How far should the Dragnet reach.

[nsaspook]

http://news.yahoo.com/exclusive-u-directs-agents-cover-program-used-investigate-091643729.html

One current federal prosecutor learned how agents were using SOD tips after a drug agent misled him, the prosecutor told Reuters. In a Florida drug case he was handling, the prosecutor said, a DEA agent told him the investigation of a U.S. citizen began with a tip from an informant. When the prosecutor pressed for more information, he said, a DEA supervisor intervened and revealed that the tip had actually come through the SOD and from an NSA intercept.

"I was pissed," the prosecutor said. "Lying about where the information came from is a bad start if you're trying to comply with the law because it can lead to all kinds of problems with discovery and candor to the court." The prosecutor never filed charges in the case because he lost confidence in the investigation, he said.

http://news.yahoo.com/dea-program-differs-recent-nsa-revelations-091643143.html

Reuters has uncovered previously unreported details about a separate program, run by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, that extends well beyond intelligence gathering. Its use, legal experts say, raises fundamental questions about whether the government is concealing information used to investigate and help build criminal cases against American citizens.

 

[nsaspook]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/09/usa-surveillance-obama-idUSL1N0GA17E20130809

WASHINGTON, Aug 9 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama announced plans on Friday to limit sweeping U.S. government surveillance programs that have come under criticism since leaks by a former spy agency contractor, saying the United States "can and must be more transparent."

"Given the history of abuse by governments, it's right to ask questions about surveillance, particularly as technology is reshaping every aspect of our lives," Obama told a news conference at the White House.

 

[jim hardy]

At least they got their all of their mail, half my moms cookies would be missing from her packages to me when (re)opened while on station overseas.

My "Rocket Propellant Handbook" took three weeks to arrive, and when it did it too was repackaged and postmarked someplace in Ohio instead of Oregon.

I guess I'm on the list as well...

 

[nsaspook]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...8c8c44-05cd-11e3-a07f-49ddc7417125_story.html

The leader of the secret court that is supposed to provide critical oversight of the government’s vast spying programs said that its ability to do so is limited and that it must trust the government to report when it improperly spies on Americans.

The chief judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court said the court lacks the tools to independently verify how often the government’s surveillance breaks the court’s rules that aim to protect Americans’ privacy. Without taking drastic steps, it also cannot check the veracity of the government’s assertions that the violations its staff members report are unintentional mistakes.
...
Walton’s comments came in response to internal government records obtained by The Post showing that National Security Agency staff members in Washington overstepped their authority on spy programs thousands of times per year. The records also show that the number of violations has been on the rise.

 

[nsaspook]

Finally a censored version of FISA courts actions on unconstitutional 'upstream' surveillance released under FOIA.

http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/775818/fisc-opinion-unconstitutional-surveillance-0.pdf

 

[nsaspook]

The "Black" budget.
http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/national/inside-the-2013-us-intelligence-black-budget/420/

 

[Pythagorean]

A breakdown of a NSA's response to the Wallstreet Journal calling them out:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/illustration-how-nsa-misleads-public-without-actually-lying

Here's the original document from the NSA:

http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/speeches_testimonies/2013_08_21_Joint_Statement_ODNI_NSA.pdf

I like how they respond to a criticism on their US communications traffic monitoring by giving statistics of their world traffic monitoring.

 

[nsaspook]

I wish they would concentrate on their mission "real foreign intelligence", like keeping track of Syrian WMD movements and use instead of these domestic fishing expeditions that are mainly used to reconstruct events, match people and places after something has happened while going little to actually stop anything.

 

[nsaspook]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/us/nsa-foils-much-internet-encryption.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0&hp

The agency’s success in defeating many of the privacy protections offered by encryption does not change the rules that prohibit the deliberate targeting of Americans’ e-mails or phone calls without a warrant. But it shows that the agency, which was sharply rebuked by a federal judge in 2011 for violating the rules and misleading the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, cannot necessarily be restrained by privacy technology. N.S.A. rules permit the agency to store any encrypted communication, domestic or foreign, for as long as the agency is trying to decrypt it or analyze its technical features.

 

[nsaspook]

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2049...-upper-limit-on-phone-records-collection.html

A U.S. surveillance court has given the National Security Agency no limit on the number of U.S. telephone records it collects in the name of fighting terrorism, the NSA director said Thursday.

The NSA intends to collect all U.S. telephone records and put them in a searchable “lock box” in the interest of national security, General Keith Alexander, the NSA’s director, told U.S. senators.

“There is no upper limit” on NSA telephone-records collection, Alexander said. “I believe it is in the nation’s best interest to put all the phone records into a lock box that we can search when the nation needs to do it.”

http://www.computerworld.com/s/arti...urb_NSA_collection_of_phone_and_other_records

Under the proposed amendments in the new bill to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the government would still be able to obtain records of anyone suspected of terrorism or espionage, or anyone in contact with a suspected terrorist or spy. But the bulk collection of "records of law-abiding Americans with no connection to terrorism or espionage will no longer be legal," according to an explanatory brief of the proposed legislation.

 

[nsaspook]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/oct/2/nsa-chief-figures-foiled-terror-plots-misleading/

Pressed by the Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee at an oversight hearing, Gen. Keith B. Alexander admitted that the number of terrorist plots foiled by the NSA’s huge database of every phone call made in or to America was only one or perhaps two — far smaller than the 54 originally claimed by the administration.
...
“There is no evidence that [bulk] phone records collection helped to thwart dozens or even several terrorist plots,” Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, Vermont Democrat and committee chairman, told Gen. Alexander of the 54 cases that administration officials — including the general himself — have cited as the fruit of the NSA’s domestic snooping.

“These weren’t all plots and they weren’t all foiled,” he said.

 

[jim hardy]

Remember "Animal Farm"
the rules got infringed as necessary, Squealer(?) painted them over at night

...
and if you don't want it public don't put it in electronic form.

 

[nsaspook]

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/p..._spooks_why_in_the_world_would_we_burn_google

To capture or siphon off data at the point labeled GFE, the NSA could implant surveillance equipment, said two of the experts. This could be a fairly small piece of hardware, but it might be difficult to install without the consent of the people running the data center. One of the experts likened it to the secret room that the NSA is believed to have installed at an AT&T facility in San Francisco, where data was split from the company's network and given to the NSA. That GFE point would be the likely place to install such a facility.

Curiously, both experts noted, in the world of official surveillance, GFE stands for something else: "government furnished equipment."

 

[russ_watters]

Is the NSA spying on Germany's PM relevant to this thread? I'm wondering if anyone cares?

My perception is that the entire issue is just bluster. It is an issue only because it went public. Because it is public, the German government has to pretend to be outraged while Obama has to pretend to be sorry, all the while, everyone is spying on everyone because that's what spy agencies do.

 

[Bystander]

Is the NSA spying on Germany's PM relevant to this thread? I'm wondering if anyone cares?

My perception is that the entire issue is just bluster. It is an issue only because it went public. Because it is public, the German government has to pretend to be outraged while Obama has to pretend to be sorry, all the while, everyone is spying on everyone because that's what spy agencies do.

Bluster? Yes. Pretense of outrage? Yes, everybody knows everyone else is doing it.

Might also be an issue due to what, in the past, is a presumption of discretion --- i.e., "I know you know that I know that you know, but we'll trust each other to keep some of the embarassing material off the front page headlines." Foreign governments might be justified in being concerned about the current apparent inability of NSA to keep the lid on anything.

 

[nsaspook]

Is the NSA spying on Germany's PM relevant to this thread? I'm wondering if anyone cares?

My perception is that the entire issue is just bluster. It is an issue only because it went public. Because it is public, the German government has to pretend to be outraged while Obama has to pretend to be sorry, all the while, everyone is spying on everyone because that's what spy agencies do.

I could care less if we spied on the German government as that's what the NSA was chartered to do and that's not why I posted that link (it's not about Germany's PM). I do care if we are using it (foreign surveillance) as a pretext for domestic surveillance of US citizens and activities on a massive scale by the US military and their contractors. The temptation to use this vast treasure of information on US citizens activities for ones own personal/political benefit will be almost impossible to prevent without legal controls that don't exist within the NSA/Military structure.
As many have pointed out the NSA uses it's overseas brothers (GCHQ in this case) to send it information on US citizens it can't legally obtain on US soil. These operations are not controlled by the FISA court as they are in the Military Intelligence domain controlled mainly by Executive Orders with almost no direct Congressional oversight. It's been this way forever and was tolerated as a legal necessity for the need of national security but we are at the point of complete national data surveillance that has moved far beyond security into the realm of the destruction of privacy in ordinary activities with warrantless searches of this data and now the government want's to be able to use this extra-legal information in court.

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/09/court-nsa-warrantless-search-american-records
http://www.wcvb.com/news/national/U-S-to-use-NSA-surveillance-in-terror-case/-/9848944/22649812/-/iwk3iq/-/index.html

 

[nsaspook]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/16/edward-snowden-ruling-nsa-surveillance

Judge Richard Leon declared that the mass collection of so-called metadata probably violates the fourth amendment, relating to unreasonable searches and seizures, and was "almost Orwellian" in its scope.

He also expressed doubt about the central rationale for the program cited by the NSA: that it is necessary for preventing terrorist attacks. “The government does not cite a single case in which analysis of the NSA’s bulk metadata collection actually stopped an imminent terrorist attack,” wrote Leon, a US district judge in the District of Columbia.

http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/pa...s-nsa-program-is-likely-unconstitutional/668/

 

[klimatos]

As a former member of the intelligence community, I believe that the real reason governments collect this type of information is simple: Knowledge is Power. Any information that can be collected will be collected. If challenged, government agencies will lie, and government leaders will back them up. Get used to it, because it is only going to get worse as technology progresses.

How this power will be used, of course, is up the the moral and ethical sensibilities of our elected and appointed leaders. (Doesn't this give you a warm and fuzzy feeling!)

When I was a field agent in the Middle East, I assumed that every hotel room and government office was bugged, that every mirror had a camera behind it, that every local female was a possible "honey trap", and that every foreign contact reported directly to their own counter-intelligence agency. This is called "constructive paranoia", and is a very useful attitude to have.

Now that I am home, I am slightly less suspicious and paranoid--but only slightly. I don't belong to an social media groups and I wouldn't dream of broadcasting details of my personal life for all the world to hear--and record. Anyone who does so has only theirselves to blame if it comes back to haunt them sometime in the future--and you can be reasonably sure that it will!

 

[tfr000]

My "Rocket Propellant Handbook" took three weeks to arrive, and when it did it too was repackaged and postmarked someplace in Ohio instead of Oregon.

I guess I'm on the list as well...

Speaking of rockets... NASA used to have this really cool archive called the NASA Technical Reports Server. You could look up anything they (or their predecessors) published in the last 80-90 years. I used to use it to peruse old data on the Apollo flights, and early rocket technology. Now all of that is some kind of state secret - you can't find it on there anymore.
I don't know - I must admit, I'm a little creeped out by all of this. Secret courts authorizing secret spying. When do the secret trials and secret sentences start?

Dig this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-logo-boast-Nothing-Is-Beyond-Our-Reach.html

 

[nsaspook]

Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, said the recommendation to end NSA’s bulk collection “goes to the very heart of NSA dragnet surveillance.” He called it “the most necessary recommendation of the review group.”

Bulk collection is the least likely thing to be eliminated unless there is a iron-clan legal ruling against it. Vast amounts of time and money have been dedicated to present and future system specifically for this analytical method and I just don't see them moving back to Pre 9/11 authority without a massive fight using every bit of dirt they have on Washington's politicians to maintain the status quo.

http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/19...llow_share=true&escape=false&view_mode=scroll
The President’s Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technologies report.

From the report:

In the American tradition, the word “security” has had multiple meanings. In contemporary parlance, it often refers to national security or homeland security. One of the government’s most fundamental responsibilities is to protect this form of security, broadly understood. At the same time, the idea of security refers to a quite different and equally fundamental value, captured in the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated . . . ” (emphasis added). Both forms of security must be protected.

 

[tfr000]

Bulk collection is the least likely thing to be eliminated unless there is a iron-clan legal ruling against it.

nsaspook: I'm inclined to agree. In fact, the genie is out of the bottle. I don't see it going back in, ever. Who is going to supervise a secret agency?

 

[nsaspook]

nsaspook: I'm inclined to agree. In fact, the genie is out of the bottle. I don't see it going back in, ever. Who is going to supervise a secret agency?

The 'secret' agents in the agency will if a culture of lawful behavior is enforced by criminal legal sanctions (prison instead of lost jobs or contracts) for side-stepping the law for any reason. In the past very few actually knew the details (sources and methods) of systems and operations so it was easy to cover-up as the actions of a few 'rogue' agents, today that's really impossible as the scope of that's needed for domestic spying is so big and the level of access has been widened to the point it can't be hidden anymore and ignored when discovered as the mindless talk of tin-foil nuts. The agencies know this and surely have made plans to cope with it. It's one reason IMO Snowden won't be seen as a 'hero' to freedom from universal surveillance unless there is a fundamental change in the objectives of domestic spying (unlikely) and the whole episode won't be gamed by NSA and others to make overtly lawful for US citizens that's been used under it's charter covertly for foreign powers for decades.

 

[klimatos]

Secret courts authorizing secret spying. When do the secret trials and secret sentences start?

What makes you think they haven't?

 

[tfr000]

What makes you think they haven't?

Well, so far there are no widespread instances of people disappearing, for one thing.

 

[klimatos]

Well, so far there are no widespread instances of people disappearing, for one thing.

It's unlikely to be "widespread", just an uncooperative individual here and there. Police officers will tell you that people disappear by the thousands every day. They go out for "a pack of cigarettes" and are never heard from again. IMO secret tribunals are far more likely than abduction by UFO's.

 

[nsaspook]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/22/u...from-ruling-on-surveillance-efforts.html?_r=0


More of the status quo.

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration moved late Friday to prevent a federal judge in California from ruling on the constitutionality of warrantless surveillance programs authorized during the Bush administration, telling a court that recent disclosures about National Security Agency spying were not enough to undermine its claim that litigating the case would jeopardize state secrets.
...
So, he said, he was continuing to assert the state secrets privilege, which allows the government to seek to block information from being used in court even if that means the case must be dismissed. The Justice Department wants the judge to dismiss the matter without ruling on whether the programs violated the First or Fourth Amendment.

 

[Evo]

This thread has gotten out of hand with conspiracies and unsubstantiated personal opinions.

 

[Astronuc]

According to dozens of previously undisclosed classified documents, among the most valuable of those unintended intelligence tools are so-called leaky apps that spew everything from the smartphone identification codes of users to where they have been that day.

The N.S.A. and Britain’s Government Communications Headquarters were working together on how to collect and store data from dozens of smartphone apps by 2007, according to the documents, provided by Edward J. Snowden, the former N.S.A. contractor. Since then, the agencies have traded recipes for grabbing location and planning data when a target uses Google Maps, and for vacuuming up address books, buddy lists, telephone logs and the geographic data embedded in photographs when someone sends a post to the mobile versions of Facebook, Flickr, LinkedIn, Twitter and other Internet services.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/28/world/spy-agencies-scour-phone-apps-for-personal-data.html

Hmmm. Perhaps smart phones (or apps) are a bit too smart. One certainly has the choice of not using such technology.