The NSA’s long history of often legally sketchy mass surveillance continues, despite some of the agency’s activities getting exposed more than a decade ago by whistleblower Edward Snowden.
Now, the National Security Agency has had to reveal, in response to a senator’s questions, that it is, as one report put it, “sidestepping” obtaining warrants first before it buys people’s information, put on sale by data brokers.
This came to light in an exchange of letters between Senator Ron Wyden and several top security officials.
And this time – because of NSA’s own interest being at stake – he has been able to reveal the information he obtained.
Wyden’s January 25 letter to Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines contained a fairly straight-forward request: US intelligence agencies should only buy American’s data “that has been obtained in a lawful manner.”
We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.
With the implication that something entirely different is happening, the senator went on to explain what: if these agencies went to communications companies themselves for the data, that would require a court order.
Instead, Wyden continued, they go the roundabout way to get information (like location data) taken from people’s phones – collected via apps, and finally ending up with commercial brokers, who sell it to the likes of the NSA. And, this particular agency is also buying “Americans’ domestic internet metadata.”
In other words, a comprehensive, yet legally questionable mass surveillance scheme.
Wyden “reinforced” his letter to Haines by attaching NSA Director General Paul Nakasone’s December response to one of his earlier queries – a back-and-forth that has been going on for almost three years, he says, and concerned other agencies as well and their practice of data acquisition.
But now that he said he would block the Senate confirmation of Nakasone’s successor – the information he received finally “got cleared” for release and pretty quickly.
Nakasone confirmed the practice, and then went on to justify it by saying it only pertains to “records” of online traffic, rather than “emails and documents.” He said what the NSA purchases is “netflow data” that comes from devices where “one or both” ends of the connection is in the US.
And why? It is “critical,” wrote Nakasone, in “protecting US defense contractors from cyber threats.”
The problem isn't that they buy it, everyone can do that, why would they not be allowed to? This makes no sense.
The problem is they don't investigate the origins of the data they purchased - high chance half the data they've looked at was illegally obtained.
And sold by Facebook and co...
I get your point but the problem is still that it's sold.
Because no one should be allowed to give to someone else your personal data. Not everything should be allowed to be sold. It should be theirs in the first place.
Just because you click you agree on terms of service, doesn't mean you actually have a choice if your employer requires you to use that service and you live in wage slavery society where you have to get someones permission to have a place to live.
EDIT: Besides, government that can literary print money in a society where everything can be bought for money is in practice no different then any autoritarian regime. What is next, pay for private cops that can kidnap you without cause and governments says they weren't the ones that did it, it was these private companies and "we will fine them for this" then give them money for doing it and cover their fines with it. This is just ridiculous system. Who in their right mind can look at capitalism and say, wow, what a free society.
So you agree that the problem is that its sold rather than that a government agency buys it...
And no, a government cant just print money, Central Banks are their own governing bodies, they are part of the State, but just like the courts the politicians cant interfere to much for security.
And printing money is a big no no for every country unless its to replace old printed currency or stabilizing the market. It would cause a hyper inflation otherwise.
Both is the problem, in fact, it is the same problem. If one is selling it, clearly someone is buying it. Not all things should be for sale, that is my point. Central banks print money all the time, they never really stop, it is definitely not a big no no, it is a very basis of this debt based economic system. Central bank has to continously print money, because all money that is printed is owned back with interest to the central bank. And if there is no money for those lenders to pay back the interest, the banks that lend it will default. So in fact, money, in this stupid system, has to be constantly printed so that there is enough money to pay back interest on previously lended printed money. Central banks, congress, police and even private banks are all part of the governing body that decides for us, the regular people, how resources are allocated in our society. They are inseperable and intertvined in one power structure. As Gorge Carlin put it "it's a big club, and you ain't in it".