FISA court rules NSA can resume bulk data collection • Hacker News Board

Re: FISA court rules NSA can resume bulk data collection

#61

Post by fineman » Wed, Jul 01, 2015, 5:11 AM UTC

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #44

superuser2 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the NSA's domestic spying is illegal, it's only on a technicality. Congress explicitly authorizes it, and the Supreme Court explicitly finds that the 4th amendment doesn't protect 3rd party records. I'm sure it's violated some specific regulations here and there, but on the whole, spying on everything everyone says and does is not illegal . Which is insane. It absolutely should be.

The 3rd Party Doctrine made sense when you were physically handing something to somebody else or whispering something in somebody else's ear. In today's world, its interpretation is ludicrously antiquated. Unfortunately, I don't forsee Congress doing much to solve this any time soon.

Fortunately. Only battles hard-fought are valued. If congress caved for a few years until this blew over, nothing would really change. And ultimately only strong client-side communication schemes (encryption+identity+etc) will solve the problem. Which is something that has a cost people must bear but that they will not if they don't understand the issue.

TL;DR - If congress made it "illegal" it wouldn't change anything. That they refuse to, will change everything.

Also, the third-party doctrine is sort of a recognition of the right the blow the whistle on crimes you see. It's not even (generally) a bad thing. It's only our government's too-cozy of a relationship with too much of the industry that means it's not whistle-blowing but twisted-arm leaks.

Re: FISA court rules NSA can resume bulk data collection

#62

Post by fineman » Wed, Jul 01, 2015, 5:23 AM UTC

superuser2 wrote: post #36

fru2013 wrote: post #13

I personally think that creating laws to prevent government surveillance is a pointless endeavor. The NSA has ignored and broken laws in the past, why would we expect them to follow new ones that are passed? The only way to prevent surveillance is with a technical solution (encryption), not a legal solution (more laws).

If the NSA's domestic spying is illegal, it's only on a technicality. Congress explicitly authorizes it, and the Supreme Court explicitly finds that the 4th amendment doesn't protect 3rd party records. I'm sure it's violated some specific regulations here and there, but on the whole, spying on everything everyone says and does is not illegal . Which is insane. It absolutely should be.

It doesn't matter if the actions of the government are (by some technicality we wouldn't accept from a five-year old) legal, if we don't want that behavior anyways.

Government rules by the mandate of the people. And we don't owe it a n-year mandate, or the completion of a grand plan, or trust, etc. When it steps out of line it is illegitimate despite its "legality" in its own laws.

Re: FISA court rules NSA can resume bulk data collection

#63

Post by jfoutz » Wed, Jul 01, 2015, 5:24 AM UTC

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #42

dmix wrote: post #9

Just a reminder about FISA's historical performance: > Between 2001 and 2012, the FISA judges approved 20,909 surveillance and property search warrants - an average of 33 a week. During that 12-year period, the judges denied just 10 applications. Prosecutors withdrew another 26 applications. > From 2007 to 2012, FISA judges also approved 532 "business record" warrant applications, the category used in the order that…

I can tell you from first hand experience that getting a warrant TO the FISA court from a sponsoring agency is a massive bureaucratic battle in and of itself. Reason being, the agency powers that be don't want to send something up that will be disapproved because it takes significant time and effort of general counsel and leadership of these agencies to process, implement and track to maintain compliance - even if th…

I've been thinking about this for a while. This is a very compelling argument.

You must have left on horrible terms though, the FISA court has just approved tracking your personal calls. I realize it's not personal, heck, they did the same to me. Nonetheless, there is a warrant to track your personal data. I'm not sure how reliable you could be. Why would they collect your data if you aren't under investigation?

Anyway, this is a stupid ranty argument appealing to emotion rather than logic. Bulk collection seems wrong in a way i have a hard time articulating.

Re: FISA court rules NSA can resume bulk data collection

#64

Post by billions » Wed, Jul 01, 2015, 5:39 AM UTC

dmix wrote: post #9

Just a reminder about FISA's historical performance: > Between 2001 and 2012, the FISA judges approved 20,909 surveillance and property search warrants - an average of 33 a week. During that 12-year period, the judges denied just 10 applications. Prosecutors withdrew another 26 applications. > From 2007 to 2012, FISA judges also approved 532 "business record" warrant applications, the category used in the order that…

The FISA court is unconstitutional.

Re: FISA court rules NSA can resume bulk data collection

#65

Post by aestetix » Wed, Jul 01, 2015, 5:45 AM UTC

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #42

dmix wrote: post #9

Just a reminder about FISA's historical performance: > Between 2001 and 2012, the FISA judges approved 20,909 surveillance and property search warrants - an average of 33 a week. During that 12-year period, the judges denied just 10 applications. Prosecutors withdrew another 26 applications. > From 2007 to 2012, FISA judges also approved 532 "business record" warrant applications, the category used in the order that…

I can tell you from first hand experience that getting a warrant TO the FISA court from a sponsoring agency is a massive bureaucratic battle in and of itself. Reason being, the agency powers that be don't want to send something up that will be disapproved because it takes significant time and effort of general counsel and leadership of these agencies to process, implement and track to maintain compliance - even if th…

I believe the first Snowden document leaked (the dragnet Verizon FISC decision) is evidence against this argument.

Re: FISA court rules NSA can resume bulk data collection

#66

Post by shadowmint » Wed, Jul 01, 2015, 5:46 AM UTC

dmix wrote: post #9

Just a reminder about FISA's historical performance: > Between 2001 and 2012, the FISA judges approved 20,909 surveillance and property search warrants - an average of 33 a week. During that 12-year period, the judges denied just 10 applications. Prosecutors withdrew another 26 applications. > From 2007 to 2012, FISA judges also approved 532 "business record" warrant applications, the category used in the order that…

> an average of 33 a week

Sounds pretty reasonable, until you read:

> Every few months, the FISA judges set aside their regular, public cases, travel to Washington, and take the bench inside a secure, windowless courtroom at 333 Constitution Avenue.

Oh, so what actually happens is that every few months the judges get together and do a "rigorous review process of applications" of hundreds of applications?

Sounds legit to me.

... wait...

Re: FISA court rules NSA can resume bulk data collection

#67

Post by belorn » Wed, Jul 01, 2015, 6:26 AM UTC

bazillion wrote: post #53

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can tell you from first hand experience that getting a warrant TO the FISA court from a sponsoring agency is a massive bureaucratic battle in and of itself. Reason being, the agency powers that be don't want to send something up that will be disapproved because it takes significant time and effort of general counsel and leadership of these agencies to process, implement and track to maintain compliance - even if th…

This is exactly the case. The reason there are almost no denials is that there would have been a great amount of due diligence performed to ensure that FISA collection was warranted. The fact that there are any denials after such analytic rigor takes place, suggests that the FISA court is not a rubber stamp. Every single year people who are read onto FISA must complete a comprehensive course on how to deal with FISA…

> failure to timely delete accidental collection on US Persons

You mean that rule which previously said you had to delete accidental collected information regarding US persons after 6 months? That rule was changed a year ago to 5 years, and in 4 years there won't be any systems left that can delete information and the 5 years will be extended again and again, in the same way as copyright.

Re: FISA court rules NSA can resume bulk data collection

#68

Post by simplemath » Wed, Jul 01, 2015, 6:30 AM UTC

fru2013 wrote: post #13

I personally think that creating laws to prevent government surveillance is a pointless endeavor. The NSA has ignored and broken laws in the past, why would we expect them to follow new ones that are passed? The only way to prevent surveillance is with a technical solution (encryption), not a legal solution (more laws).

Always-on end to end crypto is an extremely difficult problem, and whoever solves it is going to win a gigantic market.

Re: FISA court rules NSA can resume bulk data collection

#69

Post by rhino369 » Wed, Jul 01, 2015, 6:34 AM UTC

shadowmint wrote: post #66

dmix wrote: post #9

Just a reminder about FISA's historical performance: > Between 2001 and 2012, the FISA judges approved 20,909 surveillance and property search warrants - an average of 33 a week. During that 12-year period, the judges denied just 10 applications. Prosecutors withdrew another 26 applications. > From 2007 to 2012, FISA judges also approved 532 "business record" warrant applications, the category used in the order that…

> an average of 33 a week Sounds pretty reasonable, until you read: > Every few months, the FISA judges set aside their regular, public cases, travel to Washington, and take the bench inside a secure, windowless courtroom at 333 Constitution Avenue. Oh, so what actually happens is that every few months the judges get together and do a "rigorous review process of applications" of hundreds of applications ? Sounds legi…

I believe they rotate who has the duty.

Re: FISA court rules NSA can resume bulk data collection

#70

Post by kmonsen » Wed, Jul 01, 2015, 6:45 AM UTC

fru2013 wrote: post #13

I personally think that creating laws to prevent government surveillance is a pointless endeavor. The NSA has ignored and broken laws in the past, why would we expect them to follow new ones that are passed? The only way to prevent surveillance is with a technical solution (encryption), not a legal solution (more laws).

And they even lie about it in congress with no consequences http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2014/mar/11/...