While I’m on my soapbox, we should be really mad at Google and Facebook and Microsoft, because they’re doing a very interesting, and I think, very dangerous thing. They’ve decided to come out and say “we oppose this new FISA bill, because it doesn’t go far enough.” And when you peel that onion back a bit and say “Why are you doing this? This is a good bill, it’s safe, it’s bi-partisan, it’s rational. It meets all the requirements for 4th Amendment protections and privacy protection and allowing the system to work.”
And they say, “Well, we have to do this because we’re trying to make sure we don’t lose our European business.” I don’t know about the rest of you but that offends me from the words “European business.” Think about what they’re doing. They’re willing to, in their mind, justify the importance of their next quarter’s earnings in Europe versus the national security of the United States. Everybody on those boards should be embarrassed and their CEOs should be embarrassed and their stockholders should be embarrassed. That one quarter cannot be worth the national security of the United States for the next ten generations.”
Category: Spying
EFF to Court: U.S. Warrants Don’t Apply to Overseas Emails
San Francisco – The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has urged a federal court to block a U.S. search warrant ordering Microsoft to turn over a customer’s emails held in an overseas server, arguing that the case has dangerous privacy implications for Internet users everywhere.
The case started in December of last year, when a magistrate judge in New York signed a search warrant seeking records and emails from a Microsoft account in connection with a criminal investigation. However, Microsoft determined that the emails the government sought were on a Microsoft server in Dublin, Ireland. Because a U.S. judge has no authority to issue warrants to search and seize property or data abroad, Microsoft refused to turn over the emails and asked the magistrate to quash the warrant. But the magistrate denied Microsoft’s request, ruling there was no foreign search because the data would be reviewed by law enforcement agents in the U.S.
It seems like many US courts have trouble understanding the term “abroad”. Lets hope this one understands it.
This is actually excellent news…
… but I don’t think for a second the court will get what it has asked for.
Late Friday, a judge in California ordered the DOJ to hand over key rulings from the FISA Court concerning the legality of the bulk records collection under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act. As you probably know by now, Section 215 is the “business records” provision, that the government claims allows the NSA to collect phone and other records on all communications in the US (despite the fact that the law itself is limited to the FBI and is only supposed to be about records related to terrorism). The FISA Court, however, has broadly (mis)interpreted the law, but done so in secret, such that the NSA now believes it can get basically any phone record (and lots of other kinds of records as well). The EFF filed a lawsuit after its attempt to get access to the relevant FISA Court interpretations (five of ’em) was denied, and the judge is now ordering the DOJ to let them see the rulings in question, after a heavily redacted deposition wasn’t satisfying enough. The ruling is worth reading. The judge basically says that the DOJ has very little credibility on these things, having withheld info it should have released in the past.
CIA rendition jet was waiting in Europe to SNATCH SNOWDEN
As the whistleblowing NSA sysadmin Edward Snowden made his dramatic escape to Russia a year ago, a secret US government jet – previously employed in CIA “rendition” flights on which terror suspects disappeared into invisible “black” imprisonment – flew into Europe in a bid to spirit him back to America, the Register can reveal.
If The NSA’s System Is Too Big To Comply With Court Orders, Court Should Require It To Change Its System
This is a follow up on the Jewel vs NSA case from last week
For an agency whose motto is “Collect It All,” the NSA’s claim that its mission could be endangered by a court order to preserve evidence is a remarkable one. That is especially true given the immense amount of data the NSA is known to process and warehouse for its own future use.
The NSA also argued that retaining evidence for EFF’s privacy lawsuit would put it in violation of other rules designed to protect privacy. But what the NSA presents as an impossible choice between accountability and privacy is actually a false one. Surely, the NSA — with its ability to sift and sort terabytes of information — can devise procedures that allow it to preserve the plaintiffs’ data here without retaining everyone’s data.
The crucial question is this: If the NSA does not have to keep evidence of its spying activities, how can a court ever test whether it is in fact complying with the Constitution?(…)
The ACLU calls this “too big to comply,”
Companies No Longer Lulled Into Helping NSA Without Legal Basis
An article over at Techdirt show how the relationship between the NSA and tech companies have changed since Edward Snowden and Glen Greenwald published the information about the extent of US spying.
companies are now proactively doing everything possible to counteract the NSA, realizing that they actually have to think about the impact on their customers when (not if) these programs become public. What used to be a simple relationship, with a lot of help from various companies, has changed to something much more approaching a directly adversarial relationship.
There is still a long way to go, but just the fact that companies now have to take into account “how will this look when splashed across the internet” means that they’re already going much, much further in protecting the privacy of their users and customers.
All thanks to Mr. Edward Snowden. I say the world owes that man a lot of gratitude.
Spying is a big deal. If you’re spying on a politician.
Spying on regular citizens? Not so much.
Germany To Begin Formal Investigation Into NSA Surveillance — But Only Of Angela Merkel
Germany’s federal prosecutor has launched the country’s first formal investigation into the activities of the NSA in Germany, specifically the U.S. intelligence agency’s reported bugging of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s mobile phone.
Harald Range said on Wednesday that the other potential avenue of investigation — that of the surveillance of the German people — remained open, though no investigation was being launched yet due to a lack of evidence.
So spying on all of Germany is perfectly fine. Spying on Angela Merkel is apparently not fine.
Update on the update on the NSA vs EFF case
Judge Says NSA Can Continue To Destroy Evidence (Techdirt)
In short: because we’re ordered to delete some data by the law to avoid spying on Americans, to now ask us not to delete any data would violate the law that says we have to delete some data. And, to figure out how to do this would be crazy confusing, because the NSA is a giant bureaucratic machine of spying, and you can’t just throw a rock into it like that. Or something.
After the hearing, the judge sided with the NSA/DOJ, basically saying that the original temporary restraining order blocking the destruction of evidence (from back in March) still stands, but that the issue of whether or not it actually also covers data collected under Section 702 will be briefed at a later date, and until that time the DOJ/NSA are free to continue destroying evidence.
Emergency Hearing Today at 2 p.m. PT in NSA Spying Case
This post is related to the post DOJ Admits It’s Still Destroying Evidence In NSA Case; Judge Orders Them (Again) To Stop; DOJ Flips Out
Yesterday afternoon, EFF filed an emergency motion with U.S. District Judge Jeffrey S. White, explaining that communications with government lawyers over the last week had revealed that the government has continued to destroy evidence relating to the mass interception of Internet communications it is conducting under Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act. The judge responded less than two hours later, reiterating that his TRO was still in place and continues to prohibit the destruction of evidence collected under Section 702. Late Thursday evening, the government filed papers with the court, claiming that compliance with the preservation order that has been in effect since March “would cause severe operational consequences” for the NSA, “including the possible suspension of the Section 702” program.
“This TRO has been in place since March. Yet we are only hearing these excuses now,” said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. “Once again, the government has secretly and unilaterally reinterpreted its obligations about the evidence preservation orders, and determined that it need not comply with a federal court order, and now is asking for a blessing from the court after the fact. We are pleased that Judge White has called this emergency hearing to get to the bottom of this.”
DOJ Admits It’s Still Destroying Evidence In NSA Case; Judge Orders Them (Again) To Stop; DOJ Flips Out
In the court case between DOJ and EFF, the DOJ has apparently decided the temporary restraining order ordering them to preserve any relevant evidence, doesn’t concern them. According to the DOJ, preserving evidence means that the terrorists will win.
The court has now sent a new TRO, reaffirming the previous.
In its TRO, the Court ordered the government to refrain from any further destruction of evidence pending final resolution of the parties’ dispute over the government’s evidence preservation obligations: “Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and all those in active concert or participation with them are prohibited, enjoined, and restrained from destroying any potential evidence relevant to the claims at issue in this action, including but not limited to prohibiting the destruction of any telephone metadata or ‘call detail’ records, pending further order of the Court.” ECF No. 189 at 2 (emphasis added). In its Amended Minute Order, the Court reiterated that the TRO’s prohibition on any evidence destruction remains in effect until the Court has finally decided the evidence preservation dispute: “The Court extends the temporary restraining order issued on March 10, 2014 until a final order resolving the matter is issued.” ECF No. 206 at 1.
The response from the DOJ was simple, yet unbelievable
Undersigned counsel have been advised by the National Security Agency that compliance with the June 5, 2014 Order would cause severe operational consequences for the National Security Agency (NSA’s) national security mission, including the possible suspension of the Section 702 program and potential loss of access to lawfully collected signals intelligence information on foreign intelligence targets that is vital to NSA’s foreign intelligence mission.
So basically, look the other way or the terrorists win.
I would rather say; If we look the other way, the terrorists win.