*Glenn Greenwald* @ggreenwald
<https://twitter.com/ggreenwald>2h<https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/365933487158603776>

Obama's claim that the debate would have happened absent Snowden's
revelations is . . . laughable http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-swit
ch/wp/2013/08/09/the-president-is-wrong-the-nsa-debate-wouldnt-have-happened-without-snowden/
 … <http://t.co/lQIs32f1BD>


----------------------------------

Cryptome new public key <http://cryptome.org/#Cryptome PK>.

*2013-0979.pdf <http://cryptome.org/2013/08/doj-13-0809.pdf>
DoJ: NSA Bulk Collection of Telephone Metadata   August 9, 2013*
*2013-0978.pdf <http://cryptome.org/2013/08/nsa-13-0809.pdf>
NSA: Missions, Authorities, Oversight, Partners  August 9, 2013*
*2013-0976.htm <http://cryptome.org/2013/08/joey006/usa-v-joey006.htm>
        USA v Lavabit LLC Email Account of Joey006       August 9,
2013*
*2013-0974.htm <http://cryptome.org/eyeball/scs-bird/scs-birdseye.htm>
        NSA Pre-XKeystore in US Embassies 3-2005 Repost  August 9,
2013*
*2013-0973.htm <http://cryptome.org/eyeball/scs/scs-eyeball.htm>
  NSA Pre-XKeystore in US Embassies 2-2002 Repost  August 9,
2013**2013-0972.htm <http://cryptome.org/cia-nsa-scs.htm>         NSA
Pre-XKeystore in US Embassies 1-2000 Repost  August 9, 2013*


---------------------------------------

Obama’s Credibility
Trap<http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/08/09/obamas-credibility-trap/>
By: emptywheel <http://www.emptywheel.net/author/emptywheel/> Friday August
9, 2013 6:28 pm

President Obama just stood before the nation and said,

And if you look at the reports — even the disclosures that Mr. Snowden has
put forward — all the stories that have been written, what you’re not
reading about is the government actually abusing these programs and
listening in on people’s phone calls or inappropriately reading people’s
emails. What you’re hearing about is the prospect that these could be
abused. Now, part of the reason they’re not abused is because these checks
are in place, and those abuses would be against the law and would be
against the orders of the FISC.

Even as he was speaking, his Administration released a
document<http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/750210/administration-white-paper-section-215.pdf>
that
said, in part,

Since the telephony metadata collection program under Section 215 was
initiated, there have been a number of significant compliance and
implementation issues that were discovered as a result of DOJ and ODNI
reviews and internal NSA oversight. In accordance with the Court’s rules,
upon discovery, these violations were reported to the FISC, which ordered
appropriate remedial action. The incidents, and the Court’s responses, were
also reported to the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees in great detail.
These problems generally involved human error or highly sophisticated
technology issues related to NSA’s compliance with particular aspects of
the Court’s orders. The FISC has on occasion been critical of the Executive
Branch’s compliance problems as well as the Government’s court filings.
However, the NSA and DOJ have corrected the problems identified to the
Court, and the Court has continued to authorize the program with
appropriate remedial measures.

While (as I will show in a future post), Obama’s Administration has worked
hard to prevent details of these violations from becoming public and
delayed even the Judiciary Committees from being briefed, some of them may
come out as part of the DOJ Inspector General review that the
Administration tried to thwart in 2009.

Also, even as he was speaking, EFF announced the government will turn over
a redacted copy of the October 3, 2011 FISA Court ruling that found the
minimization procedures for Section 702 violated the Fourth Amendment. A new
Guardian 
report<http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/09/nsa-loophole-warrantless-searches-email-calls>
suggests
that ruling may
pertain<http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/08/09/did-nsa-interpret-adverse-fisc-fourth-amendment-ruling-as-permission-to-search-american-contacts/>
to
the use of a backdoor to conduct warrantless searches on US person content
already collected under Section 702. (While many commentators have insisted
the Guardian report provides no evidence of abuse, NSA and DNI’s Inspectors
General refused to count how often Americans have been searched in such a
way, effectively refusing to look if it has been abused.)

As Shane Harris astutely describes, all of this kabuki is designed
solely<http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/08/09/making_you_comfortable_with_spying_is_obamas_big_nsa_fix>
to
make people feel more comfortable about these dragnets.

And the President’s message really boiled down to this: It’s more important
to persuade people surveillance is useful and legal than to make structural
changes to the programs.

“The question is, how do I make the American people more comfortable?”
Obama said.

Not that Obama’s unwilling to make any changes to America’s surveillance
driftnets — and he detailed a few of them — but his overriding concern was
that people didn’t believe him when he said there was nothing to fear.

But the President just stood up and claimed the government hasn’t abused
any of these programs.

It has, by its own admission, violated the rules for them.

Meanwhile, Ron Wyden has already released a
statement<http://www.wyden.senate.gov/news/press-releases/wyden-statement-on-president-obamas-proposed-reforms-to-the-fisc-and-patriot-act>
applauding
some of these changes while noting that Obama is still minimizing how bad
the violations have been.

Notably absent from President Obama’s speech was any mention of closing the
backdoor searches loophole that potentially allows for the warrantless
searches of Americans’ phone calls and emails under section 702 of the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. I believe that this provision
requires significant reforms as well and I will continue to fight to close
that loophole. I am also concerned that the executive branch has not fully
acknowledged the extent to which violations of FISC orders and the spirit
of the law have already had a significant impact on Americans’ privacy.

Ultimately, details of these violations will come out, and are on their way
out in some form already.

If this press conference was designed solely to make us feel better,
wouldn’t Obama have been better advised to come clean about these
violations than to pretend they don’t exist?





BREAKING! Information “is collected” on millions of
Americans<http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/08/09/breaking-information-is-collected-on-millions-of-americans/>
By: emptywheel <http://www.emptywheel.net/author/emptywheel/> Friday August
9, 2013 4:21 pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIcJ_QFSuUU

Obama just gave a press conference to announce some changes to FISA. They
include four things:

   1. Making some changes to the dragnet program
   2. Appointing a privacy officer to do for NSA what DOJ’s IG has done
   competently in the past but isn’t encouraged to do now
   3. Appointing an adversary for major decisions at FISC to represent
   civil liberties’ side
   4. Having a committee review the programs technically to see if we can
   improve them (this was something Ron Wyden and Mark Udall pressed for last
   year but got shot down on)

In addition, the Administration released a pretty useless white
paper<https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/750223/obama-administrations-legal-rationale-for.pdf>
on
the dragnet program. I’ll have more substantive comments about it later,
but for now, note this sentence:

Likewise, the program does not violate the First Amendment, particularly
given that the *telephony metadata is collected* to serve as an
investigative tool in authorized investigations of international terrorism.
[my emphasis]

Yeah, sure, they don’t even try to offer some explanation of how an
associational database of all Americans doesn’t violate the Freedom of
Assembly.

But at least they’re finally admitting they do too “collect” data on
millions of Americans.

It’s well past time to fire James Clapper.

Update: Bobby Chesney offers some real
analysis<http://www.lawfareblog.com/2013/08/the-presidents-surveillance-reform-initiatives-a-section-by-section-analysis/>.
Note I got the order wrong and the Privacy Officer bullet is actually a
broader “more transparency.”



NSA-Speak — Timely: (Adj.) 2-Month
Delay<http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/08/09/nsa-speak-timely-adj-2-month-delay/>
By: emptywheel <http://www.emptywheel.net/author/emptywheel/> Friday August
9, 2013 2:19 pm

For some reason, this Ellen Nakashima
story<http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-cites-case-as-success-of-phone-data-collection-program/2013/08/08/fc915e5a-feda-11e2-96a8-d3b921c0924a_print.html>
covering
parts of what CNN <http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/23/us/somalia-al-shabaab>,
Wired <http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-06/19/nsa-defence-lawyers>,
and I have already
reported<http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/07/16/the-8-fisa-judge-11-docket-spying-authorization-to-identify-less-than-10000-to-al-shabaab/>
is
generating a lot of attention today.

While I’m grateful that more people are catching on to what I’ve been
harping on for months — that NSA justifies its entire Section 215 metadata
dragnet with a case involving the transfer of less than $10,000 to
al-Shabaab — there’s one point that further demonstrates the absurdity of
the claim that Nakashima didn’t cover.

She quotes government officials repeatedly talking about the importance of
the 215 dragnet because it provides *timely* identification of numbers.

U.S. officials emphasize that those logs do not contain the names of
customers or content — just “metadata,” which includes phone numbers and
the times and dates of calls. They note that they need a “reasonable,
articulable suspicion” that a number they wish to check in the database is
linked to a foreign terrorist group.

And they say that without having all the calls in one place and easily
searchable with a keystroke, finding links to suspicious numbers would be
tedious and *time-consuming*.

[snip]

U.S. officials argue that Moalin’s number probably would not have surfaced
— *at least not in a timely fashion* — had it not been for the database.

[snip]

Had the intelligence community known where Mihdhar and a co-conspirator
were and detained them, the “simple fact of their detention could have
derailed the plan,” the 9/11 Commission
said<http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf>.
To close that gap, the government created the phone call database. The
goal, the reports say, is to “*rapidly* identify any terrorist threats
emanating from within the United States.”

The NSA could put together a more limited dataset by going to every phone
company and asking for all the numbers that have been in contact with a
target number. *But that takes time*, and if analysts want to examine
secondary contacts, they would have to go back to the phone company,
officials said. [my emphasis]

And Nakashima quotes Ron Wyden challenging the timeliness of all this.

If time was of the essence, he said, a different court order or
administrative subpoena would allow for an emergency request for the
records. Wyden noted that both Moalin and the subway plot co-conspirator
were arrested “months or years after they were first identified” by mining
the phone logs.

But there’s a further reason, if Moalin is the exemplar of the practice, to
challenge the NSA’s claims that the dragnet gives them timeliness they
wouldn’t get otherwise.

Because at least according to the public record, there was a 2-month delay
between the time they found the number used to query the 215 database and
when they wiretapped Moalin. (Note, I do have significant suspicions that
the court record does not accurately reflect what happened, but if it is
inaccurate that’s the government’s own damn fault.)

In a hearing <http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/113th/hear_07172013.html>
before
the House Judiciary Committee last month, FBI’s National Security Division
Executive Assistant Director Stephanie Douglas provided more details on how
they found (or refound) Moalin.

I’d like to also represent one case to you, specific to the Business Record
215 authority. In 2003, the FBI initiated a case on an individual
identified as Bisaaly Moalin. It was based on anonymous tips that he was
somehow connected to terrorism.

In 2004 the case was closed without sufficient information to move forward
on the investigation. However, *three years later in October 2007, NSA
provided a phone number to the FBI with an area code which came back to an
area consistent with San Diego*. NSA found this phone number was in contact
with an al-Qaida East African affiliated person.

Once provided to the FBI, we initiated an investigation, submitted a
national security letter for the subscriber of the phone number and
determined that it was Mr. Moalin, the subject of the previously closed
case. Subsequent investigation led to the identification of others, and to
date Moalin and three others have been convicted of material support for
terrorism. [my emphasis]

The FBI got this lead in October 2007.

But an affidavit for a search
warrant<http://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/101029-Search-Warrant1.pdf>
at
the time Moalin was arrested claims that the government first wiretapped
Moalin in December 2007.

In December 2007, the FBI began intercepting MOALIN’s cell phone.

And a 2011 
report<http://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/110605-FBI-Report.pdf>
summarizing
a 2009 assessment (this is the source of Moalin’s Defense claims that the
FBI had concluded he wasn’t trying to fund al-Shabaab per se) the Full
Investigation into Moalin was initiated on December 18, 2007.

All that’s with hints from the government opposition to Moalin’s FISA
challenge<http://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/120217-Govt-Opposition-to-FISA.pdf>
that
at least some of this intelligence was collected under emergency
authorization. (See, for example, the discussion on page 7, and footnote
22, which would probably be unnecessary unless the government did use
emergency authorizations at some point in the process.)

In other words, even on the signature case using Section 215 — and with
FBI’s use of a National Security Letter to pinpoint Moalin — it still took
2 months before they initiated the full investigation into him.

And yet they need to collect every Americans’ phone records so they can
quickly get leads they take 2 months to open full investigations into.


Posted in FISA <http://www.emptywheel.net/category/fisa/>,
PATRIOT<http://www.emptywheel.net/category/patriot/>
| Tagged Basaaly Saeed
Moalin<http://www.emptywheel.net/tag/basaaly-saeed-moalin/>
, Section 215 <http://www.emptywheel.net/tag/section-215/> | *3*
Replies<http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/08/09/nsa-speak-timely-adj-2-month-delay/#comments>Did
NSA Interpret Adverse FISC Fourth Amendment Ruling as Permission to Search
American 
Contacts?<http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/08/09/did-nsa-interpret-adverse-fisc-fourth-amendment-ruling-as-permission-to-search-american-contacts/>
By: emptywheel <http://www.emptywheel.net/author/emptywheel/> Friday August
9, 2013 1:00 pm

Finally! The backdoor!

The Guardian today
confirms<http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/09/nsa-loophole-warrantless-searches-email-calls>
what
Ron Wyden and, before him, Russ Feingold have warned about for years. In a
glossary updated in June 2012, the NSA claims that minimization rules
“approved” on October 3, 2011 “now allow for use of certain United States
person names and identifiers as query terms.”

A secret glossary document provided to operatives in the NSA’s Special
Source Operations division – which runs the Prism program and large-scale
cable intercepts through corporate partnerships with technology companies –
details an update to the “minimization” procedures that govern how the
agency must handle the communications of US persons. That group is defined
as both American citizens and foreigners located in the US.

“While the FAA 702 minimization procedures approved on 3 October 2011 now
allow for use of certain United States person names and identifiers as
query terms when reviewing collected FAA 702 data,” the glossary states,
“analysts may NOT/NOT [not repeat not] implement any USP [US persons]
queries until an effective oversight process has been developed by NSA and
agreed to by DOJ/ODNI [Office of the Director of National Intelligence].”

The term “identifiers” is NSA jargon for information relating to an
individual, such as telephone number, email address, IP address and
username as well as their name.

The document – which is undated, though metadata suggests this version was
last updated in June 2012 – does not say whether the oversight process it
mentions has been established or whether any searches against US person
names have taken place.

The Guardian goes on to quote Ron Wyden confirming that this is the back
door he’s been warning about for years.

Once Americans’ communications are collected, a gap in the law that I call
the ‘back-door searches loophole’ allows the government to potentially go
through these communications and conduct warrantless searches for the phone
calls or emails of law-abiding Americans.

But the Guardian is missing one critical part of this story.

The FISC Court didn’t just “approve” minimization procedures on October 3,
2011. In fact, that was the day that it
declared<https://www.eff.org/node/74631> that
part of the program — precisely pertaining to minimization procedures —
violated the Fourth Amendment.

So where the glossary says minimization procedures approved on that date
“now allow” for querying US person data, it almost certainly means that on
October 3, 2011, the FISC court ruled the querying the government had
already been doing violated the Fourth Amendment, and sent it away to
generate “an effective oversight process,” even while approving the idea in
general.

And note that FISC didn’t, apparently, require that ODNI/DOJ come back to
the FISC to approve that new “effective oversight process.”

Consider one more thing.

As I have 
repeatedly<http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/06/25/confirmed-nsa-does-search-section-702-data-for-particular-us-person-data/>
 
highlighted<http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/06/25/nsas-querying-of-us-person-data-take-two/>,
the Senate Intelligence Committee (and the Senate Judiciary Committee,
though there’s no equivalent report)
considered<https://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2012_rpt/faa-extend.html>
whether
to regulate precisely this issue last year when extending the FISA
Amendments Act.

Finally, on a related matter, the Committee considered whether querying
information collected under Section 702 to find communications of a
particular United States person should be prohibited or more robustly
constrained. As already noted, the Intelligence Community is strictly
prohibited from using Section 702 to target a U.S. person, which must at
all times be carried out pursuant to an individualized court order based
upon probable cause. With respect to analyzing the information lawfully
collected under Section 702, however, the Intelligence Community provided
several examples in which it might have a legitimate foreign intelligence
need to conduct queries in order to analyze data already in its
possession. The Department of Justice and Intelligence Community reaffirmed
that any queries made of Section 702 data will be conducted in strict
compliance with applicable guidelines and procedures and do not provide a
means to circumvent the general requirement to obtain a court order before
targeting a U.S. person under FISA.

But in spite of Ron Wyden and Mark Udall’s best efforts — and, it now
appears, in spite of FISC concerns about precisely this issue — the Senate
Intelligence Committee chose not to do so.

This strongly suggests that the concerns FISC had about the Fourth
Amendment directly pertained to this backdoor search. But if that’s the
case, it also suggests that none of NSA’s overseers — not the Intelligence
Committees, not ODNI/DOJ, and not FISC — have bothered to actually close
that back door.
- See more at: http://www.emptywheel.net/#sthash.LFVYuog0.dpuf - See more
at: http://www.emptywheel.net/#sthash.LFVYuog0.dpuf - See more at:
http://www.emptywheel.net/#sthash.LFVYuog0.dpuf - See more at:
http://www.emptywheel.net/#sthash.LFVYuog0.dpuf


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to