Comments on: Legal loophole emerges in NSA spy program
An AT&T attorney hints that the White House authorized the company to open its network to surveillance.
Most Popular
Latest tech news headlines
- IBM: Envisioning the world's fastest supercomputer
December 7, 2009 4:00 AM PST
- I want my Vevo: Will video site be next-gen MTV?
December 6, 2009 10:40 PM PST
- Google Favorite Places coming to window near you
December 6, 2009 9:00 PM PST
- See all headlines
RSS Feeds
Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.
- Markets
Related quotes
AT&T has other issues too with regard to the
NSA, not just the call data records one.
I already pointed out why it wouldn't be a good
loophole, and why I'm pretty sure AT&T doesn't
have the ceritfication:
http://news.com.com/5208-1028-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=17081&messageID=147554&start=-159
AT&T has other issues too with regard to the
NSA, not just the call data records one.
I already pointed out why it wouldn't be a good
loophole, and why I'm pretty sure AT&T doesn't
have the ceritfication:
http://news.com.com/5208-1028-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=17081&messageID=147554&start=-159
I am against loss of personal privacy, except under circumstances and controls that allow the monitoring of the process by competent judicial authority, and public disclosure of the existance of the program's monitoring requirements and compliance. To do less opens the door to insidious further invasion of my "personal space," something I won't give up without a fight to the death.
It appears that the availability of phone records relating to each and every telephone call are designed to allow the government to "reverse engineer" contacts between suspected terrorists and their collaborators.
This is a process by which the government may at a future date discover calls and telephone numbers between a known or suspected terror operation. Discovering their contacts and methods of communication would then allow "trolling" of archived records to see with whom those suspects communicated. Same for wireless and Internet, including VOIP.
Nothwistanding the lack of overt cooperation that some foreigh countries have displayed, I believe the US should have the absolute right to destroy terrorists wherever and whenever found, regardless of the host countrys willingness to cooperate. And if they object or interfere, why they might just get a dose of Afghanistan.
I am angry that the US is being hunted in so many ways by so many people, and other governments like Pakistan, Syria, and Iran to name a few are complicit and should be "taken out" if need be.
No mercy, no rules.
But let's protect our privacy and freedom here, and pursue the war where it needs to be confronted.
Make the terrorists disapear and supporting governments cooperate or face the consequences. And those consequences are to be swift and harsh.
A few capitols bombed, a few terrorist leaders taken out regardless of collateral damage, and a few goverments might understand our willingness to "go the distance" on this issue.
"Beware waking the tiger, his bite is ferocious, and his defense of his territory relentless."
Diogenes
Regards
Viet Vet
We as a nation have NO RIGHT to invade, enslave or destroy ANY nation, no matter how terrible we think that nation may be in OUR views, we are NOT the global police and I DESPISE any thought that we have become this as well!
If we keep this so-called 'war' in Iraq going, we will be seen as a nation that must be stopped at all costs, and since most of the middle eastern nations already hate us, how long do you think it will take to rally support from these fractured countries to unite and stand up to fight us AND defeat us as well?
We assume we are the might of the world, and to any defenseless country, that may be true, but with the middle east, they DO have thousands if not MILLIONS of willing people ready to strap on explosives and kill as many of us as they can.
If history has taught anything to anybody, it's the FACT you can NOT stop a DETERMINED group of people bent on killing U.S. citizens, this is a hard fact that many willingly and (stupidly) IGNORE!!
Just like the 'war' on drugs, it is IMPOSSIBLE to stop people determined to do something or anything, or stop the flow of a 'wanted' substance, no matter what it is.
Things like these are failures that need to STOP and be re-examined for validity and necessity, and the 'war' on drugs is NOT a 'necessity' that will ever be stopped, no matter how many cops are on the prowl.
Smae goes for this latest fiasco in Iraq.
Once we leave, that country WILL revert back to the way it's used to working (or not working really), this is a fact we must remember, and we can NEVER install any type of 'democracy' on a nation that does not desire it,and they have been living their own lives with the type of 'government' THEY created for thousands of years, it's ARROGANT to assume we can change their entire way of thinking and living with our presence alone, it's foolhardy to think it will work.
Forcing a life style on others has proven to be ineffective and wrong and will only lengthen the time it takes for the 'terrorists' to unite into a far stronger force than we could ever hope to destroy or eliminate, they have had several thousands of years to prepare, who are we to think we have the power or ability to stop this?
We NEED a NEW government, OR a CIVIL WAR to FORCE the government to change the way they do OUR business!
BUSH: Good for decorating your yard, but HORRIBLE as a nation's leader!
Bush MUST be PLANTED in PRISON for LIFE for TREASON!!!
NO EXCUSES, NO PAROLE!!
If I were the president, the FIRST order of business I would perform would be to close down the NSA as it currently exists and enact laws to PROHIBIT ANY spy agency from spying on ANY citizen, at aany time, and make is a treasonous offense to do so, with life terms in prison for attepmting it.
The next thing I would do is RECALL our troops from Iraq and concentrate on Osama, THAT is who we SHOULD be looking for in the first place.
After this latest fiasco with AT&T handing ove OUR private information to the NSA, I'll be DUMPING MY SHARES OF AT&T STOCK and CANCELLING ALL OF MY AT&T services from this day forward!!
They want to SCREW me, then SCREW AT&T and NEVER pay for their 'srvices ever again!
Hit them where it HURTS....THE BANK ACCOUNT!!!
Thank goodness I have my guns!
I am against loss of personal privacy, except under circumstances and controls that allow the monitoring of the process by competent judicial authority, and public disclosure of the existance of the program's monitoring requirements and compliance. To do less opens the door to insidious further invasion of my "personal space," something I won't give up without a fight to the death.
It appears that the availability of phone records relating to each and every telephone call are designed to allow the government to "reverse engineer" contacts between suspected terrorists and their collaborators.
This is a process by which the government may at a future date discover calls and telephone numbers between a known or suspected terror operation. Discovering their contacts and methods of communication would then allow "trolling" of archived records to see with whom those suspects communicated. Same for wireless and Internet, including VOIP.
Nothwistanding the lack of overt cooperation that some foreigh countries have displayed, I believe the US should have the absolute right to destroy terrorists wherever and whenever found, regardless of the host countrys willingness to cooperate. And if they object or interfere, why they might just get a dose of Afghanistan.
I am angry that the US is being hunted in so many ways by so many people, and other governments like Pakistan, Syria, and Iran to name a few are complicit and should be "taken out" if need be.
No mercy, no rules.
But let's protect our privacy and freedom here, and pursue the war where it needs to be confronted.
Make the terrorists disapear and supporting governments cooperate or face the consequences. And those consequences are to be swift and harsh.
A few capitols bombed, a few terrorist leaders taken out regardless of collateral damage, and a few goverments might understand our willingness to "go the distance" on this issue.
"Beware waking the tiger, his bite is ferocious, and his defense of his territory relentless."
Diogenes
Regards
Viet Vet
We as a nation have NO RIGHT to invade, enslave or destroy ANY nation, no matter how terrible we think that nation may be in OUR views, we are NOT the global police and I DESPISE any thought that we have become this as well!
If we keep this so-called 'war' in Iraq going, we will be seen as a nation that must be stopped at all costs, and since most of the middle eastern nations already hate us, how long do you think it will take to rally support from these fractured countries to unite and stand up to fight us AND defeat us as well?
We assume we are the might of the world, and to any defenseless country, that may be true, but with the middle east, they DO have thousands if not MILLIONS of willing people ready to strap on explosives and kill as many of us as they can.
If history has taught anything to anybody, it's the FACT you can NOT stop a DETERMINED group of people bent on killing U.S. citizens, this is a hard fact that many willingly and (stupidly) IGNORE!!
Just like the 'war' on drugs, it is IMPOSSIBLE to stop people determined to do something or anything, or stop the flow of a 'wanted' substance, no matter what it is.
Things like these are failures that need to STOP and be re-examined for validity and necessity, and the 'war' on drugs is NOT a 'necessity' that will ever be stopped, no matter how many cops are on the prowl.
Smae goes for this latest fiasco in Iraq.
Once we leave, that country WILL revert back to the way it's used to working (or not working really), this is a fact we must remember, and we can NEVER install any type of 'democracy' on a nation that does not desire it,and they have been living their own lives with the type of 'government' THEY created for thousands of years, it's ARROGANT to assume we can change their entire way of thinking and living with our presence alone, it's foolhardy to think it will work.
Forcing a life style on others has proven to be ineffective and wrong and will only lengthen the time it takes for the 'terrorists' to unite into a far stronger force than we could ever hope to destroy or eliminate, they have had several thousands of years to prepare, who are we to think we have the power or ability to stop this?
We NEED a NEW government, OR a CIVIL WAR to FORCE the government to change the way they do OUR business!
BUSH: Good for decorating your yard, but HORRIBLE as a nation's leader!
Bush MUST be PLANTED in PRISON for LIFE for TREASON!!!
NO EXCUSES, NO PAROLE!!
If I were the president, the FIRST order of business I would perform would be to close down the NSA as it currently exists and enact laws to PROHIBIT ANY spy agency from spying on ANY citizen, at aany time, and make is a treasonous offense to do so, with life terms in prison for attepmting it.
The next thing I would do is RECALL our troops from Iraq and concentrate on Osama, THAT is who we SHOULD be looking for in the first place.
After this latest fiasco with AT&T handing ove OUR private information to the NSA, I'll be DUMPING MY SHARES OF AT&T STOCK and CANCELLING ALL OF MY AT&T services from this day forward!!
They want to SCREW me, then SCREW AT&T and NEVER pay for their 'srvices ever again!
Hit them where it HURTS....THE BANK ACCOUNT!!!
Thank goodness I have my guns!
I am against loss of personal privacy, except under circumstances and controls that allow the monitoring of the process by competent judicial authority, and public disclosure of the existance of the program's monitoring requirements and compliance. To do less opens the door to insidious further invasion of my "personal space," something I won't give up without a fight to the death.
It appears that the availability of phone records relating to each and every telephone call are designed to allow the government to "reverse engineer" contacts between suspected terrorists and their collaborators.
This is a process by which the government may at a future date discover calls and telephone numbers between a known or suspected terror operation. Discovering their contacts and methods of communication would then allow "trolling" of archived records to see with whom those suspects communicated. Same for wireless and Internet, including VOIP.
Nothwistanding the lack of overt cooperation that some foreign countries have displayed, I believe the US should have the absolute right to destroy terrorists wherever and whenever found, regardless of the host countrys willingness to cooperate. And if they object or interfere, why they might just get a dose of Afghanistan.
I am angry that the US is being hunted in so many ways by so many people, and other governments like Pakistan, Syria, and Iran to name a few, are complicit and should be "taken out" if need be.
No mercy, no rules.
But let's protect our privacy and freedom here, and pursue the war where it needs to be confronted.
Make the terrorists disapear and supporting governments cooperate or face the consequences. And those consequences are to be swift and harsh.
A few capitols bombed, a few terrorist leaders and collaborators taken out regardless of collateral damage, and a few goverments might understand our willingness to "go the distance" on this issue.
"Beware waking the tiger, his bite is ferocious, and his defense of his territory relentless."
Diogenes
I am against loss of personal privacy, except under circumstances and controls that allow the monitoring of the process by competent judicial authority, and public disclosure of the existance of the program's monitoring requirements and compliance. To do less opens the door to insidious further invasion of my "personal space," something I won't give up without a fight to the death.
It appears that the availability of phone records relating to each and every telephone call are designed to allow the government to "reverse engineer" contacts between suspected terrorists and their collaborators.
This is a process by which the government may at a future date discover calls and telephone numbers between a known or suspected terror operation. Discovering their contacts and methods of communication would then allow "trolling" of archived records to see with whom those suspects communicated. Same for wireless and Internet, including VOIP.
Nothwistanding the lack of overt cooperation that some foreign countries have displayed, I believe the US should have the absolute right to destroy terrorists wherever and whenever found, regardless of the host countrys willingness to cooperate. And if they object or interfere, why they might just get a dose of Afghanistan.
I am angry that the US is being hunted in so many ways by so many people, and other governments like Pakistan, Syria, and Iran to name a few, are complicit and should be "taken out" if need be.
No mercy, no rules.
But let's protect our privacy and freedom here, and pursue the war where it needs to be confronted.
Make the terrorists disapear and supporting governments cooperate or face the consequences. And those consequences are to be swift and harsh.
A few capitols bombed, a few terrorist leaders and collaborators taken out regardless of collateral damage, and a few goverments might understand our willingness to "go the distance" on this issue.
"Beware waking the tiger, his bite is ferocious, and his defense of his territory relentless."
Diogenes
Now that the Bush administration is trying to use the tools at it's disposal; including a 1993 law, created by a Democrat President, passed by a Democrat House and Democrat Senate, and signed into law by the same Democrat President, that permits them to request third party information from the telecommunications industry; to find dots to connect together, the anti-Bush crowd is screaming "Privacy".
The collection of the information is legal. The analogies in other media have been upheld in court. (ie: The contents of a letter is private, the what is written on the outside, including addressing, is not.)
Bush is severely unfit for the presidency.
The 4th Ammendment reads as follows.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
The US wiretap law, contained in Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (just called Title II for short) makes it illegal to intercept or disclose the contents of intercepted communications without an appropriate warrant, either for law enforcement purposes, or under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
Next we have Congress, who passed the Pen-register statute, which provided that it was illegal to install a "pen register" or "trap and trace" device (a device to record numbers dialed, etc.) without first obtaining a court order after a certification by a federal or state prosecutor, or under FISA.
Don't like that one, well Title 18 U.S.C. 2702(a)(3) of the Stored Communications Act makes it a crime for phone companies or ISPs to disclose either the contents of communications or non-content subscriber information. It specifically prohibits disclosure of this data to a government entity.
Finally we have the Federal Communications Commission, which mandates that phone companies protect the privacy of customer data, specifically Customer Proprietary Network Information, e.g. the numbers you call, and how long you?re on the phone, who I talk to, and when. The statute goes on to say that the phone company can't give out the records of who I have called, or who has called me unless otherwise required by law ? not just permitted by law.
Ofcourse if you choose to ignore the law, there are the privacy policies of the carriers themselves.
Verizon
?Access to databases containing customer information is limited to employees who need it to perform their jobs - and they follow strict rules when handling that information"
AT&T
"We must disclose information, when requested, to comply with court orders or subpoenas. We will also share information when necessary to prevent unlawful use of communications services, when necessary to repair network outages, and when a customer dials 911 and information regarding their location is transmitted to a public safety agency."
While not laws, the AT&T policy in particular clearly states that they will not simply hand over my information on request, but that some sort of court order or subpoena would be required. So in effect they've broken their contract with me, and I should be able to sue them for it.
Now that the Bush administration is trying to use the tools at it's disposal; including a 1993 law, created by a Democrat President, passed by a Democrat House and Democrat Senate, and signed into law by the same Democrat President, that permits them to request third party information from the telecommunications industry; to find dots to connect together, the anti-Bush crowd is screaming "Privacy".
The collection of the information is legal. The analogies in other media have been upheld in court. (ie: The contents of a letter is private, the what is written on the outside, including addressing, is not.)
Bush is severely unfit for the presidency.
The 4th Ammendment reads as follows.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
The US wiretap law, contained in Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (just called Title II for short) makes it illegal to intercept or disclose the contents of intercepted communications without an appropriate warrant, either for law enforcement purposes, or under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
Next we have Congress, who passed the Pen-register statute, which provided that it was illegal to install a "pen register" or "trap and trace" device (a device to record numbers dialed, etc.) without first obtaining a court order after a certification by a federal or state prosecutor, or under FISA.
Don't like that one, well Title 18 U.S.C. 2702(a)(3) of the Stored Communications Act makes it a crime for phone companies or ISPs to disclose either the contents of communications or non-content subscriber information. It specifically prohibits disclosure of this data to a government entity.
Finally we have the Federal Communications Commission, which mandates that phone companies protect the privacy of customer data, specifically Customer Proprietary Network Information, e.g. the numbers you call, and how long you?re on the phone, who I talk to, and when. The statute goes on to say that the phone company can't give out the records of who I have called, or who has called me unless otherwise required by law ? not just permitted by law.
Ofcourse if you choose to ignore the law, there are the privacy policies of the carriers themselves.
Verizon
?Access to databases containing customer information is limited to employees who need it to perform their jobs - and they follow strict rules when handling that information"
AT&T
"We must disclose information, when requested, to comply with court orders or subpoenas. We will also share information when necessary to prevent unlawful use of communications services, when necessary to repair network outages, and when a customer dials 911 and information regarding their location is transmitted to a public safety agency."
While not laws, the AT&T policy in particular clearly states that they will not simply hand over my information on request, but that some sort of court order or subpoena would be required. So in effect they've broken their contract with me, and I should be able to sue them for it.
Read my lips: "Go to open court and get a warrant."
Read my lips: "Go to open court and get a warrant."
As for AT&T being "one of the great companies of the United States...." GET REAL. ATT&T has been the enemy of the people for many years indeed, going back long before Vietnam. No sane person accepts that ********. If ATT&T is one of the great companies of the United States, then Gawd help the USA.
As for AT&T being "one of the great companies of the United States...." GET REAL. ATT&T has been the enemy of the people for many years indeed, going back long before Vietnam. No sane person accepts that ********. If ATT&T is one of the great companies of the United States, then Gawd help the USA.
- Harper
facilitating unwarranted eavesdropping on phone
conversations, the other being providing
call-details records. The former could be
prevented using encrypted conversations,
particularly VOIP ones). The latter is a simply
a record of the end-points, dates, call
duration, and carrier. That would not be
affected by encryption (though, using VOIP
methods would change the carrier and nature of
the record of the end-points, and strict
IP-to-IP communications might be difficult
pinpoint the nature of the communication (it's
all data) and the recipient terminal).
- Harper
facilitating unwarranted eavesdropping on phone
conversations, the other being providing
call-details records. The former could be
prevented using encrypted conversations,
particularly VOIP ones). The latter is a simply
a record of the end-points, dates, call
duration, and carrier. That would not be
affected by encryption (though, using VOIP
methods would change the carrier and nature of
the record of the end-points, and strict
IP-to-IP communications might be difficult
pinpoint the nature of the communication (it's
all data) and the recipient terminal).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cointelpro
"Illegal surveillance
The Final report of the Church Committee concluded: Too many people have been spied upon by too many Government agencies and to much information has been collected. The Government has often undertaken the secret surveillance of citizens on the basis of their political beliefs, even when those beliefs posed no threat of violence or illegal acts on behalf of a hostile foreign power. The Government, operating primarily through secret informants, but also using other intrusive techniques such as wiretaps, microphone "bugs" surreptitious mail opening, and break-ins, has swept in vast amounts of information about the personal lives, views, and associations of American citizens. Investigations have been based upon vague standards whose breadth made excessive collection inevitable. Intelligence agencies have served the political and personal objectives of presidents and other high officials. Governmental officials -- including those whose principal duty is to enforce the law --have violated or ignored the law over long periods of time and have advocated and defended their right to break the law.
The Constitutional system of checks and balances has not adequately controlled intelligence activities. Until recently the Executive branch has neither delineated the scope of permissible activities nor established procedures for supervising intelligence agencies. Congress has failed to exercise sufficient oversight, seldom questioning the use to which its apropriations were being put. Most domestic intelligence issues have not reached the courts, and in those cases when they have reached the courts, the judiciary has been reluctant to grapple with them."
- Disturbingly Similar To COINTELPRO
- by maxwis May 18, 2006 10:17 AM PDT
- If you read the findings of the Church Commission on COINTELPRO, specifically the wiretapping and snooping, the lack of oversight, you see the same pattern of abuse. The justification is always the same: Protection of the Fatherland. It seems that destruction of freedom to protect freedom is always the justification.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 2 of 3 pages (102 Comments)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cointelpro
"Illegal surveillance
The Final report of the Church Committee concluded: Too many people have been spied upon by too many Government agencies and to much information has been collected. The Government has often undertaken the secret surveillance of citizens on the basis of their political beliefs, even when those beliefs posed no threat of violence or illegal acts on behalf of a hostile foreign power. The Government, operating primarily through secret informants, but also using other intrusive techniques such as wiretaps, microphone "bugs" surreptitious mail opening, and break-ins, has swept in vast amounts of information about the personal lives, views, and associations of American citizens. Investigations have been based upon vague standards whose breadth made excessive collection inevitable. Intelligence agencies have served the political and personal objectives of presidents and other high officials. Governmental officials -- including those whose principal duty is to enforce the law --have violated or ignored the law over long periods of time and have advocated and defended their right to break the law.
The Constitutional system of checks and balances has not adequately controlled intelligence activities. Until recently the Executive branch has neither delineated the scope of permissible activities nor established procedures for supervising intelligence agencies. Congress has failed to exercise sufficient oversight, seldom questioning the use to which its apropriations were being put. Most domestic intelligence issues have not reached the courts, and in those cases when they have reached the courts, the judiciary has been reluctant to grapple with them."