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

71–80 of 97 posts

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

#71

Post by rayiner »

nickodell wrote: post #27
rayiner wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

In the 18th century as now you could have chosen to give all your personal correspondence over to some company.

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

#72

Post by anigbrowl »

namank wrote: post #64
anigbrowl wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wildly implausible.

I find it to be the direct consequence of institutionalization.

We will continue to differ about this. I consider public institutions to be more responsive than you do, so I suppose we are looking at it from quite different perspectives.

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

#73

Post by znowi »

jholman wrote: post #62

Argh. Important subject material, crappy article, lots of confusion, argh argh argh. TL;DR: everything about the WAY this story was reported is an obvious deception. First, methodology. This is blogspam that adds nothing to the original article at http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=EF9BC1BF-34EB-41... (at least they link it). That article, in turn, cites no sources. So I'm basing the following only on those…

I applaud your zeal in the pursuit of fairness, but it's NSA that is on the spot. There's no fair game when it comes to national security. At least not for the public.

Alexander would not be heading the agency if he bluntly asked for blanket immunity or talked about spying on citizens. (How much was said about PRISM?) The article deduced what is possible within the proposal. And knowing some history, I say it's likely to happen.

So yes, it is biased and baity, but hardly prompts a "fuckety fuck" rant :)

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

#74

Post by sitkack »

We need (maybe not) a constitutional amendment that prevents

- retroactive legality - retroactive il-legality - immunity

I don't / can't even understand how immunity can be a thing. Sounds like some kids making up bullshit rules on the playground. To even suggest it points directly at guilt.

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

#75

Post by sitkack »

pvnick wrote: post #44
jtome wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wrong, if they are tapping at the wires they only see that your using gmail, not the content of your email or who you are speaking to (Unless you turn off ssl for some strange reason).

How likely is it that these companies can be compelled to turn over their SSL private keys via FISA court?

Very likely. Even if it was for a specific case.

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

#76

Post by jholman »

znowi wrote: post #73
jholman wrote: post #62

Argh. Important subject material, crappy article, lots of confusion, argh argh argh. TL;DR: everything about the WAY this story was reported is an obvious deception. First, methodology. This is blogspam that adds nothing to the original article at http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=EF9BC1BF-34EB-41... (at least they link it). That article, in turn, cites no sources. So I'm basing the following only on those…

I applaud your zeal in the pursuit of fairness, but it's NSA that is on the spot. There's no fair game when it comes to national security . At least not for the public. Alexander would not be heading the agency if he bluntly asked for blanket immunity or talked about spying on citizens. (How much was said about PRISM?) The article deduced what is possible within the proposal. And knowing some history, I say it's like…

Minor quibble #1: Alexander has roles other than the NSA, and techdirt invented the NSA connection without evidence. See my cousin comment about USCYBERCOM.

Minor quibble #2: "blanket immunity" and "spying on citizens" are deliberate fabrications of what was proposed. Separate paragraphs "deduc[ing] what is possible" would be well-and-good, but actually saying he said things that he definitely didn't say is not okay.

KEY POINT: When it comes out that Alexander/NSA/whatever didn't commit/advocate the particular abuses/crimes that some liar (e.g. Masnick) said they were committing, no one will believe you and me when we tell them the truth. And the truth is BAD ENOUGH!

Dishonest shysters posing as journalists always rates a "fuckety fuck" rant.

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

#77

Post by malandrew »

jholman wrote: post #67
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…

I wish this plan of yours made any sense. Btw, IANAL. First of all, I strongly disagree with "enough evidence now". Next, to sue successfully, you need to prove that the thing happened (and that it happened in a way or in a place where the relevant law claims jurisdiction). How will your imagined plaintiffs get actual evidence? Subpoena the companies? Seriously, imagine you're a successful, law-abiding, US company. A…

I reckon you could use link honeypots to prove emails are being read. Send out enough emails from many accounts with links that aren't meant to be followed and see how many are followed and what IP addresses the links are followed from. If you do that across enough accounts, you should be able to figure out whose accounts are being wiretapped.

I'm sure there are other types of honeypots that could be set up.

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

#79

Post by wavefunction »

krapp wrote: post #60
oceanstone wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really. We need to send him to jail, otherwise he'll keep breaking the law. Edit: While he's in jail, maybe he could pick up a copy of the Constitution. :)

Let's wait until any of this has been definitively, objectively declared illegal first. [edit] His Wikipedia page says he's expected to retire next year. I have a sneaking suspicion nothing touches him and he's left alone to ride off into the sunset. [edit edit] Actually... lying to the House is kind of illegal isn't it....

Under oath with penalty of perjury, it is.

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

#80

Post by jholman »

malandrew wrote: post #77
jholman wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish this plan of yours made any sense. Btw, IANAL. First of all, I strongly disagree with "enough evidence now". Next, to sue successfully, you need to prove that the thing happened (and that it happened in a way or in a place where the relevant law claims jurisdiction). How will your imagined plaintiffs get actual evidence? Subpoena the companies? Seriously, imagine you're a successful, law-abiding, US company. A…

I reckon you could use link honeypots to prove emails are being read. Send out enough emails from many accounts with links that aren't meant to be followed and see how many are followed and what IP addresses the links are followed from. If you do that across enough accounts, you should be able to figure out whose accounts are being wiretapped. I'm sure there are other types of honeypots that could be set up.

Ah, hmn, that's a more-clever plan than any of mine.

BUT I'm still a little skeptical, though maybe the details could be worked-out. I mean, if you send the emails to fake users, then the NSA isn't likely to follow the links. And if you send emails to real users, then you have trouble proving it wasn't the real user (owner of the mailbox) who followed the link. I mean, the IP addresses do help... unless the snoopers use TOR, or equivalent. (In fact, what do you figure are the odds that the original TOR developers now report to Alexander, via USCYBERCOM, via the Tenth Fleet, via NETWARCOM? Where would you assign those guys, if they still work for the Navy?)

In favour of this honeypotting idea, though, if you set up fifty honeypots, and your opponent evades forty-nine of them but falls into the fiftieth, maybe you've still got something.

Post reply on HN