Feeds

Bush-era NSA wiretap violations exposed

US hawks not amused

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops

The New York Times has broken the latest news in the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretapping odyssey: that the NSA has been routinely scanning American communications at a rate far beyond what had been envisioned by Congress when the telecoms immunity and FISA wiretapping revisions passed last summer.

Even more salacious was the latest revelation of Bush-era overreach: according to the report, either in 2005 or 2006, the agency sought to wiretap a member of Congress surreptitiously during a congressional fact-finding trip to the Middle East. Unnamed intelligence higher-ups with some political acumen squelched the idea, though the effort reveals much about the breadth and scope of the NSA's ambitions.

That the NSA has repeatedly and as a matter of practice overstepped its bounds will surprise few of its critics, including some here at El Reg. What makes the latest revelations intriguing - apart from the intelligence community's constitutionally dubious interest in a member of the legislative branch - is that they provide further evidence that the NSA is still engaged in exactly the kind of activities that initially created such a firestorm, and that the agency promised to halt, What activities, exactly? Mass, algorithmic, data mining dragnets that ensnare ordinary Americans.

When the FISA law came up for review last year, many critics wondered why the law needed to be revised if the NSA already had the ability to obtain warrants retroactively, which it did routinely. Backdoors had been built into the American telecoms infrastructure back in the 1990s allowing law enforcement instantaneous access to all telecommunications passing through the US, so, really, what was the problem?

After apologists for the agency repeatedly claimed the FISA law needed to be brought "technologically" up to date, critics - including those here at El Reg - began to suspect that the revised FISA law was nothing more than a gussied up version of the very same program that caused such outrage in the first place.

Under the revised law the NSA no longer needed "warrants": "targets" had to be identified, and a method designed to "minimize" surveillance of the innocent put forth. Even so, information obtained on the untargeted could be used provided that it was not obtained "intentionally."

As we've noted in the past, algorithms are nothing more than mathematical models and are utterly incapable of forming intent. The revised law seemed to legalize the very activity it purported to halt.

Lo and behold, since the new law passed last July, "technical" complications have led to "inadvertent" "over-collection" issues. Well, stop the presses.

Ironically, the diffuse nature of the internet, which was originally perceived to be advantageous in the event of an enemy strike on the American infrastructure, is now making it difficult for the NSA to adhere to the modest requirement that warrantless surveillance targets be "reasonably believed" to be outside the US.

The activities were uncovered by the FBI in a semiannual review of NSA practices, and were described as "systemic." Since the original warrantless surveillance was described as impacting "hundreds, perhaps thousands" of Americans in the Times in December, 2005 - a number that was greeted with considerable skepticism by critics, particularly when the Bush administration continued to revise the number downward - the new language almost certainly reflects the breadth of the FISA revisions rather than a new-found honesty in Washington.

The Department of Justice was concerned enough that the new Attorney General, Eric Holder, appeared personally before the FISA court to answer questions about the program. Congress, too, is now concerned, to no one's surprise: Senator Dianne Feinstein, a fairly hawkish legislator from California, has promised hearings on the issue.

It turns out even members of Congress would rather not be spied on. ®

Beginner's guide to SSL certificates

More from The Register

next story
Facebook pays INFINITELY MORE UK corp tax than in 2012
Thanks for the £3k, Zuck. Doh! you're IN CREDIT. Guess not
Facebook, Apple: LADIES! Why not FREEZE your EGGS? It's on the company!
No biological clockwatching when you work in Silicon Valley
Happiness economics is bollocks. Oh, UK.gov just adopted it? Er ...
Opportunity doesn't knock; it costs us instead
Sysadmin with EBOLA? Gartner's issued advice to debug your biz
Start hoarding cleaning supplies, analyst firm says, and assume your team will scatter
YARR! Pirates walk the plank: DMCA magnets sink in Google results
Spaffing copyrighted stuff over the web? No search ranking for you
Don't bother telling people if you lose their data, say Euro bods
You read that right – with the proviso that it's encrypted
Apple SILENCES Bose, YANKS headphones from stores
The, er, Beats go on after noise-cancelling spat
prev story

Whitepapers

Cloud and hybrid-cloud data protection for VMware
Learn how quick and easy it is to configure backups and perform restores for VMware environments.
A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.
High Performance for All
While HPC is not new, it has traditionally been seen as a specialist area – is it now geared up to meet more mainstream requirements?
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.