Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Security

Echelon Architect Interviewed 264

Posted by Hemos from the talking-with-the-man dept.
ploog writes "Echelon has been surrounded by controversy since rumors of it first popped up on the net. The US Government has never admitted to it, although various other governments have. Now, a lead architect for Echelon and its "big brother," Echelon II, has been discovered and interviewed. This is fascinating stuff. He is able to give some details about how Echelon works, although he doesn't come divulge everything, for obvious reasons. Trying to deny Echelon just got that much harder. Link found via Megarad.com."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Echelon Architect Interviewed More

Echelon Architect Interviewed

Comments Filter:

  • Yeah, right (Score:2, Interesting)

    by --daz-- ( 139799 )
    The US government is trying to deny it and hide its existance, and then someone "suddenly" finds the architect and he starts freely talking about it? I doubt it.
  • How long until this guy gets offed by the feds? :-)

    • How long until this guy gets offed by the feds? :-)

      as long as it takes for Jed Bartlett to say "take him."
  • ... by secrecy, I wouldn't instantly arrive at the conclusion that any of this interview (with a somewhat elusive subject) is valid. :p
    • You'd like us to believe that, wouldn't you?? You're in on it too!
    • Well, the website looks kinda legit, and Echelon II is mentioned in the guy's bio:

      http://www.ijet.com/about/management.html [ijet.com]

      • Of course, that's what they want you to believe.

        If you want people to believe what doesn't exist, deny it's existence. If you want people to not believe what does exist, admit it existence. Basic lesson from Illuminatus!

      • Whoring here, but:

        Extensive Information [humanunderground.com] on Echelon. Note that the ACLU is investigating. Or was, until it became neccessary for "combatting terrorism."

        Keep in mind our government is using this information to KILL PEOPLE.

        But I digress. Form your own conclusions.
      • He also appears in this Washinton post article

        http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/ 02 / etro_ijet040402.htm
    • I recall this thing on the Discovery channel that was an interview with a senior guy from Area 51 -- I didn't believe that either.

  • [Save your mod points. I have enough Karma.]

    Answers to Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) about Echelon
    Updated February 7, 2002

    Q - What is Project ECHELON?

    ECHELON is the term popularly used for an automated global interception and relay system operated by the intelligence agencies in five nations: the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand (it is believed that ECHELON is the code name for the portion of the system that intercepts satellite-based communications). While the United States National Security Agency (NSA) takes the lead, ECHELON works in conjunction with other intelligence agencies, including the Australian Defence Signals Directorate (DSD). It is believed that ECHELON also works with Britain's Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) and the agencies of other allies of the United States, pursuant to various treaties. (1)

    These countries coordinate their activities pursuant to the UKUSA agreement, which dates back to 1947. The original ECHELON dates back to 1971. However, its capabilities and priorities have expanded greatly since its formation. According to reports, it is capable of intercepting and processing many types of transmissions, throughout the globe. In fact, it has been suggested that ECHELON may intercept as many as 3 billion communications everyday, including phone calls, e-mail messages, Internet downloads, satellite transmissions, and so on. (2) The ECHELON system gathers all of these transmissions indiscriminately, then distills the information that is most heavily desired through artificial intelligence programs. Some sources have claimed that ECHELON sifts through an estimated 90 percent of all traffic that flows through the Internet. (3)

    However, the exact capabilities and goals of ECHELON remain unclear. For example, it is unknown whether ECHELON actually targets domestic communications. Also, it is apparently very difficult for ECHELON to intercept certain types of transmissions, particularly fiber communications.

    Q - How does ECHELON work?

    ECHELON apparently collects data in several ways. Reports suggest it has massive ground based radio antennae to intercept satellite transmissions. In addition, some sites reputedly are tasked with tapping surface traffic. These antennae reportedly are in the United States, Italy, England, Turkey, New Zealand, Canada, Australia, and several other places. (4)

    Similarly, it is believed that ECHELON uses numerous satellites to catch "spillover" data from transmissions between cities. These satellites then beam the information down to processing centers on the ground. The main centers are in the United States (near Denver), England (Menwith Hill), Australia, and Germany. (5)

    According to various sources, ECHELON also routinely intercepts Internet transmissions. The organization allegedly has installed numerous "sniffer" devices. These "sniffers" collect information from data packets as they traverse the Internet via several key junctions. It also uses search software to scan for web sites that may be of interest. (6)

    Furthermore, it is believed that ECHELON has even used special underwater devices which tap into cables that carry phone calls across the seas. According to published reports, American divers were able to install surveillance devices on to the underwater cables. One of these taps was discovered in 1982, but other devices apparently continued to function undetected. (7)

    It is not known at this point whether ECHELON has been able to tap fiber optic phone cables.
    Finally, if the aforementioned methods fail to garner the desired information, there is another alternative. Apparently, the nations that are involved with ECHELON also train special agents to install a variety of special data collection devices. One of these devices is reputed to be an information processing kit that is the size of a suitcase. Another such item is a sophisticated radio receiver that is as small as a credit card. (8)

    After capturing this raw data, ECHELON sifts through them using DICTIONARY. DICTIONARY is actually a special system of computers which finds pertinent information by searching for key words, addresses, etc. These search programs help pare down the voluminous quantity of transmissions which pass through the ECHELON network every day. These programs also seem to enable users to focus on any specific subject upon which information is desired. (9)

    Q - If ECHELON is so powerful, why haven't I heard about it before?

    The United States government has gone to extreme lengths to keep ECHELON a secret. To this day, the U.S. government refuses to admit that ECHELON even exists. We know it exists because both the governments of Australia (through its Defence Signals Directorate) and New Zealand have admitted to this fact. (10) However, even with this revelation, US officials have refused to comment.

    This "wall of silence" is beginning to erode. The first report on ECHELON was published in 1988. (11) In addition, besides the revelations from Australia, the Scientific and Technical Options Assessment program office (STOA) of the European Parliament commissioned two reports which describe ECHELON's activities. These reports unearthed a startling amount of evidence, which suggests that Echelon's powers may have been underestimated. The first report, entitled "An Appraisal of Technologies of Political Control," suggested that ECHELON primarily targeted civilians.

    This report found that:

    "The ECHELON system forms part of the UKUSA system but unlike many of the electronic spy systems developed during the cold war, ECHELON is designed for primarily non-military targets: governments, organisations and businesses in virtually every country. The ECHELON system works by indiscriminately intercepting very large quantities of communications and then siphoning out what is valuable using artificial intelligence aids like Memex to find key words. Five nations share the results with the US as the senior partner under the UKUSA agreement of 1948, Britain, Canada, New Zealand and Australia are very much acting as subordinate information servicers.
    "Each of the five centres supply "dictionaries" to the other four of keywords, phrases, people and places to "tag" and the tagged intercept is forwarded straight to the requesting country. Whilst there is much information gathered about potential terrorists, there is a lot of economic intelligence, notably intensive monitoring of all the countries participating in the GATT negotiations. But Hager found that by far the main priorities of this system continued to be military and political intelligence applicable to their wider interests. Hager quotes from a "highly placed intelligence operatives" who spoke to the Observer in London. "We feel we can no longer remain silent regarding that which we regard to be gross malpractice and negligence within the establishment in which we operate." They gave as examples. GCHQ interception of three charities, including Amnesty International and Christian Aid. "At any time GCHQ is able to home in on their communications for a routine target request," the GCHQ source said. In the case of phone taps the procedure is known as Mantis. With telexes its called Mayfly. By keying in a code relating to third world aid, the source was able to demonstrate telex "fixes" on the three organisations. With no system of accountability, it is difficult to discover what criteria determine who is not a target." (12)
    A more recent report, known as Interception Capabilities 2000, describes ECHELON capabilities in even more elaborate detail. (13) The release of the report sparked accusations from the French government that the United States was using ECHELON to give American companies an advantage over rival firms. (14) In response, R. James Woolsey, the former head of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), charged that the French government was using bribes to get lucrative deals around the world, and that US surveillance networks were used simply to level the playing field. (15) However, experts have pointed out that Woolsey missed several key points. For example, Woolsey neglected to mention alleged instances of economic espionage (cited in Intelligence Capabilities 2000) that did not involve bribery. Furthermore, many observers expressed alarm with Woolsey's apparent assertion that isolated incidents of bribery could justify the wholesale interception of the world's communications. (16)

    The European Parliament formed a temporary Committee of Enquiry to investigate ECHELON abuses. (17) In May 2001, members of this committee visited the United States in an attempt to discover more details about ECHELON. However, officials from both the NSA and the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) canceled meetings that they had previously scheduled with the European panel. The committee's chairman, Carlos Coelho, said that his group was "very disappointed" with the apparent rebuffs; in protest, the Parliamentary representatives returned home a day early. (18)

    Afterwards, the committee published a report stating that ECHELON does indeed exist and that individuals should strongly consider encrypting their emails and other Internet messages. (19) However, the panel was unable to confirm suspicions that ECHELON is used to conduct industrial espionage, due to a lack of evidence. (20) Ironically, the report also mentioned the idea that European government agents should be allowed greater powers to decrypt electronic communications, which was criticized by some observers (including several members of the committee) as giving further support to Europe's own ECHELON-type system. (21) The European Parliament approved the report, but despite the apparent need for further investigation, the committee was disbanded. (22) Nevertheless, the European Commission plans to draft a "roadmap" for data protection that will address many of the concerns aired by the EP panel. (23)

    Meanwhile, after years of denying the existence of ECHELON, the Dutch government issued a letter that stated: "Although the Dutch government does not have official confirmation of the existence of Echelon by the governments related to this system, it thinks it is plausible this network exists. The government believes not only the governments associated with Echelon are able to intercept communication systems, but that it is an activity of the investigative authorities and intelligence services of many countries with governments of different political signature." (24) These revelations worried Dutch legislators, who had convened a special hearing on the subject. During the hearing, several experts argued that there must be tougher oversight of government surveillance activities. There was also considerable criticism of Dutch government efforts to protect individual privacy, particularly the fact that no information had been made available relating to Dutch intelligence service's investigation of possible ECHELON abuses.(25)

    In addition, an Italian government official has begun to investigate Echelon's intelligence-gathering efforts, based on the belief that the organization may be spying on European citizens in violation of Italian or international law. (26)

    Events in the United States have also indicated that the "wall of silence" might not last much longer. Exercising their Constitutionally created oversight authority, members of the House Select Committee on Intelligence started asking questions about the legal basis for NSA's ECHELON activities. In particular, the Committee wanted to know if the communications of Americans were being intercepted and under what authority, since US law severely limits the ability of the intelligence agencies to engage in domestic surveillance. When asked about its legal authority, NSA invoked the attorney-client privilege and refused to disclose the legal standards by which ECHELON might have conducted its activities. (27)

    President Clinton then signed into law a funding bill which required the NSA to report on the legal basis for ECHELON and similar activities. (28) However, the subsequent report (entitled Legal Standards for the Intelligence Community in Conducting Electronic Surveillance) gave few details about Echelon's operations and legality. (29)

    However, during these proceedings, Rep. Bob Barr (R-GA), who has taken the lead in Congressional efforts to ferret out the truth about ECHELON, stated that he had arranged for the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee to hold its own oversight hearings.(30)

    Finally, the Electronic Privacy Information Center has sued the US Government, hoping to obtain documents which would describe the legal standards by which ECHELON operates.(31)

    Q - What is being done with the information that ECHELON collects?

    The original purpose of ECHELON was to protect national security. That purpose continues today. For example, we know that ECHELON is gathering information on North Korea. Sources from Australia's DSD have disclosed this much because Australian officials help operate the facilities there which scan through transmissions, looking for pertinent material. (32) Similarly, the Spanish government has apparently signed a deal with the United States to receive information collected using ECHELON. The consummation of this agreement was confirmed by Spanish Foreign Minister Josep Pique, who tried to justify this arrangement on security grounds. (33)

    However, national security is not Echelon's only concern. Reports have indicated that industrial espionage has become a part of Echelon's activities. While present information seems to suggest that only high-ranking government officials have direct control over Echelon's tasks, the information that is gained may be passed along at the discretion of these very same officials. As a result, much of this information has been given to American companies, in apparent attempts to give these companies an edge over their less knowledgeable counterparts. (34)

    In addition, there are concerns that Echelon's actions may be used to stifle political dissent. Many of these concerns were voiced in a report commissioned by the European Parliament. What is more, there are no known safeguards to prevent such abuses of power. (35)

    Q - Is there any evidence that ECHELON is doing anything improper or illegal with the spying resources at its disposal?

    ECHELON is a highly classified operation, which is conducted with little or no oversight by national parliaments or courts. Most of what is known comes from whistleblowers and classified documents. The simple truth is that there is no way to know precisely what ECHELON is being used for.

    But there is evidence, much of which is circumstantial, that ECHELON (along with its British counterpart) has been engaged in significant invasions of privacy. These alleged violations include secret surveillance of political organizations, such as Amnesty International. (36) It has also been reported that ECHELON has engaged in industrial espionage on various private companies such as Airbus Industries and Panavia, then has passed along the information to their American competitors. (37) It is unclear just how far Echelon's activities have harmed private individuals.

    However, the most sensational revelation was that Diana, Princess of Wales may have come under ECHELON surveillance before she died. As reported in the Washington Post, the NSA admitted that they possessed files on the Princess, partly composed of intercepted phone conversations. While one official from the NSA claimed that the Princess was never a direct target, this disclosure seems to indicates the intrusive, yet surreptitious manner by which ECHELON operates. (38)

    What is even more disquieting is that, if these allegations are proven to be true, the NSA and its compatriot organizations may have circumvented countless laws in numerous countries. Many nations have laws in place to prevent such invasions of privacy. However, there are suspicions that ECHELON has engaged in subterfuge to avoid these legal restrictions. For example, it is rumored that nations would not use their own agents to spy on their own citizens, but assign the task to agents from other countries. (39) In addition, as mentioned earlier, it is unclear just what legal standards ECHELON follows, if any actually exist. Thus, it is difficult to say what could prevent ECHELON from abusing its remarkable capabilities.

    Q - Is everyone else doing what ECHELON does?

    Maybe not everyone else, but there are plenty of other countries that engage in the type of intelligence gathering that ECHELON performs. These countries apparently include Russia, France, Israel, India, Pakistan and many others. (40) Indeed, the excesses of these ECHELON-like operations are rumored to be similar in form to their American equivalents, including digging up information for private companies to give them a commercial advantage.

    However, it is also known that ECHELON system is the largest of its kind. What is more, its considerable powers are enhanced through the efforts of America's allies, including the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Other countries don't have the resources to engage in the massive garnering of information that the United States is carrying out.

    Notes
    1. Development of Surveillance Technology and Risk of Abuse of Economic Information (An appraisal of technologies for political control), Part 4/4: The state of the art in Communications Intelligence (COMINT) of automated processing for intelligence purposes of intercepted broadband multi-language leased or common carrier systems, and its applicability to COMINT targeting and selection, including speech recognition, Ch. 1, para. 5, PE 168.184 / Part 4/4 (April 1999). See Duncan Campbell, Interception Capabilities 2000 (April 1999) (http://www.iptvreports.mcmail.com/stoa_cover.htm) .

    2. Kevin Poulsen, Echelon Revealed, ZDTV (June 9, 1999).

    3. Greg Lindsay, The Government Is Reading Your E-Mail, TIME DIGITAL DAILY (June 24, 1999).

    4. PE 168.184 / Part 4/4, supra note 1, Ch. 2, para. 32-34, 45-46.

    5. Id. Ch. 2, para. 42.

    6. Id. Ch. 2, para. 60.

    7. Id. Ch. 2, para. 50.

    8. Id. Ch. 2, para. 62-63.

    9. An Appraisal of Technologies for Political Control, at 20, PE 166.499 (January 6, 1998). See Steve Wright, An Appraisal of Technologies for Political Control (January 6, 1998) (http://cryptome.org/stoa-atpc.htm).

    10. Letter from Martin Brady, Director, Defence Signals Directorate, to Ross Coulhart, Reporter, Nine Network Australia 2 (Mar. 16, 1999) (on file with the author); see also Calls for inquiry into spy bases, ONE NEWS New Zealand (Dec. 28, 1999).

    11. Duncan Campbell, Somebody's listening, NEW STATESMAN, 12 August 1988, Cover, pages 10-12. See Duncan Campbell, ECHELON: NSA's Global Electronic Interception, (last visited October 12, 1999) (http://jya.com/echelon-dc.htm).

    12. PE 166.499, supra note 9, at 19-20.

    13. PE 168.184 / Part 4/4, supra note 1.

    14. David Ruppe, Snooping on Friends?, ABCNews.com (US) (Feb. 25, 2000) (http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/dailynews/ec helon000224.html).

    15. R. James Woolsey, Why We Spy on Our Allies, WALL ST. J., March 17, 2000. See also CRYPTOME, Ex-CIA Head: Why We Spy on Our Allies (last visited April 11, 2000) (http://cryptome.org/echelon-cia2.htm).

    16. Letter from Duncan Campbell to the Wall Street Journal (March 20, 2000) (on file with the author). See also Kevin Poulsen, Echelon Reporter answers Ex-CIA Chief, SecurityFocus.com (March 23, 2000) (http://www.securityfocus.com/news/6).

    17. Duncan Campbell, Flaw in Human Rights Uncovered, HEISE TELEPOLIS, April 8, 2000. See also HEISE ONLINE, Flaw in Human Rights Uncovered (April 8, 2000) (http://www.heise.de/tp/english/inhalt/co/6724/1.h tml).

    18.Angus Roxburgh, EU investigators 'snubbed' in US, BBC News, May 11, 2001 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/new sid_1325000/1325186.stm).

    19.Report on the existence of a global system for intercepting private and commercial communications (ECHELON interception system), PE 305.391 (July 11, 2001) (available in PDF or Word format at http://www2.europarl.eu.int).

    20. Id.; see also E-mail users warned over spy network, BBC News, May 29, 2001 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/europe/new sid_1357000/1357264.stm).

    21. Steve Kettman, Echelon Furor Ends in a Whimper, Wired News, July 3, 2001 (http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,44984,00.h tml).

    22. European Parliament resolution on the existence of a global system for the interception of private and commercial communications (ECHELON interception system) (2001/2098(INI)), A5-0264/2001, PE 305.391/DEF (Sept. 5, 2001) (available at http://www3.europarl.eu.int); Christiane Schulzki-Haddouti, Europa-Parlament verabsciedet Echelon-Bericht, Heise Telepolis, Sept. 5, 2001 (available at http://www.heise.de/tp/); Steve Kettman, Echelon Panel Calls It a Day, Wired News, June 21, 2001 (http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,44721,00.h tml).

    23. European Commission member Erkki Liikanen, Speech regarding European Parliament motion for a resolution on the Echelon interception system (Sept. 5, 2001) (transcript available at http://europa.eu.int).

    24. Jelle van Buuren, Dutch Government Says Echelon Exists, Heise Telepolis, Jan. 20, 2001 (available at http://www.heise.de/tp/).

    25. Jelle van Buuren, Hearing On Echelon In Dutch Parliament, Heise Telepolis, Jan. 23, 2001 (available at http://www.heise.de/tp/).

    26. Nicholas Rufford, Spy Station F83, SUNDAY TIMES (London), May 31, 1998. See Nicholas Rufford, Spy Station F83 (May 31, 1998) (http://www.sunday-times.co.uk/news/pages/sti/98/0 5/31/stifocnws01003.html?999).

    27. H. Rep. No. 106-130 (1999). See Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000, Additional Views of Chairman Porter J. Goss (http://www.echelonwatch.org/goss.htm).

    28. Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000, Pub. L. 106-120, Section 309, 113 Stat. 1605, 1613 (1999). See H.R. 1555 Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Enrolled Bill (Sent to President)) http://www.echelonwatch.org/hr1555c.htm).

    29. UNITED STATES NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, LEGAL STANDARDS FOR THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY IN CONDUCTING ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE (2000) (http://www.fas.org/irp/nsa/standards.html).

    30. House Committee to Hold Privacy Hearings, (August 16, 1999) (http://www.house.gov/barr/p_081699.html).

    31. ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER, PRESS RELEASE: LAWSUIT SEEKS MEMOS ON SURVEILLANCE OF AMERICANS; EPIC LAUNCHES STUDY OF NSA INTERCEPTION ACTIVITIES (1999). See also Electronic Privacy Information Center, EPIC Sues for NSA Surveillance Memos (last visited December 17, 1999) (http://www.epic.org/open_gov/foia/nsa_suit_12_99. html).

    32. Ross Coulhart, Echelon System: FAQs and website links, (May 23, 1999).

    33. Isambard Wilkinson, US wins Spain's favour with offer to share spy network material, Sydney Morning Herald, June 18, 2001 (http://www.smh.com.au/news/0106/18/text/world11.h tml).

    34. PE 168.184 / Part 4/4, supra note 1, Ch. 5, para. 101-103.

    35. PE 166.499, supra note 9, at 20.

    36. Id.

    37. PE 168.184 / Part 4/4, supra note 1, Ch. 5, para. 101-102; Brian Dooks, EU vice-president to claim US site spies on European business, YORKSHIRE POST, Jan. 30, 2002 (available at http://yorkshirepost.co.uk).

    38. Vernon Loeb, NSA Admits to Spying on Princess Diana, WASHINGTON POST, December 12, 1998, at A13. See Vernon Loeb, NSA Admits to Spying on Princess Diana, WASHINGTON POST, A13 (December 12, 1998) (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/dai ly/dec98/diana12.htm).

    39. Ross Coulhart, Big Brother is listening, (May 23, 1999).

    40. PE 168.184 / Part 4/4, supra note 1, Ch. 1, para. 7.

  • Article Text (Score:2, Informative)

    by meth0s ( 94243 )
    Since the server is already slowing down, here's the article.

    ECHELON'S ARCHITECT

    Echelon now has a big brother. Meet Bruce McIndoe, lead architect for Echelon II, the 'most productive intelligence program' in history

    By Bo Elkjaer and Kenan Seeberg

    Meet Bruce McIndoe. He has information that the Danish government and several others around the globe, continuously pretends isn't there. McIndoe knows that Echelon is real. Because he helped to build it. "Yes, that's right", McIndoe confirms to the Danish paper Ekstra Bladet today Bruce McIndoe dedicated more than ten years of his life to Echelon. He helped to finalize the original Echelon system starting in 1987. After that, he started to design Echelon II, an enlargement of the original system.

    Bruce McIndoe left the inner circle of the enormous espionage network in 1998, a network run by the National Security Agency, the world's most powerful intelligence agency, in cooperation with other Western intelligence services. Ekstra Bladet tracked down Bruce McIndoe to IJet Travel Intelligence, a private espionage agency where he is currently second in command.

    IJet Travel Intelligence is an exceedingly effective, specialized company that employs former staff members of the NSA, CIA, KGB and South African intelligence services.

    The company's task is to furnish reports for top executives from US business and industry that reveal everything about the destination to which they are travelling for their multinational company. All the information they need to make the trip as safe as possible. The company resembles a miniature version of his previous employer, the world's most powerful intelligence agency, the NSA.

    And they are almost neighbours.

    Bruce McIndoe's new company is headquartered in the state of Maryland, near the NSA's gigantic Fort Meade headquarters.

    CURIOUS SPY

    We phone IJet Travel Intelligence and a secretary asks us to spell our names. Bruce McIndoe calls back one hour later, at the very minute we had agreed on. He starts by asking the first questions. "It appears you have written a lot about spies, intelligence and Echelon before."

    "Well, you might say that."

    "You have especially written a lot about Echelon, haven't you?"

    "Yes, we have, some two hundred articles."

    Bruce McIndoe is more than just casually inquisitive when he calls. He hasn't wasted any time and obviously ran a background check on the two curious reporters from Denmark, and it all took less than an hour. Now that he has broached the subject of top-secret Echelon himself, we decide to get right to the point.

    "You were one of the architects for Echelon II. When did you work on that program for the NSA?"

    "When I was at CSSI. We worked for the NSA most of the time that CSSI existed. Mainly from 1987 until four years ago. At that time, my company was bought out by a company known as the Computer Science Corporation. Although CSSI was involved in many large-scale projects for the NSA, Echelon was probably the biggest."

    "Is Echelon II some sort of superstructure to Echelon?"

    "Yes. Echelon has existed for a long time, as you know, and they needed to update the system."

    SILLY POLITICIANS

    "Have you kept up with the European Echelon discussion and the report issued by the European Parliament?"

    "Yes, I have followed it quite closely, actually. At least I know that some countries are uncertain about the entire program, and I'm familiar with their considerations on whether they shall continue to support it. The US government and its allies have already run into somewhat of a challenge."

    "What do you mean by that?"

    "Well, they can't avoid the glare of publicity anymore. If I perform a search on the word 'Echelon' right now, I can find maybe one thousand articles dealing with Echelon, so it is a pretty well-known system by now. And as you know, many people mildly disapprove of Echelon. So accepting the use of it poses a challenge to many countries."

    "The European Parliament is airing the possibility that the EU should make its own Echelon system?"

    "Well, there are three possible options. They can openly join Echelon and demand more control, they can make their own system or they can refrain from having one. But in my opinion, pretending it doesn't exist just isn't an option. Especially not after September eleventh."

    "Were you ever involved in the first Echelon system?"

    "Only at the end of it. It was already operational when I entered the picture."

    "The report of the European Parliament firmly establishes that Echelon is a global surveillance system which intercepts private and commercial communication and that it is led by the US in concert with Great Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand as second partners. But the Parliament is not totally sure the system is named Echelon."

    Bruce McIndoe laughs dryly and somewhat indulgently about the thought of our silly European politicians. IJet Travel Intelligence's website proudly, and with surprising candour, mentions McIndoe's contribution to making Echelon II. The website states that: 'Bruce was one of the lead architects for the National Security Agency's Echelon II program, identified as one of the most productive intelligence programs in the agency's history.'

    LISTENING IN ON EVERYTHING

    "On the whole, it doesn't take long to verify the existence of Echelon if you look at the US Defence Department's budgets. And besides, code names are usually not classified as top secret. This practice enables people in the right circles to refer to the program, yet without revealing its capacity or how it operates."

    "So you are the person who can document that you have made Echelon II?"

    "Yes, that's for sure. I can even do so without revealing any secrets. Echelon II is the successor, so to speak, of the original Echelon system."

    "Can you tell us whether it is used to monitor all types of communication?"

    "No system of such enormous magnitude would only be used for a single purpose. They use it for everything they can, if they feel it's necessary. Whenever they need to exploit its potential, they do it."

    Bruce takes a little breather while he considers whether he has said too much:

    "But it doesn't mean they're a bunch of wild cowboys. There are rules, you know, that stipulate what they are allowed to monitor, and they definitely don't ignore the laws of any individual countries. Not American laws either. This poses somewhat of a challenge, of course, but after they get a court order, they can do just about anything they please," explains McIndoe, who emphasizes that he is no expert in these matters.

    In 1998, Computer Science Corporation took over Bruce McIndoe's company - and with that the Echelon contract with the National Security Agency. Shortly afterwards, Bruce McIndoe co-founded the company he now works for. A company where he makes great use of his experience from working with the largest espionage system in the world.

    AUTOMATIC TRANSLATION

    "Tell us something about the company you work for now."

    "Okay. In short, we have transferred everything I did for the NSA and other services to a private company that then sells intelligence to businesspersons. We get information on everything from local diseases, outbreaks of malaria epidemics and local unrest to strikes, the weather and traffic conditions. Our customers are large multinational companies like Prudential and Texas Instruments. We also work for institutions like the World Bank and the IMF."

    "Your offices resemble a command post at the NSA's Fort Meade headquarters?"

    "Yes, exactly. Our staff are also former intelligent agents who have either developed or run espionage operations for US intelligence agencies or people from the UK, South Africa and Russia."

    "How does the NSA feel about the fact you're applying the same technology in the private sector?"

    "A lot of the technology developed at the NSA will sooner or later find its way into civilian life. Things like word spotting, automatic translation, language recognition and so on. But since we don't try to hide our work and primarily use open sources, the NSA doesn't complain."

    Yet the architect for Echelon II indirectly reveals some secrets to us. One of the ways Echelon works is by using words and voice recognition, as well as automatic translation.
    • In the article it states that Mr. McIndoe was involved since 1987, but in the interview it states:

      "Were you ever involved in the first Echelon system?"

      "Only at the end of it. It was already operational when I entered the picture."

      So which is it? I don't think this is quite the smoking gun we think this to be.

  • Hopefully this guy doesn't now disappear like the world's leading microbiologists [slashdot.org]. At least he is "the business" and should be better able to protect himself.

  • 5 copies already (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Boy the moderators are going to have fun with the redundant mod today!

  • mirror (Score:1, Informative)

    by mocktor ( 536122 )
    not to karma whore, but...

    mirror: http://www.gothicasfuck.co.uk/temp/echelon2-arch.h tm [gothicasfuck.co.uk]

  • its amazing how, just now people are starting to discover the intents and purposes of this project. This dates back to even as far back as mid 1995, when FBI head of the CyberCrime division even said himself that echelon was something that americans would "have to learn to get used to". You would think that more awareness would be brought up concerning this considering that 9.3 billion of our tax dollars goes to the research and development of echelon a year. (http://w3.access.gpo.gov/usbudget/fy2003/db.html)

    • Re:nothing new..... (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Well, see...most people have been conditioned to brush anything like this aside as a "conspiracy theory" or "urban legend".

      I swear, if I hear another sheep bring one of those two phrases up in a conversation again, I'll club him like a baby seal...

      There's nothing like waking people up to the world around them, just to have some walmart-shopping, sports-uberfan butt in with "nah, you're just one of those 'black helicopter' nutbars", and drive people back into their shell...
      (BTW, there have been thousands of 'black helicopter' operations run across the US and other countries, filmed and shown on local and national news shows...but these morons still don't 'believe' in them?!?!?)

      As I said to someone the other day, I don't know who was the original quoter:
      "You're ignorance doesn't make me a crackpot"

  • I wonder... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by CaffeineAddict2001 ( 518485 ) on Thursday May 23, 2002 @01:24PM (#3574121)
    Why arn't senators\congressmen worried about being blackmailed by this thing?
    What if there was a watergate-esque break in to echelon?

  • shocked, shocked! (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 23, 2002 @01:24PM (#3574122)
    Trying to deny Echelon just got that much harder.

    ok, so i just read the article... if this is all true, it implies that the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Administration (in cooperation with foreign intelligence agencies) actually spy on communications including email and voice? and that they use computer systems to do it? and they even have a code name for it? WTF???!!!

    why weren't we kept informed about this?

    • OK, try looking at it from the other side of the Atlantic.

      A consortium of countries, led by the USA, is spying on (among others) European governments and comapnies. It is doing this using equipment based in (among other places) the UK. It is denying doing this.

      So the US government is in cahoots with part of the European Union to spy on another part of the EU. There are also suggestions that the results of this spying are used for commercial benefit as well as national security.

      Try imagining it was Canada and Texas spying on the rest of the USA, and using the results to compete against US companies and see if that changes the way you feel about it...

      • Re:shocked, shocked! (Score:3, Insightful)

        by LunaticLeo ( 3949 )
        Let me turn that around one more time. Spying...why is it bad? I would love to have the EU spying on the US.

        Spying reassures each country that the others are doing what each say they are doing. Spying evens out technological developements. Without spying your fears are fed with ignorance, and in the end your enemy may be hiding a Nuke behind his back.

        Spying between nations is good. I think it sucks when it goes from national security (ie war, death, territorial gain, etc), to enomomic security. That is were the it changes from self preservation to a crime.
        • I would love to have the EU spying on the US.

          I doubt the EU as a body would ever spy, but their individual countries are certainly at it. The French in particular (one of the loudest complainers of "Echelon") have a nice little satellite network keeping an eye on the rest of the world, and probably their EU partners. Where are the screams of protest about this? The whole hoo-har about "Echelon" is simply an attempt to embarass the US and gain concessions - welcome to diplomacy...
  • "Gateway Timeout

    The following error occurred:

    Server unreachable

    Please contact the administrator. "

    See? They are just toying with us!

  • iJET Services for the Plebes (Score:4, Interesting)

    by floppy ears ( 470810 ) on Thursday May 23, 2002 @01:26PM (#3574131) Homepage
    The company that this guy works for -- iJET [ijet.com] -- is fairly interesting. I'm surprised to see that they have a service for regular travelers. For $8 per day (1 week minimum), you get an international cell phone or satellite phone, as well as text alerts "of any major developments that may impact your trip, such as civil unrest, labor strikes, severe weather, disease outbreaks or transportation delays." The info comes from the iJET database that is somehow similar to Echelon.

    The service is called WorldLink. It sounds like a pretty good service to me, especially if you don't already have a cell phone that works internationally. For more info, this is the product web site [ijet.com].

    • Re:iJET Services for the Plebes (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      You all are breaking the TOS by linking to a page other than the index. Now that I think about it, so am I.

      http://www.ijet.com/about/terms.html [ijet.com]


      "General. You may create a bookmark in your browser to the home page of the Site. Otherwise, you may not create a link to the Site without our prior written approval. All rights not expressly granted in this Agreement are reserved to iJET No other rights or licenses, whether express, implied, arising by estoppel, or otherwise are conveyed or intended by this Agreement."

  • Echelon and Issues of Trust (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Alien54 ( 180860 ) on Thursday May 23, 2002 @01:26PM (#3574132) Journal
    Looking back over time, it is interesting to look at the history of electronic intelligence and survellience.

    I seem to remember that when the US was the only one with surveillance satellites, countries like Ruissia got very very nervous and upset about it, claiming the violation of airspace, etc.

    With the advent of the first Russian spy satellites, things got a lot easier. and dealing with the Russians was easier, because they could verify things with their own spy satellites. They didn't have to take the US word on things.

    You didn't have a situation of someone saying "Trust Us"

    I wonder if a similar situation will exist with other forms of surverlliance as they develop. Countries tend to get nervous when there are a lot of secrets involved, especially their own. While countries probably can justify secrets, I imagine that life will be easier when there is some sort of parity.

    This would be especially interesting in seeing about the average citizen getting some parity with his/her/its government.

  • if you believe that (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gobelijn ( 574326 ) on Thursday May 23, 2002 @01:27PM (#3574135)
    Well, I don't know what to think of this article. Actually, I do: I don't believe any of it.

    I've somewhat followed the entire echelon story, and you quickly end up with a lot of speculation, conspiracy theories etc., which is of course exactly what THEY want :-)

    Anyway, more reliable information can be found in the official reports of the european union, in their investigation of the echelon system. Look on google for Duncan Campbell and his first reports for the european parliament. Scary stuff, and definitely more trustworthy than some interview with the supposed creator of echelon, containing no evidence of anything whatsoever.

    Here's a link to get you started:
    http://www.europarl.eu.int/tempcom/echel on/prechel on_en.htm

    • Agreed (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Yet the architect for Echelon II indirectly reveals some secrets to us. One of the ways Echelon works is by using words and voice recognition, as well as automatic translation

      You should all notice this doesn't tell us anything at all. Not technical specifications, no idea about facilities, and boy do i hope that the automatic translation software they have is better than the stuff on the market at the moment.

      I'm starting to think the whole think is just a smoke screen for less high tecvh breaking & entering & pressuring sources for information.

    • Re:if you believe that (Score:5, Interesting)

      by guttentag ( 313541 ) on Thursday May 23, 2002 @03:01PM (#3574827) Journal
      I agree the story seems pretty sketchy... it has the pretentious tone of a 15-year-old's tale of his latest StarCraft conquest mixed with the ambiguity of fiction written for people who want to believe. And no, it doesn't tell us anything new.

      On the other hand, The New York Times seems to confirm [nytimes.com] McIndoe knows something about Echelon (though it doesn't call him the architect): "...Mr. McIndoe, who previously helped develop the National Security Agency's Echelon II program and also founded a company that develops computer intelligence-gathering systems." That seems to me like a pretty major claim (in light of the insistence that Echelon doesn't exist) and the reporter should qualify the source of his info, but he doesn't.

      The Washington Post ran one of its standard "check out this company" profiles [washingtonpost.com] on iJet, though it makes no mention of Echelon or McIndoe's intelligence background. It's still an interesting read.

  • Why are the Federales allowing this "architect" to talk about it? Here's my best guess:

    Since everybody with half a clue already knows about echelon/echelon II, they've developed a NEW system, so they're going to let information leak about echelon, thereby lulling people back into complacency. The sheep will be satisifed that echelon is somewhat out in the open, and go back about their lives, meanwhile the governament is implementing it's NEW, IMPROVED system. How's that for a conspiracy theory?
  • If I perform a search on the word 'Echelon' right now, I can find maybe one thousand articles dealing with Echelon, so it is a pretty well-known system by now

    Uh, try 397,000 [google.com]
  • This is a fake story check out the eyespy magazine for the real story..

    You guys got duped..

    By the way I am glad i have pgp and gnupgp..

    Power of Individuals trumps Censorship and Illegal Control!
    • Hope you're not using the public key algorithms in PGP and GnuPG if your paranoid about the NSA. Consider that the NSA typically is 15 years ahead of the academics in security (hence DES' security against differential cryptanalysis). Recently there's been some talk about being able to factor 3x as many bits just as quickly; imagine what factoring breakthroughs the NSA has made...

      If you want something really secure, exchange keys privately and use a secure private key block cipher in CBC mode, and pray that the NSA hasn't broken your block cipher...

  • Big Secret (Score:3, Funny)

    by asv108 ( 141455 ) <asvNO@SPAMivoss.com> on Thursday May 23, 2002 @01:31PM (#3574166) Homepage Journal
    From The Article:

    Yet the architect for Echelon II indirectly reveals some secrets to us. One of the ways Echelon works is by using words and voice recognition, as well as automatic translation

    Umm yeah, nobody thought it did that.

  • I can just see it - the lead architect of Echelon II is lead into a smoke-filled room filled with the world leaders of the global industrial-military complex and they show him footage of the Kennedy assasination filmed from what could only have been the grassy knoll...and they say to him "Yeah, you go right ahead and tell the public about Echelon II."

    Right...

  • Echelon == SkyNet???? (Score:5, Funny)

    by binaryDigit ( 557647 ) on Thursday May 23, 2002 @01:32PM (#3574174)
    Think about it, it listens in on everything we say and type. I know it must be automatically programmed into the SAC/NORAD so it can automatically launch offsenives if it monitors a phone call or email warning of an impending attack. With all this "human", "unfiltered" knowledge going through it, it shouldn't be long before it becomes self aware and after listening to umpteen gazillion phone calls that are so incredibly mundane and banal, it realizes that humans are hardly worth the carbon they're based on, then decides to take over the planet.

  • Mirror... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 23, 2002 @01:33PM (#3574176)
    Here is a mirror site [mirrorsplus.com].
    • Ha... ha... very funny...

      I actually clicked on it believing it (mirrorsplus.com? woah, kewl a site that only mirrors other sites when they've been slashdotted!)

  • Echelon admitted by U.S. Senator (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dmccarty ( 152630 ) on Thursday May 23, 2002 @01:35PM (#3574187)
    I'm kicking myself for not having written down the name of the station, the time and the Senator being interviewed, but I'll post from what I do remember.

    The evening of Sept. 11 I was watching the news--ABC, probably--and some senator from such and such intelligence committee was on for a few minutes. The anchor was asking him about the plane crash in Pennsylvania, which we all knew very little about at the time.

    The anchor said, "There are reports that some phone calls were made on mobile phones from the airplane shortly before it went down. Do you have any more information about this?"

    Senator XYZ [matter-of-factly]: "Well there were several calls made and I can't comment on that right now, but we should't have any problem getting the recordings on those."

    The anchor moved on to the next question without realizing the impact of what had just been said. But if that wasn't an admission of clandestine listening of routine telephone traffic in the U.S., I don't know what is.

    • If they were calls to 911, they were recorded anyway. No reason to be paranoid.

      - A.P.
      • But there weren't any calls to 911 that we know about. There were several calls to wives and loved ones, and a call to a GTE operator on an AirFone. See this page [flight93crash.com] (about halfway down) for more details. So the fact remains that somehow a U.S. Senator was pretty sure of himself in stating that they would find out what was said on those calls, even though they were placed on private cell phones and a private airplane satellite phone.
    • Seriously, I heard that too. It struck me quite strongly, and I -wished- I had been taping it. If only someone who did would capture it and post it somewhere.
  • The satellites are pointed right at you, and can effectively see the color of your eyes. I'd say more but /. is no longer safe.
    • Yes, but that would require us to be outside...
      Tell me how often /. readers get outside :)

    • Repeat after me...
      "Os@ma Bin L@den...."

      Unless I see hard evidence that it's providing any real value, it's just a political toy being masqueraded as a security measure. To put this in perspective, it's the politician's answer to the miracle pill we're all looking for that will restore our health after years of neglect.

  • big time. Who's to say this thing won't get (ab)used in a similar manner as the FBI system [slashdot.org] system a few stories earlier?

    Makes me wonder if you could take both stories, slap 'em together in a single email, and really start showing everybody what's out there to be concerned about.

  • after re-reading.... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by flirzan ( 133046 ) <<gro.scilohohcysp> <ta> <nazrilf>> on Thursday May 23, 2002 @01:43PM (#3574231) Homepage Journal
    "Okay. In short, we have transferred everything I did for the NSA and other services to a private company that then sells intelligence to businesspersons.

    I'm sorry, but I don't think you'd be transferring ANYTHING you did *for* the NSA...you might take something you did for the NSA and implement a similar solution, but you're not just going to grab a project and run with it.

    We get information on everything from local diseases, outbreaks of malaria epidemics and local unrest to strikes, the weather and traffic conditions. Our customers are large multinational companies like Prudential and Texas Instruments. We also work for institutions like the World Bank and the IMF."

    And you need former KGB, NSA, etc agents to check the weather...?

    This whole interview strikes me as a little off. Something's not right in Denamrk, here folks.

  • Yeah, but what is the point of having systems like Echelon in use for "national security" if it can't even protect us from things like September 11? What exactly IS it protecting us from?

  • Now if they only had thought about posting (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    this on april fools day.
  • This interview is definitely a fake. He throws around real sub-contractor names in an effort to sound believable. However, NSA doesn't contract out the honest-to-God engineering and research work. They contract out the IT-sorta stuff. Thus, there's no way this could be true. How do I know? Mostly because I'm friends with people who work at CSC and NSA. -Erwos

  • More information available in "Body of Secrets" (Score:4, Interesting)

    by u2zoo ( 213839 ) on Thursday May 23, 2002 @01:51PM (#3574287) Homepage
    A book by James Bamford called "Body of Secrets" [booksamillion.com] (booksamillon.com) contains tons of info on Echelon... yep they are spying on us and everyone else and they put into one large database which has the NSA's own version of Google ontop. Also governements around the world have access to this database - Bamford shows an example of how someone got blacklisted in various countries due to humor error. I'm not saying the whole deal is a bad or good thing... not until I get my hands on it. *grin*

    Read the book... it is awesome.. you'll never look at our government's security system the same way again - we have a powerful system. He covers the whole thing from the start in World War II till now. Has several interesting bits in there - one on the U.S.S. Liberty [rr.com] (background info) incident which is fascinating really - Israel really screwed us over on that one.
    • Bamford shows an example of how someone got blacklisted in various countries due to humor error.

      Too bad Slashdot doesn't blacklist based on humor error; we'd have half as many posts.

  • Helios (Score:3, Funny)

    by bonch ( 38532 ) on Thursday May 23, 2002 @01:53PM (#3574303)
    I merged with the Helios A.I., so all of this is very exciting.

  • Warning about that Danis newspaper! (Score:4, Informative)

    by pointwood ( 14018 ) <jramskov AT gmail DOT com> on Thursday May 23, 2002 @01:53PM (#3574308) Homepage

    The Danish newspaper, Ekstra Bladet, which apparently got that story isn't exactly the most "respected" (sorry, english isn't my primary language) newspaper in Denmark. Actually it's quite the opposite - it's one of the least frivolous papers in Denmark and I generally don't take much of their writings too seriously.

  • The Real Consequence of Echelon (Score:5, Insightful)

    by donnacha ( 161610 ) on Thursday May 23, 2002 @01:58PM (#3574348) Homepage


    Echelon is the largest contributor to the exasperation that Europe feels towards America. Essentially, Europe is happy to back the US line on everything as they, too, stand to gain from the promoting the fantasy of a free market that puts the rest of the world at a permanent disadvantage.

    What stuns European leaders is the fact the US is just as enthusiastic about screwing them: using this incredibly sophisticated spy network, lavishly funded by the American people, to undermine European companies, all the while evangelistically talking up the idea of Free Markets.

    And the kicker is that, in order not to rock the boat, the European leaders have to pretend they don't know that Echelon exists! So far only the Netherlands government has officially acknowledged what everyone already knows.

    Here's an article [zdnet.co.uk] describing the growing concerns of America's most important partner. The main problem is that the contradiction between the Free Market talk and actual actions such as Echelon threaten to stoke a widespread antipathy towards America.

    BTW, I'm so tired of the way in which any post that in any way examines American foreign policy gets modded down. If we're discussing Echelon, of all things, we should be able to discuss it's real implications without feeling that someone is attacking the American Way of Life.

  • Mirrors (Score:2, Informative)

    by henben ( 578800 )
    Have mercy on cryptome.org's server - the main one seems to be running on very limited bandwidth.

    Here are the automatic mirrors: http://www.eu.cryptome.org/echelon2-arch.htm [cryptome.org] http://www.nl.cryptome.org/echelon2-arch.htm [cryptome.org] http://www.at.cryptome.org/echelon2-arch.htm [cryptome.org]

    Slashdot needs to figure out some automatic mirroring scheme to avoid shutting down useful sites. Make it available to subscribers only if you have to.

  • Treading carefully (Score:4, Insightful)

    by PortPuppie ( 580855 ) <[cooperja] [at] [zoominternet.net]> on Thursday May 23, 2002 @02:05PM (#3574407)
    How do we know if they are abusing the power of Echelon? Easy.

    One of the scary facts of Intelligence is having to intentionally not act on it.

    For example, we broke the German codes during WWII. We knew way too much. But yet to act on that info (saving Allied lives in the process) would tip our hand, the Germans would change encryption, and we would lose our advantage.

    So what advantage did we have? The Big Picture. Which allowed us to "randomly" take advantage of weak points, etc. Allowing us to win the overall objective: National Security (and win the war).

    So how does this relate here? If the NSA et al actually used this massive field of info to help small, pathetic things (saving an individual life, helping an individual company, saying "tsk, tsk" about naughty e-mail suggestions to your secretary), that would not have survived any other way, then the NSA would be giving up their hand.

    By not caring about day to day affairs of people and the world, they are free to inform heads of government about grave threats to national security and then play the chess game which follows.

    If the NSA began abusing this power, eg, a lot of NSA employees making it big on the stock market, or the guvmint coming to your door asking about e-mail sent to your tailor in the middle east, etc. There would be huge public outrage.

    The truth of the matter is, the intel weenies aren't hitting it big on the market. I have not been harassed for getting hand-tailored suits from the middle east (I was stationed there btw). And the average joe isn't getting harassed by NSA for copyright infringment, etc...

    Just my 1/50th of a dollar.

    The USA Patriot Act is another matter entirely.
  • Our ability to deny the existance of echelon went out the window when politicians started demanding more use of echelon to gather inteligence in the wake of sept 11.

  • Accuracy be damned! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by brooks_talley ( 86840 ) <brooksNO@SPAMfrnk.com> on Thursday May 23, 2002 @02:42PM (#3574679) Journal

    From ./'s blurb:

    Now, a lead architect for Echelon and its "big brother," Echelon II, has been discovered and interviewed.

    From the article:

    "Were you ever involved in the first Echelon system?"

    "Only at the end of it. It was already operational when I entered the picture."

    Aren't most architects involved before something is built? Is it really that hard to get this kind of thing right?

    Cheers
    -b

    • You make a good point, but keep in mind that large, mature software systems that live on for years will continually have projects to enhance functionality and performance. Even echelon, if it's in maintenance mode, could need new architects for performance tweaks and whatnot.

      But, just as easily, this guy's full of crap and was just a co-op when echelon was finishing up ;-) .

  • Echelon is also apparently useless (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    It would seem obvious to me, but I haven't seen anyone point out that this was useless against al Qaeda. Supposedly, bin Laden and them all communicate personally through close family ties, not with the use of pgp or e-mail. So not only is this a waste of money, a violation of our civil rights, and a great wedge between the US and Europe, but it, ah, well, that's about it, actually. Hope this isn't redundant.

    Dan

  • Echelon (Score:5, Interesting)

    by surfcow ( 169572 ) on Thursday May 23, 2002 @02:57PM (#3574800) Homepage
    I wrote to my congressmen about Echelon, only one replied. He said that he was on a congressional committee charged with investigating Echelon which repeatedly questioned the military and has repeatedly been stonewalled, publically told that it does not exist. He was genuinely pissed about it. This is positive proof that parts of the military are no longer responsive to government. (I wonder what happens when all of it is unresponsive?)

    The European Parliment is also upset about Echelon. Germany has strong evidence that german Echelon stations have been used for industrial espionage. I recall that Japan was upset when it was learned that their private calls between negotiators were being spied on during high-level trade-talks.

    I have no doubt that the information yeilded from the system has been used for good purposes, like preventing terrorist attacks and such. It ihas also been misused. It is my opinion that you can not use fascist tactics in defense of democracy.

    A good source of information on Echelon is the ACLU: http://www.aclu.org/echelonwatch/faq.html The ACLU even have a simple way to send your congressmen a fax about it. http://www.aclu.org/action/echelon107.html

    Let them know. Use your vote or you may lose it.

    =brian (a coward, but not an anonymous coward)

    • Re:Echelon (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Baka*Exp 2 ( 581017 ) on Thursday May 23, 2002 @03:58PM (#3575173)
      "he was on a congressional committee charged with investigating Echelon which repeatedly questioned the military" Very vague.. the U.S. military is very compartmentalized, and information between classified projects isn't supposed to be passed around. Who did they question, and why were those Military Officers thought to have knowledge of Echelon. (I could go up to a boot camp private, demand he acknoledge the existence of Echelon, and also claim proof of "stonewall"(ing) and military denial) Also, is the NSA is a part of any branch of the U.S. Military?

  • about 'ekstra bladet' (Score:2, Informative)

    by C_nemo ( 520601 )
    'ekstra bladet' is a very tabloid newspaper willing to print anything that will sell issues. one of the first newspapers to include a pinup model every thuesday. read with caution

  • This guy really did help build echelon! (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Because the guy really has worked on Echelon II, just check out their site:

    HERE [216.239.51.100]

    Bruce McIndoe was the founder & CEO of CSSi, an Inc.500 and four-time Washington Technology FAST 50 company that developed intelligence collection and processing systems for various national intelligence organizations. Bruce was one of the lead architects for the National Security Agency's Echelon II program, identified as one of the most productive intelligence programs in the agency's history. He was also a major contributor to the Future Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) Systems Architecture Program, several major Communications Security (COMSEC) programs and numerous technical programs. After successfully growing CSSi to 150 people and $17 million in annual revenues, Bruce sold the company to Nichols Research Corporation where he became VP Enterprise Applications and then VP Sales & Marketing with Nichols InfoTec. Prior to joining iJET, he was President of B2B Web Solutions specializing in supply chain automation using the Internet and XML technologies. Bruce holds an M.S. in Computer Science from Johns Hopkins University and is a trustee of Allegheny College, where he received his B.S. in Physics.

  • Mr McIndoe (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Popocatepetl ( 267000 )

    It is not like the interview revealed anything. Absolutely nothing of importance was mentioned that you can not find elsewhere. The thing is, I think this interview is real.

    This doesn't prove the case, but Bruce McIndoe is mentioned on the net. Here is his official biographical blurb on IJet's web site: . Everything there corroborates the interview. His bio hypes him up, but that doesn't mean it is totally false. [ijet.com]

    I just don't understand why everyone is so skeptical about this interview. It wasn't even particularly interesting. I would understand the cynicism if Mr McIndoe had actually said something of interest, but since he said exactly the things (nothing juicy or outrageous or even anything more than mildly interesting) I would expect someone to say who is involved in such projects, I don't have any reason to doubt the credibility of the article.

  • I have to admit, I got more information about Echolon from a talk on DDJ's Technetcast:

    'ECHELON and The Insecurity Industry' [ddj.com] at
    http://technetcast.ddj.com/tnc_play_stream.htm l?st ream_id=423

  • The Echelon project cannot be completely implemented due to the Echelon paradox:

    • If you have a system that classifies every information in the internet and also make it avaiable in the internet; the more data it classifies, the more data it generates, the more information need to be classified.

    • So it's impossible to classify every information in the internet and make it avaiable without add more information to the internet.

    That's why I don't believe that Echelon is watching me now.

Slashdot Top Deals

C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas l'Informatique. -- Bosquet [on seeing the IBM 4341]

Close