{"id":688,"date":"2014-01-24T18:46:01","date_gmt":"2014-01-24T18:46:01","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.opensource.im\/?p=688"},"modified":"2014-01-24T18:46:01","modified_gmt":"2014-01-24T18:46:01","slug":"civil-liberties-board-says-nsa-spying-is-illegal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/euvolution.com\/open-source-convergence\/nsa-spying\/civil-liberties-board-says-nsa-spying-is-illegal.php","title":{"rendered":"Civil Liberties Board Says NSA Spying Is Illegal"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    Last week, President Obama     announced a number of reforms to how the NSA conducts its    business. Chief among those reforms was changing how the agency    collects bulk cellphone metadata. Some felt that the program        should be ended immediately though, and the Presidents own    civil liberties board couldnt agree more.  <\/p>\n<p>    The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board     published a 238-page document today detailing their opinion    on the NSAs collection of bulk telephone metadata. In stark    contrast to just about everybody else in the executive branch,    the board concluded in a 3-2 decision that it is illegal and    should be ended immediately.  <\/p>\n<p>    So, how did the Board come about to this conclusion? In the    executive summary of the document, the board points out that    Section 215 of the Patriot Act only allows the FBI to acquire    records that a business has in its possession as part of an FBI    investigation, when those records are relevant to the    investigation. The current interpretation of Section 215 that    allows the NSA to collect the phone records of every America    bears almost no resemblance to that description, according to    the board.  <\/p>\n<p>    The Board then breaks down how the NSAs actions goes beyond    what Section 215 allows in four parts:  <\/p>\n<p>      First, the telephone records acquired under the program      have no connection to any specific FBI investigation at the      time of their collection. Second, because the records are      collected in bulk  potentially encompassing all telephone      calling records across the nation  they cannot be regarded      as relevant to any FBI investigation as required by the      statute without redefining the world relevant in a manner      that is circular, unlimited in scope, and out of step with      the case law from analogous legal contexts involving the      production of records. Third, the program operates by putting      telephone companies under an obligation to furnish new      calling records on a daily basis as they are generated      (instead of turning over records already in their possession)       an approach lacking foundation in the statute and one that      is inconsistent with FISA as a whole. Fourth, the statute      permits only the FBI to obtain items for use in its      investigation; it does not authorize the NSA to collect      anything.    <\/p>\n<p>    If that wasnt enough, the Board also says that Section 215    violates the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, or ECPA.  <\/p>\n<p>      In addition, we conclude that the program violates the      Electronic Communications Privacy Act. That statute prohibits      telephone companies from sharing consumer records with the      government except in response to specific enumerated      circumstances, which do not include Section 215 orders.    <\/p>\n<p>    Oh, but the trashing of Section 215 doesnt stop there. A bit    further into the summary, the Board says that the common    defense of the bulk metadata collection program (i.e. it stops    terrorism) doesnt hold up in the face of reality:  <\/p>\n<p>      we conclude that the Section 215 program has shown      minimal value in safeguarding the nation from terrorism.      Based on information provided to the Board, including      classified briefings and documentation, we have not      identified a single instance involving a threat to the United      States in which the program made a concrete difference in the      outcome of a counterterrorism investigation. Moreover, we are      aware of no instance in which the program directly      contributed to the discovery of a previously unknown      terrorist plot or the disruption of a terrorist attack. And      we believe that in only one instance over the past seven      years has the program arguably contributed to the      identification of an unknown terrorism suspect. Even in that      case, the suspect was not involved in planning a terrorist      attack and there is reason to believe that the FBI may have      discovered him without the contribution of the NSAs      program.    <\/p>\n<p>    Despite saying that it has never directly contributed to the    foiling of a terrorist plot, the Board plays devils advocate    for a bit by saying that the bulk metadata collection program    may help investigators in two ways. The first is that the    program may offer additional leads regarding the contacts of    terrorism suspects already known to investigators. The second    can help investigators confirm suspicions about the target of    an inquiry. Despite this, the Board feels that the bulk    metadata collection program largely duplicates the FBIs own    information gathering efforts. In other words, its redundant    and contributes nothing of value.  <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>Excerpt from:<\/p>\n<p><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.webpronews.com\/civil-liberties-board-says-nsa-spying-is-illegal-2014-01\" title=\"Civil Liberties Board Says NSA Spying Is Illegal\">Civil Liberties Board Says NSA Spying Is Illegal<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> Last week, President Obama announced a number of reforms to how the NSA conducts its business. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[46],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-688","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-nsa-spying"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/euvolution.com\/open-source-convergence\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/688"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/euvolution.com\/open-source-convergence\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/euvolution.com\/open-source-convergence\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/euvolution.com\/open-source-convergence\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/euvolution.com\/open-source-convergence\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=688"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/euvolution.com\/open-source-convergence\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/688\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/euvolution.com\/open-source-convergence\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=688"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/euvolution.com\/open-source-convergence\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=688"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/euvolution.com\/open-source-convergence\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=688"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}