Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NSA “precomputed contact chaining” enhances phone-record tracking program

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 54 posts

Re: NSA “precomputed contact chaining” enhances phone-record tracking program

#21

Post by soraminazuki »

dylan604 wrote: post #16
redis_mlc wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Essentially the White House can do anything it wants by asking the White House Counsel to make up a legal opinion supporting whatever the President or VP want to do. Then the onus is on people outside that circle to learn, investigate and prosecute, which could take years, or never. Sounds bizarre, but it's a real thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Counsel

Legal opinions are not law. And as the old saying goes, opinions are like assholes, everybody has one and they all stink

You're correct in the sense that it's how things are supposed to work. However in practice, things are different. Secret interpretations of the law, which should have no more weight than mere opinions, were used to justify surveillance programs that seems outright illegal at first glance, and people got away with it.

Re: NSA “precomputed contact chaining” enhances phone-record tracking program

#22

Post by voxic11 »

billme wrote: post #19
redis_mlc wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Essentially the White House can do anything it wants by asking the White House Counsel to make up a legal opinion supporting whatever the President or VP want to do. Then the onus is on people outside that circle to learn, investigate and prosecute, which could take years, or never. Sounds bizarre, but it's a real thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Counsel

Neither the contents of your comment, nor that of the document on Wikipedia appear to substantiate the claims you have made. Please cite any relevant documents, laws, etc - that support your claims as directly as possible; for example, document link, page number, subheading, paragraph, etc. As is, your comment to me is worth less than having said nothing at all — as it requires time to read your comment, link, and th…

The issue is that the white house council can declare anything they want to be legal, and unless the supreme court has ruled on that issue specifically everyone involved has immunity from prosecution until the supreme court does rule on it. See how the council's torture memos played out https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Yoo

Re: NSA “precomputed contact chaining” enhances phone-record tracking program

#23

Post by billme »

voxic11 wrote: post #22
billme wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither the contents of your comment, nor that of the document on Wikipedia appear to substantiate the claims you have made. Please cite any relevant documents, laws, etc - that support your claims as directly as possible; for example, document link, page number, subheading, paragraph, etc. As is, your comment to me is worth less than having said nothing at all — as it requires time to read your comment, link, and th…

The issue is that the white house council can declare anything they want to be legal, and unless the supreme court has ruled on that issue specifically everyone involved has immunity from prosecution until the supreme court does rule on it. See how the council's torture memos played out https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Yoo

Supreme Court has ruled on the executive branches limited legal authority, even during war time:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youngstown_Sheet_%26_Tube_Co...

That being, “The President did not have the inherent authority to seize private property in the absence of either specifically enumerated authority under Article Two of the Constitution or statutory authority conferred on him by Congress.”

My rewording, “The President [does] not have the inherent authority to [do anything] in the absence of either specifically enumerated authority under Article Two of the Constitution or statutory authority conferred on [them] by Congress.”

Re: NSA “precomputed contact chaining” enhances phone-record tracking program

#24

Post by billme »

billme wrote: post #7

>> “Cheney ordered that Stellarwind be concealed from the judges of the FISA Court and from members of the intelligence committees in Congress.” (a) Anyone able to expand on the author’s source for this; (b) what if any US legal guidance at the time enabled this; (c) and if anything between now and then has changed legally.

Supreme Court has ruled on the executive branches limited legal authority, even during war time, via “Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer” (1952):

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youngstown_Sheet_%26_Tube_Co...

That being, “The President did not have the inherent authority to seize private property in the absence of either specifically enumerated authority under Article Two of the Constitution or statutory authority conferred on him by Congress.”

My rewording, “The President [does] not have the inherent authority to [do anything] in the absence of either specifically enumerated authority under Article Two of the Constitution or statutory authority conferred on [them] by Congress.”

—

Question then is did Constitution or Congress authorize this, directly or indirectly prior to or retroactively after the fact?

Re: NSA “precomputed contact chaining” enhances phone-record tracking program

#25

Post by voxic11 »

billme wrote: post #23
voxic11 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is that the white house council can declare anything they want to be legal, and unless the supreme court has ruled on that issue specifically everyone involved has immunity from prosecution until the supreme court does rule on it. See how the council's torture memos played out https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Yoo

Supreme Court has ruled on the executive branches limited legal authority, even during war time: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youngstown_Sheet_%26_Tube_Co... That being, “The President did not have the inherent authority to seize private property in the absence of either specifically enumerated authority under Article Two of the Constitution or statutory authority conferred on him by Congress.” My rewording, “The…

I don't disagree that legally the authority of the president is limited. But in practice the president can order and see executed the torture of innocent people for years without any possibilty of justice for those victimized. This is because legally the president and anyone acting under his command are immune from prosecution if they acted according to legal guidance from the white house council and the supreme court hasn't specifically ruled that exact behavior illegal.

I guess my question for you if there is a difference between something being legal and something being illegal but those doing it are immune from prosecution.

Re: NSA “precomputed contact chaining” enhances phone-record tracking program

#26

Post by monocasa »

soraminazuki wrote: post #21
dylan604 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legal opinions are not law. And as the old saying goes, opinions are like assholes, everybody has one and they all stink

You're correct in the sense that it's how things are supposed to work. However in practice, things are different. Secret interpretations of the law, which should have no more weight than mere opinions, were used to justify surveillance programs that seems outright illegal at first glance, and people got away with it.

Or create a program to extrajudicially assassinate American citizens, including specifically targeting minors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdulrahman_al-Awlaki

Re: NSA “precomputed contact chaining” enhances phone-record tracking program

#27

Post by billme »

voxic11 wrote: post #25
billme wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Supreme Court has ruled on the executive branches limited legal authority, even during war time: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Youngstown_Sheet_%26_Tube_Co... That being, “The President did not have the inherent authority to seize private property in the absence of either specifically enumerated authority under Article Two of the Constitution or statutory authority conferred on him by Congress.” My rewording, “The…

I don't disagree that legally the authority of the president is limited. But in practice the president can order and see executed the torture of innocent people for years without any possibilty of justice for those victimized. This is because legally the president and anyone acting under his command are immune from prosecution if they acted according to legal guidance from the white house council and the supreme cour…

>> “legally the president and anyone acting under his command are immune from prosecution if they acted according to legal guidance from the white house council“

Source? As far as I am able to tell, this is false; as in it is not that they are immune from prosecution, but that prosecution has never occurred.

Clearly, if war crimes were ever brought, regardless of the laws, commands, etc - it would have not resulted in being immune from prosecution.

Re: NSA “precomputed contact chaining” enhances phone-record tracking program

#29

Post by aSockPuppeteer »

billme wrote: post #7

>> “Cheney ordered that Stellarwind be concealed from the judges of the FISA Court and from members of the intelligence committees in Congress.” (a) Anyone able to expand on the author’s source for this; (b) what if any US legal guidance at the time enabled this; (c) and if anything between now and then has changed legally.

Here is just some history to note that little has changed in legality, lack of documentation, and destruction of evidence.

I would like to source the MKULTRA program. “It was approved by the director of central intelligence, the general council, director of the office of technical services, and leadership at the agency.” (1. P12)

“Present practice is to maintain no records of the planning and approval of test programs.” (1. p14)

Congress nor the White House were notified and if they were, there are no records of it. (1. P19)

1. Joint hearing before the select committee on intelligence..95th congress [Pages are of the pdf not the actual document.]

https://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/national/13inmate_Proje... From the Wikipedia reference

Re: NSA “precomputed contact chaining” enhances phone-record tracking program

#30

Post by bo1024 »

walterbell wrote: post #4

Some countries are also collecting physical location data from telecom companies, for the claimed purpose of contact chaining-tracing-matrix-graph-network analysis: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/05/global-contact-tracing... > Despite the lack of evidence to show the effectiveness of location data to stop the spread of the virus, a number of countries’ governments have used the crisis to introduce completely new…

Apple and google’s system apparently doesn’t store location information. Actually it’s getting pushback from health people because it doesn’t collect data.
Post reply on HN