Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsA Guide to What We Now Know About the NSA's Dragnet Searches of Your Communications
http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/guide-what-we-now-know-about-nsas-dragnet-searches-your-communicationsIt's lengthy but worth it. These are the last four paragraphs:
According to the slides released by The Guardian and Greenwald's reporting, XKeyScore allows analysts to search the metadata and content residing on any XKeyScore server by different selectors name, email address, telephone number, IP address, keywords, and even language or type of Internet browser "without prior authorization." Searches might either turn up content which analysts can then view or listen to or help an analyst identify an anonymous user who is, for example, searching for "suspicious stuff" or speaking a language "out of place" for a given region. Some slides also suggest that the XKeyScore searches can also query data stored in other NSA databases. And Ambinder insinuates that anything targeted through XKeyScore can be directed into one of the government's more permanent metadata and content databases, some of which the Post's Barton Gellman described in June.
In an online video shortly after the revelations began, Snowden claimed that "sitting at [his] desk," he could "wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant, to a federal judge or even the president, if [he] had a personal email." The government's reaction was both harsh and emphatic. Gen. Alexander went so far as to testify to the Senate Appropriations Committee not only that Snowden's claim was "false," but that "I know of no way to do that."
The Guardian slides give us good reason to believe that Snowden was telling the truth, and that Alexander was being coy. Greenwald reports that Snowden has stated that supervisors often find ways to circumvent the very targeting procedures that are meant to confine the NSA's searches: "It's very rare to be questioned on our searches," he said, "and even when we are, it's usually along the lines of: let's bulk up the justification.'" As far back as 2009, members of Congress were raising alarms about the NSA's collection under the FAA, including Rep. Rush Holt's ominous warning that "[s]ome actions are so flagrant that they can't be accidental."
* * *
We'll have to wait for additional revelations or, preferably, official disclosures by the government to fully understand how XKeyScore, and the government's other FAA surveillance capabilities, actually work, and how much power NSA analysts have to circumvent the agency's own procedures. But what we already do know gives us plenty of important reasons to reject it as a model for surveillance that is compatible with the Constitution.
In an online video shortly after the revelations began, Snowden claimed that "sitting at [his] desk," he could "wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant, to a federal judge or even the president, if [he] had a personal email." The government's reaction was both harsh and emphatic. Gen. Alexander went so far as to testify to the Senate Appropriations Committee not only that Snowden's claim was "false," but that "I know of no way to do that."
The Guardian slides give us good reason to believe that Snowden was telling the truth, and that Alexander was being coy. Greenwald reports that Snowden has stated that supervisors often find ways to circumvent the very targeting procedures that are meant to confine the NSA's searches: "It's very rare to be questioned on our searches," he said, "and even when we are, it's usually along the lines of: let's bulk up the justification.'" As far back as 2009, members of Congress were raising alarms about the NSA's collection under the FAA, including Rep. Rush Holt's ominous warning that "[s]ome actions are so flagrant that they can't be accidental."
* * *
We'll have to wait for additional revelations or, preferably, official disclosures by the government to fully understand how XKeyScore, and the government's other FAA surveillance capabilities, actually work, and how much power NSA analysts have to circumvent the agency's own procedures. But what we already do know gives us plenty of important reasons to reject it as a model for surveillance that is compatible with the Constitution.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
10 replies, 1659 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (30)
ReplyReply to this post
10 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
A Guide to What We Now Know About the NSA's Dragnet Searches of Your Communications (Original Post)
Luminous Animal
Aug 2013
OP
Th1onein
(8,514 posts)1. Kicked and recommended
Catherina
(35,568 posts)2. K&R! And thanks to the ACLU for consistently keeping it real n/t
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)4. Yep And why I am a life time card carrying member.
Logical
(22,457 posts)3. Kick and rec! n-t
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)5. Do the apologists ever read these?
How can anyone, with a working brain and with a straight face, blue links and all, deny that there are no privacy violations here? It literally boggles the mind.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)6. This is a good collection of Greenwald's reporting,
and a lot of it has been addressed and debunked. It reads like a Greenwald press release.
For example, Greenwald on Xkeyscore:
Under US law, the NSA is required to obtain an individualized Fisa warrant only if the target of their surveillance is a 'US person', though no such warrant is required for intercepting the communications of Americans with foreign targets. But XKeyscore provides the technological capability, if not the legal authority, to target even US persons for extensive electronic surveillance without a warrant provided that some identifying information, such as their email or IP address, is known to the analyst.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/nsa-top-secret-program-online-data
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/nsa-top-secret-program-online-data
Again, Greenwald is talking about "technological capability." He's speculating and has no evidence that any laws are being ignored. The program targets are foreign.
Greenwald is now recycling his breaking revelations.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023378966
usGovOwesUs3Trillion
(2,022 posts)7. This is more than just greenwald
In more ways than one.
hootinholler
(26,449 posts)8. So Greenwald is working for the ACLU now?
How about for the EFF?
You do know that Snowden's revelations have allowed stimied court cases to proceed?
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)9. Kick.
nashville_brook
(20,958 posts)10. k and r