House Leaders Strike Deal To Protect US Web Browsing Data From Warrantless Surveillance (gizmodo.com) 38
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Gizmodo: After three days of negotiations, House lawmakers have struck a deal on an amendment to protect innocent Americans from being spied on by their own government online. Discussions were carried out behind closed doors over Memorial Day weekend after news broke Friday that House leaders had agreed to allow a vote on an amendment introduced by Reps. Zoe Lofgren and Warren Davidson to prohibit the FBI from collecting Americans' web browsing history without a warrant.
The Lofgren-Davidson amendment will require the FBI to obtain a warrant even if there's only a possibility that the data it seeks is tied to a U.S. person. If the government wishes to access the IP addresses of everyone who has visited a particular website, it could not do so without a warrant unless it can "guarantee" that no U.S. persons will be identified. The House is preparing to vote as early as this week on the surveillance re-authorization bill, which will reinstate several key tools used by the FBI to conduct foreign intelligence investigations.
The Lofgren-Davidson amendment will require the FBI to obtain a warrant even if there's only a possibility that the data it seeks is tied to a U.S. person. If the government wishes to access the IP addresses of everyone who has visited a particular website, it could not do so without a warrant unless it can "guarantee" that no U.S. persons will be identified. The House is preparing to vote as early as this week on the surveillance re-authorization bill, which will reinstate several key tools used by the FBI to conduct foreign intelligence investigations.
The public is watching (Score:3)
I sure hope the government is truly doing what they are claiming, and not putting in some loophole. If they are doing it right, good, about damn time. If they aren't, we'll know soon enough.
Re: (Score:3)
What? How could you doubt us, Comrade?
Of course we put in loophole. Don't worry.
Re: The public is watching (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Quite right - they're both willing to be bought by anybody.
Re:The public is watching (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
No, the public is not watching. They do their shit *behind closed doors*. The public doesn't want to see.
Re:The public is watching (Score:4, Informative)
> I sure hope the government is truly doing what they are claiming, and not putting in some loophole.
The whole thing was going to expire, I mean, the FISA court only found it was being abused some 85% of the time and all. This deal is to restart the overall spying. But hey, at least they need a warrant for this, I guess? Yay?
Re: (Score:2)
As an addendum, Trump is now vetoing the whole damned thing because he wants a review of why they were abusing it so much to begin with, as determined by the FISA court.
Of course, we know the answers to that--Obama was spying on his campaign the entire time and constructed an ex post facto justification via the infamous dossier where they laundered random Russian rumors from Oleg Deripaksa through Steele. But don't expect the same people laundering stories for McCabe, Comey & the rest to own up to that
Re: (Score:1)
1) They don't understand the technology that's involved
2) They have NO idea it's already being monetized and being helped by private industry
So what else is in the Bill? (Score:3)
That fight was over quickly.
Now, what's in the Bill that we didn't notice?
Re:Thank you Zoe and Warren (Score:4, Insightful)
The Republicans aren't going to be happy about this!
This isn't a partisan issue.
On the Senate side, 24 on the 59 votes in favor [senate.gov] of the Wyden amendment were from Republicans.
Needed just one more "yea" to move forward. Bernie didn't vote. WTF.
Re: (Score:1)
Bernie didn't vote. WTF
Sheepdog... His job is to bring in donations
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention the Davidson mentioned in the summary is a Republican.... (R-OH)
The top house Republican wants to end FISA (Score:3)
The top Republican in the house, minority leader Kevin McCarthy, wants to get rid of FISA altogether, let it expire. As does President Trump. They are urging members to vote "no" on the entire reauthorization bill, so that FISA will be gone.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
> Thank you Zoe and Warren
> The Republicans aren't going to be happy about this!
Just FYI, Warren is the Republicans.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL you got that "troll" mod for pointing out a simple fact.
It's true, though, Warren Davidson [wikipedia.org] is an Ohio Republican, so the GP post makes no sense, yet gets modded 'insightful'. Go figure.
Just like the gun debate, or the speech debate (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
From the quotes you laid out, it's clear that the forefathers saw a world where there was no standing army. A world where law enforcement agencies didn't exist, where militias were necessary ,where every free man was conscripted to a militia that maintained the state's rights against tyranny, that every free man should provide his own weapon to that militia, that every free man should be trained to use their weapon, and that weapon was intended to be used only in service of the militia, not for personal def
false modernity (Score:1)
Napoleon, probably afraid of assassination, ordered the Austrian military's air guns all destroyed when Austria surrendered to him. Napoleon also made possession a death penalty offense.
Re: (Score:2)
I do not know, once the pols realize this means their own WEB history could be searched, the amendment will pass in record time
But maybe their private history is exempt anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
> But maybe their private history is exempt anyway.
Well there's no final draft passed by the House+Senate and signed by the President, but yes, I agree with you.
There are ALWAYS carve-outs for law enforcement and politicians.
Wouldn't it be be nice if laws had NO carve-outs.... so that cops and other LEOs and pols had to live by the same laws, same health insurance, same everything so that it was "all US citizens have the same rights and privileges".
E
That's why Trump wants to get rid of FISA (Score:2)
That worked for Trump. He's urging Republicans to let FISA expire and stay expired. This after politically active FBI agents lied to the the FISA court to surveil his campaign. He doesn't like secret spy courts after he was the target.
The top Republican in the house, minority leader Kevin McCarthy, is also urging members to vote "no" on the entire reauthorization bill, so that FISA will be gone.
Re: (Score:2)
November 3rd is coming. Vote Blue.
Stet.
The Senate supports it (Score:2)
"surveillance re-authorization bill" (Score:1)
"The House is preparing to vote as early as this week on the surveillance re-authorization bill, which will reinstate several key tools used by the FBI to conduct foreign intelligence investigations."
So the FBI can't legally do certain surveillance activities at this time. Interesting...
Re: (Score:2)
" So the FBI can't legally do certain surveillance activities at this time. Interesting... "
Since when does the FBI let something like LAWS get in their way ?
behind closed doors (Score:1)
Fuck 'em...
Sucks that 90% of them will be reelected
Oddly specific. (Score:3)
FBI? What about the NSA that is collecting the bulk data. What about all the other 3 letter agencies? (And they, then, can share with the FBI if they need to)
The bigger question (Score:3)
Is why we even need to have discussions and / or laws written to prevent spying on citizens by their government in the first place.
They're fully aware of what the Fourth Amendment is, they just don't seem to give a shit about it.
What's the point of even having a Bill of Rights / Constitution if the Government ( and the technology industries they utilize as a
proxy to do their dirty work for them ) simply ignores it when it suits them to do so ?
The last time I read that particular passage there was no mention of exceptions due to:
1) Borders
2) Terrorism
3) Think of the Children
4) How difficult our rights makes it for Law Enforcement
5) Whatever excuse they come up with in the future
Re: (Score:1)
But our ruling class can't trust us. If we knew what they have been doing, we'd overthrow them in an instant. They must safeguard themselves against us. We're dangerous and unpredictable.
We already terrorized them with voting for Trump and Brexit. They clearly instructed us the correct way to vote on both, through the media, and we rudely disobeyed. We deserve whatever is coming to us. We cannot be trusted. We are a threat to everything they hold dear.
If you think they're going to give up without
foreign intelligence investigations? (Score:2)
The question is not "several key tools used by the FBI to conduct foreign intelligence investigations", the question is domestic investigations. And domestic investigations carried out by other countries on behalf of the FBI (CIA, DIA, NSA, etc.), that the FBI would be prohibited from doing.
Re: (Score:2)