The NSA's big problem, explained by the NSA
Amongst the new trove of classified documents released by Der Speigel is a rather academic discussion, in the NSA's own foreign affairs journal, about the differences between American signals intelligence collection and German signals intelligence collection.
One passage in particular stands out, as it highlights how the Germans give far more weight to privacy than the NSA does.
For the Germans, "...spam filters are used to process large data volumes. Selected traffic is passed through an automated privacy protection system, ensuring analysts cannot view German protected traffic. On-site BND analysts then manually assess all selected traffic to determine intelligence value." (BND refers to the German foreign intelligence agency, the Bundeshachrichtendienst.) It continues:
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
NSA analysts discussed NSA's "hunt versus gather" philosophy, our multi-stage selection and filtering process, and the evolution of DNI targeting systems from GRANDMASTER to WEALTHYCLUSTER, and in the future, TURMOIL. BND appeared especially interested in the TURMOIL approach of scanning and making judgments at the packet level prior to sessioning.
...NSA and BND use opposite selection and filtering approaches. Where NSA primarily relies on equipment for selection ... and analyst minimization for privacy protection, the BND relies on analysts to manually scan traffic for selection, and then equipment to filter data for privacy protection.
Full use of NSA DNI processing systems and technologies at the JSA will be key to influencing the BND to alter their strategic DNI approach.
Let me translate. The NSA has chosen the "gather" philosophy, which means they collect as much information as possible, from everywhere and anywhere, use sophisticated technology and analytics to figure out what's important automatically, determine targets and selectors by algorithms and metrics, and then, with the data that has "won" this Darwinian competition to get to the human analyst's desk, determines whether the target is legitimate.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
BND, by contrast, employs privacy protection technology before raw intelligence reaches an analyst. The analyst is therefore only seeing the data cuts that do not meet pre-determined criteria for being screened out. In real terms, that means that the BND programs in a bunch of domestic German domain names and IP addresses into its system and asks the system to delete the "digital network information" — metadata and such — that matches them.
The NSA's cable taps do this a little bit. But the agency errs on the side of gathering information. It empowers (and obligates) the analyst herself to determine, using both her brain and other data, whether a selector, a target, is legitimate and foreign.
The BND approach, if adopted by the NSA, would probably reduce the number of so-called over-collects — where U.S. persons' information is inadvertently ingested and stored. The BND does not store the content that it deletes.
The NSA justifies its approach, generally, by pointing to the scope of its mission. It would be, the agency believes, far too time intensive to manually assess traffic for intelligence value. It is much easier to let computers see patterns and make matches — there is just so much damn data — and then "minimize" any domestic data that's collected. The NSA would also say that there is simply no other way to prosecute its mission.
I think the NSA might be correct. But I also see, from this assessment, that other countries have determined that the balance between collection and privacy can tip in the opposite direction and still be steady enough to get the job done.
Create an account with the same email registered to your subscription to unlock access.
Marc Ambinder is TheWeek.com's editor-at-large. He is the author, with D.B. Grady, of The Command and Deep State: Inside the Government Secrecy Industry. Marc is also a contributing editor for The Atlantic and GQ. Formerly, he served as White House correspondent for National Journal, chief political consultant for CBS News, and politics editor at The Atlantic. Marc is a 2001 graduate of Harvard. He is married to Michael Park, a corporate strategy consultant, and lives in Los Angeles.
-
The growing thirst for camel milk
Under the radar Climate change and health-conscious consumers are pushing demand for nutrient-rich product – and the growth of industrialised farming
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
'Good riddance to the televised presidential debate'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Harold Maass, The Week US Published
-
Caitlin Clark the No. 1 pick in bullish WNBA Draft
Speed Read As expected, she went to the Indiana Fever
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
How Cleopatra became a canvas for society's anxieties
The Explainer All of our fears about women in power, female sexuality, and race have been projected onto this historical figure
By Erika Harlitz-Kern Published
-
The recycling crisis
The Explainer Much of the stuff Americans think they are "recycling" now ends up in landfills and incinerators. Why?
By The Week Staff Published
-
The growing crisis in Venezuela
The Explainer Three million people have fled imploding Venezuela. How did it get this bad?
By The Week Staff Published
-
The L.A. teachers strike, explained
The Explainer Everything you need to know about the education crisis roiling the Los Angeles Unified School District
By Jeff Spross Published
-
Theresa May is Britain's worst procrastinator
The Explainer She had a difficult choice to make — and she opted not to make it
By Jeff Spross Last updated
-
How Saudi Arabia became America's ally
The Explainer Here's everything you need to know
By The Week Staff Published
-
Afghanistan, the endless war
The Explainer The U.S. war in the 'graveyard of empires' has lasted nearly 17 years. Will it ever end?
By The Week Staff Published
-
Is democracy finally taking root in Iraq?
The Explainer Iraq is again struggling to form a new government. But 15 years after the U.S.-led invasion, there are distinct signs of progress.
By The Week Staff Published