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

NSA Boss Asks Congress For Blanket Immunity For Companies That Help NSA Spy

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 97 posts

Re: NSA Boss Asks Congress For Blanket Immunity For Companies That Help NSA Spy

#21

Post by rayiner »

mullingitover wrote: post #10

This is a brilliant end-run around the fourth amendment. Sure, the government isn't allowed to do mass warrantless surveillance, but they can order companies to do it illegally and then pardon them.

It might be an end-run around the 4th amendment if the government was ordering companies to do mass surveillance (though we can argue about whether the 4th amendment has anything to do with surveillance at all). But the government doesn't need to do that. The companies already do all the surveillance, and people happily hand over to those companies their data. Is it an end-run around the 4th amendment for the government to then compel companies to provide this data? It's not like the subpoena is a new and novel legal instrument. Even in 1790 the government could compel companies to hand over all the information they had about a target of investigation.

Re: NSA Boss Asks Congress For Blanket Immunity For Companies That Help NSA Spy

#22

Post by jtome »

jlgreco wrote: post #20
jtome wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think they will give the companies immunity by name.

They certainly would not, since that would add far to much administrative overhead when they want to add new companies to the list in the future.

Right, like dropbox which was "coming soon".

Re: NSA Boss Asks Congress For Blanket Immunity For Companies That Help NSA Spy

#23

Post by skygazer »

bumbledraven wrote: post #12

Why is everyone so angry at the companies for complying with these government orders instead of being angry at the government that's ordering them to do these illegal things ?

Because 1) we want as many barriers to tyranny as possible. We should not be relying upon government self-restraint. And 2) "I was only following orders" is not a defense against wrong doing.

Re: NSA Boss Asks Congress For Blanket Immunity For Companies That Help NSA Spy

#24

Post by rcthompson »

An interesting tidbit from this article is the quote of the quote of the quote of Gen. Alexander asking for an intentionally "ill-defined" law. I've never heard of such a strategy before. Is this a new thing, or are there documented examples of laws that were made intentionally vague in order to give their beneficiaries more power or latitude than anyone would rationally agree to explicitly? Off the top of my head, Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law might qualify.

Re: NSA Boss Asks Congress For Blanket Immunity For Companies That Help NSA Spy

#26

Post by criley2 »

malandrew wrote: post #16

I'm honestly shocked that many of these companies aren't being sued in European courts. There is more than enough evidence now to support this. Hit every company on their bottom line. Europeans need to present the following dichotomous choice to every American tech company: (1) Operate in Europe and make money here, but no spying on any EU citizen. (2) Continue spying, but don't operate in Europe. Alternatively, elim…

If the NSA is tapping fiber at providers, a la Room 641A, then the companies behavior is completely irrelevant to the spying, and the NSA watches all traffic in and out of their networks anyway.

So your choice, as a European, seems to be utilize networks that don't pass through America at all, or have the NSA spy on you. I apologize for the inconvenience.

Re: NSA Boss Asks Congress For Blanket Immunity For Companies That Help NSA Spy

#27

Post by nickodell »

rayiner wrote: post #21
mullingitover wrote: post #10

This is a brilliant end-run around the fourth amendment. Sure, the government isn't allowed to do mass warrantless surveillance, but they can order companies to do it illegally and then pardon them.

It might be an end-run around the 4th amendment if the government was ordering companies to do mass surveillance (though we can argue about whether the 4th amendment has anything to do with surveillance at all). But the government doesn't need to do that. The companies already do all the surveillance, and people happily hand over to those companies their data. Is it an end-run around the 4th amendment for the governm…

  It's not like the subpoena is a new legal instrument
True, but there isn't an 18th century analogue to a company that has all of your personal correspondence.

Re: NSA Boss Asks Congress For Blanket Immunity For Companies That Help NSA Spy

#28

Post by jtome »

rcthompson wrote: post #24

An interesting tidbit from this article is the quote of the quote of the quote of Gen. Alexander asking for an intentionally "ill-defined" law. I've never heard of such a strategy before. Is this a new thing, or are there documented examples of laws that were made intentionally vague in order to give their beneficiaries more power or latitude than anyone would rationally agree to explicitly? Off the top of my head, F…

Section 215 of the Patriot Act has a secret interpretation

Re: NSA Boss Asks Congress For Blanket Immunity For Companies That Help NSA Spy

#29

Post by nano111 »

malandrew wrote: post #16

I'm honestly shocked that many of these companies aren't being sued in European courts. There is more than enough evidence now to support this. Hit every company on their bottom line. Europeans need to present the following dichotomous choice to every American tech company: (1) Operate in Europe and make money here, but no spying on any EU citizen. (2) Continue spying, but don't operate in Europe. Alternatively, elim…

Russia promises legal action over NSA surveillance scandal -> http://rt.com/politics/internet-surveillance-western-prevent...

Re: NSA Boss Asks Congress For Blanket Immunity For Companies That Help NSA Spy

#30

Post by marcell »

rayiner wrote: post #21
mullingitover wrote: post #10

This is a brilliant end-run around the fourth amendment. Sure, the government isn't allowed to do mass warrantless surveillance, but they can order companies to do it illegally and then pardon them.

It might be an end-run around the 4th amendment if the government was ordering companies to do mass surveillance (though we can argue about whether the 4th amendment has anything to do with surveillance at all). But the government doesn't need to do that. The companies already do all the surveillance, and people happily hand over to those companies their data. Is it an end-run around the 4th amendment for the governm…

> It's not like the subpoena is a new and novel legal instrument.

Subpoenas are intended to recover specific pieces of evidence to prove guilt in a trial. They are not meant for blanket vacuuming of data, or for discovery.

Post reply on HN