Yahoo Scanning Order Unlikely To Be Made Public: Reuters (reuters.com) 61
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: Obama administration officials briefed key congressional staffers last week about a secret court order to Yahoo that prompted it to search all users' incoming emails for a still undisclosed digital signature, but they remain reluctant to discuss the unusual case with a broader audience. Executive branch officials spoke to staff for members of the Senate and House of Representatives committees overseeing intelligence operations and the judiciary, according to people briefed on the events, which followed Reuters' disclosure of the massive search. But attempts by other members of Congress and civil society groups to learn more about the Yahoo order are unlikely to meet with success anytime soon, because its details remain a sensitive national security matter, U.S. officials told Reuters. Release of any declassified version of the order is unlikely in the foreseeable future, the officials said. The decision to keep details of the order secret comes amid mounting pressure on the U.S. government to be more transparent about its data-collection activities ahead of a congressional deadline next year to reauthorize some foreign intelligence authorities. On Tuesday, more than 30 advocacy groups will send a letter to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper asking for declassification of the Yahoo order that led to the search of emails last year in pursuit of data matching a specific digital symbol. The groups say that Title I of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, under which sources said the order was issued, requires a finding that the target of such a wiretap is probably an agent of a foreign power and that the facility to be tapped is probably going to be used for a transmission. An entire service, such as Yahoo, has never publicly been considered to be a "facility" in such a case: instead, the word usually refers to a phone number or an email account.
Re: (Score:2)
like the net "virus"
Transparancy (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, sorry, did you think transparency meant you could see IN to what was happening?
Silly silly citizen.. No. Transparency means what you can look, but you wont see anything, you can see straight through as if nothing is there!!
And you are completely wrong on the second point also!
Hillary wont continue in this way!
Obama was just a test case, so get a feel for how have we could bend the general public over.
Hillary is the whole enchilada! now you are nicely greased up, its time for the whole Neocon delivery!
Vo
Re: (Score:2)
a day when Cthulhu doesn't have the worst policy plan. SIGH
Re: (Score:2)
The encryption offered by big US brands reverts back to plain text to help the US gov.
Recall the help in PRISM https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
"Prism collects this data prior to encryption"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Transparancy (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Gary Johnson is an open borders zealot. We don't need any more of those.
So am I. Well not really a zealot, but open borders would be fine. Having governments not telling you where you can or cannot go would be nice. It's lovely to drive through Europe crossing borders without that hassle of border controls.
Re: (Score:2)
You let your fear of dark skin limit you? Why?
Re: (Score:2)
Gary Johnson is an open borders zealot. We don't need any more of those.
So am I. Well not really a zealot, but open borders would be fine. Having governments not telling you where you can or cannot go would be nice. It's lovely to drive through Europe crossing borders without that hassle of border controls.
Just like driving from state to state in the USA... No border controls.
States aren't countries. Try driving to Canada.
Re: (Score:2)
States aren't countries, try driving to Russia.
The EU is a collection of states that formed a Union in order to better work together. The US formed no Union with Canada and Mexico.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why would I vote for another person who leaks classified information and committed treason? I refuse to vote for Hillary because of all the classified information and official records mishandling, why do you somehow think that Snowden would be any better?
Re: (Score:2)
with hillary, you know you'll get a politician.
with trump, what ARE you going to get?
I'll take the devil I know to the devil I don't know, thankyouverymuch.
Re: (Score:1)
You know what you will get with Don Don, a very pissed off and angry President who will likely pursue every single corrupt Democrat and Republican he can and you know, you just know, the more he gets, the louder his crowd will scream and the more Don Don, will pursue the,. There is a good reason the establishment is in panic mode, Don Don, will most probably go through them like roto rooter. Now that will be oh so amusing, watch them scatter overseas like roaches escaping the light, the ugly light, torches
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
with hillary, you know you'll get a politician.
with trump, what ARE you going to get?
I'll take the devil I know to the devil I don't know, thankyouverymuch.
So you would take a pineapple in the ass rather than a chance at some sort or salvation?
Yeah, that makes sense...
Human salvation lies in the hands of the creatively maladjusted. - Martin Luther King, Jr.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: "So you would take a pineapple in the ass rather than a chance at some sort or salvation?"
Yes. It's a bit graphic, but yes. As opposed to The Donald, who in this analogy is a stick of dynamite in the ass, with the fuse lit, and Donald is distracted by attractive women he'd like to grope. There's no salvation with The Donald. That's just a dream of his followers.
Kind of like Bill Clinton but unlike Bill Clinton none of the supposed misogyny carried out by Trump has any proof other than incidental stories and embellishment by the pop media otherwise all of the supposed victims would have sued long ago. Whereas Bill Clinton has had to payoff multiple rape victims and of course there is his sex for promotion scandal where he used the office of the POTUS to force women to have sex with him that got him impeached. This was the same scandal that also saw Hillary a regul
Re: (Score:3)
A vote for Trump is also four more years of lies, evasions, secret warrants and other unconstitutional actions.
No-one who actually stands a snowballs chance in hell of becoming president is going to actually DO anything about the spying (no matter what they may say during an election campaign).
At least a vote for Clinton isn't a vote for a guy who has said things that would probably get you thrown in jail or worse if you said them openly on the street in any number of Arab countries.
Re: (Score:3)
You realise that you're being totally ridiculous as well as having your partisan bias show though, right?
It's insane (and party-political) to suggest that an ongoing counter-intelligence operation, that has been confirmed by a judge to meet the criteria agreed on by law, should be splattered on the front page just to satisfy your idle curiosity.
It's insane
Re: (Score:2)
@ techno-vampire
And now we know what Obama meant when he claimed that he'd run the most transparent administration in history: absolutely nothing.
You realise that you're being totally ridiculous as well as having your partisan bias show though, right?
It's insane (and party-political) to suggest that an ongoing counter-intelligence operation, that has been confirmed by a judge to meet the criteria agreed on by law, should be splattered on the front page just to satisfy your idle curiosity.
It's insane because counter-intelligence operations are needed to prevent spies and/or terrorists from being effective when they work here and in doing so and thereby to protect our security.
We have laws and procedures in place to ensure that snooping is done only when warranted. They are being followed and it has been determined that in this case the snoop order is warranted. Even the House Intelligence committee has been briefed (as it should), and apparently they agree too. So much for your smear that it might be "unconstitutional".
Yet there you are posting unjustified, snide, and derogatory comments. Well, that's your right. But it makes your comments squarely party-political because you're trying to make a government, that is simply doing its job, look bad just because you don't like it.
In a word: deplorable.
And here he is in person, kiddies!
The Tool Of The State in all his glory!
Huzzah, Sir! Tyrants past and present approve!
Strat
Re: (Score:2)
"If it's done in secret, legality is irrelevant." - Barak Obama
"Laws are for the little people." - Hillary Clinton
"I love laws. I have the best lawyers. Absolutely the best." - Donald Trump
dicpic (Score:2)
matter of national security
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
be sure to use win 10 3d picture.
Slashdot editors suck: Anonymous Coward (Score:1)
Stop writing headlines like that. It should be Source: What the source said. Stop reversing the order of that because then it makes no sense.
Re:anonymous reader quotes (Score:2)
The mission is to make spying read as been not illegal.
The more words that are used in a big submission and hints like "foreign power" make it sound more legal and distract from the vast illegal domestic spying.
Terms like "declassified version" hints that it had oversight and was Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act like and all very legal.
The "order was issued" under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is more about preventing
how long will take wikileaks to get it out? (Score:2)
how long will take wikileaks to get it out?
Re: (Score:2)
Clapper, is that you?
No one here but us Russians (Score:1)