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

Majority Views NSA Phone Tracking as Acceptable Anti-terror Tactic

people-press.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 96 posts

Re: Majority Views NSA Phone Tracking as Acceptable Anti-terror Tactic

#71

Post by dragonwriter »

tptacek wrote: post #67
mindcrime wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I stand corrected. But the more important point is that the decisions and discussion are private and without oversight, and the presumption that they basically "rubber stamp" all these surveillance requests. Now, maybe they don't just "rubber stamp" everything. But without more info, who's to say? Edit: Also, for anyone more interested in details of the FISC (some of which I obviously misremembered), here's a good re…

The rubber stamp argument is brandished in any discussion about FISA anywhere, from message boards to NPR. But it's not hard to see that there are at least two phenomenon that can account for it: (1) That FISA courts are not a meaningful check on the authority of NSA and the FBI to surveil people, or (2) That the overwhelming majority of FISA cases involve prima facie legitimate surveillance targets. I do not find (2…

#1 is true whether or not #2 is true, because there is no adversarial process in the FISA courts. A one-sided legal process is never a meaningful check. With regular courts, even when the initial process is similarly one-sided (as it is with search and arrest warrants), the fact that the outcome will be subject to adversarial process down the road is something of a constraint (but, even then, I don't think anyone is going to be point to the regular warrant process as a particularly strong check on executive power.)

The FISA warrant process, because of its secrecy and because it is generally not subject to downstream adversarial process, isn't a meaningful check. If the judges on the FISA Court are extremely diligent, it might be better than nothing, but given the secrecy around it, its unlikely that anyone not directly involved will ever really know whether or not it is (which is one of the things that makes it less likely that it will be.)

Re: Majority Views NSA Phone Tracking as Acceptable Anti-terror Tactic

#72

Post by tptacek »

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #34
tptacek wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get the sense that this doesn't surprise you. My question is: why would it surprise anyone? It's not just that most Americans don't believe they have anything to hide from NSA. It's that they don't have anything to hide from NSA. I'm not invoking the fallacious "nothing to hide" argument; I have stuff I need to keep hidden. But most people really don't , and especially not from NSA.

How many different refutations of "I have nothing to hide" have to be posted before it sinks in what a terrible stance that is? Or are you simply explaining the average person's inner response?

The latter. But I'm going a step farther than you probably think I am. I'm terribly annoyed by the presumption geeks like us have that Americans are ok with surveillance because they're stupid. They're not: their stance on surveillance is entirely rational. It is a fact that most of them --- like, 99.999% of them --- really don't have anything to fear from NSA†; in fact, the cost/benefit of NSA surveillance vs. Islamist terrorism probably does favor NSA, for most of them.

† IN 2013!

Re: Majority Views NSA Phone Tracking as Acceptable Anti-terror Tactic

#73

Post by tptacek »

dragonwriter wrote: post #71
tptacek wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rubber stamp argument is brandished in any discussion about FISA anywhere, from message boards to NPR. But it's not hard to see that there are at least two phenomenon that can account for it: (1) That FISA courts are not a meaningful check on the authority of NSA and the FBI to surveil people, or (2) That the overwhelming majority of FISA cases involve prima facie legitimate surveillance targets. I do not find (2…

#1 is true whether or not #2 is true, because there is no adversarial process in the FISA courts. A one-sided legal process is never a meaningful check. With regular courts, even when the initial process is similarly one-sided (as it is with search and arrest warrants), the fact that the outcome will be subject to adversarial process down the road is something of a constraint (but, even then, I don't think anyone is…

How could there ever be an adversarial process for foreign intelligence surveillance? Can you explain how that could ever work?

Re: Majority Views NSA Phone Tracking as Acceptable Anti-terror Tactic

#74

Post by drivebyacct2 »

tptacek wrote: post #72
drivebyacct2 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many different refutations of "I have nothing to hide" have to be posted before it sinks in what a terrible stance that is? Or are you simply explaining the average person's inner response?

The latter. But I'm going a step farther than you probably think I am. I'm terribly annoyed by the presumption geeks like us have that Americans are ok with surveillance because they're stupid. They're not: their stance on surveillance is entirely rational. It is a fact that most of them --- like, 99.999% of them --- really don't have anything to fear from NSA†; in fact, the cost/benefit of NSA surveillance vs. Islam…

I see. I would tend to agree. Some Americans are ignorant and stupid about a lot of things (I say this as an American) but I think you're right. I mean, part of that also is being aware of the implications of saying "I have nothing to hide", etc, but that's for the other discussions.

Anyway, to be clear, I don't think this is one of those "Why does America care about the Kardashians instead of this?!!" issues.

Re: Majority Views NSA Phone Tracking as Acceptable Anti-terror Tactic

#75

Post by rdl »

tptacek wrote: post #70
rdl wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happens if they make you sign a waiver to allow all their collections to become voluntary disclosures, though. And don't hire you if you refuse. Getting a clearance already means allowing a bunch of background investigations, medical records, financial records, etc. to be turned over.

I'm not sure how that could happen under the aegis of FISA.

FISA limits intercept, surveillance, and search, not collection, from what I've read of it (I don't think there is any restriction on collection). They have chosen the (IMO bad) interpretation that merely collecting information is not special at all.

You'd "voluntarily" wave the protection of that collected data, so it would be identical to "give us your last 10 years of email", except conveniently they would be the ones holding it for you.

(I could be wrong; I'm really not claiming any expertise on FISA or FAA or any of the secret court rulings determining its scope, just trying to figure out ways which collected information could be used to one's detriment. Plus, of course, FISA 2 is always possible, modifying FISA.)

Re: Majority Views NSA Phone Tracking as Acceptable Anti-terror Tactic

#76

Post by tptacek »

rdl wrote: post #75
tptacek wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how that could happen under the aegis of FISA.

FISA limits intercept, surveillance, and search, not collection, from what I've read of it (I don't think there is any restriction on collection). They have chosen the (IMO bad) interpretation that merely collecting information is not special at all. You'd "voluntarily" wave the protection of that collected data, so it would be identical to "give us your last 10 years of email", except conveniently they would be the…

I looked and can't find an allowance FISA makes for any private citizen to waive anything in FISA.

Re: Majority Views NSA Phone Tracking as Acceptable Anti-terror Tactic

#77

Post by wavefunction »

GHFigs wrote: post #19
wavefunction wrote: post #5

Keep in mind many Americans have never traveled outside the country, they are fed a constant diet of bullshit by our media alternating between frantic fear-mongering and gushing American paternalism, and simply don't stop to think about what is actually going on. I would call them complete morons but that is unkind. Incurious and ignorant and perhaps far too trusting is perhaps more polite.

What's the polite word for elitist?

You can call me an asshole, it certainly won't be the first or last time.

Most people who meet me find me rather average in pretty much every respect. Probably below average in quite a few. We all have choices we can make with our time and I know nothing about spectator sports, for example.

Re: Majority Views NSA Phone Tracking as Acceptable Anti-terror Tactic

#78

Post by wavefunction »

sliverstorm wrote: post #54
jmadsen wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Realist speaking from experience"

Maybe if the poster had said we are fed a diet of bullshit; we don't stop to think enough; we are ignorant. Instead, it is always they, they, they. Never the poster- no, the poster is much smarter than they , much too smart to fall for any of that.

Speak for yourself ;)

Re: Majority Views NSA Phone Tracking as Acceptable Anti-terror Tactic

#79

Post by rdl »

socillion wrote: post #50
rdl wrote: post #23

I think we need to make a choice as a society where the line is drawn. We chose to allow privilege for religious, medical, and legal conversations. Sure, in individual cases, it would be better to get the data from someone's confession, but overall, it's better for society (or people decided) to allow those conversations to encourage religious confession. Maybe there needs to be special protection for certain classes…

IANAL but aren't warrants designed to override privacy when there is existing probable cause? IMO one problem is sweeping collection and indefinite storage for the purposes of trawling for crimes. The other is that the FISA court could be a token "APPROVED" rubber stamp for all we know, taking a "guilty until proven innocent" stance on anyone outside the US. The bit that really bothers me is the total lack of transpa…

The collect-first and degree of oversight in FISA are issues, but generally you can't get a warrant to access protected communications (lawyer, doctor, priest) unless that professional is actually a co-conspirator, not just a professional service provider. There are exceptions (e.g. child abuse, imminent harm, etc.) to the privilege, though. And I think weaker spousal privilege (not being compelled to testify, but if wiretapped, that's fine). IANAL.

Re: Majority Views NSA Phone Tracking as Acceptable Anti-terror Tactic

#80

Post by brymaster »

tptacek wrote: post #46
brymaster wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think I would vote for allowing call logs to be trackable by the NSA Why? Someone looking to do harm doesn't use phones (maybe Burners) or other communication methods where they know they'd be easily tracked.

Why do you think people looking to do harm don't use phones? Why do you assume the use of burners makes telephonic surveillance pointless? Are you attributing to adversaries the best possible set of circumstances and smallest possible set of constraints?

I think the argument I wanted to make was that the people NSA claim to be after aren't using your typical contractual phone plans, since OP was suggesting they should simply track call logs.

Sure they used pre-paid phones as well as pay phones, hotmail and were still using coded and hidden messages.

Today they'd be using that steganography over cryptography.

Few sources: http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-205_162-4985597.html

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/11/al_qaeda_secre...

Post reply on HN