http://news.com.com/2010-1071-983921.html

Perspective: Ashcroft's worrisome spy plans

By Declan McCullagh 
February 10, 2003, 4:00 AM PT

WASHINGTON--Attorney General John Ashcroft wants even more power to snoop
on the Internet, spy on private conversations and install secret
microphones, spyware and keystroke loggers. 
Ashcroft's Justice Department has quietly crafted a whopping 120-page
proposal that represents the boldest attack yet on our electronic privacy
in the name of thwarting future terrorist attacks. The nonpartisan Center
for Public Integrity posted the draft legislation, which reads like J.
Edgar Hoover's wish list, on its Web site Friday. 

Called the Domestic Security Enhancement Act (DSEA), the legislation has
not been formally introduced in Congress, and a representative for
Ashcroft indicated on Friday that it's a work in progress. But the fact
that the legislation is under consideration already, before we know the
effects of its USA Patriot Act predecessor, should make us realize that
the Bush administration thinks "homeland security" is the root password
to the Constitution. 

Don't believe me? Keep reading and peruse some of DSEA's highlights: 

� The FBI and state police would be able to eavesdrop on what Web sites
you visit, what you search for with Google and with whom you chat through
e-mail and instant messaging--all without a court order for up to 48
hours. That's if you're suspected of what would become a new offense of
"activities threatening the national security interest." 

� Currently police can seek a warrant to "require the disclosure by a
provider of electronic communication service of the contents of an
electronic communication." Under existing law, police must notify the
target of an investigation except in rare cases such as when witnesses
may be intimidated or a prospective defendant might flee. DSEA allows
police to delay notification for three months simply by citing "national
security." 

"I think the Department of Justice has concluded that it wants the
ability to use these techniques in virtually every situation." 
-- Marc Rotenberg, director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center 


� When investigating a computer crime or other serious felonies,
prosecutors would be able to serve secret subpoenas on people, ordering
them to hand over evidence and testify in person. If served with a secret
subpoena, you'd go to jail if you "disclosed" to anyone but your lawyer
that you received it. 

� Police would be able to ask a judge to issue search warrants valid for
anywhere in the United States if someone were suspected of computer
hacking. Previously that law applied only to "violent acts or acts
dangerous to human life." 

Other portions of DSEA are devoted to unshackling the mighty Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), a post-Watergate law that was
intended to be used against foreign spies. 

FISA isn't limited to traditional phone wiretapping. There's an entire
section devoted to electronic surveillance, permitting "the installation
or use of an electronic, mechanical or other surveillance device." That's
a flexible definition that stretches to include the FBI's Carnivore
Net-surveillance system, keystroke loggers and remotely installed spyware
like the FBI's Magic Lantern spyware. 

"I think the Department of Justice has concluded that it wants the
ability to use these techniques in virtually every situation," says Marc
Rotenberg, director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center. "This
is breathtakingly bad. Apart from the dramatic expansion of government
surveillance authority and government secrecy, (the DSEA) transfers
enormous power from the Congress and the judiciary to the executive
branch and gives the attorney general absolutely unprecedented authority.
This is more than an assault on constitutional liberty--it is an attack
on the constitutional system of checks and balances." 

Another worrisome part of the DSEA is a section that targets encryption.
It would create a new federal felony of willfully using encryption during
the commission of a felony, punishable by "no more than five years" in
prison plus a hefty fine. 

When encryption eventually becomes glued into just about every technology
we use, from secure Web browsing to encrypted hard drives, the DSEA would
have the effect of boosting maximum prison terms for every serious crime
by five years. It'll be no different--and no more logical--than a law
that says "breathing air while committing a crime" is its own offense. 

"This is more than an assault on constitutional liberty--it is an attack
on the constitutional system of checks and balances." 
-- Marc Rotenberg, director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center 

A leaked Justice Department document suggests that Ashcroft already
forwarded a copy of the DSEA to House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Vice
President Dick Cheney last month. Unfortunately, with a Congress as
supine as ours happens to be, Ashcroft will likely get what he wants.
After all, the USA Patriot Act passed the House by a 6-to-1 margin and
ran into only one dissenting vote in the Senate. 

Many of the DSEA's new powers will go--surprise!--to agents in FBI field
offices. That possibility should worry anyone with an appreciation of
history, which reveals that time and again, the FBI and other law
enforcement organizations have ignored the law and spied on Americans
illegally, without court authorization. 

In the past, government agencies have subjected hundreds of thousands of
law-abiding Americans to unlawful surveillance, illegal wiretaps and
warrantless searches. Eleanor Roosevelt, Martin Luther King Jr.,
feminists, gay rights leaders and Catholic priests were spied upon. The
FBI used secret files and hidden microphones to blackmail the Kennedy
brothers, sway the Supreme Court and influence presidential elections. 

It's true that our current FBI appears to be more trustworthy than the
bureau during its dark years of the 1950s and 1960s. But the possibility
that future FBI directors may misuse the DSEA's vast powers--and
transform America into a tech-enabled surveillance state--means that we
should be extraordinarily cautious about acquiescing to Ashcroft's
demands. 

_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to