3 ms·

> FBI/NSA interpret FAA 702 to acquire "one end foreign" communications, i.e. the communications of Americans with other parties abroad. There are millions of A

> FBI/NSA interpret FAA 702 to acquire "one end foreign" communications, i.e. the communications of Americans with other parties abroad. There are millions of American citizens who reside abroad, and many thousands more at any given time are vacationing abroad. Those citizens' rights are being systematically trampled. That's not accurate. They can only request the data of non-Americans living outside the US. If you are a US citizen, they cannot request your data without a court order. If you are not a US citizen but living in the US, they need a court order as well. Also, it's Section 702 of FISA. The Federal Aviation Administration has nothing to do with it. > Supposedly they apply "minimization" filters on that full-take, but considering their incentives I doubt they try very hard. More inaccuracies here. It's not full-take. The documents Klein released clearly showed a Narus filtering device here, which Snowden's documents showed is used to collect the communications of targeted foreigners outside the US whose data passes through the US. In this era of https everywhere, it is exceedingly unlikely that this source is still useful. > Anyway how can you say the legality isn't in dispute when the government has a secret interpretation of the law that they refuse to allow anyone to see? Snowden leaked the interpretations. These interpretations (aside from phone metadata) have not been challenged.

kyboren 3y ago
That's not accurate. They "acquire" it all, then "collect" it later from their databases upon request. So-called "incidental collection" is totally fair game for exploitation, defrauding courts, and perverting the course of justice. For US citizens abroad, any filtering is obviously insufficient, as they couldn't generally know your foreign phone number or residential IP address belong to a US citizen. That doesn't even get into the government's claimed authorities under EO12333, or exactly what "communication facilities" they have obtained secret bulk collection FISA warrants for (likely VPNs, US Tor exits, etc.), or data received about US persons from collaborating foreign intelligence agencies. I wasn't referring to the Federal Aviation Administration, and you'd know that if you were seriously engaged with this issue. It's not Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA), it's Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 Amendments Act of 2008 (FAA). It's also important to note the distinction between the seizure of communications, which happens at massive scale without individualized suspicion, and the search of those communications when they "request" it, as you put it. The Constitution prohibits both unreasonable searches and seizures. Considering Sen. Wyden has long sat on the SSCI, I assume his warning yesterday was about a new, different secret interpretation than the few court documents that were made public by Snowden et al. a decade ago.
- lern_too_spel 3y ago
  > That's not accurate. They "acquire" it all, then "collect" it later from their databases upon request. is fully hackable. This is conspiracy theory nonsense. If it were happening, Snowden would have leaked documents saying so. Instead, his leaked documents said this is only happening in a handful of war zones where the US controls the telecommunications systems. > The Constitution prohibits both unreasonable searches and seizures. It's good that you understand this basic fact. Then why do you think what you claimed is happening, despite not having any evidence to support your claim?
  - smolder 3y ago
    > This is conspiracy theory nonsense. No. This publicly goes back to Clapper telling congress that the NSA doesn't "collect" data on Americans. The lie was excused on the grounds that "collection" isn't them saving the data, but rather querying it later.
    - lern_too_spel 3y ago
      > This publicly goes back to Clapper telling congress that the NSA doesn't "collect" data on Americans. The lie was excused on the grounds that "collection" isn't them saving the data, but rather querying it later. More conspiracy theory nonsense. The lie was that they don't collect any data on Americans, when they did collect phone metadata. The reason he made that mistake was that the previous question was about making dossiers of Americans, which they do not do, not having the content of any Americans' communications.
      - smolder 3y ago
        You're wrong. Go read about it in this article by Bruce Schneier. And don't accuse people of being conspiracy theorists when you haven't checked your facts. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/10/why-the-nsas-defense-of-mass-data-collection-makes-no-sense/280715/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/10/why-the...

kyboren 3y ago

That's not accurate. They "acquire" it all, then "collect" it later from their databases upon request. So-called "incidental collection" is totally fair game for exploitation, defrauding courts, and perverting the course of justice. For US citizens abroad, any filtering is obviously insufficient, as they couldn't generally know your foreign phone number or residential IP address belong to a US citizen. That doesn't even get into the government's claimed authorities under EO12333, or exactly what "communication facilities" they have obtained secret bulk collection FISA warrants for (likely VPNs, US Tor exits, etc.), or data received about US persons from collaborating foreign intelligence agencies. I wasn't referring to the Federal Aviation Administration, and you'd know that if you were seriously engaged with this issue. It's not Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA), it's Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 Amendments Act of 2008 (FAA). It's also important to note the distinction between the seizure of communications, which happens at massive scale without individualized suspicion, and the search of those communications when they "request" it, as you put it. The Constitution prohibits both unreasonable searches and seizures. Considering Sen. Wyden has long sat on the SSCI, I assume his warning yesterday was about a new, different secret interpretation than the few court documents that were made public by Snowden et al. a decade ago.

lern_too_spel 3y ago
> That's not accurate. They "acquire" it all, then "collect" it later from their databases upon request. is fully hackable. This is conspiracy theory nonsense. If it were happening, Snowden would have leaked documents saying so. Instead, his leaked documents said this is only happening in a handful of war zones where the US controls the telecommunications systems. > The Constitution prohibits both unreasonable searches and seizures. It's good that you understand this basic fact. Then why do you think what you claimed is happening, despite not having any evidence to support your claim?
- smolder 3y ago
  > This is conspiracy theory nonsense. No. This publicly goes back to Clapper telling congress that the NSA doesn't "collect" data on Americans. The lie was excused on the grounds that "collection" isn't them saving the data, but rather querying it later.
  - lern_too_spel 3y ago
    > This publicly goes back to Clapper telling congress that the NSA doesn't "collect" data on Americans. The lie was excused on the grounds that "collection" isn't them saving the data, but rather querying it later. More conspiracy theory nonsense. The lie was that they don't collect any data on Americans, when they did collect phone metadata. The reason he made that mistake was that the previous question was about making dossiers of Americans, which they do not do, not having the content of any Americans' communications.
    - smolder 3y ago
      You're wrong. Go read about it in this article by Bruce Schneier. And don't accuse people of being conspiracy theorists when you haven't checked your facts. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/10/why-the-nsas-defense-of-mass-data-collection-makes-no-sense/280715/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/10/why-the...