Schneier on Security

Clive Robinson • September 29, 2020 2:27 AM

@ SpaceLifeForm,

One thing to keep in mind regarding EO12333, is that we do not really know if the information sharing is really happening between NSA, FBI, CIA.

There is good reason to think not, and it’s not just historic turf wars in the last century.

But if we go and look in Peter Wright’s “Spycatcher” we get a glimps of pre-Reagan EO12333 behaviour. Although his book was aimed at MI5 he had liason duties with other UK and US IC partners. In effect he compared and contrasted and the disfunctionality of both the UK and US agencies came out.

He portrayed the CIA as not having internal scientific or technical skills and reliant on what they could purchase from what was being manufactured for others. Further they were very distrustful of other agencies believing other agencies were full of philanderers, homosexuals, communists, and other compromisable persons. This attitude was in part due to the times but had a lot to do with the attitudes of Allen Welsh Dulles and his brother John Foster Dulles[1] who’s Presbyterian minister father Allen Macy Dulles instilled certain ideas in them. Although Allen was a known philanderer with over a hundred extramarital affairs under his belt according to his sister many whilst he was Director of the CIA.

In his book Wright observes the tedious nature of liaising with the US IC because of the inter departmental distrust and how rather than one presentation followed by questions he would end up presenting over and over and fielding identical or near identical questions multiple times.

So clearly the trust between US IC agencies was about as low as it could get, and not just for Empire building reasons. Such things become institutional quite quickly by “selection and promotion” then becomes effectively a self sustaining club and can take upto three generations of workers to clear out of an agency. In the CIA there is a tendency to “lifers” so the attitudes would exist for sixty to ninety years. So starting in the late 1950’s we can expect the attitudes to still be somewhat prevelant today and continue to do so for atleast another decade or two.

The fact that major structural changes were made after 9/11 shows that at the turn of the century the distrust was still very high. However such soloutions forced on an organisation from without have a bad habit of not just reinforcing such attitudes but actually make them more clandestine. Thus you get “lip service” and “low grade” cooperation. But in reality the more important and valuable information gets not just withheld but as it might be usefull politically to inflict damage on other agencies gets a whole series of “alternative histories” as to it’s origins and timelines. Unfortunately such alternatives get to be believed within the agencies as well and thus “pi55 in the well spring” from which all agency analysis draws…

But there is another issue and that is the one of “Knowledge is Power”. It’s one of the most misunderstood notions there is out there. Knowledge arises not from individuals but environments individuals are in thus it’s a lottery as to who gets the idea first. Academics understand this with the “Rush to publish or perish” advice. In effect “Knowledge begets Knowledge” thus by “Hiding and hording” knowledge you not just hurt yourself you hurt the environment you are in.

Thus the petty squables hurt the agencies and make another 9/11 rather more likely than detering one. However do not expect it to change because there is always a desire to be “First amongst equalls” that will drive the “Hide and hord” notions of the misunderstanding of “Knowledge is Power”.

[1] Allen was known to hold with a view of a “single bullet in time” would change world events and had espoused it many times prior to and during his being Director of the CIA. In part it explains a number of CIA fiascos whilst under his tenure. His view point was that assasination changed history thus the start of the First World War that the US got draged into. With Allen having being sacked by JFK over the Bay of Pigs Fiasco and his brother John serving on the Warren Commission it’s hardly surprising that the “lone gunman with a single bullet” idea dispite all the available evidence became the “magic bullet theory” of JFK’s death. Put simply Allen believed in assasinating heads of state to achive objectives. What he was apparently not cognizant of was that an assaination was mearly the match on the fuse, it was the actual long running political issues that was the explosive force (as was seen with Arab Spring the notable death of an almost unknown individual “Mohamed Bouazizi” becomes the straw that breaks the camels back.).

Clive Robinson • September 29, 2020 1:21 PM

@ WmG,

As mind-boggling as it may seem…

Looks like my old grey matter is letting me down 🙁

Mind you it’s been a long while since I last thought about it (towards the end of the Bush administration IIRC).

Neither of the brothers struck me as particularly pleasant in their life/world view but then I am not judging them by the standards of six decades ago.

I guess the Million Dollar question is how many orher “political families” are waiting in the wings to do a,

“Family, Faith, Donors, Party, Country”

Priority system.

Clive Robinson • September 30, 2020 4:06 AM

@ WmG,

But Churchill did quip that J. F. Dulles was “The only bull I know who carries his own china shop around with him.”

The china shop being “the US State Dept” which from the looks of it is still suffering from the old bulls ghost… So the three generations rule of thumb looks like it’s still running….

It still amazes my as to US Gov Appointees, the old,

“More money than sense”

Rule still applies I guess…

Mind you my attraction to politics is in the nature of a freeway driver, who stops to look over the road kill for the best pickings, but it’s kind of spolied these days due to it being a target rich environment where ever I look.

Clive Robinson • October 2, 2020 9:56 AM

@ SpaceLifeForm,

But some national security policy experts believe the expanded partnership could lead to internal conflict. They say intelligence and law enforcement agencies sometimes have different goals that could conflict with one another.

It will lead to considerable conflict and not just because the goals are entirely different, but also their entire methodologies of operation.

But starting with the goals, the operational intent of Law enforcment is not as people think “crime prevention”. Their job is actually to “reactively respond to crime”. In essence by finding the perpetrators by open and approved methods and bringing both the products of their methods “Evidence” and the “individuals” to a prosecutor to present before “A Tribunal of Truth” where both evidence and witnesses will be challenged infront of a jury of the peers of the accused to decide truth or innocence (or case unproven). Effectively the whole process is open to public scrutiny and in some cases veey intensive investigation.

As many know the purposes of the intelligence servicies is very much like investigative journalism. That is to gather intelligence proces and evaluate it and produce reports as to activities that would be considered threats to National Security how ever that might be defined at the time. You will hear talk of “methods and sources” and how these need to be protected at all costs. Thus the process of gathering their evidence is very far from open. Likewise the analysis of the evidence and the reports produced. Importantly the reports are not ment to produce proof of guilt or innocence they are designed to investigate and show intent of individuals, entities and nations such that resources can if required be brought againts them to persuade them to cease the activities. The methods of persuasion are generaly not restrained by law, only ambiguous oversight at best.

The result is two entirely different cultures outlooks and ethics, that after a little thought people will realise have little or no common ground and can not realistically be reconciled.

In the UK there has been some realisation of this and a liaison agency created the purpose of which is to find some middle ground on a case by case process. However it’s become clear to some that the agency has in effect become “captured” and it’s not middle ground that gets pushed forward but at best “crumbs off of the table”… Which is one reason the UK police partnered with crime agencies in Europe over those criminals using “encrypted phones”. Evidence that crosses “National Borders” is rarely subject to any kind of scrutiny brcause those involved in it’s gathering are “out of jurisdiction” thus can not be compelled into court. Also as their legal systems are in many respects significantly different when it comes to gathering evidence they can do what is not allowed under other legal systems.