NSA Provides Heavily Redacted Report on Its "Improper Surveillance" of Americans

The elves at the NSA were certainly busy this holiday season. Besides their usual snooping activities, the agency prepared a report on instances of its "improper surveillance" of American citizens. The NSA did not exactly go into this project willingly; it was compelled via a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union.

The agency released its heavily redacted report on who was naughty or nice on the afternoon of Christmas Eve. A story about the information appeared in Bloomberg; the piece was later linked in a Washington Post roundup. The timing virtually guaranteed minimal public attention to an issue on which left-wing occupiers and right-wing liberty lovers should theoretically find common ground.

The NSA would not have even entertained providing these crumbs of knowledge of its business, except that Edward Snowden's revelations forced its hand. Coincidentally (or maybe not), a former naval officer filed suit this week in Kansas against the producers of Citizenfour, the Laura Poitras-directed documentary about Snowden's efforts to make public what the NSA most devoutly wished to reamin concealed. The suit alleges, among other things, the producers' intent to profiteer from the film. The story about the litigation appears in commondreams.org; a link to a PDF of the court papers appears courtesy of the information technology news website theregister.co.uk.

Court Nixes Feds Request to Keep NSA Phone Records Longer Than Five Years

Federal judge Reggie Walton

In a story that slipped under the radar during SXSW, the Ukraine crisis, and the Malaysian Airlines plane disaster, a federal judge ruled that the NSA could not keep phone records longer than five years. According to an article in theverge.com, the judge in charge of NSA oversight asserted that privacy protections trumped the government's contention that five years just wasn't enough time to hold gathered data for evidentiary purposes.

The ruling jurist, Reggie Walton, is a George W. Bush appointee. The judge has tended to see the merits of protecting individual privacy versus sweeping, secret government encroachment of it.

A Look Ahead to 2014's Surveillance Politics

Tech's high priests and their financial enablers continue to squirm under the harsh light the Snowden surveillance revelations cast on their activities. Naturally, Silicon Valley, which has viewed the developed world as its experimental animal, has decided to publicly stand tall against the alleged bad actors at the NSA.

A few caveats should make one pause in that convenient posture. Peter Thiel, Pay Pal principal and leading libertarian light in the Valley, happens to be a major investor in a firm called Palantir. This company was characterized in a recent Financial Times piece as "a secretive data-mining company that made its name working for the CIA..." Jeff Bezos' Amazon, which has been quiet in the entire NSA-Valley imbroglio, has a cloud computing contract with the Central Intelligence Agency. As for other tech firms, do you want to guess how many have federal contracts?

Peter Thiel

Meanwhile, the usual hypocritical "rule of law" arguments high tech trots out to defend its global interests and ruthless invasion of personal privacy have notably not emerged to protest the NSA's own data "extraction" efforts. After all, the NSA is a federal agency with broad mandates to protect and serve the nation. And that's the law, too.

A recent article in Wired suggests that diminished expectations for "business development" is a significant reason the Valley was shocked to discover gambling in its data collection and exploitation casino. Chris Finan's opinion piece -- "What To Expect From Surveillance Politics in 2014 (Hint: It's Not Reform)" -- asserts high tech's public outrage partly stems from anticipated international business losses as a consequence of the Snowden expose. Finan contends

it’s safe to say that American tech executives are angry. And they have good reason to be: U.S. companies’ association — via cooperation, coercion, or simply unwitting victimization — with government surveillance programs have cost them huge shares of the IT services market internationally.Forrester Research has projected that the overall impact to the U.S. cloud computing industry could be as high as $180 billion, or 25% of IT service provider revenues over three years. While many companies will try to convince policymakers of the the significant costs of intrusive surveillance and the need for reform — as a group of tech execs tried to do this week in a meeting with President Obama — expect companies to take matters into their own hands.

What's fascinating is the Valley's relentless determination to transform the world into a global data colony which these firms are free to exploit as they please. An essential piece of that initiative is the evisceration and degradation of personal privacy. Anyone who has received unwanted "targeted" advertising on their phones, tablets, or computers can grasp this concept. Why does the Valley insist it qualifies for an exemption from criticism over its arrogant, anti-privacy activities? The NSA, in this case, is a convenient pinata for actions high tech has developed, exploited, and tried to wink and nod its way through legal action and protest.

One wishes the Valley, in its collective sense, had a conscience that went beyond IPO "success" and an unwavering faith in "progress" (as defined by improved data mining and consumer gadgets). Those sentiments are rarely displayed. At least the NSA has a mission to guard our nation. The Valley's primary mission is to guard its own interests, its own egos, its own financial opportunities. Who do you trust, baby?

AP Report: NSA-Silicon Valley Struggle Centers on Profit That User Data Generates

The Snowden leaks revealed the global reach and evisceration of personal privacy the American military-tech complex routinely conducts. While Silicon Valley's highest profile search and social media firms have cried "foul" over the NSA's stunning data mining and analysis activities, these libertarian entrepreneurs are reticent to come clean about the depth and relentlessness of their collection of personal data. Of course, the money and power firms such as Google (yes, thanks for Blogger), Facebook, and Amazon now command should make one pause. However, few media outlets feel any urge to upset these data titans. (To this day, some major media outlets continue to identity data-driven Amazon's principal business as a retail concern, as if Jeff Bezos' ambition is simply to open an online version of The Home Depot.)

An Associated Press article appearing in today's siliconvalley.com attempts to illuminate certain truths animating the NSA-Silicon Valley struggle. AP reporters Michael Liedtke's and Marcy Gordon's useful piece gets to the heart of the matter: profit. The NSA's "violation of trust," according to the piece, has upset the Valley's expansion plans into emerging nations and their economies. Oops. Now nations such as Brazil are now at least publicly determined to keep close the data its citizens generate. Meanwhile, the Valley's lustful data expropriation and exploitation, along with its trumpeting of the virtues of "sharing," has produced a 21st Century version of colonialism that must certainly rub formerly colonized nations a very wrong way.

Facebook server farm in Sweden

The stakes are high for the Valley. As the AP story noted, countries in addition to Brazil "and international regulators are considering strict rules for data-handling by U.S. tech companies. If that were to happen, it could cripple the companies' crucial drive to grow in overseas markets, and could fracture the Internet's seamless inner-workings."

Yes, you're welcome to share or post this story.

Google Settles Over Unauthorized Cookies in Safari Browser

One irony of the Snowden-NSA revelations is how quickly Silicon Valley's data mining titans professed shock over the federal snoopers' lies. It's instructive to recall that the Valley's green giants (as in the color of money) have done their fair share of unauthorized collection of personal data. Today's edition of siliconvalley.com included an Associated Press story noting Google's quiet settlement of litigation alleging that the Mountain Valley firm conducted unwelcome data collection on Apple's Safari browser. This activity was in violation of Apple policy and Google's own statements of innocence in the matter. Google later claimed its actions were "inadvertent."

Uh-huh. This is the same company whose Google Maps crews routinely gathered data without permission. Meanwhile, Google has screamed and yelled about the NSA's volte-face on the feds' data mining. Googlers complained about how the NSA violated understandings and trust.

The question to ask Silicon Valley's repeat violators of personal privacy is the following one: how does it feel to be violated?

NSA Chief Rips Media's Coverage of Surveillance Flaps

General Keith Alexander
(Image: abcnews.go.com)

NSA boss General Keith Alexander didn't get the memo about the federal government's shutdown. He's still on duty; I salute him for that action (no pun intended). America's Chief Surveillance Officer (CSO) did find time today to deliver a public speech to the Telecommunications Industry Association about the media's coverage of recent revelations about the NSA's surveillance efforts. The story appeared in today's online editions of The Washington Post.

His address to the collected telecom insiders repeated the NSA mantra about "damage" to the nation's security and how the media mismanaged reporting the spy agency's virtuous labors on behalf of freedom everywhere. Alexander, who also runs the military's Cyber Command, said somehow the nation would manage despite Edward Snowden's information about the extent of NSA snooping on ordinary American citizens. He noted l'affaire Snowden caused an erosion of trust, notably in the very industries the NSA has assiduously courted and, at times, strong armed. That's a fair point.

NYPD Surveillance Camera

However, Alexander did not allude to the increasing mistrust some Americans have toward allegedly "benign" surveillance. Then again, America's CSO doesn't have a profound desire for informed citizens to ponder what the NSA has wrought. He must have the insiders to buy into the "needs" of the surveillance state. He certainly does not want the extent of America's military-technology complex openly considered by a thoughtful electorate. Those industrial-governmental relationships were the heart of Snowden's revelations. I doubt General Alexander will be making any speeches on that topic in the near future.

Report: NSA Surveillance Panel's First Meeting Dodges Change

Ten days ago, the UK newspaper The Guardian reported on an Obama Administration panel's initial meeting to determine changes to NSA surveillance practices and data collection. The group included representatives from tech heavyweights (with the notable exception of Amazon), insiders from the fed's spy world, and think tank policy mavens. Some participants claimed the meeting was a borderline sham, in which no change was discussed and tech firms worked hard to advance their interests. Those "interests" did not necessarily coincide with those of the larger body of American citizens, who have discovered the military-technology complex has compromised their constitutional right to privacy.

Some details from the Guardian's story offer a disturbing look into what passes for transparency inside the Beltway. The meeting, one participant noted, was something less than a full, open dialogue. For one participant, the tech firms, who dominated the 90-minute meeting, seemed to be walking through a prepared script.

Representatives from the technology firms were identified around the table not by their names, but by placards listing their employers. There was minimal technical discussion of surveillance mechanisms despite the presence of technology companies; (the participant) took the representatives to be lawyers, not technologists.

When it appeared like the meeting would discuss a surveillance issue in a sophisticated way, participants and commissioners suggested it be done in a classified meeting. (The participant) interpreted that as a maneuver to exclude his more-critical viewpoint.

The privacy vs. surveillance issue is one of the few issues where American conservatives and liberals share a common concern. It is the conservatives' great shame that they allowed the Bush Administration to emasculate personal privacy guarantees; it is the liberals' great shame that they have played matador to the Obama Administration's bullish advocacy of the NSA's breathtaking data and communication sweeps.

It's a sad state of affairs when a British newspaper takes the lead and sheds light -- continued light -- on this American issue. No Fox News, no NPR, no major American media player really wants this story. That's a national shame.

FISA Court Upholds NSA Phone Snooping Tactics

Ellen Nakashima
(Image: cfp.org)

The NSA's sweeping (no pun intended) ability and evident willingness to aggressively data mine domestic phone conversations was upheld by a FISA judge this week. The Washington Post's Ellen Nakashima reported this story in today's online editions of the newspaper.

The FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) court is an American judicial anomaly. Its secret proceedings feature a plaintiff and no defendant. A government attorney makes a case, and a FISA jurist determines its suitability under the judge's interpretation of current federal statutes. The court straddles the line between a rubber stamp for NSA activities and a light touch of "judicial oversight."

Former US Attorney General
Alberto Gonzalez

One consequence of Edward Snowden's revelations was sharply increased doubt regarding the efficacy of the FISA court. The NSA seemed like an organization that could simply make up the rules of the game, and not inform anyone about them. The right to privacy? That notion seemed as "quaint" as George W. Bush's former attorney general Alberto Gonzalez once considered the Geneva Convention's protocols.

The recent FISA ruling the Post cites expands this alarming erosion of privacy rights. As Nakashima notes:

The gathering of "all call detail records" from phone companies is justified as long as the government can show that it is relevant to an authorized investigation into known -- and, significantly -- unknown terrorists who may be in the United States, the Aug. 29 opinion states.

Moreover, the government need only show that there are "reasonable grounds to believe" the records will be relevant to the investigation, a lower burden than required in ordinary criminal investigations. That is justified because the goal is to prevent a terrorist attack, not solve a crime that has already taken place, the court said, affirming the government's position.

Court Ruling Permits Major Privacy Case Against Google To Continue

Judge Jay Bybee
(Image: UNLV Law School)

In a day when Apple presented new iPhones the NSA can effortlessly monitor, a three-judge federal court panel allowed the continuation of a lawsuit alleging privacy violations by Google.

According to a story in today's technology section of The New York Times, the litigation involves Google's collection of personal data during its controversial Street View project. The court, the Times noted, "found little merit in Google's legal maneuverings, stating at one critical point that the company was basically inventing meanings in an effort to declare its actions legal."

One curiosity in the story is Judge Jay Bybee, who wrote the ruling. During the George W. Bush administration, Bybee was an assistant attorney general. His claim to fame? He signed the Torture Memos is 2002, which authorized "enhanced interrogation" techniques.

Alberto Moravia, Italian Fascism, and the NSA Security State

Alberto Moravia
(Image: raistoria.rai.it)

Lately, I've been reading about the life and work of the 20th century Italian novelist Alberto Moravia. His novels and short stories, often exploring middle-class puzzlement or conformism in the face of Fascism, seem eerily connected to today's political and social situation in the United States. Two years ago, The New York Times' Rachel Donadio wrote a telling piece about Moravia's work and Silvio Berlusconi. As with the United States under the NSA shadow, the Berlusconi regime had taken, as Donadio noted, "all the oxygen out of the room."

Donadio cites a passage from Moravia's Two Friends, in which a character "attributes his lack of conviction -- about his career, his lover, his politics -- to his formation under Fascism." To quote Moravia's work, it had

wormed its way into his blood, not in the form of political allegiance, but rather as a kind of torpor and moral passivity, like a poison that slowly intoxicates and weakens the body. He was confronted once again with his feeling of impotence, but this time it not only affected his personal life but encompassed the destiny of the nation and humanity as a whole.

Torpor and moral passivity? Sounds like the American public's response to the devaluation of personal privacy, brought to you by the Feds and the military-technological complex.

Moravia's books remain in print. Many are translated into American English. The works of the author who wrote The Conformist remain strong and vital today. Can we say the same about our own society?

Facebook Opens Server Farm in Sweden

Facebook's server farm in Sweden
(photo: facebook.com)

With an exquisitely ironic sense of timing, Facebook today began processing data from a new server farm outside the United States. The opening comes on the heels of Facebook's first public meeting for its equity shareholders, and revelations suggesting Facebook cooperated in the American security state's data sweeps. (How many "likes" did the NSA get today, eh?)

According to a story in siliconvalley.com, Facebook's Swedish server farm is located on the edge of the Arctic Circle. Mark Zuckerberg's version of Green Acres happens to be near major hydroelectric dams, an essential need for energy-hungry servers. Sweden's northern reaches also happen to be chilly, and high performance servers require constant, cool temperatures to run at maximum efficiency.

The siliconvalley.com piece noted some Swedes questioning their Facebook data's privacy. European laws tend to be far more restrictive than American regulations regarding data privacy. The Swedes may have reason to worry. One critic claimed that the data Facebook collects in Sweden is "mirrored" on US-based servers. Thanks to Edward Snowden, we have a more definitive sense of just how private American data is.