3 ms·
The point is that the companies decide what production data to deposit on these servers after their legal teams have reviewed FISA requests. According to the t
by skwirl 13y ago
The point is that the companies decide what production data to deposit on these servers after their legal teams have reviewed FISA requests. According to the tech companies, these requests are individually reviewed and target individuals and are narrow in scope. And they push back when they are broad.
This detail is a major one. This would mean the NSA cannot simply log on to Facebook and query for whatever they want. It means the system is simply a way for companies to comply with FISA requests, something that they were already required to do.
So: even though Twitter doesn't use PRISM, there is really no difference between what the NSA can access on Twitter and what they can access on Facebook. Twitter just complies through some other manner.
- holloway 13y agoI think that's a bit generous. They look over the request but if the result set is too large it couldn't be reasonably vetted by lawyers. Eg, they would have a look at it but we don't know how rigorous they are or could be.
- skwirl 13y agoYeah, I think the main point is that this is simply a way of responding to FISA requests, which are completely independent of PRISM. In other words, there is no new news here. The debate over FISA itself is certainly quite valid. Google has claimed these requests are infrequent and narrowly focused, and they have requested permission from the government to publish some statistics. I hope they get it.