Manage updates with the Download AppFebruary 9, 2006 5:46 PM PST
Police blotter: Patriot Act e-mail spying approved
- Related Stories
-
Police blotter: Sysadmin loses e-intrusion case
January 13, 2006 -
Police blotter: Alleged eDonkey pirate gets trial
January 6, 2006 -
Police blotter: Nude 'profile' yields Yahoo suit
December 9, 2005 -
Police blotter: Legal flap over secret sex video
November 25, 2005 -
Police blotter: Judge questions Patriot Act bugs
November 4, 2005 -
Police blotter: Feds' cell phone tracking denied
October 28, 2005 -
Police blotter: Closed-source breathalyzer on trial
October 21, 2005 -
Police blotter: Patriot Act wins a round
October 14, 2005
What: The Justice Department asks a judge to approve Patriot Act e-mail monitoring without any evidence of criminal behavior.
When: Decided Feb. 2, 2006 by U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan in Washington, D.C.
Outcome: E-mail surveillance approved.
What happened: As part of a grand jury investigation that's still secret, the Justice Department asked a federal magistrate judge to approve monitoring of an unnamed person's e-mail correspondents.
The request had a twist: Instead of asking to eavesdrop on the contents of the e-mail messages, which would require some evidence of wrongdoing, prosecutors instead requested the identities of the correspondents. Also included in the request was header information like date and time and Internet address--but not subject lines.
The federal magistrate judge balked and asked the Justice Department to submit an additional brief to demonstrate that such a request would be legal.
Instead, prosecutors asked Judge Hogan to step in. He reviewed the portion of federal law dealing with "pen register" and "trap and trace" devices--terms originating in the world of telephone wiretapping--and concluded it "unambiguously" authorizes the e-mail surveillance request.
Though the language may be clumsy, Hogan said, the Patriot Act's amendments authorize that type of easily obtainable surveillance of e-mail. All that's required, he said, is that prosecutors claim the surveillance could conceivably be "relevant" to an investigation.
Excerpt from the court's opinion:
"In 2001, Congress enacted the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (the "USA Patriot Act"), Section 216 of which explicitly amended the authorities relating to pen registers and trap and trace devices...by expanding the definitions of these devices to include "processes" to obtain information about "electronic communication."
"Commenting on the very language that was finally enacted in Section 216 of the USA Patriot Act, several members of Congress highlighted the fact that the amendments would bring the state of the law in line with current technology by making pen registers and trap and trace devices applicable to the Internet and--more to the point--e-mail.
"For example, a section-by-section analysis of the bill that Representative John Conyers included in the record before the final House vote, which contains the same language that was finally enacted by Congress, states that Section 216 "extends the pen/trap provisions so they apply not just to telephone communications but also to Internet traffic."
"In addition, Senator Jon Kyl, who is currently Chairman of the United States Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology & Homeland Security, noted that the same language in the Senate version of the bill "would codify current case law that holds that pen/trap orders apply to modern communication technologies such as e-mail and the Internet, in addition to traditional phone lines."
"The Congressional Research Service also published a legal analysis of the USA Patriot Act that states that the Act "permits pen register and trap and trace orders for electronic communications (e.g., e-mail)."
"The plain language of the statute makes clear that pen registers and trap and trace devices may be processes used to obtain information about e-mail communications. The statute's history confirms this interpretation and there is no support for a contrary result."
See more CNET content tagged:
USA PATRIOT Act, Police Blotter, prosecutor, surveillance, electronic communication
53 comments
Join the conversation! Add your comment
The judge should be jailed along with everyone involved with the unpatriotic act.
Level heads do not abound there. Apparently some are in denial of how the American populace (no matter how small or large) is being infringed upon.
This biggest threat to our liberty is not Islamic Terrorists. It's the Bush Corporatocracy.
Vodaka comrade ?
Contrary to this judge's narrow view, I think there is a strong argument in the context of Internet communications and email for the numeric IP addresses to makeup the "routing and addressing" information and for e-mail addresses and domain names and URLs to be considered "content". For example, if I send a message to supportthetroops@army.us.mil, or go to the web page <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://donate.prayforpeace.org," target="_newWindow">http://donate.prayforpeace.org,</a> does not the e-mail address and URL respectively reveal the purpose of my communication? And as such, would it not be "content" as defined in the statutes and distinquished in Smith? Any thus protected and only obtainable with a warrant?
Let's hope this one goes to the Supreme Court for some clarification!
C'mon people, wake up. This stuff is being done to catch the bad guys - the Feds have no interest in your silly little emails - unless they are going to known terrorist operatives.
By the way, this isn't a new idea. Does anyone remember carnivore or the wiretapping that occurred under Clinton? (And we weren't even at war then...)
This stuff isn't new, it's just the American people don't care and are scared by the propaganda the news stations spew constantly at them.
What are they going to do with this information? Look for suspicious email addresses and start tracking them? What usefulness will this information provide to catching terrorists?
They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty or safety. --Benjamin Franklin
Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote! --Benjamin Franklin
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. -Abraham Lincoln
Yes, privacy and domestic liberty are more valuable than life. Without them your life isn't worth much. So you take a liettle extra risk to keep your privacy, that's an acceptable risk, considering the alternative.
The USA may yet become the USSR of the future.
Why should the government have _more_ power when it hasn't effectively used what they already had.
Oh, yeah, the soldiers. Tell me again why we didn't finish the war against the Taliban and the terrorist organization they sponsored? To go after Saddam, who had nothing to do with the hijacking?
This isn't a war against a foreign enemy. It's a war by this government against the constitution, and they grasp every chance they can get their greasy little hands on to undermine constitutional government in this country.
And don't tell me they're not intersted in my silly little emails. Nixon tapped my phone because I spoke out against him. I expect I'll be among the first to go to the camps when W. sets them up for political prisoners.
Bush and Cheney, and the way they undermine the rule of law, are the real enemies here. Anyone, Repoublican or Democrat, who fails to uphold the constitution endangers our country far more than a few terrorists.
Carnivore was pushed and backed by the FBI, not the NSA or the executive administration. In fact it was a complete failure that cost the taxpayer millions.
What is happeining here is not sniffing of packets, it's pure unadulterated intrusion by the FBI and NSA because they failed in their investigative and analysis skills. They can't go into your house and sift through your paper files without a warrant, but they can now track and read what you do anytime of the day electronically.
There have been tons of cases in the past when people's lives have been ruined because of shoddy police work. This makes it all the easier for those gov't workers who got C's in college to make the wrong decisions and screw over an innocent citizen.
On one hand:
"Any country that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security deserves neither and will lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
On the other hand:
They didn't have nukes in Ben's day. It wasn't possible for one person with the right technology to kill 10 million in one instant.
If this law keeps the unthinkable from happening it was obviously worth it and necessary. If it wasn't necessary to keep the unthinkable from happening, it's a great injustice. How can we possibly tell which it was until after the fact?
My 2 cents...
In the other corner we have maybe 3,000 so called terrorists, most illiterate, many broke and the rest with little money.
So we say it's a War?
Something is wrong here, even for you humans. What we need is more police officers trained in anti-terrorist methods and more communication between current police agencies, including Interpol. Hey, humans, it's a police matter, you know,those guys in blue uniforms and black suits with sunglasses.
One point I haven't seen pointed out yet is that it takes a war footing for the Feds to call out the National Guard. They can call up the Reserves at any time, but the NG is a State agency. I know, since I was once in the famous Rat Commandos in Vietnam.
Oscar Rat
Have a great day...
While software solutions will vary from software producer to software producer, encryption protects email in transit. Rights management protects it even after it's stored on your computer or someone else's.
If the government did subpoena an organization, a Chief Compliance Officer, Risk Officer and/or IT/Operations Officer would be able to provide such sensitive information.
Companies like ours provide education to business enterprises - <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.essentialsecurity.com/technical_sheets.htm" target="_newWindow">http://www.essentialsecurity.com/technical_sheets.htm</a>
All I can sadly conclude is that we have the government that we
deserve, and those arrogant selfish bastards represent us all too
well.
Sorry, but as an independent it seems to me this statement's only purpose is to inflame the situation. It's all I've heard from my democratic friends for far too long and the evidence I've examined is actually to the contrary.
Republicans are in bed with big business. They need to pass campaign finance reform.
Democrats are in bed with the lawyers. They need to reform our legal system so judgements are limited and appropriate.
Both are in bed with special interest groups. Both sides need to pass campaign finance reform to help deal with this.
I will agree, in spirit, with one thing you said: People usually get the leaders they deserve. It's time we stood up and demanded campaign finance reform as a good first step IMO. Simply put, we can't afford the cost of corruption in our government.
My 2 cents...
It saddens me to hear as an American, the ways we're throwing away our treasured liberties and values for the sake of "protection from terrorism". This is what the terrorists intended---to weaken our resolve to be free, to weaken our resolve to think rationally concerning issues, to be gripped into a paranoia that stifles creativity and advancement of this nation.
This type of e-mail surveillance is just another attempt at destroying civil liberties in this country.
When the Democrats take office after this supposed BS war on middle easterner, they will then get to spy on the GOP and get away with whatever they so please without repercussion.
The problem with the "War on Terror" is that 9/11 concerned eleven criminals and one instigator---Osama Bin Laden. If George W. had focused on Afghanistan and catching Osama, I doubt many people would be concerned with his actions. Instead, he uses the "War on Terrorism" as an excuse to spy on American citizens. Instead, he goes into a lengthy and costly war in Iraq and catches Saddam. Saddam(according to George) "might have" thought about the 9/11 attack, but there is no substantiated evidence. If George W. were a policeman, he'd be laughed out of the squad.
cases in town, and all their little brothers too.
At least not much intelligence is wasted among them...
That is by far the most agregious act I have heard any tech company do. I changed my homepage that day and will never support that conglomerate again.
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://news.com.com/2061-10796_3-6037055.html" target="_newWindow">http://news.com.com/2061-10796_3-6037055.html</a>
And here's a roundup of *eight* more articles on the topic from Wednesday:
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://news.com.com/Capitol+Hills+fury+on+China/2009-1028_3-6040291.html" target="_newWindow">http://news.com.com/Capitol+Hills+fury+on+China/2009-1028_3-6040291.html</a>
while, wars can end. We're involved in several police actions, and
like the "war on drugs," the "war on terrorism" can never be over.
The Republican controlled congress and White House call it a
war so they can cover their actions. Actions like exposing covert
operatives for political advantage, spying on Americans without
warrants, and playing politics with "threat levels" during election
periods. Haven't you noticed that the threat level stopped
fluctuating after the elections? These things infringe on
American rights and endanger our Democracy more than any
terrorist.
Bill Langer?
Now there was corruption that actually worked. You wanted
something, it cost you, but it got done. Now if you want something,
it costs you, and nothing gets done.