Lookin for a nsa deal

Added: Markeese Dubuque - Date: 22.01.2022 13:39 - Views: 40650 - Clicks: 1935

We use cookies and other tracking technologies to improve your browsing experience on our site, show personalized content and targetedanalyze site traffic, and understand where our audiences come from. To learn more or opt-out, read our Cookie Policy.

Yesterday, one of the major fronts closed down. Since July, tech companies had been putting pressure on the Department of Justice, fighting for the right to say more about their interactions with law enforcement. Yesterday they made peace, reaching a settlement and withdrawing a class action suit that had drawn in some of the most powerful companies in America.

From the outside, it looked like a simple response to the president's recent NSA order, but according to the Wall Street Journal 's reporting, it was the result of intricate backroom negotiations between tech companies and the administration, the end of a conversation that's been going on for months.

Lookin for a nsa deal

As soon as the order was announced, the companies quietly dropped their motion against the FISA court, declining to comment beyond a short prepared statement:. As one Obama aide told Politico more simply, the deal was "understood to resolve the question of transparency around national security. So what did they win, exactly? On the transparency side, companies get to add two new columns to their transparency reports, announcing the general of national security letters and FISA warrants alongside traditional warrants and wiretaps. So if Microsoft were to launch an all-new chat platform tomorrow, the government will have at least two years between the first data request and the first transparency report, supposedly lulling gullible terrorists into a false sense of security.

It also applies to entirely new kinds of warrant, so if terrorists start sending self-destructing messages through Snapchat, the same two-year lag time will apply. It's the kind of compromise President Obama loveslocking both sides into a limited version of what they want. There's some chilling effect, since users of smaller services will never know whether a given service is in the two-year window or not — but in the long term, two years is just a snippet, hardly enough time for society to spiral into a surveillance dystopia.

As long as all the programs are disclosed within two years, then the public will be generally informed about the government's surveillance programs, and the gears of democracy can take it from there. If that were the whole story, privacy advocates would be declaring victory right now — but they're not. That's because the order also leaves a of loopholes that seem to be deed to let programs like PRISM slip by unnoticed.

ACLU chief technologist Chris Soghoian has already raised concerns that the disclosure rules Lookin for a nsa deal apply to "customer selectors" targeting individual users.

Lookin for a nsa deal

That would mean a FISA warrant for a specific person or address would be included in the s, but it might not include broader queries that brought up anyone who ed the word "terrorist" or started accessing their from Yemen. The order only addresses bulk collection programs in a footnote, offering vague assurances at best. Those programs are still closed off, effectively unreportable. While NSA reformers have been crusading for fundamental changes in US surveillance, tech companies have been looking for something simpler: trust.

All the web's most successful products are built on trust, from Gmail and Facebook on down.

Lookin for a nsa deal

Disclosure isn't just a public service; it's a business imperative. Yesterday's deal Lookin for a nsa deal that trust, but it doesn't go further. It's a move back to the pre-Snowden state, with fights over targeted surveillance obscuring more secretive programs that suck up data in bulk and escape ability entirely.

Programs like PRISM strike at the nature of the internet itself, establishing a breed of totalizing surveillance on a scale that would be unthinkable elsewhere. The free flow of data, once a tool of freedom, becomes something much darker. Any true reform will have to grapple with that fact. Subscribe to get the best Verge-approved tech deals of the week.

Cookie banner We use cookies and other tracking technologies to improve your browsing experience on our site, show personalized content and targetedanalyze site traffic, and understand where our audiences come from. By choosing I Acceptyou consent to our use of cookies and other tracking technologies. Cybersecurity Mobile Policy Privacy Scooters. Phones Laptops Headphones Cameras. Tablets Smartwatches Speakers Drones. Accessories Buying Guides How-tos Deals.

Health Energy Environment. YouTube Instagram Adobe. Kickstarter Tumblr Art Club. Film TV Games. Fortnite Game of Thrones Books. Comics Music. Linkedin Reddit Pocket Flipboard. The deal was "understood to resolve the question of transparency" From the outside, it looked like a simple response to the president's recent NSA order, but according to the Wall Street Journal 's reporting, it was the result of intricate backroom negotiations between tech companies and the administration, the end of a conversation that's been going on for months.

As soon as the order was announced, the companies quietly dropped their motion against the FISA court, declining to comment beyond a short prepared statement: We filed our lawsuits because we believe that the public has a right to know about the volume and types of national security requests we receive. We're pleased the Department of Justice has agreed that we and other providers can disclose this information. While this is a very positive step, we'll continue to encourage Congress to take additional steps to address all of the reforms we believe are needed.

It's the kind of compromise President Obama loves So what did they win, exactly? The disclosure rules only apply to "customer selectors" If that were the whole story, privacy advocates would be declaring victory right now — but they're not. Tech companies have been looking for something simpler: trust That's a big concern for the ACLU, but for Google and others, it may be beside the point.

Next Up In Policy. Thanks for ing up! Check your inbox for a welcome. required. Loading comments Share this story Twitter Facebook.

Lookin for a nsa deal

email: [email protected] - phone:(625) 861-4687 x 4897

PRISM (surveillance program)