more on Who they're spying on

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb () cs columbia edu>
Date: June 7, 2006 12:20:42 PM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Cc: h_bray () globe com
Subject: Re: [IP] Who they're spying on

On Wed, 7 Jun 2006 11:53:48 -0400, David Farber <dave () farber net> wrote:

> In all the fuss about the NSA spying issue, it's sometimes forgotten
> that there are real bad guys out there, who badly need to be spied on.
> Here's a story that makes the point, from today's London Times.
The issue has never been whether or not there are bad guys or even  
whether
or not there should be spying.  The issue is the authorization to do so,
and the checks and balances on surveillance requests.

The Fourth Amendment recognized this, more than 200 years ago.  It  
doesn't
outlaw searches; it does, however, require an outside check on what  
is to
be searched and why.  Without such checks, we're open to arbitrary  
abuses
of executive power.  We've already seen the claim that the government is
using the phone call databases to track down leakers.  Is this  
legal?  I'm
hard-put to think that it is, since they're using the very sort of broad
spectrum fishing that is specifically barred by the Fourth  
Amendment.  (By
the way, don't make the mistake of thinking that traffic analysis is  
new,
and hence unanticipatable by the framers of the Bill of Rights.  I
recently stumbled on a report of a spy, noting who was meeting, how
frequently, and how many messages were sent out following such meetings.
This was in 1603.)


                --Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/