declan

82 ms·

1. 721.▲
   by declan 13y ago

   I interviewed Harvey Silverglate while he was writing his Three Felonies book and came away with precisely the opposite opinion. Harvey is hardly a "liar and manipulator." He was EFF's first attorney and is one of the leading
2. 722.▲
   by declan 13y ago

   I interviewed Harvey Silverglate while he was writing his Three Felonies book and came away with precisely the opposite opinion. Harvey is hardly a "liar and manipulator." He was EFF's first attorney and is one of the leading
3. 723.▲
   by declan 13y ago

   This is a far bigger story than PRISM or XKEYSCORE. Both described databases compiled through known processes (FAA orders and fiber taps) and used for terrorism and foreign intelligence investigations -- not domestic criminal investigations
4. 724.▲
   by declan 13y ago

   And that article is published and is being discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6149393
5. 725.▲
   by declan 13y ago

   It looks like that was directed at me. So: Thanks! :)
6. 726.▲
   by declan 13y ago

   Simple. Send a pen register/trap and trace order to, say, Microsoft for a target's Hotmail traffic (except Subject: lines and body content). I disclosed Microsoft's wiretap compliance system in this article last month: http:
7. 727.▲
   by declan 13y ago

   Yep. Julian Assange and I go way back. :)
8. 728.▲
   by declan 13y ago

   The U.S. courts publish non-intelligence wiretap stats per year: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=us+courts+annual+wiretap+statistics+201... Intelligence gathering is rather different.
9. 729.▲
   by declan 13y ago

   Thanks for the citation. Excerpt from the article: "That is 1681 per day. 84% of this tapping concerned mobile phones. Compare this with the news that there were 2208 taps in the United States in the whole of 2007." It's comp
10. 730.▲
    by declan 13y ago

    On a per-capita basis, the Netherlands is at the top with far more electronic surveillance than almost any other country, and the U.S. is at the bottom. (This may be only domestic LE surveillance, can't remember.)
11. 731.▲
    by declan 13y ago

    Fortunately, the author is right here to say you're incorrect. The article cited and linked to federal law with the PR/TT definition of metadata. It gave examples of header fields the FBI is asking for. It linked to and excerpted
12. 732.▲
    by declan 13y ago

    By request I just posted this 2006 court opinion that says all email headers except Subject: lines are metadata. No wiretap order required to do a live intercept: https://plus.google.com/u/0/112961607570158342254&#
13. 733.▲
    by declan 13y ago

    The problem for engineers is that what lawyers call metadata does not track the application/transport/Internet/link layer model we all know and love. A good rule of thumb is that unless it's in the body of a message and
14. 734.▲
    by declan 13y ago

    Discussion is here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6149393
15. 735.▲
    by declan 13y ago

    It depends on who you ask. But the DOJ and FBI and NSA are very good about getting what they want from Congress. I can't think of any clear examples in the last 15 years when Congress has rolled back surveillance authority. (They'
16. 736.▲
    by declan 13y ago

    See also, from my earlier article: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57593538-38/how-the-u.s-fo... "The government has a lot of leverage," including contracts and licenses, said a representative for an Intern
17. 737.▲
    FBI pressures Internet providers to install surveillance software(news.cnet.com)

    2 points by declan 13y ago|1 comments
18. 738.▲
    by declan 13y ago

    I'm working on an unrelated piece this evening, so briefly: I don't know if my 2006 article fueled conspiracies. I assume that Glenn's pieces on the NSA for the Guardian moved the needle far more in that direction, but nevert
19. 739.▲
    by declan 13y ago

    Oh, sorry. I didn't notice the comment was deleted. Quite welcome!
20. 740.▲
    by declan 13y ago

    Alas, yes. More people should have been reading my articles from seven years ago. :)
21. 741.▲
    by declan 13y ago

    Yep. Also see my article from 2006: http://news.cnet.com/2100-1029-6140191.html "The FBI appears to have begun using a novel form of electronic surveillance in criminal investigations: remotely activating a mobile phon
22. 742.▲
    FBI taps cell phone mic as eavesdropping tool (2006)(news.cnet.com)

    2 points by declan 13y ago|2 comments
23. 743.▲
    by declan 13y ago

    Um, Google+ doesn't have subscription fees. It was a joke.
24. 744.▲
    by declan 13y ago

    As I said in the G+ comments: "I would be surprised if cops on routine visits about explosives did not ask about pressure cookers. The Boston bombing wasn't that long ago."
25. 745.▲
    by declan 13y ago

    Who's "they?" Long Island cops?
26. 746.▲
    by declan 13y ago

    I'm not making those assumptions.
27. 747.▲
    by declan 13y ago

    Yes, it's lacking "rigorous" work. It's a G+ post, which is almost by definition not "rigorous." Sheesh. Would you like a refund on your subscription fees?
28. 748.▲
    by declan 13y ago

    If you don't think the Facebook post was relevant, I feel sorry for you. But you're right, I should be writing the other article.
29. 749.▲
    by declan 13y ago

    Thanks, tptacek, for posting this. Though now I'm participating here and it's taking time away from my surveillance article for tomorrow! :(
30. 750.▲
    by declan 13y ago

    Alas, this only shows you don't understand what PRISM is. (Hint: it's not used by local cops! Sigh.)