NSA Broke Privacy Rules Thousands of Times Per Year, Audit Finds 312
NettiWelho writes "The Washington Post reports: The National Security Agency has broken privacy rules or overstepped its legal authority thousands of times each year since Congress granted the agency broad new powers in 2008, according to an internal audit and other top-secret documents. Most of the infractions involve unauthorized surveillance of Americans or foreign intelligence targets in the United States, both of which are restricted by law and executive order. They range from significant violations of law to typographical errors that resulted in unintended interception of U.S. e-mails and telephone calls."
3 frightening words (Score:5, Insightful)
Brazil (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Well finally (Score:5, Insightful)
Now congress HAS to do something about it!
Yeah. They're going to increase the NSA budget so they can implement an internal office of surveillance review or something like that.
Re:So what? (Score:5, Insightful)
If they violated the law, lock them up.
Then again, they probably have enough blackmail on the congress critters to keep their program hush hush.
Sneakernet (Score:2, Insightful)
Time to go back to "sneakernet" and face-to-face communications. Since we now know that even encrypting your data may not be a fool-proof way to secure our communications from prying governement/corporatocracy eyes.
We might as well shred the Constitution and start over again. Our governement "by the people and for the people" doesn't abide by it anyway. :-(
Re:Well finally (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't worry, they're on it! I'm sure they've already got broad bipartisan support for passing a bill imposing harsher penalties on leakers and countries who shelter them.
Re:so basically, what we knew (Score:5, Insightful)
The question left is, what are we(the people) going to do about it?
Next time, they'll vote for Kodos instead.
Re:SURPRISE! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:so basically, what we knew (Score:5, Insightful)
We (the people) gave them a little power, and they grossly over stepped the bounds.
I don't think it is useful to exaggerate. We don't have any evidence (yet) of malicious intent - almost all of the stuff in this report was just sloppiness because nobody was there to keep them in line. It isn't like they were digging up dirt on political candidates in order to sway elections or blackmailing the leaders of the Occupy movement to make them back off.
On the flip-side it is useful to note that this was an internal report - pretty much guaranteed not to turn up anything heinous because that would be career suicide for the investigators who report to the same command-structure they are investigating. So the relatively benign level of abuse is not proof that really bad shit has not happened, it just wouldn't be in this report if it did happen.
Re:3 frightening words (Score:5, Insightful)
Is it time to say "We told you fuckers."?
Don't worry. The next time you see it coming because you understand this concept of a "track record" or have read a little history, you'll still be called a tin-foil hatter.
There are large numbers of people who never really grew up emotionally and are unable to cope with reality despite possibly having high intelligence. It's not that they have any solid reason to doubt you (in fact it's the opposite if they bothered to look). It's that they want so badly to believe their government is not out-of-control that they're personally offended you would suggest otherwise. Of course anything that offends them must be wrong, right?
This is actually how the average person perceives reality. Yes it's scary. It's why so little effort is put towards prevention.
clever (Score:5, Insightful)
The findings conveniently move the goalposts - it implies that the issue is that the spying is being done incorrectly, not that it's being done at all; if it were done "correctly" we would never know, which was the NSA's original win condition.
Yep. We're fucked.
Re:Take a breath, get some perspective. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:so basically, what we knew (Score:5, Insightful)
It isn't like they were digging up dirt on political candidates in order to sway elections or blackmailing the leaders of the Occupy movement to make them back off.
no but we DO know that the IRS was abusing political opponants, damn near everything that we have been told has been a lie since obama took office (and before he did to be clear) I dont know how you or anyone can still say things like "well we dont know...." we know enough to know they lied, about ALOT. I feel that we have only just begun to find the truth in this administration.
Re:Take a breath, get some perspective. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:so basically, what we knew (Score:5, Insightful)
Americans seem too easily distracted to really do much more than complain.
Habeas corpus? Gone. Being spied on in clear violation of the 4th Amendment? No problem. Invade and occupy a country that had nothing to do with the events of 911? Bring it on. Grant China entry to the WTO, and in the end, loose millions of American job to the PRC? Hey, that's just "business."
It doesn't really matter if the Man In Office is Baby Bush, the Blue Dress Stainer, or Obama. In-action on the part of We The People tells the people in power everything they ever wanted to hear. They can get way with anything and no meaningful action against them will be taken. Never.
The question left is, what are we(the people) going to do about it?
It is a very serious question. At what point do westerners say enough is enough and overthrow governments, or at the very least hold people accountable and arrest them?
Re:Take a breath, get some perspective. (Score:4, Insightful)
So, in other words, my data is either in the hands of immoral or incompetent people.
Gee, I feel safer already.
Re:SURPRISE! (Score:4, Insightful)
Of course they will. For a very simple reason, they have more pressing problems. They have a recession to deal with, many are busy trying to make ends meet or at least get by somehow. People don't tend to care about freedom a lot if food&shelter are on their "to be worried about" list.
Why do you think we do everything to prolong that recession for as long as we possibly can? Think back to the 60s and realize what happens when people have time to worry about a crappy government.
Re:Take a breath, get some perspective. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yep. Us citizens do not get a pass if we "accidentally" break the law. The NSA should not get one either. Plus their definition of "accidentally" is pretty lame and not really that far removed from intentional.
Re:so basically, what we knew (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Take a breath, get some perspective. (Score:5, Insightful)
Please sheeple, the above is not that hard to understand what the intent was of this. The contortions of logic to justify FISA and the Patriot Act are ridiculous. Call, write, and go scream in person at your congress critter. We must have our republic back!
Re: 3 frightening words (Score:5, Insightful)
But almost the entire party fought the civil rights movement.
There was an ideological transition that occurred because of this. Anyone against the civil rights movement fled the Democratic party, drawn to the Republicans by Nixon's Southern strategy of courting bible belt racists. It's disingenuous to apply contemporary labels across vast periods of history. Names and labels change. This is the same reason why it's fallacious for contemporary Republicans to claim to be the party of Lincoln. If Lincoln were alive today, it's not safe to say he'd be a Democrat, but he'd certainly NOT be a Republican.
I should note I'm not a Democrat or a Republican. I vote Green Party.
Re:Cash for Clunkers? (Score:4, Insightful)
How is a government subsidized tradein for a new car destroying wealth? Seem more like aid in purchasing a capital good to me.
It wasn't the subsidy or the new car that destroyed capital, it was all the strings (like come attached to every government grant or subsidy). The "strings" in this case said that your trade-in, regardless of age or utility, had to be destroyed and crushed.
It even described how. First, you had to drain all the oil from the engine, add a sand/silica mixture to the cooling system, then you had to run the engine until it froze up. What was left of the car had to be crushed. This meant that not only were all those cars destroyed, but the ones left on the road are harder to find parts for because all the engine parts were destroyed and everything else was crushed. You can find lots of videos of engines being destroyed [youtube.com] on the interwebs.
The value in all those destroyed cars was far greater than anything that was created by the incentives. And in the long term it hurts the poorest the most, who need transportation for jobs and keep their cars longer and rely on older cars to be reasonable to buy.