<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
[The challenge for multistakeholderism... now IFF you
don't/can't/refuse to take BigCorporates and USG relationship
seriously with stuff like this happening... and can yawn at the
regulatory revolving door between companies and the USG then
Multistakeholderism can simply be seen as the soft glove over the
imperial fist on a reasonable basis... and it also serves to dilute
the legitimate concerns of some Third World countries to have
democratic control over CIR... something we cannot even discuss
reasonably in a non-binding forum... ]<br>
<h1 class="title">Thousands Of Firms Trade Confidential Data With
The US Government In Exchange For Classified Intelligence</h1>
<div class="picture"> <a
href="http://www.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden" title="View
user profile."><img src="cid:part1.08070900.05060503@gmail.com"
alt="Tyler Durden's picture" title="Tyler Durden's picture"></a></div>
<span class="submitted">Submitted by <a
href="http://www.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden">Tyler Durden</a>
on 06/14/2013 00:29 -0400</span><br>
<br>
<span class="taxonomy"></span>The rabbit hole just got deeper. A
whole lot deeper.
<div class="content">
<p>On Sunday we predicated that "there's one reason why the
administration, James Clapper and the NSA should just keep their
mouths shut as the PRISM-gate fallout escalates: <strong>with
every incremental attempt to refute some previously unknown
facet of the US Big Brother state, a new piece of previously
unleaked information from the same intelligence organization
now scrambling for damage control, emerges and exposes the
brand new narrative as yet another lie, forcing even more
lies, more retribution against sources, more journalist
persecution and so on</strong>." </p>
<p>And like a hole that just gets deeper the more you dug and
exposes ever more dirt, tonight's installment revealing one more
facet of the conversion of a once great republic into a great
fascist, "big brother" state, <a
href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-14/u-s-agencies-said-to-swap-data-with-thousands-of-firms.html">comes
from Bloomberg </a>which reports that "thousands of
technology, finance and manufacturing companies are working
closely with U.S. national security agencies, <strong>providing
sensitive information and in return receiving benefits that
include access to classified intelligence, four people
familiar with the process said</strong>."</p>
<p>The companies extend far wider than the legacy telcos, such as
Verizon, that launched the entire NSA-spying scandal a week ago:
"Makers of hardware and software, banks, Internet security
providers, satellite telecommunications companies and many other
companies also participate in the government programs. In some
cases, the information gathered may be used not just to defend
the nation but to help infiltrate computers of its adversaries."</p>
<blockquote>
<div class="quote_start">
</div>
<div class="quote_end">
</div>
<p>Many of these same Internet and telecommunications companies
voluntarily provide U.S. intelligence organizations with
additional data, such as equipment specifications, that don’t
involve private communications of their customers, the four
people said. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>And since what goes on behind the scenes is confidential,
literally anything goes: "Along with the NSA, the Central
Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and
branches of the U.S. military have agreements with such
companies to gather data that might seem innocuous but could be
highly useful in the hands of U.S. intelligence or cyber warfare
units, according to the people, who have either worked for the
government or are in companies that have these accords."</p>
<p>Some of the back and forth is innocuous, such as Microsoft
revealing ahead of time the nature of its exposed bugs
(ostensibly providing the government with a back door into any
system using a Microsoft OS, but since it's don't ask, dont'
tell, nobody really knows). However the bulk of the interaction
is steeped in secrecy: "Most of the arrangements are so
sensitive that only a handful of people in a company know of
them, and they are sometimes brokered directly between chief
executive officers and the heads of the U.S.’s major spy
agencies, the people familiar with those programs said."</p>
<p>More on this "company within a company":</p>
<blockquote>
<div class="quote_start">
</div>
<div class="quote_end">
</div>
<p>Typically, a key executive at a company and a small number of
technical people cooperate with different agencies and
sometimes multiple units within an agency, according to the
four people who described the arrangements. </p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>If necessary, a company executive, known as a
“committing officer,” is given documents that guarantee
immunity from civil actions resulting from the transfer of
data</strong>. The companies are provided with regular
updates, which may include the broad parameters of how that
information is used. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Remember how they say conspiracies are impossible because too
many people know about them, and the information always
eventually leaks? Well not if you contain it to a handful of
people in any organization, and force them to sign a bloody NDA,
pledging one's first born in the case of secrecy breach. </p>
<p>An example of a company that is happy to "communicate" with tht
the government is Intel's McAfee internet security unit, which
in addition to everything is one giant backdoor entrance for the
government. If need be of course:</p>
<blockquote>
<div class="quote_start">
</div>
<div class="quote_end">
</div>
<p>Intel Corp. (INTC)’s McAfee unit, which makes Internet
security software, regularly cooperates with the NSA, FBI and
the CIA, for example, and is a valuable partner because of its
broad view of malicious Internet traffic, including espionage
operations by foreign powers, according to one of the four
people, who is familiar with the arrangement.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Such a relationship would start with an approach to McAfee’s
chief executive, who would then clear specific individuals to
work with investigators or provide the requested data, the
person said. The public would be surprised at how much help
the government seeks, the person said.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>McAfee firewalls collect information on hackers who use
legitimate servers to do their work, and the company data can
be used to pinpoint where attacks begin. The company also has
knowledge of the architecture of information networks
worldwide, which may be useful to spy agencies who tap into
them, the person said. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Google, another participant in PRISM, already lied about its
participation in the covert-op:</p>
<blockquote>
<div class="quote_start">
</div>
<div class="quote_end">
</div>
<p>Following an attack on his company by Chinese hackers in
2010, Sergey Brin, Google’s co-founder, was provided with
highly sensitive government intelligence linking the attack to
a specific unit of the People’s Liberation Army, China’s
military, according to one of the people, who is familiar with
the government’s investigation. <span style="text-decoration:
underline;"><strong>Brin was given a temporary classified
clearance to sit in on the briefing, the person said</strong></span>.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>According to information provided by Snowden, Google,
owner of the world’s most popular search engine, had at that
point been a Prism participant for more than a year.</strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>Google CEO Larry Page said in a blog posting June 7
that he hadn’t heard of a program called Prism until after
Snowden’s disclosures and that the Mountain View,
California-based company didn’t allow the U.S. government
direct access to its servers or some back-door to its data
centers. </strong>He said Google provides user data to
governments “only in accordance with the law.” </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Ah yes, the law that no mere mortal can observe in action, and
which has zero popular checks and balances. So what specifically
does Google provide to the government? "<em><strong>Highly
offensive information</strong></em>" it appears.</p>
<blockquote>
<div class="quote_start">
</div>
<div class="quote_end">
</div>
<p>That metadata includes which version of the operating system,
browser and Java software are being used on millions of
devices around the world, information that U.S. spy agencies
could use to infiltrate those computers or phones and spy on
their users.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>“It’s highly offensive information,” </strong>said
Glenn Chisholm, the former chief information officer for
Telstra Corp (TLS)., one of Australia’s largest
telecommunications companies, contrasting it to defensive
information used to protect computers rather than infiltrate
them. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Going back to Obama's promise on live TV that nobody was
listening in to any conversations, one wonders: why did the
major telecom companies "<strong>ask for guarantees that they
wouldn’t be held liable under U.S. wiretap laws</strong>."
Because if the companies demanded a waiver, they obviously were
wiretapping, i.e., eavesdropping, and doing so on US citizens,
or those protected by US laws. And that's why Obama should have
just kept his mouth shut, instead of having to explain what he
meant and that he never said what he said.</p>
<blockquote>
<div class="quote_start">
</div>
<div class="quote_end">
</div>
<p>Before they agreed to install the system on their networks,
some of the five major Internet companies -- AT&T Inc.
(T), Verizon Communications Inc (VZ)., Sprint Nextel Corp.
(S), Level 3 Communications Inc (LVLT). and CenturyLink Inc
(CTL). -- <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>asked
for guarantees that they wouldn’t be held liable under
U.S. wiretap laws</strong></span>. Those companies that
asked received a <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>letter
signed by the U.S. attorney general </strong></span>indicating
such exposure didn’t meet the legal definition of a wiretap
and <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>granting
them immunity from civil lawsuits, the person said</strong></span>.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Ah, the US Attorney General - because what is another Obama
scandal that doesn't involve his primary henchman Eric Holder...</p>
<blockquote>
<div class="quote_start">
</div>
<div class="quote_end">
</div>
<p>Mark Siegel, a spokesman for Dallas-based AT&T, the
nation’s biggest<br>
phone carrier, declined to comment. Edward McFadden, a
spokesman for<br>
New York-based Verizon, the second-largest phone company,
declined to<br>
comment. Scott Sloat, a spokesman for Overland Park,
Kansas-based<br>
Sprint, and Monica Martinez, a spokeswoman for Broomfield,<br>
Colorado-based Level 3, didn’t immediately respond to requests
for<br>
comment. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>No need to comment - it's quite clear. </p>
<p>The last question remains: what do companies get out of this
proactive betrayal of their clients? Well, in some cases, such
as those of IBM and Amazon as <a
href="http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-06-12/ibm-or-amazon-whom-will-cia-choose">we
described yesterday</a>, they get lucrative government (CIA)
contracts for billions of dollars. But that's just taxpayer
cash. Where it gets worse is when the kickbacks are yet <em><strong>more
secrets</strong></em>.</p>
<blockquote>
<div class="quote_start">
</div>
<div class="quote_end">
</div>
<p>In exchange, <strong>leaders of companies are showered with
attention and information by the agencies to help maintain
the relationship, </strong>the person said. In other cases,
<strong>companies are given quick warnings about threats that
could affect their bottom line, </strong>including serious
Internet attacks and who is behind them. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>In other words, what is going on behind the scenes is nothing
more than one vast, very selective, extremely secretive,
symbiotic and perfectly "legal" giant information exchange
network, which allows corporations to profit off classified
government information either in kind or in cash, and which
allows the government to have all the information at its
disposal, collected using public and private venues, in order to
protect itself, to take out those it designates as targets, or
simply said - to get ever bigger.</p>
<p>The loser in all of this? </p>
<p>You.</p>
<div class="fivestar-static-form-item">
<div class="form-item"> <label>Average: </label>
<div class="fivestar-widget-static fivestar-widget-static-vote
fivestar-widget-static-5 clear-block">
<div class="star star-1 star-odd star-first"><span
class="on">4.962965</span></div>
<div class="star star-2 star-even"><span class="on"></span></div>
<div class="star star-3 star-odd"><span class="on"></span></div>
<div class="star star-4 star-even"><span class="on"></span></div>
<div class="star star-5 star-odd star-last"><span class="on"
style="width: 96.2965%"></span></div>
</div>
<div class="description">
<div class="fivestar-summary fivestar-summary-combo"><span
class="user-rating">Your rating: <span>None</span></span>
<span class="average-rating">Average: <span>5</span></span>
<span class="total-votes">(<span>27</span> votes)</span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>