nanog mailing list archives

Re: PRISM: NSA/FBI Internet data mining project


From: Phil Fagan <philfagan () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 09:10:14 -0600

I would think this is only an issue if they throw out the Fourth in that
when they use that data collected "inadvertantly" to build a case a against
you they use no other data collected under a proper warrent.

If the purpose was to actually collect data on you, in the event you do
something , they can simply run a query against this data post court
order...then that's crossing the line.

I personally think there is nothing wrong with monitoring US communications
- big difference between monitoring US communications and monitoring US
persons communications.


On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 8:56 AM, Dan White <dwhite () olp net> wrote:

On 06/09/13 11:10 -0500, Dan White wrote:

Let me put my gold tipped tinfoil hat on in response to your statement.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/**world/2013/jun/20/fisa-court-**
nsa-without-warrant<http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/20/fisa-court-nsa-without-warrant>

If accurate, this is extremely concerning:



  Top secret documents submitted to the court that oversees surveillance
by US
  intelligence agencies show the judges have signed off on broad orders
which
  allow the NSA to make use of information "inadvertently" collected from
  domestic US communications without a warrant.

  The documents show that even under authorities governing the collection
of
  foreign intelligence from foreign targets, US communications can still be
  collected, retained and used.

  ...However, alongside those provisions, the Fisa court-approved policies
  allow the NSA to:

  • Keep data that could potentially contain details of US persons for up
    to five years;

    Retain and make use of "inadvertently acquired" domestic communications
    if they contain usable intelligence, information on criminal activity,
    threat of harm to people or property, are encrypted, or are believed to
    contain any information relevant to cybersecurity;



All protections afforded by the fourth amendment have essentially been
thrown into the (rather large) bit bucket by the FISA court, when it comes
to any bits which leave your premise.

--
Dan White




-- 
Phil Fagan
Denver, CO
970-480-7618


Current thread: