Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The NSA

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    "Zero privacy violations" in NSA programs, Rogers says
    July 28, 2013

    There are "zero privacy violations" in the National Security Agency's collection of phone records, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Mich., said Sunday on "Face the Nation," just days after the chamber narrowly rejected a measure that would have stripped the agency of its assumed authority under the Patriot Act to collect records in bulk. "There's more information in a phone book than there is in this particular big pile of phone numbers that we used to close the gap - we, the intelligence services - close the gap that we saw didn't allow us to catch someone from 9/11," Rogers said. "Remember, this came about after 9/11 when we found out afterward that terrorists that we knew about overseas had called somebody who was a terrorist but living in the United States or staying in the United States," he continued. "He ended up being the person that got on an airplane and flew into the side of the Pentagon."

    Rogers argued the program culls data that's merely "to-from - no names, no addresses" and is kept at bay by strict regulations that pre-require a counterterrorism nexus for snooping. He said the tight 217-205 vote on a bill that would have mandated the NSA to prove a specific individual was under investigation before collecting his or her records was driven by misunderstanding. "The day before the vote, people were asking, 'How many of the numbers have recordings attached to them?' Well, the answer is zero. If you have to ask that the day before the vote - I knew I was in an education problem here. There are no recordings of phone calls; there are no dossiers. They do not record your e-mails. None of that was happening, none of it, zero," Rogers said.
    Source: CBS News

    If anyone would know the real poop, I'd have to imagine it would be the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.
    sigpic

    Comment


    • #92
      Obama administration officials faced deepening political skepticism Wednesday about a far-reaching counterterrorism program that collects millions of Americans’ phone records, even as they released newly declassified documents in an attempt to spotlight privacy safeguards.

      The previously secret material — a court order and reports to Congress — was released by Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper as a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing opened Wednesday morning in which lawmakers sharply questioned the efficacy of the collection of bulk phone records. A senior National Security Agency official conceded that the surveillance effort was the primary tool in thwarting only one plot — not the dozens that officials had previously suggested.

      In recent weeks, political support for such broad collection has sagged, and the House last week narrowly defeated a bipartisan bid to end the program, at least in its current form. On Wednesday, senior Democratic senators voiced equally strong doubts.

      “This bulk-collection program has massive privacy implications,” said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick J. Leahy (Vt.). “The phone records of all of us in this room — all of us in this room — reside in an NSA database. I’ve said repeatedly, just because we have the ability to collect huge amounts of data does not mean that we should be doing so. . . . If this program is not effective, it has to end. So far, I’m not convinced by what I’ve seen.”

      Administration officials defended the collection effort and a separate program targeting foreigners’ communication as essential and operating under stringent guidelines.

      “With these programs and other intelligence activities, we are constantly seeking to achieve the right balance between the protection of national security and the protection of privacy and civil liberties,” Deputy Attorney General James Cole said. “We believe these two programs have achieved the right balance.”

      Cole nonetheless said the administration is open to amending the program to achieve greater public trust. Legislation is pending in the Senate that would narrow its scope.

      The NSA program collecting phone records began after the September 2001 terrorist attacks and was brought under the supervision of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in 2006. But its existence remained hidden until June, when the Guardian newspaper in Britain published a classified FISC order to a U.S. phone company to turn over to the NSA all call records. Former NSA contractor Edward Snowden leaked the order to the newspaper.

      On Wednesday, the Guardian published new documents provided by Snowden that outlined previously unknown features of an NSA data-retrieval system called XKeyscore. The newspaper reported that the search tool allowed analysts to “search with no prior authorization through vast databases containing emails, online chats and the browsing histories of millions of individuals.”

      NSA slides describing the system published with the Guardian article indicated that analysts used it to sift through government databases, including Pinwale, the NSA’s primary storage system for e-mail and other text, and Marina, the primary storage and analysis tool for “metadata.” Another slide described analysts using XKeyscore to access a database containing phone numbers, e-mail addresses, log-ins and Internet user activity generated from other NSA programs.

      The newspaper said the disclosures shed light on Snowden’s claim that the NSA’s surveillance programs allowed him while sitting at his desk to “wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant, to a federal judge or even the president, if I had a personal *e-mail.” U.S. officials have denied that he had such capability.

      In a statement responding to the Guardian report, the NSA said “the implication that NSA’s collection is arbitrary and unconstrained is false. NSA’s activities are focused and specifically deployed against — and only against — legitimate foreign intelligence targets.” The agency further said: “Access to XKEYSCORE, as well as all of NSA’s analytic tools, is limited to only those personnel who require access for their assigned tasks. . . . Not every analyst can perform every function, and no analyst can operate freely. Every search by an NSA analyst is fully auditable, to ensure that they are proper and within the law.”

      On Wednesday, Clapper disclosed the FISA court’s “primary” order that spells out the program’s collection rules and two reports to Congress that discussed the program, which is authorized under Section 215 of the “business records” provision of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Administration officials released the documents to reassure critics that the program is strictly supervised and minimally invasive.

      For instance, the primary order states that only “appropriately trained and authorized personnel” may have access to the records, which consist of phone numbers of calls made and received, their time and duration, but not names and content. Officials call this metadata. The order also states that to query the data, there must be “reasonable, articulable suspicion,” presumably that the number is linked to a foreign terrorist group.

      But the documents fueled more concern about the program’s scope among civil liberties advocates who are pressing the administration to release the legal rationale that might explain what makes such large numbers of records relevant to an authorized investigation. Perhaps most alarming to some critics was the disclosure, in the order, that queries of the metadata return results that are placed into a “corporate store” that may then be searched for foreign intelligence purposes with fewer restrictions.

      That disclosure takes on significance in light of Deputy NSA Director John C. Inglis’s testimony last month that analysts could extend their searches by “three hops.” That means that starting from a target’s phone number, analysts can search on the phone numbers of people in contact with the target, then the numbers of people in contact with that group, and then the numbers of people in contact with that larger pool. That is potentially millions of people, said Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, who also testified Wednesday.

      The Office of the DNI earlier released a statement that fewer than 300 numbers were queried in 2012. That could still mean potentially hundreds of millions of records, Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) said at the hearing.

      Also, according to the order, the NSA does not need to audit the results of searches of the corporate store.

      The order asserts that phone metadata could be obtained with a grand jury subpoena. That may be true for one person or even a group of people, but not for all Americans’ phone records, critics said.

      Privacy advocates criticized redactions in the reports to Congress of information about the NSA’s failure to comply with its own internal rules. That is “among the most important information that the American public needs to critically assess whether these programs are proper,” said Mark Rumold, a staff lawyer at the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

      At the hearing, Leahy voiced upset with the administration for suggesting that the program was as effective in thwarting terrorist plots as another NSA program, authorized under Section 702 of FISA and targeting foreigners’ communications. “I don’t think that’s a coincidence when we have people in government make that comparison, but it needs to stop,” he said of attempts to conflate the two programs’ utility.

      He noted that senior officials had testified that the phone logging effort was critical to thwarting 54 plots, but after reviewing NSA material, he said that assertion cannot be made — “not by any stretch.” Pressed by Leahy on the point, Inglis admitted that the program “made a contribution” in 12 plots with a domestic nexus, but only one case came close to a “but-for” or critical contribution.


      Carol D. Leonnig and William Branigin contributed to this report.
      Source

      What is still being misreported in the United States is the now demonstrated fact that these programmes do not just store metadata but in fact content as well. Here's part of the Guardian report, it provides links to some of the power point slides on XKeyscore


      A top secret National Security Agency program allows analysts to search with no prior authorization through vast databases containing emails, online chats and the browsing histories of millions of individuals, according to documents provided by whistleblower Edward Snowden.

      The NSA boasts in training materials that the program, called XKeyscore, is its "widest-reaching" system for developing intelligence from the internet.

      The latest revelations will add to the intense public and congressional debate around the extent of NSA surveillance programs. They come as senior intelligence officials testify to the Senate judiciary committee on Wednesday, releasing classified documents in response to the Guardian's earlier stories on bulk collection of phone records and Fisa surveillance court oversight.

      The files shed light on one of Snowden's most controversial statements, made in his first video interview published by the Guardian on June 10.

      "I, sitting at my desk," said Snowden, could "wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant, to a federal judge or even the president, if I had a personal email".

      US officials vehemently denied this specific claim. Mike Rogers, the Republican chairman of the House intelligence committee, said of Snowden's assertion: "He's lying. It's impossible for him to do what he was saying he could do."

      But training materials for XKeyscore detail how analysts can use it and other systems to mine enormous agency databases by filling in a simple on-screen form giving only a broad justification for the search. The request is not reviewed by a court or any NSA personnel before it is processed.


      XKeyscore, the documents boast, is the NSA's "widest reaching" system developing intelligence from computer networks – what the agency calls Digital Network Intelligence (DNI). One presentation claims the program covers "nearly everything a typical user does on the internet", including the content of emails, websites visited and searches, as well as their metadata.
      In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

      Leibniz

      Comment


      • #93
        Germany just cancelled cooperation treaties between German, British and US intelligence services which had been in power since 1968. Merkel already announced this step to Obama in June, with little publicity. With the removal of this treaty it is no longer legal for German foreign intelligence (the BND) or domestic intelligence (17 of the 19 other intelligence services) to pass on any communications data regarding German citizens to the NSA or other US services. The move is mostly symbolic.

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by kato View Post
          Germany just cancelled cooperation treaties between German, British and US intelligence services which had been in power since 1968. Merkel already announced this step to Obama in June, with little publicity. With the removal of this treaty it is no longer legal for German foreign intelligence (the BND) or domestic intelligence (17 of the 19 other intelligence services) to pass on any communications data regarding German citizens to the NSA or other US services. The move is mostly symbolic.
          Because anything you put into a computer we are already getting via NSA intercepts, hacks and mining....

          Comment


          • #95
            Nah, because the German intelligence services haven't actively delivered anything to the NSA in the last few years. Or so they claim.

            Comment


            • #96
              Why would they? NSA already had the files.
              No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

              To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

              Comment


              • #97
                If you've ever used a cell phone or connected to the internet, the probability is high that your usage was noted by one of the Five Eyes Alliance members depending on how it was routed.

                USA - National Security Agency (NSA) headquarters at Fort Meade, Maryland


                Ever wonder where your NSA data is stored? Here at the NSA Data Center in Bluffdale, Utah


                UK - Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ)


                Canada - Communications Security Establishment Canada (CSEC)


                Australia - Defence Signals Directorate (DSD)


                New Zealand - Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB)
                sigpic

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by Doktor View Post
                  Why would they? NSA already had the files.
                  The important thing is that with the removal of the above clause any and all data passing to the NSA - or GCHQ for that matter - has become illegal.

                  This is important insofar as the German Federal Attorney General is currently evaluating whether to open criminal proceedings for espionage against NSA and CIA heads and members as well as any "involved" - current and future - German intelligence service employees and communication company employees. So far there's also several dozen privately launched criminal charges pressed with local district attorneys (in several German states) against the same cluster of people. These charges are about several "regular" illegal activities such as violations of communications privacy and intrusion into secured computers; the proceedings with the federal attorney are about general intelligence activity aimed against the German people at large.

                  Originally posted by Minskaya View Post
                  If you've ever used a cell phone or connected to the internet, the probability is high that your usage was noted by one of the Five Eyes Alliance members depending on how it was routed.
                  Scratch the depending for Germany. The NSA on average collected a dataset on every German adult citizen about once every four days.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    UK’s secret Middle East internet surveillance base revealed in Edward Snowden leaks
                    22 AUGUST 2013

                    Britain runs a secret internet-monitoring station in the Middle East to intercept and process vast quantities of emails, telephone calls and web traffic on behalf of Western intelligence agencies, The Independent has learnt. The station is able to tap into and extract data from the underwater fibre-optic cables passing through the region. The information is then processed for intelligence and passed to GCHQ in Cheltenham and shared with the National Security Agency (NSA) in the United States. The Government claims the station is a key element in the West’s “war on terror” and provides a vital “early warning” system for potential attacks around the world.

                    One of the areas of concern in Whitehall is that details of the Middle East spying base which could identify its location could enter the public domain. The data-gathering operation is part of a £1bn internet project still being assembled by GCHQ. It is part of the surveillance and monitoring system, code-named “Tempora”, whose wider aim is the global interception of digital communications, such as emails and text messages. Across three sites, communications – including telephone calls – are tracked both by satellite dishes and by tapping into underwater fibre-optic cables.
                    Source: The Independent

                    As I have maintained, this isn't just NSA. Each member of the Five-Eyes intelligence alliance supports and contributes to global data mining.
                    sigpic

                    Comment


                    • In another purely symbolic move, German domestic intelligence ran aerial surveillance on the US consulate in Frankfurt on August 28th. With a Federal Police helicopter taking pictures of the site, at under 200 ft altitude, in broad daylight in the morning. They made sure they were seen, gave the US diplomatic staff time to take some photos too, then waited for the deputy ambassador to call the German state department to complain.

                      This move came after Snowden maintained that the NSA was running a socalled "Special Collection Service" ELINT operation out of diplomatic quarters. By RUMINT the symbolic surveillance was directly ordered by the German intelligence coordinator, the federal government does not comment on whether they actually got any meaningful surveillance results.

                      Article in English:
                      German Helicopter Searched For NSA Listening Post In Frankfurt - SPIEGEL ONLINE

                      Comment


                      • Following reports of the NSA intercepting SWIFT data the EU is threatening to cancel the SWIFT treaty. The call by MEPs mentioned in the article below is now official EU policy as demanded by EU Interior Commissioner Malmström.

                        MEPs call for suspension of EU-US Swift agreement following new NSA revelations: theparliament.com

                        A Washington Post article on this topic has apparently been pulled.

                        SWIFT is a - on this side of the pond - very controversial treaty on exchanging banking data "for tracking terrorists" that the EU was pressured into by the US government three years ago. A cancellation of the treaty is seen by most politicians in Europe (outside Atlantic Bridge) as emancipation against the American threat to European liberty.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by kato View Post
                          This move came after Snowden maintained that the NSA was running a socalled "Special Collection Service" ELINT operation out of diplomatic quarters.
                          Germany is now doubling the size of the counterespionage department of the Federal Constitutional Protection Service, one of Germany's 18 Intelligence Services (all of which have counterespionage departments btw). This comes as an official, direct reaction to NSA activity. Focus of the staff and financial increase will be in surveillance of foreign intelligence activity from within Berlin's embassy quarter, from which the NSA operates too.

                          Originally posted by kato View Post
                          Following reports of the NSA intercepting SWIFT data the EU is threatening to cancel the SWIFT treaty. The call by MEPs mentioned in the article below is now official EU policy as demanded by EU Interior Commissioner Malmström.
                          The European Parliament has since officially passed a resolution calling for a cancelling of the SWIFT treaty. Sadly, this is not binding for the nondemocratic pseudogovernment of the EU, where this motion would require approval by two thirds of the state governments' representatives.

                          Comment


                          • I'm somewhat cynical about the hand wringing that is going on about this.

                            eg when we travel we receive a security briefing on what to do and what not to do based on the countries we are visiting
                            that advice often covers principle allies - its a fact of life that even our allies will exercise ongoing security management of even friendlies - and it includes long term and long standing partners post WW2

                            I'm also ambivalent about some of the countries who are crying foul - as they include countries we get warned about when we travel

                            I'd be interested in knowing what countries voted in favour of this resolution, as I'm pretty sure that some of them are going to be the list of countries we know who actively manage their national security interests even against their neighbours ....

                            all seems a tad hypocritical to me that some countries are wailing about the US when even amongst our allies we know that they are doing similar things - just not to the scale of the US, China, Russia (because they can't, not because they won't)

                            some of the members in the EU need to have a good hard look at themselves - as the mirror is an approp device to check before standing on stage and exercising indignation
                            Linkeden:
                            http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
                            http://cofda.wordpress.com/

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by gf0012-aust View Post
                              I'd be interested in knowing what countries voted in favour of this resolution
                              The parliament isn't divided along national lines, but along party lines. The resolution was supported by S&D (Social Democrats), EFA (Greens) and ALDE (Liberals), taking advantage of the absence of nearly one third of the parliament's representatives. Within these three parties, seat distribution to MEPs of the various countries in the union pretty much matches population distribution. Within the parties, the initiative was apparently mostly led by French, German and Spanish MEPs, albeit often simply by highly-placed people within the paneuropean party structures.

                              The EPP (European People's Party, conservatives) voted against the resolution en-bloc, similarly transcending national borders. Don't know what the fringe parties in the parliament (e.g. ultraconservaties/antieuropeans incl. Tories) voted, but i doubt it was in favour of it for the most part. EUL-NGL (European United Left) probably voted for the resolution.

                              See also MEPs call for suspension of EU-US bank data deal in response to NSA snooping
                              Last edited by kato; 27 Oct 13,, 00:36.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by gf0012-aust View Post
                                I'd be interested in knowing what countries voted in favour of this resolution
                                Got a "hostile" one for you: Bavaria.

                                German government coalition partner CSU, which rules in Bavaria with absolute majority, is calling for "consequences" at various levels:
                                • Federal Minister of the Interior Friedrich (CSU) is calling for criminal persecution of anyone involved with the espionage on Merkel's handy. There have been some allusions by him that involved US personnel with diplomatic immunity could be deported. There is a draft law peddled by the larger coalition partner CDU that would make mere knowledge of electronic espionage or an electronic attack punishable (similar to knowledge about a planned terrorist attack or a planned murder etc.). For diplomatic staff this would be a reason to be "asked to leave".
                                • Bavarian Minister-President Seehofer (CSU) calls the current relationship between Germany and the USA "significantly disturbed".
                                • CSU presidium member and EPP vice president Weber (CSU) is calling for the current safe harbour pact between EU and USA to be cancelled and has brought the EPP (largest party in the EU parliament) onboard on this matter. The safe harbour pact allows US companies to transfer personal information on EU customers - name, telephone number, email address - physically to servers in the USA. Facebook, Google and Microsoft (i.e. those delivering this information to the NSA) are the primary large-scale users of this treaty. US companies have - according to EU audits - been violating the TOS of this treaty repetitively and consistently for the past couple years. With the EPP onboard, a resolution on this matter would likely see a 80-90% majority in the parliament.
                                • Bavarian Economics Minister Aigner (CSU, former federal minister) is calling for the upcoming free trade treaty between EU and USA to be cancelled. Should the EPP get onboard here too this will not be ratified.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X