FBI Access To NSA Surveillance Data Expands In Recent Years 52
itwbennett writes The FBI's access to email and other data collected from overseas targets in the NSA's Prism program has been growing since 2008, according to a 2012 U.S. Department of Justice inspector general's report declassified last Friday by the DOJ in response to a Freedom of Information Act request by the New York Times. Here are some of the milestones mentioned in the report: In 2008, the FBI began reviewing email accounts targeted by the NSA through the Prism program. In October 2009, the FBI requested that information collected under the Prism program be 'dual routed' to both the NSA and the FBI so that the FBI 'could retain this data for analysis and dissemination in intelligence reports.' And in April 2012, the FBI began nominating email addresses and phone numbers that the NSA should target in it surveillance program, according to the document.
No (Score:1)
No, it was very specifically overseas targets, and the NSA put a lot of effort into hand filtering to ensure that no information on a "US Person" (citizen, permanent resident or corporation) was included in the information passed to the FBI. But, that part doesn't grab the headlines.
Yes, "overseas targets" my ass (Score:3, Insightful)
Specific overseas targets? (nope) (Score:2)
No, it was very specifically overseas targets, and the NSA put a lot of effort into hand filtering to ensure that no information on a "US Person" (citizen, permanent resident or corporation) was included in the information passed to the FBI. But, that part doesn't grab the headlines.
This is not a factual statement.
We have been spying on American citizens in America for a lot longer than that, and without warrants.
A lot longer.
Re: (Score:2)
And always, some Americans always get mixed in because they hide the fact they're American and have a right to be filtered out...
That's one of the ironies...
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, if you fly over both the Atlantic and the Pacific, there you are!
Re:"Overseas" Targets? (Score:4, Insightful)
nah we just call hops in chicago,LA, NY... "seas" and once data travels over "seas" its good to go.
Scope creep ... (Score:5, Insightful)
As usual, we get the scope creep beyond what they told us it would be used for.
I think at this point we can safely conclude the FBI and the NSA (and every other TLA) are actively fighting against the rights of people, as well as undermining the law.
They're more than happy to become the total surveillance state.
And what's really pathetic is people seem to think this is OK.
Papers please, comrade. But don't think for a minute we're not listening.
Re: (Score:3)
A political catch 22.
We say NSA is overreaching it needs to be stopped.
The feds send in the FBI to investigate.
We say the FBI is just as bad as the NSA.
The thing is the FBI, NSA etc... They are not trying to actively get rid of our rights. However their mandate is our security. Unfortunately Liberty and Security don't play nice with each other, more Liberty means people get to do more what they want and that could mean infringing on others security.
These groups are doing their jobs when they try to get mo
Re: (Score:2)
A political catch 22. We say NSA is overreaching it needs to be stopped. The feds send in the FBI to investigate. We say the FBI is just as bad as the NSA.
The thing is the FBI, NSA etc... They are not trying to actively get rid of our rights. However their mandate is our security. Unfortunately Liberty and Security don't play nice with each other, more Liberty means people get to do more what they want and that could mean infringing on others security.
These groups are doing their jobs when they try to get more information. However what we lack is proper leadership to stand up and make the tough decision of saying, you are reaching too far, and we need to insure we keep personal liberty.
No they're NOT doing their jobs. More Data != Better.
They have access to information, their problem isn't that they need more data, They need to understand the data they DO HAVE so that they can analyze it properly for any threats. THEN when they have a specific threat they can request the additional data they need.. BUT only once they've actually identified a REAL target.
Re: (Score:2)
BUT only once they've actually identified a REAL target.
You mean like specifically targeted email addresses in project PRISM as stated above?
Re: Scope creep ... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
At least the NSA does not shoot your wife, set you on fire, or shoot bystanders without positive identification.
Re: (Score:2)
It's worse than "papers please" -- there are a lot of laws making it illegal to cover your face or disguise your appearance. Facial recognition software is not good enough yet to really track everyone -- but they've laid the groundwork.
Total Information Awareness means that all things are known about all people. Being that there are so many laws, I'm very sure we are all guilty of something. Prosecution therefore, is selective and can be used to target anyone getting in the way of people with power and thre
Re: (Score:2)
It's worse than "papers please" ... I'm very sure we are all guilty of something. Prosecution therefore, is selective and can be used to target anyone getting in the way of people with power and three letter agencies.
As a history buff, one of the recurring themes of revolution, both as a cause of the revolution and as a key result, is the opportunity to wipe the slate of the old laws.
It is very rare for an old empire to survive more than a few hundred years without either a revolution that resets the legal slate, or some serious reformation work to clean up all the accumulated cruft. The few old empires with old established law (like the UK) have had many major rewrites of the legal infrastructure.
The US is rapidly ap
Re: (Score:2)
In the end all the files did was link the 2nd and third hops connecting informants in groups to each other.
The other aspect is a rapid expansion in the numbers of informants and the security officials needed to handle them and their flow of information.
A huge boondoggle for contractors and government employees trying to keep the data useful, filter existing data set and add more data.
The other as
A few years ago it seems they wanted thir own. (Score:3)
Director says he wants laws to give FBI power to monitor private-sector networks, going beyond existing system that conducts surveillance of .gov networks
...
...
.mil, .gov, .com--whichever network you're talking about." (See the transcript of the hearing.)
Mueller seemed to suggest that the bureau should have a broad "omnibus" authority to conduct monitoring and surveillance of private-sector networks as well.
The surveillance should include all Internet traffic, Mueller said, "whether it be
Guess the NSA beat them for funding that project?
Re: (Score:2)
Stasi (Score:5, Insightful)
I have complete confidence that my phone calls, email and web traffic are all 100% monitored and have been for sometime. Now the people who used to try and refute this accusation and call you a tinfoil hat wearer, just shout "Barbarians at the gate".
The next game has started. It's your devices' outputs they now want. If Orwell could have imagined the ubiquity of networked cameras and microphones, he'd never have had to invent the telescreen. If you've nothing to hide...
FBI also does counter intelligence (Score:4, Informative)
The FBI has counter intelligence responsibilities (ie, dealing with foreign spies in the US), and some portion of related counter terrorism responsibilities, so they do have a legit need for the data.
While this does not exclude the possibility of general misuse of the data by the FBI, it is worth keeping in mind.
END COMMUNICATION
Re:FBI also does counter intelligence (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, I notice how many foreign agents and bankers the FBI gets.
I'd like for once the FBI not to arrest someone from Green Peace, a protestor with Occupy Wall Street, a group of homeless men who had an FBI handler who put them up to it.
Eric Holder could take the Fed Chairman and the heads of Goldman Sachs and prosecute them for all sorts of crimes -- anyone paying attention will know about the abuse that one company has made. Why is this not happening?
There is nothing "legit" going on -- merely agencies preserving the status quo and a government owned by the people who they have to borrow from to get into office.
Re: (Score:2)
With the increasingly violent actions of some of the radical offshoots of Islam like ISIS [wikipedia.org] and BOKO HARAM [cnn.com], how long do you think it will be before we have Senators asking for ISIS to be kept in ch [cfr.org]
hmmm (Score:5, Insightful)
What happened in 2008 that allowed them to change their policies?
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
Re:hmmm (Score:4)
And there's nothing inherently bad about that. The problem isn't that the agencies are sharing information, it's that they're sharing information that's outside their lane. And that occurs not because they're sharing information, but because they're outside their lanes to begin with. I'd much rather have agencies that are focused on not sifting through every American's data, than ones that do that but don't share it with each other.
Re:hmmm (Score:5, Insightful)
If I remember, didn't Obama run on a platform that included implementing the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission? The same 9/11 Commission that concluded the attacks happened because the FBI and the various intelligence agencies weren't talking to each other and sharing information?
Watch and learn: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
And there's nothing inherently bad about that.
Yes there is. Go read the constitution. It's spelled out very plainly there. There is no ambiguity.
The problem isn't that the agencies are sharing information, it's that they're sharing information that's outside their lane. And that occurs not because they're sharing information, but because they're outside their lanes to begin with. I'd much rather have agencies that are focused on not sifting through every American's data, than ones that do that but don't share it with each other.
You've no idea how this works do you? They are collecting everything so that should a crime happen, they can retroactively comb though everything you've ever done to find evidence against you. It's like the local police placed cameras in your home and then said it wasn't a search because they wont look at the tapes unless there's a crime. But in reality, they really are looking at the tapes, but that's beyond the scope of this conversation.
But know this: This really is the nightmare scenario of 1984. There is direct and solid documented proof that they are doing exactly what all the conspiracy nuts were terrified of. It's not myth, its real. The only difference is, our government has not yet used this insane power to subvert the publics interest that we know of. But remember, at no time in human history has a government ever refused to exercise dictitorial power. It's only a matter of time until we elect the next Nixon or Stalin... and that person will use the NSA powers to make you wish this was just some sort of joke. But it's not. You should be horrified that your government feels it's Legal to do this.
Re: (Score:1)
Have no doubt if they see any evidence of any crime in the data, and they have an interest in getting you off the street, they will investigate an alternate theory of how they obtained the data, so they can prosecute you.
Re: (Score:2)
The FBI, the NSA, the CIA and others all have legally established roles and responsibilities that they were created to fulfill. When the FBI arrests an interstate kidnapper, or someone who was spying on the US for Russia/Chin
Re: (Score:2)
Your comparing Nixon to Stalin? Nixon was ousted from office but other than that he was really not a bad President. He ended US involvement in Vietnam with the Paris Peace Accords, He opened diplomatic relations with China. He initiated a detente with the Soviet Union that led to the SALT treaty. He established the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and signed into law the Clean Air Act and National Environmental Policy Act. On the other hand Stal
Re: (Score:2)
I prefer to avoid their selected euphemism. They are siezing (and searching) everything but apparently that is not a violation of the 4th amendment.
Re: (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
How the NSA Almost Killed the Internet (01.07.14)
http://www.wired.com/2014/01/h... [wired.com]
"The FISA Amendments Act of 2008 carved out a new section of the law, 702, which gave legal cover to the warrantless surveillance programs operated in total secrecy under President Bush; queries are often called 702s.
The NSA cites the FISA Amendments
The land of the free (Score:4, Insightful)
Freedom to be surveilled.
Freedom to be arrested.
Freedom to be jailed.
Snowden f'd up (Score:1)
Nobody cares and part of it is because he slow released everything.
Put a frog in boiling water, it jumps out. Slowly increase the temp...
Look, been spying on US citizens in US since 70s (Score:2)
Look, I hate to break your "Oh It Just Happened In 2000 and later" bubble, but we've been spying on US citizens in the continental US (and all others) since the 70s.
Without warrants.
That you think it started on 9-11 is a pleasant fiction.
Is it Unconstitutional? Of course.
Re: (Score:3)
The 1770's...
Re: (Score:1)
The 1770's...
I can't speak to that from any personal knowledge, even if my dad was in a precursor to the NSA since before I was born.
But the British Empire did spy on Americans then, one of the reasons why we have three specific Rights that are in the Constitution not permitting such actions against US citizens in the US.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Data collected from overseas targets .. (Score:1)
And GCHQ spies on Americans in England, and ASD spies on Americans in Australia, and CSEC spies on Americans in Canada, and GCSB spies on Americans in New Zealand and finally GCHQ spies on Americans in the USA