Bales 1

Brandon Bales
John Visnaw III
WRTG 121
9 November 2016
Does the National Security Administration do more harm than good?
The National Security Agency has been a hot button topic in recent years due to the
events of Edward Snowden dumping a large amount of controversial information on NSA
domestic surveillance spying on American citizens and banking an unimaginable amount of data.
I want to to discuss the topic of the National Security Administration to evaluate the NSA as a
useful government entity. To begin the discussion, I have narrowed down to the topic to the
three major arguments of terrorism prevention, the massive collection of data and whether it is a
security risk or not, and if the utility is worth the cost.
The first major argument I want to raise awareness to is the subject of terrorism
prevention. Has the government adequately prevented terrorism? Ever since the horrifying
tragedy of September 11, 2001, Americans have been uneasy about devastating potential of
terrorism in the homeland. The Patriot Act, FISA Amendments Act, and Executive Order 12333
granted tremendous surveillance powers to the NSA with the goal of stopping terrorism in its
tracks. I intend to provide a platform of information that will help unblur the lines about the
NSAs terrorism prevention.
In recent years, the number fifty-four has been thrown around by officials, including
Barack Obama. The number fifty-four signifies the number of times the NSA has allegedly
thwarted attacks. Representative Mike Rogers of Michigan said, Fifty-four times this and the
other program stopped and thwarted terrorist attacks both here and in Europe- savings real lives

Bales 2

(Elliott and Meyer 1). In the article Claim on Attacks Thwarted by NSA Spreads Despite Lack
of Evidence, Elliott and Meyer address what so many politicians and officials have been saying
about the authenticity of fifty four attacks having been thwarted, The interesting point that the
article makes is that there is no actual evidence provided to support this answer at all.
Unfortunately, this leads to controversy as it could mean that this statement is manipulated in
some way or another. In Elliot, Meyer, and Weis How the NSAs Claim on Thwarted Terrorist
Plots Has Spread, they show us the change in language among politicians to show that it isnt
exactly clear what the truth may be. The article quotes General Keith Alexander, Director of the
NSA, who was found to be inconsistent in his wording of his defense of the NSA upon testifying
before Congress. The general said, NSAs programs have contributed to understanding and
disrupting 54 terror-related events (Wei, Sisi et al.). Understanding and disrupting is a very
different argument compared to the actual thwarting of terrorism. As a means of discovering the
actual statistics of the NSAs terrorism prevention efforts, In Meghan Neals Youll Never Guess
How Many Terrorist Plots the NSAs Domestic Spy Program Has Foiled, she analyzes a report
done by nonprofit think tank New America Foundation. Her analysis concluded that only 17 of
the cases could be credited the NSAs surveillance and that only one conviction has come out of
it. ...just one conviction came out of the governments extra-controversial practice of spying on
its own citizens. And that charge, against San Diego cab driver Basaaly Moalin, was for sending
money to a terrorist group in Somalia. There was no threat of an actual attack (Neal). With this
information, we can draw a clear conclusion. The NSAs surveillance has proven to be
ineffective in that it has only lead to one conviction, that of a man who gave money to a terror
group and served no actual threat to the homeland. Unfortunately for the NSA, its politically
selective language and failure to produce the intended results isnt unknown to the Obama

Bales 3

Administration. Neals analysis ends with, ...Obamas advisory panel determined the agencys
spy operations are not essential to preventing attacks, and handed him 46 recommendations for
reforming the programs. If Obamas closest, most trusted administrators believe that there is a
need to limit the NSAs power, then there must be validity to the argument that it either isnt
performing correctly or it is unnecessary.
My second prominent argument I want to cover about the NSA is the risk of the
collection of massive amounts of personal data on American citizens. The dangers of hacking in
the modern world are very real. With the help of complex softwares, hackers can find routes and
illegally gain access to networks to collect confidential information from databases. Since the
Snowden incident, we have learned that the NSA collects massive amounts of metadata and
stores it for the purpose of immediate access without having to get warrants. People are
concerned of the right to privacy being invaded by our own government, but what if someone
hacks the NSAs systems for the purpose of abusing that massive pool of data they have collected
on us? To put this into perspective, these are my findings on some sources of just how much
information the NSA possesses. William Binney, a high-level whistleblower that was once
involved with the NSA, said, At least 80% of all audio calls, not just metadata, are recorded and
stored in the US (Loewenstein). Binneys frightening quote is supported by a collection of
sources that claim an average of 75%, a percentage shockingly close to Binneys. Josh Harkinson
of Mother Jones reported on a Senate hearing that said, Every day, the NSA receives from US
phone companies metadata on billions of domestic calls, including the time the call was placed,
its duration, and the originating and receiving numbers (Harkinson). Another example of this
call collection might surprise you. Skype, the beloved application made by Microsoft which
allows us to communicate long distances via the internet, is also subject to the NSAs

Bales 4

overwhelming surveillance power. In Sean Gallaghers article called Newly published NSA
documents show agency could grab all Skype traffic, he talks about an NSA document that was
leaked by Edward Snowden that shows the agency had full access to voice, video, text
messaging, and file sharing over Microsofts Skype service. He mentions that the full capture of
voice traffic on Skype has been happening since February 2011. The reason I hammered out
these three sources is to put a special importance on the gravity of what is being said. Can you
imagine a very private, possibly endangering thing that you or a family member may have said
over audio? Social security numbers, credit card numbers, banking numbers, and check
information are all easy examples of things that may have been exchanged over audio devices
and are now possibly stored in a government database somewhere. Is it something that we should
really worry about? Surely the NSA has very tight security on this massive wealth of private
information? According to Ian Graber-Stiehl, the sensitive NSA information is usually stored on
air-gapped networks that are not connected to the internet, meaning that they are incredibly
difficult to hack (Graber-Stiehl). However, Graber-Stiehl also mentions in his article, Humans,
however, are easy access points, and as Edward Snowden proved, someone with inside access
and a flash drive can bypass such systems. He reveals something critical in his article; your
sensitive information is being handled by contractors. Whether you like Edward Snowden or not,
there are individuals with the same power he had that has power over the same information who
could export it. At the end of Graber-Stiehls article, he talks about this years hacking of NSA
files by a group called Shadow Brokers. He says, ...the NSA could be dealing with a rogue
insider bold enough to not run, instead setting up a wild goose chase impeccably timed to match
diplomatic tensions, or a well-oiled and slyly suggestive state-sponsored attack because
whoever hacked the NSA wasnt caught yet.

Bales 5

Speaking of state sponsored attacks, that has actually already happened. The NSA
intentionally creates easy access backdoors in the networks within other countries through
American companies to monitor our countrys enemies. The issue is that when these back doors
are discovered by other countries, we wont necessarily be able to catch it in time. In John
McAfees John McAfee: The NSAs backdoor has given every US secret to our enemies, the antivirus software guru talks about the severe NSA failings when it comes to careless backdoor
creation. He says, ...while the NSA was monitoring our perceived Middle Eastern enemies, the
Chinese and Russians, and God knows who else, were making off with every important secret in
the US, courtesy of the NSAs back door (McAfee). The article came out in light of a back door
created by the NSA in Juniper Networks, a major provider of secure network systems. Juniper
Networks customers include nearly every US government agency. Foreign hackers found that
back door and stole a large volume of US secrets. Last year alone, the Defense Department was
hacked. Using the NSAs back door the Chinese walked off with 5.6 million fingerprints of
critical personnel. The same back door was used to hack the Treasury Department on May 27th
of last year in which millions of tax returns were stolen (McAfee). These truths are self evident
of the NSAs inability to effectively handle and care for sensitive information.
My final argument is about whether or not the utility of the NSA is worth the cost. There
are three main aspects to look at when talking about cost. Theres the literal estimated cost of the
program itself, the loss of credibility in the world, and the loss of business as a result. Many
sources suggest that there is an overall intelligence budget of about $75 billion annually, but
doesnt specify the amount that is allocated to the NSA because it is considered a black
program in the federal budget (Sahadi). In Jeannae Sahadis What the NSA costs taxpayers, the
federal governments budget for the NSA is estimated to be at least $10 billion annually. Another

Bales 6

source claims that the budget is more likely to be around $14 billion due to information from
Edward Snowden leaked documents (Kloc). Gordon Adams, a former White House budget
official for national security, said he wouldnt be surprised if NSAs resources are well north of
$20 billion a year (Sahadi). Based on these sources, we can conclude that the cost is $10 billion
or more. The cost of the program may be high and could be taking resources away from what we
might otherwise deem to be more effective than the NSA. As I mentioned earlier, there doesnt
seem to any real benefits from the NSA. Since the leak of NSA documents by Edward Snowden,
businesses have suffered a great deal in the United States.
Remember those backdoors that I mentioned earlier? They came with a huge price too.
According to the article Personal Privacy is Only One of the Costs of NSA Surveillance by
Kim Zetter, the United States has taken, ...economic losses to US businesses due to lost sales
and declining customer trust due to, the deterioration of internet security as a result of the NSA
stockpiling zero-day vulnerabilities, undermining encryption and installing backdoors in
software and hardware products (Zetter). What sort of economic losses does that entail? ...the
economic reverberations will likely far exceed that initial $35 billion estimate, although the
report wasnt more specific on a final figure. The reason we cant cap it is because theres no
end in sight [to the losses] (Groden).This report, done by the Information Technology and
Innovation Foundation talks of the massive loss American businesses have taken due to our
secretive and self harming actions per the NSA. Foreigner governments, businesses both at home
and abroad, believe the NSA is undermining the governments credibility and leadership (Zetter).
Some examples of this are also laid about by the report. ...when the German government, for
example, specifically cites the NSA surveillance as the reason it canceled a lucrative network
contract with Verizon, there is little doubt that U.S. spying policies are having a negative impact

Bales 7

on business (Zetter). Brazil reportedly scuttled a $4.5 billion fighter jet contract with Boeing
and gave it to Saab instead. Sources told Bloomberg News The NSA problem ruined it for the
US defense contractor (Zetter). Companies like IBM, Microsoft, and Cisco all saw drops in
their sales too after the Snowden leaks. Companies like Dropbox and Amazon Web Services
reportedly have lost business to overseas competitors like Artmotion, a Swiss hosting provider
(Zetter). Clearly, the NSAs actions have not only affected our own thoughts of integrity of the
NSA, but the rest of the worlds thoughts as well- and its only hurting us. If we dont
disassemble the NSA, we should at least force the U.S. government into limiting the surveillance
programs that concern foreign tech clients. ...foreign markets will continue to penalize U.S.
companies if dont act on it (Groden). Before I conclude my findings and give my two cents, I
wanted to survey folks about what they think.
I created a survey on SurveyMonkey and sent it around some college internet chatrooms.
On the survey, I created a format where I condensed the majority of information I provided in my
research on the top of the form, and included one question on the bottom, the inquiry Ive been
trying to address. The results of the survey to my inquiry of Does the NSA do more harm than
good? are: Yes, 77 votes, 83.70%. No, 6 votes, 6.52%. Neutral, 9 votes, 9.78%. Out of 92
people, there was an overwhelming majority who voted that the NSA does indeed do more harm
than good. This cynicism towards the government leads to the undermining of confidence in the
government, leading to citizens not trusting our government and less desired to purchase
electronics and participate in the democratic process. I will now conclude my findings and voice
my overall thoughts on my own research.
In conclusion, I have discussed the undeniably poor record of terrorism prevention, the
massive collection of data on our communications and how the NSA has been infiltrated and

Bales 8

hacked, and the price the United States has had to pay for the program itself, the loss in contracts
and revenue, and the loss of confidence by foreign governments. The inquiry of Does the NSA
do more harm than good? is easily answerable, Yes, the NSA does far more harm than good.
There is no justification to continue a highly controversial surveillance program that has lead to
only one conviction domestically, and it was one that wasnt even threatening the life of any
American. The NSAs track record of dodgy language to maintain itself is troubling and
dishonest. The inexcusable truth that the NSA has been hacked and infiltrated due to its self
made vulnerabilities while housing countless data on American citizens that undoubtedly include
sensitive, private information is appalling. The NSAs actions have lead to foreign governments
and businesses to not trust the United States credibility and leadership, leading to our companies
losing billions of dollars in contracts and business. Perhaps there is a better way to foil terrorists
and protect the homeland, but it is apparent to me that the path they have been following is not
productive and puts the average American at a vulnerability, and that is unacceptable.

Works Cited
Elliott, Justin, and Theodoric Meyer. Claim on Attacks Thwarted by NSA Spreads Despite
Lack of Evidence. ProPublica, 23 Oct. 2013, https://www.propublica.org/
article/claim-on-attacks-thwarted-by-nsa-spreads-despite-lack-of-evidence.
Gallagher, Sean. Newly published NSA documents show agency could grab all Skype traffic.
arsTechnica, 30 Dec. 2014, http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/newly-publishednsa-documents-show-agency-could-grab-all-skype-traffic/.
Graber-Stiehl, Ian. Who Hacked the NSA? Popular Science, 22 Aug. 2016,
http://www.popsci.com/who-hacked-nsa.

Bales 9

Groden, Claire. NSA spying is going to cost the tech sector much more than we thought.
Fortune, 9 Jun. 2015, http://fortune.com/2015/06/09/surveillance-tech-sector/.
Harkinson, Josh. Heres the Incredible Amount of Data the NSA Could Be Giving Up in Just 24
Hours. Mother Jones, 2 Jun. 2015, http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/
06/patriot-act-nsa-surveillance-expiration.
Kloc, Joe. NSA spying costs each U.S. taxpayer $574 a year. The Daily Dot, 30 Oct. 2013,
http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/nsa-cost-spying-taxpayer/.
Loewenstein, Antony. The ultimate goal of the NSA is a total population control. theguardian,
10 Jul. 2014, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/11/the-ultimate
-goal-of-the-nsa-is-total-population-control.
McAfee, John. John McAfee: The NSAs back door has given every US secret to our
enemies. Business Insider, 26 Feb. 2016, http://www.businessinsider.com/john-mcafeensa-back-door-gives-every-us-secret-to-enemies-2016-2.
Neal, Meghan. Youll Never Guess How Many Terrorist Plots the NSAs Domestic Spy
Program Has Foiled. Motherboard, 13 Jan. 2014, http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/you
ll-never-guess-how-many-terrorist-plots-the-nsas-domestic-spy-program-has-foiled.
Sahadi, Jeanne. What the NSA costs taxpayers. CNN Money, 7 Jun. 2013, http://money.cnn.co
m/2013/06/07/news/economy/nsa-surveillance-cost/.
Wei, Sisi et al. How the NSA's Claim on Thwarted Terrorist Has Spread. ProPublica, 23 Oct.
2013, http://projects.propublica.org/graphics/nsa-54-cases.
Zetter, Kim. Personal Privacy is Only One of the Costs of NSA
Surveillance. Wired, 29 Jul. 2014, https://www.wired.com/2014/07/the-bigcosts-of-nsa-surveillance-that-no-ones-talking-about/.