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

The Door To The FISA Court Doesn't Even Have A Sign On It

konklone.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–59 of 59 posts

Re: The Door To The FISA Court Doesn't Even Have A Sign On It

#51

Post by jerf »

stephengillie wrote: post #39
tbrownaw wrote: post #25

The lack of a sign is not the problem. Given that hand scanner by the door, having a sign would be a bit silly -- anyone who would actually need the sign can't get in regardless. Given that (almost?) everything they do apparently involves classified information, the hand scanner makes sense. What is a problem, is not having anyone to answer the phones and not having the building receptionist know what to tell people.

I wonder how hackable that hand scanner is. Is it any more secure than the hotel rooms that were cracked a year or 2 back?

Yes, there are ways of making more secure hand scanners. The article links to the exact model, if you're interested. No, it probably isn't perfect. But it's part of a larger security system; remember, whatever you're bringing to "hack" this door, you must have also slipped past a physical inspection. I don't necessarily expect total brilliance from the security guards, but I suspect they would know enough to ask you some very pointed questions if you tried to sneak in a to-scale replica of somebody's hand.

Re: The Door To The FISA Court Doesn't Even Have A Sign On It

#52

Post by DannyBee »

Not to ruin the central point of this article, but i'd say 50% of the courts i've been in don't have obvious signs on the doors.

They just tell you you are in room 302 for this or that, or whatever (this is true even in appeals courts where they aren't really shifting around courtrooms all the time. The main courtroom will just be some numbered nameless room).

The only usually obvious signs are the names on judges chambers, and in a lot of cases, they aren't even in the same building!

Re: The Door To The FISA Court Doesn't Even Have A Sign On It

#53

Post by nitrogen »

tracker1 wrote: post #33
maxerickson wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He has to fill the court with federal judges that have been appointed by a President and approved by the Senate. That's a somewhat higher standard than whoever.

I wish more people understood this... I keep seeing comments about being appointed with no oversight... there was oversight when they were approved by the congress(Senate). If they aren't fit to be on this court, then perhaps they aren't fit to be federal judges.

Perhaps there are people one would trust to be judges when there's a full public record of their proceedings, but not when those proceedings take place behind closed doors with no public oversight.

Re: The Door To The FISA Court Doesn't Even Have A Sign On It

#54

Post by techsupporter »

jasonkolb wrote: post #13

When I was doing real estate investing I ran into a kangaroo "court" that the local corrupt city set up to handle property code violations. They would have a cop set up at the front and an appointed "judge" (they had some other name for him to not offend the law too mightily) who wore robes and asked everyone to stand up and sit down. The person in the robes would arbitrarily make up fines for the offenses according…

> But cities are corporations, they aren't allowed to establish courts like this

This depends on the laws of the state in which a city is located. In Texas, for instance, cities are "municipal corporations" whose only commonality with a "business corporation" is the word "corporation." State law, consistent with the state constitution, gives certain cities the authority to establish a variety of courts and "administrative tribunals" by passing a city ordinance. So, they are very much "allowed to establish courts like this," though the fairness in practicality may be in question.

Re: The Door To The FISA Court Doesn't Even Have A Sign On It

#55

Post by dlitz »

redthrowaway wrote: post #44
rohansingh wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that was part of the basis of the DoJ's case there. The Fourteenth Amendment extends protection to all persons , not just citizens.

How does that jive with the US citizen / non-citizen split in what the NSA feels entitled to do? Does that not imply all people are granted 4A rights?

They talk of "U.S. persons", not U.S. citizens: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_person

Re: The Door To The FISA Court Doesn't Even Have A Sign On It

#56

Post by duaneb »

redthrowaway wrote: post #44
rohansingh wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, that was part of the basis of the DoJ's case there. The Fourteenth Amendment extends protection to all persons , not just citizens.

How does that jive with the US citizen / non-citizen split in what the NSA feels entitled to do? Does that not imply all people are granted 4A rights?

A US non-citizen person is still different from an alien.... consider children.

Re: The Door To The FISA Court Doesn't Even Have A Sign On It

#57

Post by duaneb »

speeder wrote: post #4

Kinda off-topic: Why cameras are banned on courtrooms? I remember the last US trial news all of them had sketches like this instead of photos and videos... EDIT about the argument below about google: I always search Google first, but I found lots of random answers, and I don't have enough domain knowledge to know what one (or ones) are correct or resemble how things really are, asking here usually spark people to pos…

> Why cameras are banned on courtrooms?

Privacy for the people being tried, and in many legitimate cases to protect identities. I suspect they just vetoed them rather than having to decide.

Besides, the vast majority of interesting content is captured by audio recording equipment.

Re: The Door To The FISA Court Doesn't Even Have A Sign On It

#58

Post by nodata »

jasonkolb wrote: post #13

When I was doing real estate investing I ran into a kangaroo "court" that the local corrupt city set up to handle property code violations. They would have a cop set up at the front and an appointed "judge" (they had some other name for him to not offend the law too mightily) who wore robes and asked everyone to stand up and sit down. The person in the robes would arbitrarily make up fines for the offenses according…

So what was the end of the story? What did you do about this kangaroo court? Report it?

Re: The Door To The FISA Court Doesn't Even Have A Sign On It

#59

Post by tracker1 »

nitrogen wrote: post #53
tracker1 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish more people understood this... I keep seeing comments about being appointed with no oversight... there was oversight when they were approved by the congress(Senate). If they aren't fit to be on this court, then perhaps they aren't fit to be federal judges.

Perhaps there are people one would trust to be judges when there's a full public record of their proceedings, but not when those proceedings take place behind closed doors with no public oversight.

My problem is the proceedings taking place behind closed doors and without any real oversight. Especially since DOJ/NSA/FBI have been outright lying to congress.
Post reply on HN