Wyden is maybe the best politician to ever come from Oregon. Thank you, Ron.
No new boss at NSA until it answers questions on buying location, browsing data
161–170 of 229 posts
Re: No new boss at NSA until it answers questions on buying location, browsing data
#162Earlier quoted context omitted.
In a world where democracies have enemies, how do you not have govt secrets?
Security through obscurity is inferior to security through transparency. Imagine if every interaction with the government; every contract, negotiation, communication was a matter of easily searchable public record. Try sneaking a little graft in there and get laughed at in public. It'd be great.
> Security through obscurity is inferior to security through transparency
According to what exactly?
Re: No new boss at NSA until it answers questions on buying location, browsing data
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this the same line of reasoning that lead to things extraordinary rendition and black sites in GWOT? Non US citizens on non US land, thus the government can do whatever they want like detain people indefinitely and "enhanced interrogation"?
Yes. Those people and lands involved in the act are outside the purview of the US judicial system. Keep in mind I'm not discussing the morality of this. Just that whatever happens there cannot be brought to court in the US.
Oh, it can. Fruitlessly, but it can. U.S. law covers all U.S. citizens, regardless of physical location. Just because you're in Mexico doesn't mean you have carte blanche to bribe or commit crimes. This is an explicit point ground into all Federal employees yearly.
It's just that the operations in question will invoke "National Security" and "sovereign immunity" arguments sufficient to ensure the judiciary will either summary judgement the case. Or leave it conspicuously unreviewed.
Or, at the end of the day, a Presidential pardon will be conferred at the appropriate/most convenient opportunity.
Or actions will just be undertaken with the understanding that the participants will be operating deniably, in which case it is quite literally the Government unilaterally deciding that breaking the law is the only way.
Re: No new boss at NSA until it answers questions on buying location, browsing data
#164I think Wyden is great, and broadly support the aim here. But the specifics just don't work for me. I mean, the argument presented by the article is that this is a fourth amendment violation: the government is conducting an unreasonable search by buying personal data. But... sorry, that's batshit. Can there be ANY definition for "reasonable" more apt than "available for legal purchase on the public market"? If we don…
It seems like the spirit
of the 4th amendment could / should be applied to the corporations and big data brokers. The problem seems to be with how it's applied in practice, private entities are freely allowed to make insecure papers / effects (data) of their customers, claim it as their own property and then redistribute it.
If that was happening with physical property instead of digital data I don't think anyone would be confused about the legality of it.
Re: No new boss at NSA until it answers questions on buying location, browsing data
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. Those people and lands involved in the act are outside the purview of the US judicial system. Keep in mind I'm not discussing the morality of this. Just that whatever happens there cannot be brought to court in the US.
Oh, it can. Fruitlessly, but it can. U.S. law covers all U.S. citizens, regardless of physical location. Just because you're in Mexico doesn't mean you have carte blanche to bribe or commit crimes. This is an explicit point ground into all Federal employees yearly. It's just that the operations in question will invoke "National Security" and "sovereign immunity" arguments sufficient to ensure the judiciary will eithe…
I can understand a federal employee being placed under this considering they are representing the US and said crimes are committed while acting on behalf of the US government. But does it extend to private citizens? If you commit crimes outside the US I don't think you can be tried for it in the US. You could be extradited to the place where you committed the crime. But I don't think the government can prosecute you in the US.
So, I do get what you're saying. If it were federal employees directly participating they can be prosecuted in the US.But if this is done through a web of contractors it will be hard to prosecute.
Re: No new boss at NSA until it answers questions on buying location, browsing data
#166So it's like a canary: the senator has the answer but wants to make it public. If the answer was "no" then he wouldn't be pushing for it, so the answer is obviously yes, they are buying data of american citizens in bulk, warrantlessly
[deleted]
Re: No new boss at NSA until it answers questions on buying location, browsing data
#167> This won't guarantee answers, however. It does mean the NSA will either need to satisfy Wyden's request, or Congress will need to hold a procedural vote to push through the confirmation. So, the most probable outcome is that this will delay the process for a few weeks at most until congress just pushes it through. At least it shines a bit light on the whole charade. Not that it makes much of a difference for me, si…
[deleted]
Re: No new boss at NSA until it answers questions on buying location, browsing data
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
Security through obscurity is inferior to security through transparency. Imagine if every interaction with the government; every contract, negotiation, communication was a matter of easily searchable public record. Try sneaking a little graft in there and get laughed at in public. It'd be great.
The reason the NSA conducts its activities in secret have little to do with "a little graft" and everything to do with the fact you don't show somebody you've broken their ciphers unless you have to.
If the NSA has broken them, they probably aren't the only ones. By keeping that a secret they're actually endangering national security.
Re: No new boss at NSA until it answers questions on buying location, browsing data
#169> CUI is not classified information, as its name indicates, but it should, generally speaking, be protected with access controls and not widely disseminated. Wyden is clearly not a fan of this labeling, which he described as a "made up designation with no basis in law." CUI was created by an executive order from President Obama in 2010. This is the bigger problem. Classified documents have a mandatory declassificatio…
That’s untrue, they have a mandatory declassification review date. The review can push the date back effectively infinitely through further reviews. The special circumstances, as you call them, are that the reviewer deems that information needs to remain classified.
Re: No new boss at NSA until it answers questions on buying location, browsing data
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a matter of ethics and morality you're probably not wrong. As a matter of law it's important that there is a distinction because it would cut both ways. Saying U.S. law that restricts the behavior of the United States Government should apply globally also implies that U.S. law in all other respects should apply globally. I mean, we'd appreciate your income tax, but you might not like all the gun ownership.
I am American, and 10000000% support the right to private gun ownership. I believe we should have less not more gun control >> also implies that U.S. law in all other respects should apply globally. No it does not imply that at all, again you are reversing the position I am talking about. In fact US Law probably applies too much to other nations via International Trade Agreements to other nations already.
Why doesn't it?