5 ms·

> Never has there been any dispute that the NSA can freely read what non Americans are doing without any sort of legal authorization. One would assume that acce

by doktrin 13y ago

> Never has there been any dispute that the NSA can freely read what non Americans are doing without any sort of legal authorization. One would assume that access is given to Customs & Dept of Homeland Security too. This makes no sense whatsoever. Even if PRISM allowed at-will searches across the FB accounts of would-be au-pairs, there is frankly no way the NSA would be sharing this with low level customs officials. At most there would be a simple flag on her record, at which point she would be shipped back without explanation. Frankly, the fact that a significant number of commenters in this thread are taking this non-story at face value is bewildering. BS alarms should be going off left right and center, here.

Houshalter 13y ago
Just because the NSA didn't share the data doesn't mean another government agency couldn't also request it from Facebook.
- davidmr 13y ago
  Are you suggesting that the TSA agent interviewing this woman called up some TSA hotline who called up someone at Facebook who just gave it to them, sans warrant, all within the span of a couple hours? Words fail me for an adjective to describe how unlikely that sounds. The far, far, far simpler explanation would that she had a printout of the conversations because it had an address or directions or that she voluntarily handed over a device (or, possibly, was bullied into doing so, which is in the rights of border control to do).
  - qb45 13y ago
    They probably had these papers already prepared. It's not like people get their visas one day before departing to the US.
    - tehmaco 13y ago
      I think Germany is part of the Visa Waiver Program, so she would have had to apply via ESTA before she flew out. It wouldn't surprise me now if there was a system in place that used the ESTA information to query the NSA/CIA/etc for anything that might be an issue for immigration control. If she's been talking about working in the USA and hasn't got a visa (ESTA is only for personal visits, not business IIRC), that's enough for the TSA to refuse her entrance for lying to them.
      - arethuza 13y ago
        "(ESTA is only for personal visits, not business IIRC)" It's for both both business and pleasure - says right there on the ESTA home page: https://esta.cbp.dhs.gov/esta/ https://esta.cbp.dhs.gov/esta/ "You plan to travel to the United States for business or pleasure." NB I've travelled a few times the US over the last few years on business using ESTA so you had me slightly worried there!
        julian_t 13y ago
        As far as I'm aware, there is a big difference between travelling to the US (and many other countries) to conduct business, and seeking employment. I think it's the first one that is covered by ESTA...
    - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
      Exactly. Border agents have a list of people arriving in advance of their arrival. Flight manifests, if nothing else.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
    > Are you suggesting that the TSA agent interviewing this woman called up some TSA hotline who called up someone at Facebook who just gave it to them, sans warrant, all within the span of a couple hours? Pretty much, only "filled in a form on a web page" not "called up someone", "made a request to the api" not "called up someone at Facebook" and "the software ran" not "just gave it to them". Get with the times. > Words fail me for an adjective to describe how unlikely that sounds. You have not been paying attention.
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
  - stef25 13y ago
    Indeed. A friend of mine was sent home after customs searched her luggage, read her diary and noticed she was planning on working in the US under the table, in a bar.
peterwwillis 13y ago
So let me get this straight... you know that at least two agencies (FBI & NSA) have total access to your Facebook data. We don't know what their exact method is or who they may pass the data along to, but we know they do this with no warrant. Now you're questioning whether Homeland Security, an agency originally created to pool information from all intelligence agencies to screen for terrorists, has access to the same information? It makes sense to read private communications to find out if she's a threat to the homeland. What doesn't make sense is your disbelief in the face of clear evidence that this kind of thing has been going on for years - just with a different agency name.
- nollidge 13y ago
  > you know that at least two agencies (FBI & NSA) have total access to your Facebook data. OK maybe I missed something, but do you have a citation for this?
  - gtirloni 13y ago
    I didn't know this discussion would be added to Wikipedia.
- doktrin 13y ago
  > So let me get this straight... you know that at least two agencies (FBI & NSA) have total access to your Facebook data. We don't know what their exact method is or who they may pass the data along to, but we know they do this with no warrant. No, I don't know this. Do you?
  - peterwwillis 13y ago
    Have you been living under a rock? Look up PRISM. It's been in the news a little. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_%28surveillance_program%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_%28surveillance_program%2... "They [NSA] could get most of it, but they couldn't get it all. So in order to get all the data, they had to go to the service providers to fill in the blanks. That's what the PRISM program is for—to fill in the blanks. It also gives the FBI basis for introducing evidence into court." "PRISM was first publicly revealed on June 6, 2013 [...] The documents identified several technology companies as participants in the PRISM program, including (date of joining PRISM in parentheses) Microsoft (2007), Yahoo! (2008), Google (2009), Facebook (2009), Paltalk (2009), YouTube (2010), AOL (2011), Skype (2011), and Apple (2012)."

by doktrin 13y ago

Houshalter 13y ago

Just because the NSA didn't share the data doesn't mean another government agency couldn't also request it from Facebook.

davidmr 13y ago
Are you suggesting that the TSA agent interviewing this woman called up some TSA hotline who called up someone at Facebook who just gave it to them, sans warrant, all within the span of a couple hours? Words fail me for an adjective to describe how unlikely that sounds. The far, far, far simpler explanation would that she had a printout of the conversations because it had an address or directions or that she voluntarily handed over a device (or, possibly, was bullied into doing so, which is in the rights of border control to do).
- qb45 13y ago
  They probably had these papers already prepared. It's not like people get their visas one day before departing to the US.
  - tehmaco 13y ago
    I think Germany is part of the Visa Waiver Program, so she would have had to apply via ESTA before she flew out. It wouldn't surprise me now if there was a system in place that used the ESTA information to query the NSA/CIA/etc for anything that might be an issue for immigration control. If she's been talking about working in the USA and hasn't got a visa (ESTA is only for personal visits, not business IIRC), that's enough for the TSA to refuse her entrance for lying to them.
    - arethuza 13y ago
      "(ESTA is only for personal visits, not business IIRC)" It's for both both business and pleasure - says right there on the ESTA home page: https://esta.cbp.dhs.gov/esta/ https://esta.cbp.dhs.gov/esta/ "You plan to travel to the United States for business or pleasure." NB I've travelled a few times the US over the last few years on business using ESTA so you had me slightly worried there!
      - julian_t 13y ago
        As far as I'm aware, there is a big difference between travelling to the US (and many other countries) to conduct business, and seeking employment. I think it's the first one that is covered by ESTA...
  - fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
    Exactly. Border agents have a list of people arriving in advance of their arrival. Flight manifests, if nothing else.
- SideburnsOfDoom 13y ago
  > Are you suggesting that the TSA agent interviewing this woman called up some TSA hotline who called up someone at Facebook who just gave it to them, sans warrant, all within the span of a couple hours? Pretty much, only "filled in a form on a web page" not "called up someone", "made a request to the api" not "called up someone at Facebook" and "the software ran" not "just gave it to them". Get with the times. > Words fail me for an adjective to describe how unlikely that sounds. You have not been paying attention.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- stef25 13y ago
  Indeed. A friend of mine was sent home after customs searched her luggage, read her diary and noticed she was planning on working in the US under the table, in a bar.

peterwwillis 13y ago

So let me get this straight... you know that at least two agencies (FBI & NSA) have total access to your Facebook data. We don't know what their exact method is or who they may pass the data along to, but we know they do this with no warrant. Now you're questioning whether Homeland Security, an agency originally created to pool information from all intelligence agencies to screen for terrorists, has access to the same information? It makes sense to read private communications to find out if she's a threat to the homeland. What doesn't make sense is your disbelief in the face of clear evidence that this kind of thing has been going on for years - just with a different agency name.

nollidge 13y ago
> you know that at least two agencies (FBI & NSA) have total access to your Facebook data. OK maybe I missed something, but do you have a citation for this?
- gtirloni 13y ago
  I didn't know this discussion would be added to Wikipedia.
doktrin 13y ago
> So let me get this straight... you know that at least two agencies (FBI & NSA) have total access to your Facebook data. We don't know what their exact method is or who they may pass the data along to, but we know they do this with no warrant. No, I don't know this. Do you?
- peterwwillis 13y ago
  Have you been living under a rock? Look up PRISM. It's been in the news a little. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_%28surveillance_program%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_%28surveillance_program%2... "They [NSA] could get most of it, but they couldn't get it all. So in order to get all the data, they had to go to the service providers to fill in the blanks. That's what the PRISM program is for—to fill in the blanks. It also gives the FBI basis for introducing evidence into court." "PRISM was first publicly revealed on June 6, 2013 [...] The documents identified several technology companies as participants in the PRISM program, including (date of joining PRISM in parentheses) Microsoft (2007), Yahoo! (2008), Google (2009), Facebook (2009), Paltalk (2009), YouTube (2010), AOL (2011), Skype (2011), and Apple (2012)."