3 ms·
> If the FSB asks Kasperski for help, they can't say no, and they won't tell. Isn't that _exactly_ how it works in the USA, with National Security Letters?
by duncan_bayne 9y ago
> If the FSB asks Kasperski for help, they can't say no, and they won't tell.
Isn't that _exactly_ how it works in the USA, with National Security Letters?
- bayesian_horse 9y agoThe difference is that there is a process in place with court oversight, and a judicial system which isn't completely beholden to the government. Even with the most egregious abuses of these National Security Letters, their scope is still limited and they have to have justification for whatever they demand. There is a record of such letters, which can be examined, for example by politicians in congress or the next administration. Companies can even challenge these letters. And they are still leaked all the time. I doubt it works that way in Russia.
- UnoriginalGuy 9y ago> The difference is that there is a process in place with court oversight You mean the FISA Court that Russ Tice once described as a "kangaroo court with a rubber stamp" and that approves over 99% of applications? Is that 1% rejection rate in a closed door court where due process lives?
- bayesian_horse 9y ago1% could also mean that the people trying to get the warrants know the law and don't try to get bad warrants. Still that is a whole lot more "due process" than in Russia. And FISA only applies in relatively few circumstances.
- duncan_bayne 9y agoYeah, I think that's the one he means. I mean, I'll grant you that it's _worse_ in Russia; they don't even have that 1%, and the scope of abuse is much broader. But I do wonder if part of the propaganda value of the aforementioned Red Scare is to drive attention away from domestic abuses.