Pentagon Surveilling Americans Without a Warrant, Senator Reveals (vice.com) 43
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: The Pentagon is carrying out warrantless surveillance of Americans, according to a new letter written by Senator Ron Wyden and obtained by Motherboard. Senator Wyden's office asked the Department of Defense (DoD), which includes various military and intelligence agencies such as the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), for detailed information about its data purchasing practices after Motherboard revealed special forces were buying location data. The responses also touched on military or intelligence use of internet browsing and other types of data, and prompted Wyden to demand more answers specifically about warrantless spying on American citizens.
Some of the answers the DoD provided were given in a form that means Wyden's office cannot legally publish specifics on the surveillance; one answer in particular was classified. In the letter Wyden is pushing the DoD to release the information to the public. A Wyden aide told Motherboard that the Senator is unable to make the information public at this time, but believes it would meaningfully inform the debate around how the DoD is interpreting the law and its purchases of data. "I write to urge you to release to the public information about the Department of Defense's (DoD) warrantless surveillance of Americans," the letter, addressed to Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III, reads. Wyden and his staff with appropriate security clearances are able to review classified responses, a Wyden aide told Motherboard. Wyden's office declined to provide Motherboard with specifics about the classified answer. But a Wyden aide said that the question related to the DoD buying internet metadata.
"Are any DoD components buying and using without a court order internet metadata, including 'netflow' and Domain Name System (DNS) records," the question read, and asked whether those records were about "domestic internet communications (where the sender and recipient are both U.S. IP addresses)" and "internet communications where one side of the communication is a U.S. IP address and the other side is located abroad." Netflow data creates a picture of traffic flow and volume across a network. DNS records relate to when a user looks up a particular domain, and a system then converts that text into the specific IP address for a computer to understand; essentially a form of internet browsing history. Wyden's new letter to Austin urging the DoD to release that answer and others says "Information should only be classified if its unauthorized disclosure would cause damage to national security. The information provided by DoD in response to my questions does not meet that bar."
Some of the answers the DoD provided were given in a form that means Wyden's office cannot legally publish specifics on the surveillance; one answer in particular was classified. In the letter Wyden is pushing the DoD to release the information to the public. A Wyden aide told Motherboard that the Senator is unable to make the information public at this time, but believes it would meaningfully inform the debate around how the DoD is interpreting the law and its purchases of data. "I write to urge you to release to the public information about the Department of Defense's (DoD) warrantless surveillance of Americans," the letter, addressed to Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III, reads. Wyden and his staff with appropriate security clearances are able to review classified responses, a Wyden aide told Motherboard. Wyden's office declined to provide Motherboard with specifics about the classified answer. But a Wyden aide said that the question related to the DoD buying internet metadata.
"Are any DoD components buying and using without a court order internet metadata, including 'netflow' and Domain Name System (DNS) records," the question read, and asked whether those records were about "domestic internet communications (where the sender and recipient are both U.S. IP addresses)" and "internet communications where one side of the communication is a U.S. IP address and the other side is located abroad." Netflow data creates a picture of traffic flow and volume across a network. DNS records relate to when a user looks up a particular domain, and a system then converts that text into the specific IP address for a computer to understand; essentially a form of internet browsing history. Wyden's new letter to Austin urging the DoD to release that answer and others says "Information should only be classified if its unauthorized disclosure would cause damage to national security. The information provided by DoD in response to my questions does not meet that bar."
Getting their scope mixed up? (Score:1)
It's supposed to be DHS doing the evil domestic snooping, not the DOD. When will the gov't learn to do evil correctly?
Re:Getting their scope mixed up? (Score:5, Funny)
Dick Gordon : National Security Agency.
Martin Bishop : Ah. You're the guys I hear breathing on the other end of my phone.
Dick Gordon : No, that's the FBI. We're not chartered for domestic surveillance.
Martin Bishop : Oh, I see. You just overthrow governments. Set up friendly dictators.
Dick Gordon : No, that's the CIA.
- -
Ah... the good old days...
Re: (Score:2)
ROTFL. Sayings from the sixties and seventies: you could tell who the agents were at a demonstration, or a meeting:
Polished black shoes: DOD
Polished brown shoes: FBI
Shiny plastic black shoes: police.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't trust anyone over 30 that wears black socks!
Also, this story has about 35 comments. We're so used to this shit that we no longer get outraged.
Thank you, Senator (Score:5, Informative)
I can happily say I have voted for this man every time he has been on a ballot.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Heh (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm sad to say I'd be more shocked if Motherboard and the Senator had come out with evidence that the NSA and DIA refused to spy on their own citizens, without a legitimate warrant, because they believed it was wrong.
All you have to know is that the technology to do so is available to them, and the consequences of getting caught is nowhere in the neighborhood of facing a firing squad.
These reposts are really getting out of hand (Score:2)
The nuttiest conspiracy theory (Score:5, Insightful)
Ooh, or remember the time they fed radioactive materials to disabled children and pregnant women [jhu.edu]?
Or remember the time the government gave Black people syphilis covertly just to see how the human body rots out on the insides [cdc.gov]?
Well, they stopped right after the last admission of guilt! cold turkey, went legit. They don’t do insane stuff anymore, they can’t - they even pinky swore last time...
Re:The nuttiest conspiracy theory (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
And they they had Operation Mockingbird https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] to have the press convince everyone that things were just hunky-dory.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The nuttiest conspiracy theory (Score:5, Informative)
Re:The nuttiest conspiracy theory (Score:4, Informative)
Of course, by leaving them infected and uninformed, the study more than likely did lead to additional infections that could and should have been prevented.
Re: (Score:2)
Who's surveilling us? (Score:5, Insightful)
As far as internet companies are concerned, their users are their product, not their customers. Advertisers and market analytics companies are their customers. Until the US has real, effective, enforceable data protection laws (which, to be fair, Sen. Wyden has been pushing too) this data is going to continue to be available to anyone willing to pay for it.
Re: (Score:2)
Until the US has real, effective, enforceable data protection laws (which, to be fair, Sen. Wyden has been pushing too) this data is going to continue to be available to anyone willing to pay for it.
So... for the foreseeable future, and at least a bit of the unforseeable as well.
Re:Who's surveilling us? (Score:5, Informative)
I've been trying to explain this to the corporatist bent of libertarians, that privacy protections either apply in all instances or no instances (even going so far as to explain ECHELON to the less experienced), for naught. The case law for divulging privileged information to third parties (like the government) is pretty well established now and you will need regulation/law to hem that in.
And all I get from them is other people aren't bounded by the 4th, so game on, and as they are usually the most ardent defenders of civil liberties but apparently can't find their asses with both hands; dystopia here we come.
Re: (Score:3)
I've been trying to explain this to the corporatist bent of libertarians, that privacy protections either apply in all instances or no instances (even going so far as to explain ECHELON to the less experienced), for naught. The case law for divulging privileged information to third parties (like the government) is pretty well established now and you will need regulation/law to hem that in.
And all I get from them is other people aren't bounded by the 4th, so game on, and as they are usually the most ardent defenders of civil liberties but apparently can't find their asses with both hands; dystopia here we come.
That's because just like how any rational debate about gun regulation devolves into "assault rifle" bans, and discussion about privacy legislation devolves into 4th amendment and teh gubmint.
IDK what the corporate-libertarian thing is you're talking about, but it's true, the 4th is not the privacy protection you want.
This is what we should focus on
https://www.wyden.senate.gov/n... [senate.gov]
It was also on Slashdot, it's just not as sexy as duh pentagun is spying!
https://news.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]
Still not as bad as China! (Score:5, Insightful)
It's just a little unwarranted, it's still good, it's still good!
At least it's not a social credit system, it's still good, it's still good!
Re: Still not as bad as China! (Score:2)
Was this related to DHS's overflights of BLM? (Score:3)
I read somewhere that DHS a while back was using privately chartered planes to continuously fly over antifa/BLM protest areas and vacuum up their digital cell phone data. Who aggregated that data after the fact?
But all that sounds more like "Stingrays." IMSI-catchers aren't really Internet-centered. This activity that Sen. Wyden is zeroing in on sounds like something else, unless I'm mistaken.
Depressing, but not unexpected (Score:5, Interesting)
What's depressing is it seems like everything Snowden did, was ultimately for naught.
( I truly wished they had held some shockingly devastating secrets back as a deterrent to the future behavior this very story brings to light. )
The Snowden revelations were all the rage for a while but, it seems we're right back to business as usual with Government agencies, yet again, abusing the technology that was never *intended to be used on American Citizens. This stuff isn't about saving lives, or stopping terrorism. It's about control. Pure and simple.
*At least, that was the lie they told all of us so we wouldn't pitch a fit about it.
I am curious how many lies it takes from the US Government before enough people finally realize they are almost as much ( if not more ) the enemy than those we've been told to hate all of our lives. ( Russia, China, North Korea, et al )
Re: (Score:2)
I am curious how many lies it takes from the US Government before enough people finally realize they are almost as much ( if not more ) the enemy than those we've been told to hate all of our lives. ( Russia, China, North Korea, et al )
I guess that depends on how you interpreted that information. I always have interpreted (and would like the media/govt to adopt) it to mean the Russian Government (the Kremlin, not the Russian people), the North Korean Government (not its people), etc. that were our enemies and when looked at that way, it is clear who the real enemy is; Government. It is inherently evil, a currently necessary evil, unfortunately, but an evil nonetheless. Our government is no different.
Papers (Score:2)
"Metadata" would have been used to round up the founding fathers, and so would have been gated behind warrants. Demand expectations of privacy as your papers move into cyberspace. Government cannot make you give it up as the cost of participating in modern conveniences.
Make a stink about it.
Re: (Score:2)
You're two decades too late.
"You have no privacy. Get over it." - Sun CEO Scott McNealy in 1998
If the data is available... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
...aren't we missing the POINT, a little?
If a business has collected data on where I'm walking every day, and makes it freely available on the open market to whoever wants to buy it...if the DOD or some gov't agency buys that data, it's hilarious that we'd get distracted by "da gubbermint is spying on meh!" issues.
I think the point was to feel outrage that the government did an unconstitutional. Only advertisers and good business folk are allowed to buy information about people, when the government does it, it's communism or socialists or fascist, or deep state liberal agenda something something George Soros? I mean who the hell knows, I don't know if those dumb Internet-libertarian types can be put in a box.
I'm not against protecting privacy, and there is no anti-privacy conspiracy, everybody wants personal priva
Why get a warrant if you don't need one (Score:2)
Is it in any way surprising that these organizations would just go and buy the data from elsewhere?
After all It costs money to have the people and maintain the gear. There are also legal restrictions preventing them from gathering the information. I know many of those restrictions also say you cannot have other members of the Five Eyes gather it for you, but I don't recall seeing anything that they cannot just purchase location information form VodaFone, or browsing habits form FB/Google.