analysis (structure of the German language, almost all communication on earth complies with 23 or so rules of Aristotlian logic). The lingustics and logic analysis were then used to create algorithims for "short cuts".
Also, the source above emphasizes that the cipher is based on a completely random phenomena. Though the phenomena is completely random, it has also been described by humans. This description seems to involves assigning the phenomena a state of (+) or (-). Whether my impression is accurate or not for this particular phenomena aside, even truly random phenomena might not be "truly random" after humans describe it. Our descriptions of the phenomena must follow certain logical precepts for us to be able to understand it.
In short...unbreakable by brute force might not mean unbreakable.
Not really. NSA had an ability to track a gigantic amount of stuff and can extract from it much information about the connections between people. But there is still no good way to break a one use cipher and others can withstand a significant assault. There are relatively simple means to make a persona that is not track able back to you. And the effort needed to track any large part of social media across language and cultures would probably require the expansion of NSA by an order of magnitude or even more.
Practically NSA would need trap door access to virtually everything. But it is also practically impossible to keep such mechanisms secret over a long period...so if NSA can get in so will the Chechen hackers in a year or so.
The Chechen hackers would likely be sub contracted to build and maintain the trap door.
The NSA can monitor all the social media it wants, but congress has shown it won't even prevent individuals who are on the terrorist watch list from exercising their "right" to purchase assault rifles. That makes NO Sense at all. Why even bother identifying anyone as a threat if you are not willing to take any actions to prevent them from causing another San Bernardino?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
