5 ms·

> Plus this was used on less than 300 numbers. The metadata is still collected and presumably stored for all, they just escalated it to additional surveillance

> Plus this was used on less than 300 numbers. The metadata is still collected and presumably stored for all, they just escalated it to additional surveillance for 300 numbers. > 20 people in the world have access to the info. [citation needed] Keith Alexander today said they have 1000 sysadmins like Snowden, most contractors. Snowden said, and the other NSA whistleblowers confirmed, that a sysadmin at the NSA has access to all data with little to no restrictions. > This is for foreign surveillance ONLY. And how do they determine whether or not it's foreign or domestic? Surely they must analyze content in order to be sure?

rtpg 13y ago
What was said in the conference: they look at the number, if the number is foreign, it's good. If there's an error and the number is US (for example, a clerical error) the query results are IMMEDIATELY destroyed, and this event is reported to subcommittees and FISA court. The metadata is collected, destroyed after 5 years, but cannot be queried except under the stringent circumstances. So it's basically if they could just go "back in time" on looking at certain phone numbers. and the 20 people is in the conference. Alexander said that 20 analysts and 2 managers (himself and Inglis) are the only people with access to this database.
- LoganCale 13y ago
  > they look at the number, if the number is foreign, it's good. If there's an error and the number is US (for example, a clerical error) the query results are IMMEDIATELY destroyed, and this event is reported to subcommittees and FISA court. They've also said they are not allowed to monitor U.S. citizens living abroad. What if they have a number outside the U.S. How do they detect that a number belongs to a U.S. citizen or resident? If a non-U.S. person has a phone number from the U.S. but they are not a citizen/resident and are not inside the U.S., is that protected or not? > The metadata is collected, destroyed after 5 years, but cannot be queried except under the stringent circumstances. That seems to contradict what they also said today, that no court order is required to query the database and it just requires reasonable suspicion on the part of the analyst. > Alexander said that 20 analysts and 2 managers (himself and Inglis) are the only people with access to this database. Is that technical access or legal access? In other words, are there technical limitations preventing anyone but those 22 people from accessing the data, or is everyone else just not supposed to? If they have sysadmins managing the databases, surely they have access too, as Snowden and Binney have both said?
- betterunix 13y ago
  "the query results are IMMEDIATELY destroyed" The data that was queried, however, is not -- so the query could be run again later if someone wanted to. "The metadata is collected, destroyed after 5 years," An awfully big window for policies to change. Destroyed after 5 years can become destroyed after 10 years, or never destroyed at all, when the people in charge change their minds. How would we even know about the change, when everything is done in secret? The fact that members of Congress need to be told what the period of time is means that they did not know beforehand; will they be told when the period of time is lengthened (I have no hope for it getting any shorter)? "Alexander said that 20 analysts and 2 managers (himself and Inglis) are the only people with access to this database." Assuming everyone always follows the rules, which is a pretty stupid assumption.
  - rtpg 13y ago
    >Assuming everyone always follows the rules, which is a pretty stupid assumption. That's why there's oversight. What's the point of making rules if you assume no one follows them? This is Rule of Law 101.
    - betterunix 13y ago
      What oversight would you be referring to here? Does someone (not chosen by the people in charge of the NSA, up to and including the President) come in to periodically audit the NSA and ensure that they are only spying on Americans when they have a warrant? Do their computers even keep logs to enable such auditing? The problem here is that you have a secret agency that is saying, "Look, really, we have these policies and we promise that we follow them. Of course, you cannot come in and check to see if we are following them, because our operations are a secret." It does not help that whistleblowers are considered to be traitors in this situation. How exactly do you think the rule of law works?

rtpg 13y ago

What was said in the conference: they look at the number, if the number is foreign, it's good. If there's an error and the number is US (for example, a clerical error) the query results are IMMEDIATELY destroyed, and this event is reported to subcommittees and FISA court. The metadata is collected, destroyed after 5 years, but cannot be queried except under the stringent circumstances. So it's basically if they could just go "back in time" on looking at certain phone numbers. and the 20 people is in the conference. Alexander said that 20 analysts and 2 managers (himself and Inglis) are the only people with access to this database.

LoganCale 13y ago
> they look at the number, if the number is foreign, it's good. If there's an error and the number is US (for example, a clerical error) the query results are IMMEDIATELY destroyed, and this event is reported to subcommittees and FISA court. They've also said they are not allowed to monitor U.S. citizens living abroad. What if they have a number outside the U.S. How do they detect that a number belongs to a U.S. citizen or resident? If a non-U.S. person has a phone number from the U.S. but they are not a citizen/resident and are not inside the U.S., is that protected or not? > The metadata is collected, destroyed after 5 years, but cannot be queried except under the stringent circumstances. That seems to contradict what they also said today, that no court order is required to query the database and it just requires reasonable suspicion on the part of the analyst. > Alexander said that 20 analysts and 2 managers (himself and Inglis) are the only people with access to this database. Is that technical access or legal access? In other words, are there technical limitations preventing anyone but those 22 people from accessing the data, or is everyone else just not supposed to? If they have sysadmins managing the databases, surely they have access too, as Snowden and Binney have both said?
betterunix 13y ago
"the query results are IMMEDIATELY destroyed" The data that was queried, however, is not -- so the query could be run again later if someone wanted to. "The metadata is collected, destroyed after 5 years," An awfully big window for policies to change. Destroyed after 5 years can become destroyed after 10 years, or never destroyed at all, when the people in charge change their minds. How would we even know about the change, when everything is done in secret? The fact that members of Congress need to be told what the period of time is means that they did not know beforehand; will they be told when the period of time is lengthened (I have no hope for it getting any shorter)? "Alexander said that 20 analysts and 2 managers (himself and Inglis) are the only people with access to this database." Assuming everyone always follows the rules, which is a pretty stupid assumption.
- rtpg 13y ago
  >Assuming everyone always follows the rules, which is a pretty stupid assumption. That's why there's oversight. What's the point of making rules if you assume no one follows them? This is Rule of Law 101.
  - betterunix 13y ago
    What oversight would you be referring to here? Does someone (not chosen by the people in charge of the NSA, up to and including the President) come in to periodically audit the NSA and ensure that they are only spying on Americans when they have a warrant? Do their computers even keep logs to enable such auditing? The problem here is that you have a secret agency that is saying, "Look, really, we have these policies and we promise that we follow them. Of course, you cannot come in and check to see if we are following them, because our operations are a secret." It does not help that whistleblowers are considered to be traitors in this situation. How exactly do you think the rule of law works?