#nsa leak

[today-in-the-past]

The NSA Surveillance Leak: Unveiling a New Era of Privacy Concerns

On June 7, 2013, a revelation shook the foundations of the American public's perception of privacy and government surveillance. A leaked document exposed that the United States' National Security Agency (NSA) had been systematically collecting telephone records of millions of Americans. This unprecedented disclosure not only sparked widespread debates but also cast a long-lasting shadow over the balance between national security and individual privacy.

The Leak and Its Immediate Impact

The explosive information came to light through the efforts of Edward Snowden, a former NSA contractor, who provided classified documents to journalists from The Guardian and The Washington Post. The leaked document detailed how the NSA, under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), had compelled telecom giant Verizon to hand over phone records, including call duration, time, location, and the participating numbers.

The immediate reaction was one of shock and outrage. Americans were confronted with the realization that their government was conducting mass surveillance on its own citizens without their knowledge. The disclosure ignited a fierce public debate over the scope and legality of such surveillance programs.

Legal and Ethical Controversies

At the heart of the controversy was the delicate balance between national security and the right to privacy. The government defended the program by arguing that it was essential for preventing terrorist attacks and protecting national security. Officials cited the Patriot Act, specifically Section 215, as the legal basis for their actions.

Legislative and Judicial Responses

The backlash prompted a series of legislative and judicial responses aimed at curbing the NSA's surveillance capabilities. In 2015, Congress passed the USA Freedom Act, which ended the bulk collection of telephone metadata by the NSA. The new legislation required the agency to obtain a targeted warrant from the FISA court to access specific records from telecom companies.

Judicially, the issue saw various rulings. In May 2015, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the NSA’s bulk collection of phone records was illegal, stating that the Patriot Act did not authorize such sweeping surveillance.

The Global Impact and Ongoing Debate

The NSA leak had ramifications far beyond the United States. It revealed the extent of global surveillance efforts, showing that the NSA had been monitoring the communications of world leaders, international organizations, and foreign nationals. This disclosure strained diplomatic relations and fueled a worldwide debate on privacy and surveillance.

A decade after the leak, the conversation about privacy in the digital age continues to evolve. The rise of social media, cloud computing, and artificial intelligence has introduced new dimensions to the debate. Governments and tech companies are continually grappling with how to protect user privacy while addressing security concerns.

Conclusion

The 2013 NSA leak was a watershed moment in the history of privacy and surveillance. It highlighted the tension between national security imperatives and the fundamental right to privacy. While significant strides have been made to regulate surveillance practices, the debate remains highly relevant in an increasingly digital world. The legacy of the leak serves as a constant reminder of the need for vigilance in protecting civil liberties in the face of evolving technological capabilities.

Sources:

The Guardian - The Washington Post - ACLU - EFF

[welcometoyouredoom]

[usatodayopinion]

Someone leaked top-secret information about Russia to the press. And that person’s name is Reality Winner. Their real name is Reality Winner. And I mean, how is this real life? You know what it feels like right now? It feels like God had a mid-life crisis and he quit his day job to make a Web series.

Trevor Noah, in Punchlines

[newstfionline]

The latest NSA leak is a reminder that your bosses can see your every move

By Brian Fung, Washington Post, June 7, 2017

It took just days for authorities to arrest and charge a federal contractor with leaking classified intelligence to the media. Court documents explain in detail how the 25-year-old woman suspected in the leak, Reality Leigh Winner, allegedly printed off a copy of a National Security Agency report on Russian tampering in the U.S. elections and mailed it to a news outlet.

What helped federal authorities link Winner to the leak were unrelated personal emails she had sent to the Intercept news site weeks before, which surfaced when investigators searched her computer. But how were officials able to gain access to her personal accounts? The answer, according to some former NSA analysts, is that the agency routinely monitors many of its employees’ computer activity.

The case offers a reminder that virtually every American worker in today’s economy can be tracked and reported--and you don’t even have to be the NSA to pull it off.

“She emailed the Intercept using her work computer,” said Michelle Richardson, a privacy expert at the Center for Democracy and Technology, a Washington think tank. “They can monitor the traffic on their systems, look at the six people who printed the doc, and see that she was the one who had contact.”

Employee monitoring is so extensive in American society that it may be difficult for workers to know just how far they might have to go to avoid it. It is a $200 million-a-year industry, according to a study last year by 451 Research, a technology research firm, and is estimated to be worth $500 million by 2020.

Monitoring techniques have become quite sophisticated, enabling employers to track not only what websites their workers visit, but also when they plug in USB storage devices, move or copy files, and what programs they run, privacy experts say. One company even allows bosses to play back videos of what took place on a user’s screen and can collect “communications activity” both on traditional email programs as well as “popular webmail services.”

Employee monitoring recently came to light in a high-profile lawsuit involving Uber and Waymo, the self-driving car company owned by Google’s parent firm, Alphabet. In accusing former Waymo employee Anthony Levandowski of stealing trade secrets and taking them to Uber, Waymo said it was able to determine that Levandowski installed inappropriate software on his company-issued laptop, then downloaded thousands of confidential files before putting them on an external storage device he connected to the machine.

Despite Levandowski’s attempt to then “erase forensic fingerprints” by reformatting the laptop’s hard drive, Waymo said, the company was nonetheless able to gather the requisite evidence--likely using monitoring technology, analysts said.

Even workers who don’t report to an office every day are subject to monitoring. The proliferation of GPS devices in smartphones now means that even truck drivers can be tracked. A recent report from the technology research firm Aberdeen Group found that nearly two-thirds of companies with employees who work “in the field” were tracking their employees with GPS.

The earliest forms of modern employee monitoring date to the early 1910s, when companies would use mechanical counters to track how quickly workers were typing on their typewriters, according to Jitendra Mishra and Suzanne M. Crampton, who co-wrote a study in 1998 on the topic. They noted that “what has changed in more recent years is the method of supervision and the extent of information gathering capabilities available.” That includes phone and video surveillance, keystroke logging and other forms of monitoring.

Since then, numerous court cases have given employers a remarkable amount of freedom to watch their workers. In 2010, the Supreme Court heard a case involving two police officers who had been punished at work after it was discovered that they had used their mobile devices to send personal text messages. The officers argued that the police department’s search of their devices was unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment, but the court unanimously ruled against them, saying it was a reasonable search and that the officers should have known that their work devices might be inspected.

Privacy advocates have been pushing for years to have Congress review various communications privacy laws in light of updates to technology. Many argue that the 1986 Electronic Communications Privacy Act does not provide enough protections to consumers today because many emails, text messages and other content can be summoned by law enforcement with little more than a subpoena.

“ECPA was first passed in 1986 before Congress could imagine the wealth of personal information that would be stored on third-party servers rather than private hard drives,” the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a technology advocacy group, has said.

Congress took a step toward updating the country’s digital privacy laws in February, when the House voted to approve the Email Privacy Act. While the bill has largely stalled, it proposes requiring a warrant for searching emails that have been sitting in an account for more than 180 days.

Still, given the other case law surrounding employee surveillance, it’s important to note that changes to the ECPA might not put an end to routine employer monitoring. So you might still want to be careful with what you do on your devices at work.

[goodolewoody]

“FBI Arrests Federal Contractor In Leak Of NSA Report On Russian Hacking Effort” HUFFINGTON POST

[garudabluffs]

The National Security Agency headquarters don't look scary. Nope, not at all.                                                                                                                    Someone's already been arrested for allegedly leaking a NSA report to The Intercept                                                                     READ MORE http://mashable.com/2017/06/05/jabii-boxing-glove/

June 5 2017, 3:44 p.m. Top-Secret NSA Report Details Russian Hacking Effort Days Before 2016 Election

READ MORE https://theintercept.com/2017/06/05/top-secret-nsa-report-details-russian-hacking-effort-days-before-2016-election/ 80 COMMENTS

“ Whether or not the report is factual, it was classified at the time it was leaked.  Reality Leigh Winner, a 25-year-old contractor with Pluribus International Corporation, was arrested by the FBI for violation of 18 U.S.C. Section 793(e),  “willfully” delivering or transmitting “information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation.” Winner is a loser and may just be a pawn in the NSA blame game.” + “This article needs to be updated. According to a DOJ release, 25-year-old Reality Leigh Winner is being charged with removing classified material from a government facility and mailing it to a news outlet. [Breitbart]“

[linkworxseo]

[lawofsecrecy]

Is Private Company Collection of Data a Better Option than the NSA?

Big story today: Obama is submitting legislation that would end the NSA's bulk collection of phone metadata. From the NY Times:

The Obama administration is preparing to unveil a legislative proposal for a far-reaching overhaul of the National Security Agency’s once-secret bulk phone records program in a way that — if approved by Congress — would end the aspect that has most alarmed privacy advocates since its existence was leaked last year, according to senior administration officials.

Under the proposal, they said, the N.S.A. would end its systematic collection of data about Americans’ calling habits. The bulk records would stay in the hands of phone companies, which would not be required to retain the data for any longer than they normally would. And the N.S.A. could obtain specific records only with permission from a judge, using a new kind of court order.

I have never really liked this proposal - it does not seem to fix the problems, yet it reduces the effectiveness of the data collection. But, if it can obtain Congressional authorization and still require court approval, I think this puts the program on more legitimate footing, which is a good thing. It does not seem clear whether this would be only for American phone metadata or worldwide - which would make a huge difference in how appealing this is for me (only American would be better, in my opinion).

As for the private phone companies keeping the data instead of the government: Target customers - do you feel safer? At least the government had oversight by three branches of government with significant restrictions in place with regard to what can be done with the data. What restrictions will be in place for AT&T, Verizon, etc?

-RM