All language subtitles for Citizenfour.2014.1080p.BluRay.x264-[YTS.AM]

Laura, at this stage I can offer nothing
more than my word.

I am a senior government employee in the
intelligence community.

I hope you understand that contacting
you is extremely high risk, and you are

willing to agree to the following
precautions before I share more.

This will not be a waste of your time.

The following sounds complex, but should
only take minutes to complete for

someone technical.

I would like to confirm out of email
that the keys we exchanged were not

intercepted and replaced by your
surveillance.

Please confirm that no one has ever had
a copy of your private key and that it

uses a strong passphrase. Assume your
adversary is capable of one trillion

guesses per second.

If the device you store the private key
and enter your passphrase on has been

hacked, it is trivial to decrypt our
communications.

Understand that the above steps are not
bulletproof and are intended only to

give us breathing room. In the end, if
you publish the source material, I will

likely be immediately implicated.

This must not deter you from releasing
the information I will provide.

Thank you and be careful.

Hey,

can you hear me?

I am here, David. How are you?

Well, I would just start by pointing to
what Barack Obama himself said about

those questions when he was running.

For the office that he now occupies, in
December of 2007, he said, quote, the

president does not have the power under
the Constitution to unilaterally

authorize a military attack in a
situation that does not involve stopping

actual or imminent threat to the nation.
So by Obama's own words, the president

does not have the power that he's now
exercising under the Constitution.

And as far as why it matters, on August
1, 2007, when he laid out his reasons

why he was running for office and why he
thought it was so important to change

the way we were doing things, he said,
quote, no more ignoring the law when

inconvenient. That is not who we are. We
will again set an example for the world

that the law is not subject to the whims
of stubborn rulers.

So to allow presidents to simply start
words on their own.

You asked why I picked you.

I didn't. You did.

The surveillance you've experienced
means you've been selected, a term which

will mean more to you as you learn about
how the modern SIGINT system works.

For now, know that every border you
cross, every purchase you make, every

you dial, every cell phone tower you
pass, friend you keep, article you

site you visit, subject line you type,
and packet you route, is in the hands of

a system whose reach is unlimited, but
whose safeguards are not.

Your victimization by the NSA system
means that you are well aware of the

that unrestricted, secret police pose
for democracies.

This is a story you bet you can tell.

Thank you for inviting me here to give
me the opportunity to express my story.

But let me give you some of my
background.

I spent about four years in the military
and then I went into NSA directly. So I

ended up with about 37 years of service
combined.

Most of it was a lot of fun, I tell you.
It was really a lot of fun breaking

these puzzles, solving problems and
things like that. And that's really what

did. I fundamentally started working out
with data, looking at data and data

systems and how you do that. I was
developing this concept of analysis that

could lay it out in such a way that it
could be coded and executed

electronically, meaning you could
automate analysis.

And it has to do with metadata and using
metadata relationships.

So that was my whole...

Being there, I didn't say that.
Eventually, that's what I ended up

the only one there doing that, by the
way.

So, at any rate, 9 -11 happened, and it
must have been right after a few days,

no more than a week after 9 -11, that
they had decided to begin actively

on everyone in this country.

And they wanted that back part of our
program to run all the spying.

All right?

So that's exactly what they did.

And then he started taking the telecom
data, and it expanded after that.

So, I mean, the one I knew was AT &T,
and that one provided 320 million

every day.

That program was reauthorized every 45
days by what I called the YES Committee,

which was Hayden and Tennant and the
DOJ.

The program was called Stellar Wind.

So first I went to the House
Intelligence Committee and the staff

personally knew there.

She then went to the chairman of that
committee.

Nancy Pelosi was the minority rep.

They were all briefed into the program
at the time, by the way, and all the

other programs that were going on,
including all these CIA programs.

I wasn't alone in this. There were four
others out of NSA, and we were all

trying to work internally in the
government over these years, trying to

to come around to being constitutionally
acceptable and take it into the courts

and have the courts' oversight of it,
too.

So we naively kept thinking that that
could happen, and it never did.

But at any rate, after that and all the
stuff we were doing, they decided to

raid us to keep us quiet, threaten us,
you know.

So we were raided simultaneously, four
of us. In my case, they came in with

drawn. I don't know why they did that,
but they did.

Laura, I will answer what I remember of
your questions as best I can. Forgive

the lack of structure.

I am not a writer, and I have to draft
this in a great hurry.

What you know as Stellar Wind has grown.

SSO, the expanded special source
operations that took over Stellar Wind's

of the pie, has spread all over the
world to practically include

coverage of the United States.

Disturbingly, The amount of U .S.
communication ingested by NSA is still

increasing.

Publicly, we complain that things are
going dark, but in fact, our accesses

improving.

The truth is that the NSA has never in
its history collected more than it does

now.

I know the location of most domestic
interception points and that the largest

telecommunication companies in the U .S.
are betraying the trust of their

customers, which I can prove.

We are building the greatest weapon for
oppression in the history of man, yet

its directors exempt themselves from
accountability.

NSA director Keith Alexander lied to
Congress, which I can prove.

Billions of U .S. communications are
being intercepted.

In gathering evidence of wrongdoing, I
focus on the wronging of the American

people. But believe me when I say that
the surveillance we live under is the

highest privilege compared to how we
treat the rest of the world.

This I can also prove.

On cyber operations, the government's
public citizen is that we still lack a

policy framework.

This too is a lie. There is a detailed
policy framework, a kind of Markle law

for cyber operations created by the
White House.

It's called Presidential Policy
Directive 20 and was finalized at the

last year.

This I can also prove.

I appreciate your concern for my safety,
but I already know how this will end

for me, and I accept the risk.

If I have luck, and you are careful, you
will have everything you need.

I ask only that you ensure this
information makes it home to the

public.

Does the NSA routinely intercept
American citizens emails?

No.

Does the NSA intercept Americans cell
phone conversations?

No. Google searches?

No. Text messages?

No. Amazon .com orders?

No. Bank records?

No. What judicial consent is required
for NSA to intercept communications

and information involving American
citizens?

Within the United States, that would be
the FBI lead. If it was a foreign actor

in the United States, the FBI would
still have to lead and could work that

NSA or other intelligence agencies as
authorized.

But to conduct that kind of collection
in the United States, it would have to

through a court order.

and the court would have to authorize
it. We are not authorized to do it, nor

we do it.

All right.

The United States Court of Appeals for
the Ninth Circuit is now in session.

Please be seated.

Good morning and welcome to the Ninth
Circuit.

The first case for argument is Jewell v.
National Security Agency.

You may proceed.

May it please the Court, Kevin Bankston
for Carolyn Jewell and her fellow

plaintiff appellants in Jewell v. NSA.

Your Honors, plaintiffs have
specifically alleged that their own

and communications records have been
acquired by the government.

But the district court found that we had
failed to allege facts that

differentiated the injury that our
plaintiffs suffered from the injury

by every other AT &T user whose
communications and records have been

the government, basically concluding
that so long as everyone is being

surveilled, no one has standing to sue.

However, to deny standing to persons who
are injured simply because many others

are also injured would mean that the
most injurious and widespread government

actions could be questioned by nobody.

Do you have anything concrete that, in
fact, a specific communication of your

client was intercepted? We have evidence
that all the communications passing

between AT &T's network and other
networks in their Northern California

have been intercepted, and so that would
necessarily include the Internet

communications of our Northern
California plaintiffs.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Your Honor.

May it please the court, I'm Thomas
Byron from the Department of Justice

behalf of the government defendants. We
think this litigation need not be

resolved in federal court in light of
the oversight of the political branches,

both legislative and executive, which
provides a better opportunity for

oversight and resolution of the concerns
raised concerning nationwide policy of

alleged surveillance in these... in
these complaints. Even if it's revealed

one or more of the plaintiffs had email
or telephone conversations intercepted

that had nothing to do with national
security.

Your Honor, I don't know that anyone
necessarily would have standing to raise

the particular claims at issue in these
two cases.

We think instead that the kinds of
claims at issue here against these...

defendants are those that are better
suited to resolution before the

representative branches of our
government. So what rule would the

if your approach is adopted?

Judge Ferguson, I think that the... I
mean, we just get out of the way, is

it? Well, Judge Ferguson, I think that
there is a narrow category, a subset of

cases in which it may be appropriate to
step aside.

for that narrow category of cases. But
the judiciary plays a role.

To be sure, Judge Ferguson.

In our system.

Yes, Your Honor.

And we don't mean to diminish that.

You're asking us to abdicate that role.

No, Your Honor, but it is a question of
this court's discretion whether to reach

that issue.

We do think that there is simply no way
for the litigation to proceed without

risk of divulging those very questions
of privileged information that would

cause, as the Director of National
Intelligence has explained,

grave damage to national security if
disclosed.

Thanks for having me.

If anybody has any questions, like I
said, just basically just raise your

and I'll try to call on you as soon as I
possibly can.

Who here actually feels like they are
under surveillance pretty regularly?

Everyone inside of Occupy. How many
people here have been arrested and at

court date they had their phone taken
into the back room?

How many people here had their retina
scanned?

Wow.

So you guys are actually, in a sense,
the canaries in the coal mine, right?

Because the incentives are all lined up
against you.

Anybody see on the subway, link your
MetroCard to your debit card?

and auto -refill.

This is a concept which is key to
everything we'll talk about today. It's

linkability. Take one piece of data and
link it to another piece of data.

For example, if you have your MetroCard
and you have your debit card, you have

those things and you can draw a line
between them.

That's not a scary thing.

Except your bank card is tied to
everything else that you do during the

they know where you're going, when you
make purchases.

When they decide to target you, they can
actually recreate your exact steps.

with a MetroCard and with a credit card
alone, like literally where you go and

what you buy.

And potentially, by linking that data
with other people on similar travel

they can figure out who you talked to
and who you met with.

When you then take cell phone data,
which logs your location, and you link

purchasing data, MetroCard data, and
your debit card, you start to get what

could call metadata in aggregate over a
person's life.

And metadata in aggregate is content.

It tells a story about you, which is
made up of facts, but it's not

true. So, for example, just because you
were on the corner and all those data

points point to it, it doesn't mean you
committed a crime.

So it's important to note that if
someone has a perception of you having

thing, it will now follow you for the
rest of your life.

So just keep in mind that what happens
to you guys, for example, with

fingerprints and retinal scans and
photographs...

That is what is going to happen to
people in the future when they resist

changes and when they try to protest in
a totally constitutionally protected

way.

This is for you, Director Clapper, again
on the surveillance front. And I hope

we can do this in just a yes or no
answer because I know Senator Feinstein

to move on.

So does the NSA collect any type of data
at all on millions or hundreds of

millions of Americans?

No, sir.

It does not?

Not wittingly.

There are cases where they could
inadvertently, perhaps, collect, but not

wittingly.

The encrypted archive should be
available to you within seven days.

The key will follow when everything else
is done.

The material I provide and investigative
effort required will be too much for

any one person.

I recommend, at a very minimum, you
involve Glenn Greenwald.

I believe you know him.

The plain text of the payload will
include my true name details for the

though it will be your decision as to
whether or how to declare my

My personal desire is that you paint the
target directly on my back.

No one, not even my most trusted
confidant, is aware of my intentions,

would not be fair for them to fall under
suspicion for my actions.

You may be the only one who can prevent
that, and that is by immediately nailing

me to the cross, rather than trying to
protect me as a source.

On timing regarding meeting up in Hong
Kong.

The first rendezvous attempt will be at
10 a .m. local time on Monday.

We will meet in the hallway outside of a
restaurant in the Mira Hotel.

I will be working on a Rubik's Cube so
you can identify me.

Approach me and ask if I know the hours
of the restaurant.

I'll respond by stating that I'm not
sure and suggest you try the lounge

instead.

I'll offer to show you where it is, and
at that point, we're good.

You simply need to follow naturally.

As far as positioning, I mean, if you
want us to sit in any particular way.

You know, I'm going to go there.

Okay.

There's so many different

enormous stories just that are kind of
stand -alone stories that

even certain things about individual
documents that can just be their own

And I just want to start turning those
stories out.

I basically woke up this morning and
already started writing stories.

So I'm hoping to start publishing within
a day or two days, as long as you're

good with that.

And so as far as the stuff we have to
talk about, I'm kind of dichotomizing it

between...

You know, stuff that I'd like to talk to
you about in terms of like the

documents and the content. And Laura has
a bunch of questions about that as

well. Sort of working through the
documents, getting your take on a lot of

stuff that, you know, will help me
understand it better. But then also the

of you story, right? Like the who you
are, what you've done, why you've done

what you've done. And I'd love to do
that first.

Okay. In part because you're the only
one who could do that. So I'd like to

get it done so that it's done.

And also because, you know, it might be
that you want to do that early because

it might be necessary or we might choose
to have that done early.

Tell me your thoughts on where you are
with that. The primary one on that, I

think I've expressed a couple times
online, is I feel the modern media has a

focus on personalities.

Totally. And I'm a little concerned the
more we focus on that, the more they're

going to use that as a distraction.

And I don't necessarily want that to
happen, which is why I've consistently

said, you know, I'm not the story here.

Nervous, huh? No, it's a very, very
cheap plan.

Go ahead.

But, yeah, anything I can do to help you
guys get this out, I will do.

I don't have any experience with media
with how this works.

So I'm kind of learning as I go.

Right. So I just want to get a sense of
why did you decide to do what you've

done? So for me, it all comes down to
state power against the people's ability

to meaningfully oppose that power.

And I'm sitting there every day getting
paid to design methods to

amplify that state power. And I'm
realizing that if, you know, the policy

switches, that are the only things that
restrain these states were chained, you

couldn't meaningfully oppose these. I
mean, you would have to be the most

incredibly sophisticated technical actor
in existence.

I mean, I'm not sure there's anybody, no
matter how gifted you are, who could

oppose all of the offices and all the
bright people, even all the mediocre

people out there with all of their tools
and all their capabilities.

And as I saw the promise of the Obama
administration be betrayed and walked

from, and in fact actually advance the
things that had been promised to be sort

of curtailed and reined in and dialed
back, and actually at work, particularly

drone strikes, which I also learned at
NSA, we could watch drone videos from

desktops.

As I saw that, that really hardened me
to action. In real time?

In real time, yeah.

It'll stream a lower quality of the
video to your desktop.

Typically, you'd be watching
surveillance drones as opposed to

you know, murder drones where they're
going out there to bomb somebody.

But you'll have a drone that's just
following somebody's house for hours and

hours. And you won't know who it is
because, you know, you don't have the

context for that. But it's just a page
where it lists and lists.

of drone feeds in all these different
countries under all these different code

names. And you can just click on which
one you want to see.

Right. So if your self -interest is to
live in a world in which there's maximum

privacy, doing something that could put
you into prison in which your privacy is

completely destroyed is sort of the
antithesis of that.

How did you reach the point where that
was a worthwhile calculation for you?

I remember what the Internet was like
before it was being watched, and there's

never been anything in the history of
man that's like it. I mean, you could,

again, have children from one part of
the world having an equal discussion

where, you know, they were sort of
granted the same respect for their ideas

conversation with experts in the field
from another part of the world on any

topic, anywhere, anytime, all the time.

And it was free and unrestrained. And
we've seen the chilling of that and the

cooling of that and the changing of that
model toward something in which people

self -police their own views.

And they literally make jokes about
ending up on the list if they donate to

political cause or if they say something
in a discussion.

And it's become an expectation that
we're being watched.

Many people I've talked to have
mentioned that they're careful about

type into search engines because they
know that it's being recorded. And that

limits the boundaries of their
intellectual exploration.

And I am more willing to

risk imprisonment or any other negative
outcome personally

than I am willing to risk.

the curtailment of my intellectual
freedom and that of those around me whom

care for equally as I do for myself.

And again, that's not to say that I'm
self -sacrificing because it gives me, I

feel good in my human experience to know
that I can contribute to the good of

others.

Could you elaborate on that?

So I don't know how much of the programs
and the actual technical capacity that

everybody's talked to you about, but
there's an infrastructure in place in

United States and worldwide that NSA has
built in cooperation

with other governments as well that
intercepts

basically every digital communication.

every radio communication, every analog
communication that it has sensors in

place to detect.

And with these capabilities, basically
the vast majority

of human and computer -to -computer
communications, device -based

communications, which sort of inform the
relationships between humans, are

automatically ingested.

without targeting.

And that allows individuals to
retroactively search your communications

on self -certifications. So, for
example, if I wanted to see the content

email or your wife's phone calls or
anything like that, all I have to do

is use what's called a selector, any
kind of...

thing in the communications chain that
might uniquely or almost uniquely

identify you as an individual.

And I'm talking about things like email
addresses, IP addresses, phone numbers,

credit cards, even passwords that are
unique to you that aren't used by anyone

else.

I can input those into the system and it
will not only go back through the

database and go, have I seen this
anywhere in the past?

It will

basically put an additional level of
scrutiny on it, moving into the future

says, if this is detected now or at any
time in the future, I want this to go to

me immediately and alert me in real time
that you're communicating with someone,

things like that.

So I don't know who you are or anything
about you.

Okay.

I work for Booz Allen Hamilton.

a defense contractor.

I'm sort of on loan to NSA.

I don't talk to a Booz Allen boss. I
don't get tasking from Booz Allen. It's

from NSA.

So I don't know your name.

Oh, sorry.

My name is Edward Snowden. I go by Ed.

Edward Joseph Snowden is the full name.

S -N -O -W -D -E -N.

And where are you from?

I'm originally, I was born in North
Carolina.

a small town, Elizabeth City.

There's a Coast Guard station there. I'm
from a military family.

But I spent most of my time growing up
around Fort Meade in Maryland.

And your family, what's the consequences
for them?

This is actually what has made this
hardest.

My family doesn't know what's happening.
They're unaware.

I don't think...

I'll be able to keep the family ties
that I've had for my life

because of the risk of associating them
with this. And I'll

leave what to publish on this and what
not to publish to you guys. I trust you

to be responsible on this.

But basically, the closer I stay to my
family, the more likely they are to be

leaned on. So you don't want me to
report this?

Yeah, we definitely want to do whatever
we can not to include them or bring them

into the mix.

That's fine.

I'm sorry, let me interrupt you. Can we
just stop for a second and do the

document and then go back to that?

What do I need? Do I need an email
address that we're using?

Well, so you can send them.

Once you've encrypted it, you can send
it from whatever you think is

appropriate. The main thing is you've
got to encapsulate all of this in a way

that it can't be decrypted and read in
transit across the network or on

either of the endpoints.

Okay. I mean, just so you know, these
documents are basically all going to be.

public within 48 hours, 72 hours,
whatever. You want to get in the process

doing this for everything because it
seems hard, but it's not hard. It's

easy. Just walk me through it.

Show me the actual folder structure
where these files are first.

How many documents did you say there
were?

Seven.

Okay, go ahead.

How many documents are we talking about?
Because when The Guardian did

WikiLeaks, technical people set up a
system so that they were available for

anybody to see.

And I just wonder if it's possible to do
the same thing. That would be the ideal

endgame. But because some of these
documents are

legitimately classified in ways that
could cause harm to people and methods.

I'm comfortable in my technical ability
to protect them. I mean, you could

literally shoot me or torture me, and I
could not disclose the password if I

wanted to.

I have the sophistication to do that.

There are some journalists that I think
could do that, but there are a number of

them that couldn't. But the question
becomes, can an organization actually

control that information in that manner?

without risking basically an
uncontrolled disclosure.

But I do agree with that. Honestly, I
don't want to be the person making

decisions on what should be public and
what shouldn't, which is why rather than

publishing these on my own or putting
them out openly, I'm running them

journalists so that my bias... and my
things, because clearly I have some

strongly held views, are removed from
that equation and the public interest is

being represented in the most
responsible manner.

Actually, given your sort of geographic

familiarity with the UK and whatnot, I'd
like to point out that GCHQ

has probably the most invasive

Network intercept program anywhere in
the world.

It's called Tempora, T -E -M -P -O -R
-A.

And it's the world's first full take,
they call it. And that means content in

addition to metadata on everything.

So this is what I like to do in terms of
scheduling, if it's good with everybody

else. Are you...

Do you feel like you're done with what
you... So, I'm anxious to go back, get

those articles done, and then there's a
bunch of documents that aren't about

those first two or three stories that
I'd like to spend time with you, you

kind of going over.

I'm not going anywhere. You're
available?

You want to check your book first? Yeah,
let me check my schedule. Is that good

for you, Oren? Okay.

Hello? Yes.

My meal was great. Thank you very much.

No, I still have some left, and I think
I'm going to be eating it later, so you

can just leave me alone for now.

Okay, great. Thank you so much.

Have a good one. Bye.

Another fun thing I was telling Laura
about, all of these new VoIP phones,

have little computers in them, and you
can hot mic these over the network all

the time, even when the receiver's down.

As long as it's plugged in, it can be
listening on and on. I hadn't even

considered that earlier, but yeah.

There are so many ways.

Everything that's in here is pretty much
going to be on the public record at

some point. We should operate on that.
Yeah, yeah, I think we are.

Do you have your hair cap machine? I do,
I do.

Let me pop that out.

Do you have an understanding or
commitment on when you guys are going to

with the first stories?

It's about 7 or 8 in the morning in
London.

Okay.

Let's see here.

Okay, look, there's the other one.

Pro tip, let's not leave the same SD
cards in our laptops forever in the

Did you know that this was still kicking
around in your laptop?

Yeah, I mean, that would be... Okay,
just making sure. Okay, yeah.

You will have a new one that looks
exactly identical, but it's a different

archive, so you might want to take a
Sharpie to it or something.

Could you pass me my magic mantle of
power?

Is that about the possibility of
overhead?

Yeah, visual collection.

I don't think at this point there's
anything in this regard that will shock

We've become pretty... In fact, Ewan
said before, he's like, I'm never

my room. He's like, I'm never leaving
anything in my room again, not a single

machine. I was like, you've been
infected with a paranoia bug. That was

us.

And the way he said it, he was like, I
would never leave a single device in the

room again alone.

My bike is getting heavier and heavier.
Are you sorry?

That's your evil informant. All right,
I'm going to need you to enter your root

password for that. No idea.

If you want to use this one, you're more
than welcome to.

It looks like your root password is
about four characters long anyway. It's

usually a lot longer, but that's just
like the one -time -only thing, right?

So it is.

It had been a lot longer, but ever since
I knew that it was just like a one

-time -only session one, I've been
making it shorter.

Is that not good?

It's actually not. I was expressing this
with Laura either. The issue is because

of the fact that it's got a hardware MAC
address and things like that, if people

are able to identify your machine and
they're able to. The fact you're about

break them.

setting stories.

Right, that's true. So they might kind
of prioritize... It's 10 letters. I type

very quickly. It actually is 10 letters.
Okay, so 10 letters would be good if

they had to brute force the entire key
space.

Right.

That would still probably only take a
couple days for NSA.

That's a fire alarm.

Okay.

Hopefully it sounds like a two -second
test.

Do you want to call the desk and ask?

I think it's fine.

Yeah, I don't think it's an issue, but
it's interesting to do this. Does that

happen before?

Maybe they got mad that they couldn't
listen in to us via the phone anymore.

Did the final alarm get off before?

No, that's the first time that's
happened.

Yeah, I think they've got like an alert
that goes to final.

That's unusual.

You probably might have to go back and
ignore that.

I don't know.

If it goes... No, it's not continuous.

It's not continuous.

No, I'm just saying, if it continues...
And then we go

and we meet the guys down in the lobby.

Yeah, right? Yeah.

Yeah, let's leave for now. Let me finish
this up.

Not that they're going to answer because
they probably got like 7 ,000 calls.

Yeah.

Hi, we hear a loud buzzing on the 10th
floor. Can you tell us what that is?

Oh, okay.

Okay, great. Thank you. Bye.

Fire alarm testing maintenance.

That's good.

That's what we want to do here.

Nice of them to let us know about that
in advance.

I just wanted to give you kind of a
quick tour.

When Laura was looking at this, she was
kind of salivating and couldn't stop,

like, actually reading the document.
Right, right, right. We'll try and

ourselves without promising that we'll
succeed. Yeah, I just wanted to kind of

explain a brief overview of what these
are and how they're organized.

The beginning are just some documents of
interest.

The primary purpose of the second
archive is to bring the focus over to

opposed to PRISM. And this is in
general.

SSO are special source operations.

Those are the worldwide passive
collection on networks. They're both

the U .S. and international.

There's a lot of different ways they do
it, but corporate partnerships are one

of the primary things they do
domestically. They also do this with

multinationals that might be
headquartered in the U .S. who they can

coerce or just pay into giving them
access.

And they also do it bilaterally with the
assistance of certain governments.

And that's basically on the premise that
they go, all right, we'll help you set

the system up if you give us all the
data from it.

There's a lot more in here than any one
person or probably one team could do.

XKeyscore Deep Dive, XKeyscore in
general, and there's a huge folder of

documentation on XKeyscore and how it
works, is the front -end system that

analysts use for querying that sort of
ocean of raw signals that I was telling

you about. All of that stuff where you
can sort of do the retroactive searches

and live searches and get flagging and
whatnot.

XKeyscore is the front -end for that.

I'm just going to show you one slide
here because Laura thought it was

and was talking about kind of how these
capabilities ramp up in sophistication

over time.

This is kind of nice. As of fiscal year
2011, they could monitor one billion

telephone or Internet sessions
simultaneously per one of these devices.

And they could collect at a rate of
about 125 gigabytes a second, which is a

terabit per second. That's for each one
of these devices? That's for each one of

these, yeah.

How many tumult missions would that be
then?

Per this, back then, there were 20
sites. There's 10 at DoD installation.

But these are all outdated. We've
expanded pretty rapidly.

But still 20 sites, that's at least 20
billion.

This all needs to get out. You know what
I mean?

Just in terms of understanding the
capabilities, it's so opaque. It's not

science fiction. This stuff is happening
right now. No, that's what I mean. It's

like the magnitude of it. And this is a
pretty inaccessible technical document.

But even this is really chilling.

Do you know what I mean? And yeah, I
mean, we could be having debates about

whether we want government.

massive and extraordinary it's amazing
even though you know it you know even

though you know that to see it like the
physical blueprints of it and sort of

the technical expressions of it really
hits home in like a super visceral way

that is so needed this

is dnn breaking news An explosive new
report is reigniting the concern that

privacy is being violated to protect
America's security.

It reveals a court order giving the
National Security Agency blanket access

millions of Verizon customers' records
on a daily basis.

Earlier, I had the chance to conduct the
first TV interview with the reporter

who broke this story wide open, Glenn
Greenwald of The Guardian.

Congratulations on the scoop. Explain
for our viewers.

Why this is important.

It's important because people have
understood that the law that this was

under, which is the Patriot Act enacted
in the wake of 9 -11.

was a law that allowed the government
very broad powers to get records about

people with a lower level of suspicion
than probable cause, the traditional

standard. So it's always been assumed
that under the Patriot Act, if the

government had even any suspicion that
you were involved in a crime or

terrorism, they could get a lot of
information about you. What this court

does that makes it so striking is that
it's not directed at any individuals who

they believe or have suspicion of
committing crimes or part of a terrorist

organization. It's collecting the phone
records. of every single customer of

Verizon Business and finding out every
single call that they've made

internationally and locally.

So it's indiscriminate and it's
sweeping. It's a government program

collect information about all Americans,
not just people where they believe

there's reason to think they've done
anything wrong.

Yeah, it's a tough situation, you know,
hearing that the person that you love,

that you've spent a decade with, may not
be coming back.

What did they ask her?

When was the last time she saw me? Where
am I?

What am I doing?

What does she know about my illness?

Things like that.

So, yeah, they're pretty solidly aware
because

I'm clearly not at home ill.

Hello? Hello?

Hello. I mean, disconnect from the
internet.

So, there's some news?

Yes, there was indeed some news. I have
config today, I think, maybe just a few

hours ago.

What kind of people visit?

An HR lady, I'm assuming from NSA, as
opposed to Booz Allen, because

she was accompanied by a police officer,
which means NSA police.

And they were planning to break into my
house, which regular police don't do.

Does she live there?

Yeah, she lives there, so I told her to
cooperate fully.

I can't find my phone, just one second.
Don't worry about her, Phillip.

You know what I'm going to do? I'll just
take out the stuff I want to use.

Okay.

Okay, well, look, I mean, this is not a
surprise at all. Not, yeah, I know, I

plan for it, but it's just, you know,
when it's impacting them and they're

talking to you, it's a little bit
different. Absolutely.

But it's possible that they just noticed
that you're missing. I guess it's not

really impossible.

It is, but yeah, they're, I mean...

Let me just get

rid of this.

So I... I obviously was focused on other
things than appearance this morning.

How did she react? Was she relatively
calm about it? She's relatively calm.

she know anything about what you're
doing in life? She has no idea.

I mean, I feel badly about that, but
that's the only way I could think of

she can't be in trouble. Did you just
basically do a I have to go somewhere

reasons that I can't tell you about kind
of thing? I just disappeared when she

was on vacation.

And I left a note saying, hey, I'm going
to be gone for a while for work, which

isn't unusual for me in my business.

Okay,

so let me ask you a couple of things
just quickly.

Are they going to be able to go into
your stuff and figure out what you took?

In some kind of, some sort of like
peripheral senses, but not necessarily.

with great specificity. Yes, because I
cast.

such a wide net.

If they do that, the only thing they're
going to do is they're going to have a

heart attack because they're going to
go, he had access to everything.

And they're not going to know what
specifically has been done.

I think they're going to start to
actually feel a little better, although

they're not going to be wild about this
in any case.

When they see that the stories are kind
of cleaving to a trend, it's not like

here's the list of everybody who works
everywhere.

Right. I also think they're going to be
paranoid in the extreme and assuming all

kinds of worst -case scenarios, which is
going to, I think, make them react in

ways that probably aren't going to be
particularly rational on their part.

But at the same time, I do think they're
limited for the moment.

I agree. And, I mean, I had kind of time
to set a stage where we all enjoy at

least a minimum level of protection, you
know, no matter who we are who's

involved in this. You know, you're
either a journalist or you're either out

jurisdiction. So we have some time to
play this before they can really get

nasty. I think it's over, you know, the
weeks when they have time to get lawyers

really sort of go, this is a special
situation.

How can we interpret this to our
advantage?

Like, we see them do this all the time,
you know, whether it's drones or

wiretapping or whatever. They'll go,
well, according to this law from the

you know, we can apply X, Y, or Z
authority.

But that takes time, and that takes
agreement. And also, you know, I mean, I

think the more public we are out there
to, like, as journalists, the more

protection that's going to give as well.

Have you started to give thought to when
you're ready to come forward?

I'm ready whenever.

Honestly, I think there's sort of an
agreement that it's not going to bias

reporting process. That's my primary
concern at this point. I don't want to

myself into the issue before it's going
to happen anyway and where it takes away

from the stories that are getting out.

of millions of Americans who weren't
suspected of doing anything who were

surveilled in this way. Your thoughts
for a moment. I want to continue this

conversation because these are really
important, sensitive issues and the

out there has a right to know what's
going on. Stand by. This is CNN Breaking

News.

Another explosive article has just
appeared, this time in The Washington

It's breaking news that it reveals
another broad and secret U .S.

surveillance program.

The Washington Post and The Guardian in
London reporting that the NSA and the

FBI are tapping directly into the
central servers of nine leading Internet

companies, including Microsoft, Yahoo,
Google, Facebook, AOL, Skype, YouTube,

and Apple. The Post says they're
extracting audio, video.

photographs, e -mails, documents, and
connection logs that enable analysts to

track a person's movements and contacts
over time.

Let's discuss this latest revelation.

They're coming out fast.

Bill Binney, the former official of the
NSA who quit back in 2001, you were

angry over what was going on. You'd be
known as a whistleblower right now.

what do you think about this Washington
Post story? Well, I assume it's just a

continuation of what they've been doing
all along.

So you're not surprised?

Do you have any idea who's leaking this
information?

I don't know who leaked this. I have no
doubt that the administration will

launch an investigation, not into who
approved these programs, but into who

leaked the information.

I'm not shocked that the companies are
denying it. I don't assume that there

be some technical basis on which they
can say that we are not actively

collaborating or they don't have.

what we consider in our own definition
to be direct access to our servers. But

what I do know is that I've talked to
more than one person who has sat at a

at a web portal and typed out commands
and reached into those servers from a

distance. So whatever they want to call
that, that's what's happening. Well,

what I would call it is the single
biggest infringement on American civil

liberties probably of all time, isn't
it?

It's interesting. I already have the New
York Times now today saying that the

administration has lost all credibility.

Yeah, the New York Times slammed
President Obama for this. And frankly, I

used to that. The New York Times slammed
George Bush for protecting the country

and for the steps he took. I don't want
us to drop our guard. I don't want us to

be struck again. As we saw in Boston,
Anderson, people are willing to

their civil liberties. People are
sheltered inside.

How can you believe in freedom, do you
think? I mean, try and play devil's

advocate for me. When you have secret
courts, secret operations like prison.

Secret investigations which go into
every bit and cough of every American's

without any member of the American
public knowing about it. That's not

is it? In 2008, they eliminated the
warrant requirement for all

except ones that take place by and among
Americans exclusively on American soil.

So they don't need warrants now for
people who are foreigners outside of the

.S., but they also don't need warrants
for Americans who are in the United

States communicating with people
reasonably believed to be outside of the

So, again, the fact that there are no
checks, no oversight about who's looking

over the NSA's shoulder means that they
can take whatever they want. And the

fact that it's all behind a wall of
secrecy and they threaten people who

expose it means that whatever they're
doing, even violating the law, is

something that we're unlikely to know
until we start having real

and real transparency into what it is
that the government is doing. Glenn

Greenwald, congratulations again on
exposing what is a true scandal. I

appreciate you joining me.

I just heard from Lindsay, and she's
still alive, which is good, and free.

My rent checks apparently are no longer
getting through to my landlord.

So they said if we don't pay them in
five days, we'll be evicted, which is

strange because I've got a system set up
that automatically pays them.

So there's that, and apparently there's
construction trucks all over the street

of my house.

I wonder what they're looking for.

It is an unusual feeling that's kind of
hard to describe

or convey in words, but not knowing
what's going to happen the next day, the

next hour, the next week.

It's scary, but at the same time it's
liberating.

The planning comes a lot easier because
you don't have that many variables to

take into play. You can only act and
then act again.

Now, all these phone calls are being
recorded digitally, not for content, but

for origin and destination.

Now, where the government is going right
into the servers of these large

Internet companies. How does the
government, politically speaking, make

argument that this is essential to
national security and not a dramatic

overreach in terms of personal privacy?

It's difficult, Matt, because as Peter
was pointing out overnight, we had an

extraordinary late night, close to
midnight announcement and a

from the director of national
intelligence.

They are scrambling. The administration
is already supported strongly by leaders

in both parties from the intelligence
committees.

GCHQ has an internal Wikipedia at the
top secret, you know, super classified

level where anybody working in
intelligence can work on anything they

That's what this is. I'm giving it to
you. You can make the decisions on that,

what's appropriate, what's not.

It's going to be documents with
different types of pictures and

Word documents, stuff like that.

Sorry, can I take that seat?

I'm sorry, I've got you to repeat. So in
these documents, they will show...

Yeah, there will be a couple more
documents on that. That's only one part,

though. Like it talks about Tempora and
a little more thing. That's the wiki

article itself.

It was also talking about a self
-developed tool called UDAQ, U -D -A -Q.

It's their search tool for all the stuff
they collect, was what it looked like.

It's going to be projects. It's going to
be troubleshooting pages for a

particular tool.

Thanks.

What's the next step?

When do you think you'll go public?

I think it's pretty soon. I mean, with
the reaction, this escalated more

quickly. I think pretty much as soon as
they start trying to make this about me,

which should be any day now, I'll come
out just to go, hey, you know, this is

not a question of somebody skulking
around in the shadows.

These are public issues.

These are not my issues.

These are everybody's issues. And I'm
not afraid of you. You're not going to

bully me into silence like you've done
to everybody else.

And if nobody else is going to do it, I
will.

And hopefully when I'm gone, whatever
you do to me, there will be somebody

who will do the same thing.

It will be the sort of Internet
principle of the Hydra. You can stomp

person, but there's going to be seven
more of us.

Are you getting more nervous?

I mean, no.

I think the way I look at stress,
particularly because I sort of knew this

coming, you know, because I sort of
volunteered to walk into it,

I'm already sort of familiar

with the idea. I'm not worried about it.
When somebody, like, busts in the door,

suddenly I'll get nervous and it'll
affect me. But until they do, you know.

I'm eating a little less. That's the
only difference I take.

Let's talk about the issue with when
we're going to say who you are.

You have to talk me through this because
I have a big worry about this. Okay,

tell me. Which is that if we come out
and I know that you believe that

you're

detection is inevitable and that it's
inevitable imminently.

There's, you know, in the New York Times
today, Charlie Savage, the fascinating

Sherlock Holmes of political reporting,
deduced that the fact that there's been

these leaks in succession probably means
that there's some one person who's

decided to leak a bunch of stuff.
Somebody else quoted you as saying it

of your readers.

Yeah. Somebody else who put in all the
things. Yeah. So, you know, I mean, it's

fine. I want people to, I want it to be,
you know, like this is a person. I want

to start introducing the concept that
this is a person who has a particular.

set of political objectives about
informing the world about what's taking

So I'm keeping it all anonymous,
totally, but I want to start introducing

that kind of incremental way.

But here's the thing.

What I'm concerned about is that if we
come out and say, here's who this is,

here's what he did, the whole thing that
we talked about, that we're going to

basically be doing the government's work
for them, and we're going to basically

be handing them a confession.

and helping them identify who found it.
I mean, maybe you're right. Maybe

they'll find out quickly, and maybe
they'll know, but is there any

that they won't? Are we kind of giving
them stuff that we don't, or...

Possibility that they know, but they
don't want to reveal it because they

know. Or that they don't know, and we're
going to be telling them. Like, is it a

possibility that they're going to need,
like, two, three months of uncertainty,

and we're going to be solving that
problem for them? Or, let me just say,

part... Maybe it doesn't matter to you.
Like, maybe you want it. Maybe, I mean,

you're not coming out because you think
inevitably they're going to catch you

and you want to do it first.

You're coming out because you want to
fucking come out. Well, there is that. I

mean, that's the thing. I don't want to
hide on this and skulk around. I don't

think I should have to.

Obviously, there's circumstances that
are saying that. And I think it is

powerful to come out and be like, look.

I'm not afraid, you know, and I don't
think other people should either. You

know, I was sitting in the office right
next to you last week. You know, we all

have a stake in this. This is our
country.

And the balance of power between the
citizenry and the government is becoming

that of the ruling and the ruled as
opposed to actually, you know, the

and the electorate. Okay, so that's what
I need to hear, that this is not

about... But I do want to say...

I don't think there's a case that I'm
not going to be discovered in the

of time. It's a question of time frame.
You're right. It could take them a long

time. I don't think it will. But I
didn't try to hide the footprint

again, I intended to come forward. Okay.
I'm going to post this morning just a

general defense of whistleblowers.
That's fine. And you in particular

saying anything about you i'm gonna go
post that right when i get back and i'm

also doing like a big fuck you to all
the people who keep like talking about

investigations like that i want that to
be like the fearlessness and the fuck

you to like the bullying tactics has got
to be completely pervading everything

we do and i think that's brilliant i i
mean your principles on this i love i

can't support them enough

because it's inverting the model that
the government has laid out where people

who are trying to say the truth skulk
around and they hide in the dark and

quote anonymously and whatnot. I say,
yes, fuck that. Okay, so here's the plan

then. I mean, and this is the thing.
It's like once you, I think we all just

felt the fact that this is the right way
to do it.

It's the, you feel the power of your
choice. You know what I mean? It's like,

and I want that power to be felt in the
world. Okay. And it is the, I mean, it's

the ultimate standing up to them, right?
Like I'm not going to fucking hide even

for like one second.

I'm going to get right in your face.

You don't have to investigate.

There's nothing to investigate. Here I
am.

You know, and I think that it's just
incredibly powerful.

And then the question just becomes, how
do we do this in the right, you know,

the perfect way? And that's my burden
and that's what I'm going to... So today

is going to be the story in the morning,
assuming that it doesn't change on the

Guardian. It's going to be the story in
the morning just to keep the momentum

going, just to keep, like, the
disclosures coming.

A big one at night.

Now it's becoming like, okay, this is...
a major leak and after today i only

post the two stuff things that we're
going to post it's going to be what the

fuck is this leak and who did it i
guarantee you

i

just want to make sure move over
slightly and you want me to move a

over okay

All right, we're rolling.

So let's just begin with some basic
background information, like just state

name, what position you held in the
intelligence community, and how long you

worked within that community.

Okay.

Just so I'm aware of where we're going.
How in depth are we going? Just in

general, like I'm currently an
infrastructure analyst, you know, Booz

Hamilton, not going through my whole
backstory.

Yeah. Okay. Just like, yeah, summary
kind of. Okay.

My name is Ed Snowden. I'm 29 years old.
I work for Booz Allen Hamilton as an

infrastructure analyst for NSA in
Hawaii.

And what are some of the positions that
you held previously within the

intelligence community?

I've been a systems engineer, systems
administrator, senior advisor

for the Central Intelligence Agency,
solutions consultant, and a

telecommunications information systems
officer.

And what kind of clearances have you
held? What kind of classification?

Top secret.

So people in my levels of access for
systems administration or as an

infrastructure analyst typically have
higher accesses than an NSA employee

normally have.

Normal NSA employees have a combination
of clearances called TS, SI, TK, and

Gamma.

That's top secret signals intelligence,
talent keyhole, and Gamma. And they all

relate to certain things that are sort
of core to the NSA mission.

As a systems administrator, you get a
special clearance called Prisac for

privileged access, which allows you to
be exposed to information of any

classification, regardless of what your
position actually needs.

So just before we go, a reminder of our
top story, and that's that the former

CIA technical worker, Edward Snowden,
says he's responsible for leaking

information that U .S. authorities have
been monitoring phone and Internet data.

The U .S. Justice Department confirmed
it in the first stages of a criminal

investigation. Leave it longer? I've got
to shorten it. What do you think?

As far as the video that people saw.

Am I laughing at Apple now? Was it?

Because I can't go all the way down.
It's still going to be double. I don't

the blade for closer.

Are you going to be talking to any other
media about the story today?

I am.

Will you be coming to our office if you
have any questions?

Of course, about where is Snowden now,
what his plans are. Well, I'm obviously

not going to talk about that. Unless you
have any other questions, it's going to

be a pretty brief interview. What are
your plans, please?

Are you staying in Hong Kong for the
time being? For a little while.

And do you have any hopes to write more
about this story? Are you stopping new

writing about this story? No, I'm going
to continue to write about it. Have you

had any pressure from the U .S.
authorities about continuing to report

No.

And have you heard anything about what
could be the attitude of Hong Kong

authorities towards this case, whether
they've contacted you or asked you

anything about the whereabouts of
Snowden and whether that is another... I

haven't heard from the authorities of
any of them.

And where do you think the story is
going for you and, of course, for

and, of course, for the U .S. media and
the U .S. administration in general?

Well, for me, I'm going to continue to
report on, do my reporting on what the

government has been doing and what I
think my readers should know about.

As for him, I don't think anyone knows.
I can have people come after me or any

of their third -party partners.

You know, they work closely with a
number of other nations.

Or, you know, they make a payout to
ProHeads or, you know, any of their

or assets.

Now it's time for our newspaper review
and looking at what's making headlines

around the world. Let's start with The
Guardian.

This is revealing the identity of the
former CAA employee.

So the paper has leaked information
exposing the scale of American

of the internet.

Edward Snowden. What a great story.

Peter, do you want to know what this is?
Well, I think it's a fantastic story,

first off. It could be straight out of a
John le Carré novel. I mean, when you

read what he did, you actually got the
material. He then decided to go to the

place he identified as being very
difficult for America to get at him.

Which is Hong Kong, because, of course,
technically inside China, the one

country, two systems policy there,
meaning that you can even get

some protection, you thought, all very
well planned. It could be just out of a

spy mode. But what about the details?

That could make it worse.

It's just the lower half of my face.

How do you feel?

What happens, happens.

We've talked about this. I knew what the
risks were.

If I get arrested, I get arrested.

We were able to get the information that
needed to get out, out.

And you and Glenn are able to keep
reporting regardless what happens to me.

Yes.

I'm sorry, who's asking?

I'm afraid you have the wrong room.
Thank you.

Wall Street Journal.

Yes. I'm sorry, say again?

No, no, thank you. No calls.

I think they have the wrong number.

Yeah, no calls. Thank you.

Wait, I'm sorry.

If it's two men from the front desk,
they can call, but no outside calls.

Wait, actually, just let them through.

Wait, wait, ma 'am?

Yes. Wait,

is it a lawyer?

Yeah, no, no, no. I mean the people who
are asking. Ask them if they are

lawyers.

No, tell her that she has the wrong

number and there's no Mr. Snowden here.

Can you talk right now?

I'm safely going into the room.

I'm not saving the client, okay? So can
we talk together about the plan?

Is the application started already or
not, technically?

Yeah, so technically it hasn't started
yet.

Would you mind to talk to him in
speakerphone?

Sorry. Hi, Robert.

Hi,

I'm the client.

Pretty good. I'm doing well.

Okay.

Okay.

Okay, that's great. Is it okay if I
bring equipment? Because I'm just kind

going so I can leave in any direction at
any time and not come back, if

necessary.

Okay. Take whatever you want with you.
Just go with Mr. Matt.

I will pick you. He knows where I'm
going to pick you guys up, and then I'll

bring you to the UNHCR. Okay, that
sounds good.

All right. Thank you so much for helping
me.

He's quite worried about the big thing.
It's about the accommodation, or he's

going to say whether there's something
pirate and they cannot be discovered by

the police.

Okay, I see. Okay, I will give you a
call, hit up before I restart, okay?

Okay, bye. Okay, thank you. Bye -bye.

Sorry, not yet, but we don't have a car.

Okay. What I'm thinking, we may ask the
concierge to arrange

a car or we just go down and catch a
taxi.

But it's quite, the traffic here in Tsim
Sha Tsui is quite difficult to catch a

taxi. Yeah, sorry.

And so is there precedent for this,
where Hong Kong would extradite someone

political speech?

No, I'm not aware of. If we have a
torture claim or asylum seeking claim on

death, then they ought, under the law,
they ought to give you a reconnaissance

for you to stay in Hong Kong because
they don't know where to come you back

The President certainly does not welcome
the way that this debate has earned

greater attention than last week, that
the leaked classified information about

sensitive programs that are important in
our fight against terrorists who would

do harm to Americans is a problem.

But the debate itself is legitimate and
should be engaged.

But tomorrow it will be on the internet,
right?

Yes.

I want to show you the new document now.

You will see this much clearer than this
one.

This is the map of the cables where they
are collecting the data for the prison.

Here it shows how many they are
collecting.

The bigger the line, the more they are
collecting.

You can see here the line, the cable, is
very thick.

For Brazil in the south and the north,
the cable in the sea of Brazil. It shows

that they are collecting a lot of things
in the Prism program, which I think is

very important because Prism is
Facebook, Skype, YouTube, Yahoo,

shows a lot of transactions being stolen
from Brazil.

But we don't know...

how much the Brazilian government was
and how much collaboration they have

Brazilian companies as well.

We don't know, but we will know.

Right, so which ones do we want here
then?

This is operational stuff, so we mustn't
pay any less. So redact that.

What about the Alexander quote? Yeah,
that's in tarmac.

Why can't we collect all the signals all
the time? Sounds like a good summer

homework project for Menwick. Peter
Alexander, the head of the NSA, on a

to the UK.

This one.

Yeah.

Secret documents in there, secret
documents.

We've got a stick here that should just
have three single...

slides on them. If it's got more than
three single slides on them, we're an

extreme example.

Yeah, that's it.

This is really dangerous stuff for us.
Guardian is going to make mistakes at

very end where we kept it all under lock
and key and no one knows.

I'm not saying that.

They will come in and smack the front
door down if we elaborate on that.

And he said the Prime Minister is
extremely concerned about this.

And they were kept saying, this is from
the very top.

As you may have heard, there is a CIA
agent who has

revealed a lot of information and he is
now trapped in the airport in Moscow.

We managed to get him out of Hong Kong,
but when he landed in the Moscow

airport... the American government had
cancelled his passport.

So formally, he hasn't entered into
Russian territory. He's in the transit

of the airport, and one of our people is
accompanying him. We are trying to

arrange a private jet to take him from

Moscow to Ecuador or perhaps maybe
Venezuela.

Or maybe I planned the country's wages
would be saved.

for Americans, for everything, since the
September 11th attack, is terrorism.

Everything for national security, to
protect our population.

In reality, it's the opposite.

There are many, many documents that have
no reasoning with anything about

terrorism.

The second thing about the X -Keys
score.

When we publish the first, second, third
articles, the defense of the American

government is that we are not invading
the content or communication, only the

metadata, the facts about, or identity,
about what you are talking about, what

you are talking about, calling you, the
duration of the communication.

In reality, if I can know all the people
with whom you are communicating, and

all the people with whom they are
communicating, and where you are when

communicating, and the address, and the
location, I can know a lot about your

personality, your activity, your life.

It's a big advantage in privacy.

But in reality, this defense is totally
false.

The American government has the capacity
to...

Thank you very

much.

Thank you very

much.

If you are American, living in the
United States, you need to be the first

to court and ask for permission to
always receive.

But if you are not American, you don't
need anything, no approval from the

to do that.

I think the consequences of the
elimination of privacy are sometimes

for Anandazar, but it is very important
to understand that...

May I collect all the phones, please?

Put them in the refrigerator.

So, as you know, in June, Snowden was in
charge with three

legal violations, felonies, principally
under a World War I era criminal

law called the Espionage Act.

The Espionage Act is an extremely broad
criminal prohibition against the sharing

or dissemination of what's called
national defense information.

It was only used to prosecute people who
had been accused of acting with a

foreign power, spies, not
whistleblowers. And it's a very unusual

representation, I think, not just for
all of you, but for me as well.

The Espionage Act does not distinguish.

between leaks to the press and the
public interest and selling secrets to

foreign enemies for personal profit.

So under the Espionage Act, it's not a
defense if the information that was

disclosed should not have been withheld
in the first place, that it was

improperly classified.

It's not a defense if the dissemination
was in the public interest, that it led

to reform.

Even if a court determines that the
programs that were revealed were illegal

unconstitutional, that's still not a
defense.

under the espionage act the government
doesn't have to defend the

it doesn't have to demonstrate harm from
the release all of this is irrelevant

so when we say that the trial wouldn't
be fair we're not talking about what

human rights lawyers think of as fair
trial practices we're saying the law the

statute itself eliminates any kind of
defense that snowden might be able to

and essentially would equate him with a
spy and of course those three count

could be increased to 100 or 200 or 300,
they could charge them separately for

each document that has been published by
a journalist.

And I think that we all recognize, even
though we sit here as lawyers in a

lawyers' meeting, that it's probably 95
% politics and 5 % law how

this will be resolved.

Mr. Snowden has been charged with very
serious crimes, and he should be

to the United States where he will be
granted full due process and every right

available to him as a United States
citizen facing our justice system under

Constitution.

I don't think Mr. Snowden was a patriot.

I called for a thorough review of our
surveillance operations before

Mr. Snowden made these leaks.

My preference, and I think the American
people's preference, would have been for

a lawful, orderly examination of these
laws, a

thoughtful, fact -based debate.

that would then lead us to a better
place.

Oh, my God.

David.

You okay?

Okay,

okay, okay.

You just have to walk in.

Good, good. I'm totally fine. I didn't
sleep at all. I couldn't sleep.

I know.

Recent reports have revealed that the
NSA have access to encryption keys and

they paid tech companies to introduce
backdoors in encryption protocols.

So we are going to talk about ways in
which we can defend ourselves against

governments spying on us. So Mr.

Jacob Appelbaum is an encryption and
security software developer and

Ladar Levinson, the founder of the
encrypted email service Lavabit, used by

Edward Snowden. You have the floor.

Thank you.

LavaBit is an email service that
hopefully one day will be able to stand

own without any references. My service
was designed to remove me from the

possibility of being forced to violate a
person's privacy.

Quite simply, LavaBit was designed to
remove the service provider from the

equation. By not having logs on my
server and not having access to a

emails on disk,

I wasn't eliminating the possibility of
surveillance. I was simply removing

myself from that equation in that
surveillance would have to be conducted

target, either the sender or the
receiver of the messages.

But I was approached by the FBI quite
recently and told that because I

turn over the information from that one
particular user.

I would be forced to give up those SSL
keys and let the FBI collect every

communication on my network without any
kind of transparency.

And, of course, I wasn't comfortable
with that, to say the least.

More disturbing was the fact that I
couldn't even tell anybody that it was

on.

So I decided if I didn't win the fight
to unseal my case, if I didn't win the

battle to be able to tell people what
was going on,

then my only ethical choice left was to
shut down.

Think about that.

I believe in the rule of law. I believe
in the need to conduct investigations.

But those investigations are supposed to
be difficult for a reason. It's

supposed to be difficult to invade
somebody's privacy because of how

it is, because of how disruptive it is.

If we don't have our right to privacy,
how do we have a free and open

discussion?

What good is the right to free speech if
it's not protected

in the sense that you can't have a
private discussion with somebody else

something you disagree with?

Think about the chilling effect that
that has. Think about the chilling

it does have on countries that don't
have a right to privacy.

I've noticed a really interesting
discussion point, which is that what

used to call liberty and freedom, we now
call privacy.

And we say in the same breath that
privacy is dead.

This is something that really concerns
me about my generation, especially when

we talk about how we're not surprised by
anything.

I think that we should consider that
when we lose privacy, we lose agency. We

lose liberty itself because we no longer
feel free to express what we think.

There's this myth of the passive
surveillance machine.

But actually, what is surveillance
except control?

This notion that the NSA are passive,
this is nonsense.

What we see is that they actively attack
European citizens, American citizens,

and, in fact, anyone that they can if
they perceive an advantage.

And then comes the decisive part, which
speaks a lot for the fact that it was

the SDS that took the cell phone from
Chancellor Merkel into the museum.

So we have the map.

Yes.

Okay.

All right.

I'll have to give that in testimony.

Everything I can truthfully.

Whatever the questions they ask me.

Okay. All right.

Thank you.

Hello, good day. How are you?

Good to see you again. Nice to meet you.

It

is

my pleasure to be here. I feel that it's
important to testify about what's

really going on behind the scenes and
the intelligence community around the

world, not just in a day.

All these programs that Edward Snowden
exposed fundamentally are ways of

acquiring information.

Every dictatorship down through history
has always done it. One of the first

things they need to do is to try to
acquire knowledge of their population,

that's exactly what these programs do.

I see this as the most major threat to
our democracy all around the world.

What do you think they're doing to
reporters, those of us that are working

directly with Snowden documents?

How do you think they would approach
dealing with people like us?

You're on the cast iron cover list,
which means any electronic device you

use that they can attach to you, they'll
record and capture all that data.

And what do they do with that data?
They're just trying to figure out what

doing?

Well, they're trying to...

That's part of it, but the other part,
primarily part, for them, I think, is to

find the sources of information you're
getting.

So if I have a confidential source who's
giving me information as a

whistleblower, and he works within the U
.S. government, and he's concerned

about what he perceives as violations of
the Constitution, and he gets in touch

with me, they... Go ahead.

From there on, they would nail him and
start watching everything he did, and if

he started passing data, I'm sure they'd
take him off the street.

I mean, the way you have to do it is
like Deep Throat did, right, in the

years. Meet in the basement of a parking
garage, physically.

Let's disassociate our metadata one last
time, so we don't have a clear record

of your true name and our final
communication chain.

This is obviously not to say you can't
claim your involvement, but as every

trick in the book is likely to be used
in looking into this, I believe it's

better that that particular disclosure
come on your own terms.

Thank you again for all you've done.

So sorry again for the multiple delays,
but we've been in uncharted territory

with no model to benefit from.

If all ends well, perhaps the
demonstration that our methods work will

more to come forward.

So the

update that I want to give you

is about the new source that we...

Okay.

That... You picked what?

This is the, you know, this is the
person who's doing the most of the work

it.

And now, and then, like, basically
what's happened is,

and... That's actually, that's really
dangerous

on the sources side.

Do they know how to take care of
themselves? Well, he knows. I mean, it's

being done.

Through this.

Okay. And they're all talking this way.

Okay.

And... I was going to say, one of the
big questions there is, can they handle

it? You know, do they have the... No,
they're very careful, even though

that. Okay. Yeah.

And...

That's where that is.

Wow, that's really something.

You know that?

It's not the actual plane. Right, right.

You mean the control.

It's the process.

There's a chart.

There's a whole layout for everyone.

That is really bold. It's really risky.

But that's the thing. If they understand
what they're doing. There's this chart.

It shows the decision -making chart.

It's shaped like this.

So up here it says,

That's the decision -making chart for
each one.

It's so political. This part's amazing.

That's fucking ridiculous.

It's so shocking.

That's the population of an entire
country. I know.

That's what we're working on.

That person is incredibly bold.

But also very well aware.

Right. You know, I just hope, I mean.

No, I mean, the boldness of it is
shocking, but I mean, it was obviously

motivated by what you did. This is going
to, this is going to, that could raise

the profile of this whole political
situation with whistleblowing to a whole

level. Exactly.

It's going to.

Yeah, I actually think that's a great
thing.

And I think people are going to see
what's being hidden again, again, by a

totally different part of the
government.

Thank you.