The difference between NSA spying on you and some large company doing it

[1-Old-Man]

First off the company will do it for marketing reasons, the NSA isn't trying to sell you anything. But the reason is a lot deeper that that. The private company may be able to learn a lot about you but it can't link your emails to your phone calls and your financial records and your medical records and your criminal records and you daily movements and the data associated with your birth records and your tax records (Federal, state, and local) and your publications and any and all correspondence you have ever had with any public official ... just for starters.

[sibelian]

1. And the NSA is on YOUR SIDE.

I mean, they say they are, so they must be.

[JoePhilly]

2. The police can do al those things too.

And in both cases, warrants are required.

[Pholus]

5. Fun fact: Warrants were required between before 1971 too.

And yet, illegal surveillance happened.

[JoePhilly]

11. That's why the FISA courts were created in 1978.

To prevent exactly that kind of illegal surveillance.

33 years later, and suddenly people are SHOCKED that the FISA courts exist at all.

[RC]

24. They setup a Kangaroo Court to rubber stamp requests, either before or after the fact

and suddenly the illegal spying is legal? That pesky 4th Amendment got shoved under the bus also.

[JoePhilly]

28. How is a court created in 1978 "suddenly" an issue?

The FISA court has been in operation for 33 years ... yet "suddenly" some are outraged and shocked.

And why is it that this rubber stamp court was only used about 1800 times last year.

Certainly a police state like ours would use its rubber stamp court more frequently than that don't you think?

And which part of the 4th amendment has been violated? Please be specific.

[tblue]

25. Chief Justice Roberts appoints the "Court"

The most pro-corporate Chief Justice ever provides the "Court" that grants permission for spying on you. And the appointees are not necessarily even judges. And they never say no. IOW, even if this system of checks worked, it hasn't done a damn thing. It's not checked. And, do you really think "terrorists" are the only people considered a threat?

Remember this?

And will you feel as certain when Pres. Jeb Bush has this power at his fingertips?

[JoePhilly]

30. Ah ... and he's been appointing the judges since 1978??

Every President since Jimmy Carter had access to the FISA court.

Suddenly its a big issue.

[JDPriestly]

43. Our government did not have the kind of vast phone

and e-mail database that is so easily hacked and snooped on in 1978. In 1978, they subpoenaed phone records one at a time and based on probable cause with a request that identified who, what and why they wanted the court order.

The only really specific reference in the court order that was attached to Greenwald's first Guardian article was Verizon.

The massive collecting of data that the government and private contractors are now doing has nothing to do with the legal theories that supported the FISA court's creation.

This mass surveillance is way out of bounds, way out of control. It is worse than anything the STASI did, and while the STASI may not really have collected people's scents as was rumored, they made the East German people hate them. The STASI was one of the major factors that ended the East German Communist state.

Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

The kind of surveillance that is now going on in the US is absolute power. Sooner or later it will corrupt our system to the point that we reject it.

It is important for a government to keep its people safe and as secure as possible. But massive surveillance is not an effective way to do it. Eventually, massive surveillance becomes so intrusive that it makes a population feel more insecure than they felt without it.

That is the point when governments and entire systems fail.

This surveillance of electronic data must stop. And before that, we need to see all the data they have collected on us. If they think we are terrorists, they should take us to court individually and give us a fair trial. Under the Constitution, we have the right to counsel and to confront our accusers.

If the problem is foreigners in the US, then don't let them in in the first place. But this problem has gone way beyond that. This is massive domestic surveillance.

I would like to see the NSA's records on the Occupiers. Did they collect data on anyone who went to the streaming websites? Did they collect data on anyone who posted about Occupy? Because that was a nonviolent, vaguely political protest movement. And the government should have respected their right of assembly in open public spaces and of speech among other rights.

[JoePhilly]

60. The Shakespeare reference aside ...

Why would the government need to go to the FISA court to investigate the folks involved in Occupy protests. The normal courts would work just fine if they DID want to investigate those folks. You are conflating unrelated events.

By the way, the Tea Party makes the same claims. So do the far right wing militia groups. The latter group probably does have a reason to be suspected by the NSA. But none of these groups rise to the level of a national security concern requiring the FISA court. Which is why the legal cases in all of these cases are public.

As for the "massive surveillance" and your claim that its not effective. I'm curious why you think that. In scientific inquiry, in most cases, more data points (or observations) improve the accuracy of the subsequent data analysis. Computers are very good at conducting tedious data analysis and pattern detection. Data mining any large data set allows one to make predictions that are more accurate. This fact is proven true in numerous applications. Most companies now use a variety of business analytic methods to understand their markets and predict their growth. Bottom line, its far easier to argue that data mining is effective than not.

Finally, as for the potential of the entire system failing, not going to happen. As has happened throughout American history the push and pull goes on. Laws are created, and changed, and then potentially repealed. The same is happening here. The people scream "protect us". Then, when they learn what it takes to do that, they scream "gimme my freedom back" ... and that push and pull will continue. The government is not going to collapse.

[JDPriestly]

62. This system is too broad, and too well financed.

Those who work for and in it are going to want job security. That means that the range and scope of "suspicious" words and communications will have to be enlarged in order to justify their jobs and high salaries. I've been around a long time, and that is how these things work.

The program needs to be ended now.

Der Spiegel is a mainstream, German publication. Here is what it says about our program.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/europe-must-stand-up-to-american-cyber-snooping-a-906250.html

The article is a call for European unity against this program. If you work for the program, I would suggest sending out your resume. You may be changing jobs soon. And Microsoft, Apple and all the other companies that are being used by our government to snoop on us should change their tactics too. Because they may be able to snoop on Americans like this. We are foolish and naive enough not to know where this leads. But the Germans have a guarantee of freedom of speech that even extends to private countries, and they are not going along with this super-surveillance by a foreign government.

We depend on Germany as an ally to back us up in Europe. I think this program is going to be changed, drastically changed. It can't take the smell test. It is way, way overbroad.

[KittyWampus]

33. And if it were a CJ seated by Obama? This is how politics, policies, laws and governing operate.

this is why voting, redistricting and being involved are important. This is why elections matter.

Should we disband the Supreme Court because a Republican can seat a justice perceived as right wing?

[JoePhilly]

63. Bingo.

I think a lot of folks engaging in this debate need to take a civics class.

Here we have the legislative branch creating the laws. The executive branch is enforcing those laws, and the Judicial branch is ensuring that the government is not overstepping its authority with regard to both the laws, and the constitution, with Congress maintaining its oversight role, through multiple committees.

That's how its supposed to work.

Now ... we could debate whether THIS congress is doing its job, or if they should create new laws or change existing laws.

And .. can you imagine if Obama was picking the judges for the FISA court? Folks would be screaming that Obama hand picked these judges so they could rubber stamp what ever he did. Some how most of them miss the possibility that Roberts would pick judges that would make Obama's efforts more difficult.

And as you said ... elections matter ... you don't like the laws, then you you need to vote in people who will help fix the laws to your liking.

[Pholus]

64. I'd be more shocked if they actually did their assigned job once in a while.

0 denials in 1856 applications in 2012...

How was it John Oliver put it?

It's like an American Idol panel with four Randy Jacksons...

Yeah, that's it.

[sabrina 1]

31. WITH Probable cause. Do you know what probable cause, and the President has confirmed this

very important requirement for getting warrants in accordance with the law of the land, did the NSA get to collect the data of all Americans and store it? We have been trying to find out what wrong doing we were all accused of under oath in the FISA Court, which btw, has no jurisdiction over domestic intel?

So do YOU know what probable cause to collect and store my phone records of wrong doing on my part was presented to get that warrant. I'd like to know as would millions of other Verizon customers.

[BenzoDia]

3. Private companies can still exert lobbying pressures on the Government.

A company's profit-driven agenda can certainly be at odds with the rights of ordinary citizens.

They can also smear and destroy people and businesses if they chose to.

[1-Old-Man]

4. Yes they certainly can, even with the relatively limited data companies have available to them

So just think of what the agency can do with the considerably more information systems they are able to use. Also, and I have no idea why no one ventures into the realm. The NSA uses the data. OK, got that? They use it to inform first the President and then at his discretion other Agencies of Government on matters where action will be recommended. Think about that for a minute.

Google might watch your patterns and figure out that you want to buy a new electric drill and then send advertisers your way but they won't have the FBI breaking down your door.

[BenzoDia]

15. A company with your data can link you to politicians and organizations they don't like,

determine if you might take legal action them for some reason, etc.

Maybe they'll inform Ron Paul's wife that he's been looking at animal porn, or provide the DEA with tips about a competior's visits to Hightimes.com, or inform a parent about a daughter's pregnancy (which has happened).

Private business can be as disruptive and corrupt as the Government.

[sabrina 1]

34. Especially when they are receiving billions of dollars from the Government, like Booz Allen, And

their former CEOs are appointed to powerful Government positions, as Clapper, former CEO of Booz Allen is, in his case of all things, to Director of Intelligence.

[disidoro01]

6. The

really funny thing is that the NSA is subcontracting to a private corporation. Do a background check on Booz Allen and you may be suprised what you learn.

[AlbertCat]

7. link your emails to your phone calls and your financial records and your medical records and your ..

... medical records and your criminal records and you daily movements and the data associated with your birth records and your tax records (Federal, state, and local) and your publications and any and all correspondence you have ever had with any public official"

Yeah, well, after they've done all that, is there anyone to make sense of it all?.....if that's possible.

[tblue]

29. Computers can sort that info.

Why do you think they're building that ginormous facility in Utah? To handle this huge treasure trove of data. If they want to know about any individual, they can pull up a record in no time. A complete record too.

But just knowing that they're monitoring us changes our behavior and makes us less free.

[AlbertCat]

70. Computers can sort that info.

But computers don't make sense of it.

I'm not defending spying....

It's just too much info can be quite a burden.

And considering the mistakes marketers make.... y'know like sending vegetarians who eat at vegan restaurants and never buy meat at the grocery store, but still get Omaha Steak flyers.... it just makes all this spying even scarier.

[marions ghost]

8. Risk assessors are assessing you for risk...

As they freely admit:

"The National Security Agency probably isn't spying on you. It's just measuring you for risk, according to two experts on the science of predictive analytics and data mining.

The NSA's Prism program, it has now been revealed, collects communications data from leading online commercial services and collects metadata and envelope information from mobile providers, including Verizon."

(snip)

Spam filters come equipped with settings that identify junk messages based on the way email is addressed, the sender and the content. Individual users train their filters by making decisions on which emails to mark as suspect. Netflix users, meanwhile, get movie recommendations based on individual taste profiles, and the historical likes and dislikes of similar users. The more movies a user rates, the more refined the profile becomes and theoretically the more likely it is that a Netflix suggestion will fit with a user's taste. Abbott said he can imagine something similar at work on the NSA computers, parsing connections between phone calls, geo-location data, web activity, social network contacts, and more.

"Think of it as a nefarious activity filter," Abbott said. The scale of the enterprise doesn't present any hurdles. "There's no technical problem with being able to crunch through all this data. With enough resources, you can do just about anything," Abbott said. In his career working with commercial and government clients, Abbott has not worked with petabytes worth of data, but private companies like the telecom providers and Google are certainly set up to handle that level of processing power, and the NSA with its computing power is surely equipped to do more.


http://fcw.com/articles/2013/06/12/nsa-risk-assessment.aspx

[ohheckyeah]

50. "It's just measuring you for risk"

And it does that how? By SPYING on you.

[marions ghost]

52. right but

nothing to worry about if you're not a "risk."

[ohheckyeah]

54. I wonder what their definition of risk is. n/t

[marions ghost]

56. their definition might be different from ours

maybe.

[ohheckyeah]

58. I think we can bank on their definition being

different from ours.

[MindPilot]

9. The private company cannot put me in prison

at least not yet.

[Billy Pilgrim]

10. Private companies can't authorize federal law enforcement.

That is the most important difference.

[1-Old-Man]

13. See post number 4, above

Exactly.

[sabrina 1]

37. But when the CEO of a private company, paid by the Government for 'security' see Booz Allen eg,

becomes Director of Intelligence, (see Clapper, former CEO of Booz Allen) he surely has no conflict of interest? And that is just one example of hundreds, maybe thousands of these 'Security Contractors' hired by the Government for 'security' purposes.

So when the Government pays a mega corporation billions of dollars for 'security', who owns the work they do?? And when their CEOs end up in Powerful Government positions, mostly related to their 'security experience', DO they have access both to their former Corps data AND the Government's secrets?

And finally, how did this happen? the Privatization of our Security? Are they now an extension of the Government, although not accountable as Congress would be, or the NSA, under the law, but accountable financially to the Government? Iow, would a Corp like Booz Allen be in any position to refuse to pass on what it is collecting, to the Government that is keeping them in business?

And one more question, what laws protect the people from these multi billion dollar Corps from spying on them for any reason? ARE there any laws to stop them? Are they just an excuse to do what the government cannot do under the Constitution for which we are paying billions of dollars? Surely we are not wasting all that money just to make them rich?

[GeorgeGist]

12. I have no reason to believe that they do ...

but Amazon could certainly link my email, phone, address, friends and family members, bank accounts, credit cards, doctors and more if they wanted to.

[Thinkingabout]

14. If the truth was obtained and given properly and not by someone who broke the Code of Ethics I could

appreciate it more as being truthful. If you was not aware of data being collected before Snowden blew off then you have not been paying attention.

[Skinner]

16. The other difference is that you can choose not to associate with a particular company...

...if you disapprove of their data collection practices. The association is voluntary.

But with the government, you are not choosing to associate yourself with their practices. They are doing it behind the scenes, without your knowledge or consent, and you do not know which companies they are getting your data from. To make absolutely certain that you are not giving your data over to the government, you would have to completely disconnect from every company -- go off the grid. That is not a real choice in this day and age.

[blackspade]

21. +1000

[Liberal Veteran]

67. Tell that to Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax.

[gtar100]

17. Private companies can hide their secrets with no public duty to report

what it's doing. If it has secret energy meetings other companies, there isn't anything we can do except shout outside their doors. Short of a subpoena, we have no right to know what's going on.

Sticky issue. One should expect privacy in one's affairs but when a company is part of an industry that controls resources we all depend upon, that privacy becomes a barrier to oversight of our own needs and requirements. That becomes really problematic when we're talking about a monopoly, oligopoly, or cartels.

[nineteen50]

26. Does this mean

it is legal for private corporations to do meta-data mining? If they can and they are private contractors is that why the government can truthfully say they are not doing it.

[magellan]

35. Yes, private businesses legally do data mining all the time

You purchase their goods or service, you usually wind up on a list somewhere that gets shared far and wide. As long as the privacy policy covers them, they can do this.

And I think this is the cover the government is using to get that data. Because businesses aren't covered by the 4th amendment. They're just sharing it with the government (and in we don't know how many cases, being paid for it using our tax dollars!!).

[rhett o rick]

18. I agree that corporations wants all our data for marketing. And that's why I believe

it's very possible that a corporation like Booz Allen can make the link-ups you mentioned. If it's just "meta-date" then it may not be illegal.

How much would this information be worth to the Koch Bros. or Karl Rove? The data might be useful in bringing down a powerful political opponent like a prominent New York governor.

To answer the question of why would they? For money and power.

[Gormy Cuss]

57. Corporations also use that data to select (and not select) customers.

Corporations target customers with more money and offer greater discounts because they perceive that in the long run they'll make more money from this customers. From a bottom line perspective this makes sense but it also has the effect of further disadvantaging lower income people.

Insurers use data profiles to deny coverage or increase premiums even when the data aren't related to the individual. Homeowners insurance has been denied to people because of theft claims at the house under prior ownership for example.

There are so many ways that data profiling can be abused that I want strict regulation of it, whether private companies or government are the ones doing the profiling.

[alfredo]

19. The 4th amendment doesn't apply to businesses, only government.

[magellan]

22. This ^^

The government is using the information businesses keep about us -- with our consent -- to get around that.

[RobinA]

55. So This Whole

"privatization" boondoggle, in addition to creating huge profits from crap service, is an end run around the Constitution...

The bridges back to sanity have been burned.

[magellan]

59. That's just my take on it

Not saying it's right, but I don't know how else the government could get hold of all our phone records and internet activity without the help of private business.

I question the use of private contractors to rake through the data for the same reason. I very much doubt it's more cost-effective. But if the employee of a private contractor like BAH were to trawl through information they shouldn't about a spouse or neighbor, the government can't be accused of having invaded their privacy, can it?

And if BAH or one of the other contractors finds a "relationship" between a few OWS folks that it thinks is hinky, and passes that on to the government, who invaded their privacy?

It's really rotten to the core if you ask me.

[alfredo]

65. The abortion battle was about privacy.

[Buzz Clik]

39. Not all invasions of privacy are fourth amendment issues.

An invasion is an invasion regardless of who is doing it.

[rhett o rick]

61. The Constitution doesnt apply to corporations because they arent people. Wait, what? nm

[blackspade]

20. Good point.

[gtar100]

23. One other point. You say that a company's stated purpose for collecting data

is for marketing purposes. To be fair, the stated purpose of the NSA collecting data is to maintain our security. It's not a nefarious mission statement. Would anyone not want their government collecting intelligence in order to avoid dangers? People are saying "not on me... don't listen in on on me". But the NSA is looking over wide and expansive fields in which its purpose is to protect. How could they possibly find the needle in the haystack without sifting through a lot of innocent hay?

It pisses me off when they go off mission and are dishonorable in their charge. And that's what should be an outrage. We need them to do their jobs well but when they abuse the power we've given them, it reeks of political manipulation, favoritism, and criminality and it deserves all the ridicule it has been receiving. But let's fix it, not destroy it. The NSA exists for the public good - or at least it should. Our problems with it are its misuse and abuse, not its existence.

I don't disagree with anything you said but wanted to make that point. I want it fixed, not eliminated.

[Buzz Clik]

40. +1

[booley]

27. can't private companies sell their data, including to the government

seems like private businesses become part of the problem.

They don't necessarily haver the same restrictions as the government. So they would be a good way to circumvent those restrictions.

So the distinction becomes meaningless

[woo me with science]

32. The government has the power

to use the information to make inconvenient citizens, or inconvenient protests, or inconvenient political movements disappear.

[Buzz Clik]

41. Anyone has the power to do that. It happens every day.

You don't have to be in the government to misuse power.

[Marr]

45. Really? How can Ford throw a political protestor into prison? /nt

[Buzz Clik]

46. So naive.

[Marr]

66. Very illuminating. /nt

[nineteen50]

36. Large

international corporations are like governments and refuse to adhere to national laws. It is time to treat them like governments and stop their spying and deal with them as adversaries not part of our country their interest in America is purely monetary.

[SalviaBlue]

38. The NSA is doing it through as private company.

The government has bee privatized and contracted out.

[Buzz Clik]

42. So you're okay with individuals and corporations invading your privacy, but just not the government?

Odd.

[1-Old-Man]

51. No, what I am saying is one is not equal to the other.

nothing particularly odd about that, is there?

[Marr]

44. Companies also don't have courts, prisons, assault teams, and a direct need to

shut down political dissent.

Corporate intrusion tends to be, "hey, you might like this car". Government intrusion can easily be, "you were talking to someone our plutocrats don't like. Now you'll go to jail for... some reason. We'll find something".

If that second part sounds tinfoil, just look at the arrests that surround G8 (or whatever the number is now) conferences. I once saw several regular protestors hauled off for being suspected "terrorists" a few days ahead of a G8 conference, and the authorities claimed to have found the makings of an incendiary device in their home. Manths later, I learned that this potential "incendiary device" was... a molotov cocktail. Well, who DOESN'T have the makings of a molotov cocktail? That's kind of the whole point of improvised devices.

Anyway, there is no doubt in my mind that these sorts of intrusive powers are used against regular citizens far more often than any foreign terrorist threat.

[KT2000]

47. Says who?

Booz Allen Hamilton has corporate clients as well as the government. I am sure that their corporate clients are able to obtain any information they want.

Who is making sure there is a firewall between government spying and corporate spying - think health advocates, environmental groups, scientists publishing "unfriendly" research etc.

[fasttense]

48. But there is no difference. They are both spying on you right now.

The NSA, FBI and all the other alphabet soup of domestic spying organizations are using corporate contractors.

Do you really believe that there isn't some backwash? Do you believe that the NSA, FBI and police don't provide to the contractors links to your emails, phones, financial records, medical records birth and tax records, if they think they need the info to hunt down more detailed info? Look how Wall Street coordinated with the federal government to get rid of Occupy. Look at how the Canadian XL pipeline executives are directing the police against protesters.

They are in it together right now. The only reason it is such a huge endeavor is because some corporation is making big bucks off of this spying. Government is run and controlled by the whims of the corporate elite. It's been that way since the mentally incompetent Raygun allowed banksters to tell him what to do. If you think otherwise then you are pretty naive.

America is controlled by corporate capitalists and their money. It's how capitalism always ends up destroying democracy.

[Historic NY]

49. Large companies can and do obtain lots of information on you..

They may not link you email directly but they can link your emails on any number of blogs or web site you sign on to. Use their private e-mail they have it....were talking Google- Amazon - Ebay-PayPal-Facebook etc.

Financial records, use a credit reporting service - checking your credit scores - how about those free credit checks the ones you forget to cancel...How do you think you get those great loan offers. Want to buy something on credit they check your score...it comes from private companies. Anyone can see if your a deadbeat - had unpaid balences - a bankrupcy - miss monthly payments.

Criminal records that easy, it public information....I can get prison or parole records in a few minutes all on-line and legal. Been out of the pen for 10yrs - served Federal time its all still there. I don't even need to use a private company that supplies it for a fee.

Use linked in of any one of those social media type sites, they do the connecting for you...from people in your house hold to possible relationship beteen individuals. Hey its not NSA but I can use it to check up on you.

How about you phone number for a small fee sometimes not I can cross check it to you or a residence......reverse phone directories exist, they have for years...known as a blue book.

Really collection agencies, and other companies know more than you think. Even the supermarket or grocers think what I want and give me coupons for it.

If I was doing a background check on a person I'd have a folder of data in front of me all obtained legally w/o them even knowing. It would be a basis for an interview. Your think it for marketing....humms that what the government does in a manner of speaking it tries to sort out the bad guys from the good guys or predict things. At least there not sending out junk mail or calling me even when I am on a do not call list.

[1-Old-Man]

53. Yes they do, and the reason is a failure of my Representatives to enact laws to make that illegal

even if you can argue that we have no right to privacy that does not mean that we can not enact laws that have the effect of requiring it. I for one want such laws but for now apparently either we have no such thing or like so many other top-level laws they are simply not being enforced.

[Historic NY]

69. You bought into the new technology.....

government can barely keep up with what it wants to do. From your cell phone to E-911 enhanced to ezpass..convenience comes with a price the loss of privacy. Hell I bet you even keep your password signed in when you visit a internet site like DU, you don't have to type it in each time.

Your Rep won't do crap...why because he is lazy too. It funny people surrender to technology and then complain later its big brother watching them.

Tomato soup cans and a string are about as low tech as you can go today w/o being surveiled. Unfortunately the grocer would know you bought tomato soup and string. Live with it or live off the grid.

[Rex]

68. One is trying to make a profit, the other is trying to profit off of certain information.

One wants your dollars, the other wants your mindset.