Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government Privacy The Internet Your Rights Online

House Passes Bill To Renew NSA Internet Spying Tool (reuters.com) 114

Dustin Volz, reporting for Reuters: The U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday passed a bill to renew the National Security Agency's warrantless internet surveillance program, overcoming objections from privacy advocates and confusion prompted by morning tweets from President Donald Trump that initially questioned the spying tool. The legislation, which passed 256-164 and split party lines, is the culmination of a yearslong debate in Congress on the proper scope of U.S. intelligence collection -- one fueled by the 2013 disclosures of classified surveillance secrets by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden. Senior Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives had urged cancellation of the vote after Trump appeared to cast doubt on the merits of the program, but Republicans forged ahead.

House Passes Bill To Renew NSA Internet Spying Tool

Comments Filter:
  • ...is watching how long slashdot takes to release one of the twitter "shadowban" stories currently burning up its firehose all morning...
    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by msmash ( 4491995 ) Works for Slashdot
      We're aware of the story. But we need credible sources to corroborate the claims before we run it here.
      • It's at least got a better claim of news for nerds than my attempted Congressional Candidacy announcement via slashdot--which went purple. OTOH I do have a solution for identity theft [johnmoserforcongress.com] and the post was right after Equifax got hacked.

        • Excellent, I would vote for you...well I'm not from Maryland or even the US, but I like your policies :-P

          Protip: Get HSTS on your website for cypherpunk brownie points ;-)

          • Right now, NationBuilder forwards to their own domain for SSL. They're in the middle of finally getting SSL on all custom domains so we can move away from HTTP. So if you donate to my campaign [johnmoserforcongress.com], it will shove you to a different domain under https instead of http.

            It's kind of annoying.

            • Actually, don't donate to my campaign; you're not from the US. Missed that part.
              • If you open a hotel, could I rent a room in it? ;-)

              • by jep77 ( 1357465 )

                This message is incredibly contradictory.

                Don't donate to my campaign...
                --
                Donate to my campaign!

                These messages will be cited completely out of context during your race and your activity on Slashdot will be your ruin. Live and die by the / and . I suppose. ... I'm only half kidding.

                • Making assertions with enough content to be possible to contradict later rather than vague statements that people can give meaning like horoscopes. Having somewhat different opinions about certain issues when approached another way or considered in a different mood or in light of new information. Nope, you are right, he'd never make it as a politician in US politics.
                  • by jep77 ( 1357465 )

                    Yeah... I'm a Marylander but I'm not in his district so I intentionally didn't read much on his web site... because I don't want to be any more disappointed in my options.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        No disrespect meant, but if you'd like I can start listing stories which you personally posted that the only source was a personal blog. Why is there suddenly a higher standard for this story? If it's a site wide policy recently introduced to improve the quality of the content, then I'm all for it. If it's just an arbitrary requirement you've added because you find the story distasteful....well, yeah.

        Though my question is, what will your personal response be if you hold this story to a higher level, and

      • Please tell me you wrote that tongue-in-cheek.
      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        Apparently, two Firehose submissions of the same exact story from a right-wing website qualifies as "burning up the Firehose".

      • by Trailer Trash ( 60756 ) on Thursday January 11, 2018 @01:15PM (#55909115) Homepage

        We're aware of the story. But we need credible sources to corroborate the claims before we run it here.

        Oh, this is rich. msmash now requires "credible sources". Thank God I wasn't taking a drink when I read that.

      • by arth1 ( 260657 )

        We're aware of the story. But we need credible sources to corroborate the claims before we run it here.

        *Blink*
        I welcome this new policy. I really do.
        Will it be accompanied by pink ponies?

      • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

        by _xeno_ ( 155264 )

        Hundreds of stories about Russia hacking the election, which never happened and has no credible sources, and now all of a sudden Slashdot requires "credible sources."

        Now I remember why I had "forgotten" my login for the longest time.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        How much more credible can it get when the information is coming straight from the Twitter engineers mouth? LOL.

      • We're aware of the story. But we need credible sources to corroborate the claims before we run it here.

        This must be a joke, have you guys not read what you let on the front page??

      • You can report it the same way the news media reports Trump stories:

        "Industry experts are reacting to reports of alleged [...] from anonymous sources who claim to be close to the individuals at the event who also wish to remain anonymous."

        Good enough for Pulitzer Prize winning news outlets, good enough for Slashdot.
    • by PopeRatzo ( 965947 ) on Thursday January 11, 2018 @01:08PM (#55909063) Journal

      ...is watching how long slashdot takes to release one of the twitter "shadowban" stories currently burning up its firehose all morning...

      The only source reporting the "shadowban" is James O'Keefe, who has never, ever broken an honest story. I would think that before you believe anything a source has to say, there needs to be at least one instance of that source not being dishonest.

      Whatever your definition of credible source, O'Keefe and Project Veritas are the exact opposite of that.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        Does O'Keefe hire voice actors to make it seem like Twitter and CNN employees say things they actually don't, or do you just consider recording people without their knowledge to be dishonest reporting?

        • Does O'Keefe hire voice actors to make it seem like Twitter and CNN employees say things they actually don't

          No, he employs editorsK to make it seem like they say something they actually don't.

          • by Anonymous Coward

            Care to provide an example of an edit in a Project Veritas video that wildly changed the context of the statement?

            Did James O'Keefe edit several innocuous videos of a Twitter engineer together to create a narrative about shadowbanning?

            “One strategy is to shadow ban so you have ultimate control. The idea of a shadow ban is that you ban someone but they don’t know they’ve been banned, because they keep posting and no one sees their content. So they just think that no one is engaging with the

  • by bigpat ( 158134 ) on Thursday January 11, 2018 @12:45PM (#55908863)

    Until there are meaningful restrictions and requirements to report "incidental" collections of Americans communications then we know this still law and others are being used for mass surveillance of Americans on American soil.

    When congress yet again passes the buck on this law it will be up to the President to step up and order those restrictions and reporting be put into place.

  • by Anonymous Coward
    This is EXACTLY why the people *MUST* have access to unbreakable encryption. The government doesn't have any right to know when someone's spouse asks them to pick up milk on their way home!
    • by arth1 ( 260657 )

      Meanwhile, those who do have nefarious plans have access to unbreakable encryption, and aren't going to stop using it just because congress passes a law.

      Hell, even from a conservative point of view it should be obvious that businesses outside the US are still going to use it, and win an advantage over law-abiding US businesses who won't.

    • This is EXACTLY why the people *MUST* have access to unbreakable encryption. The government doesn't have any right to know when someone's spouse asks them to pick up milk on their way home!

      You have access to unbreakable encryption now..

      The ONLY unbreakable encryption technique is a one time use pad that uses truly random data for the pad.

      All you need is a way to generate and distribute the pads securely...

    • Hey! How did you know I picked up milk on the way home last night?

  • Here [house.gov] is a breakdown of the vote. I wish news outlets would simply provide a link to this and make life easier.
    • Re:Vote (Score:5, Informative)

      by arth1 ( 260657 ) on Thursday January 11, 2018 @01:36PM (#55909327) Homepage Journal

      It would have been better if you had posted the link to the right roll. The one you posted is about rapid DNA analysis, not the counter individual network act. Try http://clerk.house.gov/evs/201... [house.gov]
      And weep.

      • by bigpat ( 158134 )

        It would have been better if you had posted the link to the right roll. The one you posted is about rapid DNA analysis, not the counter individual network act. Try http://clerk.house.gov/evs/201... [house.gov]
        And weep.

        Funny enough the "Rapid DNA Act of 2017 is actually the http://clerk.house.gov/evs/201... [slashdot.org]">correct roll call. The text of what was on the schedule as the "Rapid DNA Act of 2017 was completely replaced with the text for the FISA 702 extension.

        This was the Amash amendment Roll Call [house.gov] for the amendment that would have included some privacy protections.

        Apparently it is a somewhat common practice that bills get swapped out in this fashion. It threw me at first also.

        • by arth1 ( 260657 )

          Now that is just twisted. How are we to know what our representatives voted for and against, if the bill has nothing to do with the bill?

          If a congresscritter shows as having voted NAY for "allow offshore oil drilling", and AYE on "increase NASA Earth Science funding", he might have voted for warrantless surveillance and against the right of immigrants to have abortion?

      • by bigpat ( 158134 )

        It would have been better if you had posted the link to the right roll. The one you posted is about rapid DNA analysis, not the counter individual network act. Try http://clerk.house.gov/evs/201... [house.gov]
        And weep.

        Sorry copy paste screwed up... but yes it was the Rapid DNA Act of 2017 [house.gov]
        that was the FISA extension. Passed 256 to 164

      • Ooh, thanks for that. I apologize.
  • by schwit1 ( 797399 ) on Thursday January 11, 2018 @02:42PM (#55909945)
    https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/10... [cnn.com]

    Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., is prepared to filibuster the reauthorization of Section 702 of the Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act, which is up for a vote in the House to authorize a six-year extension, in an effort to get warrant requirement for Americans.

    “My worry is that they also collect information on millions of Americans, and I don’t want that database to be searched without a warrant,” “I will filibuster and do whatever to stop that,” he added.

    In the event that protections were included for U.S. citizens’ private information, Paul said he would support reauthorizing Section 702.

Tomorrow's computers some time next month. -- DEC

Working...