Revealed: the top secret rules that allow NSA to use US data without a warrant

[dipsydoodle]

Source: Guardian

Top secret documents submitted to the court that oversees surveillance by US intelligence agencies show the judges have signed off on broad orders which allow the NSA to make use of information "inadvertently" collected from domestic US communications without a warrant.

The Guardian is publishing in full two documents submitted to the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (known as the Fisa court), signed by Attorney General Eric Holder and stamped 29 July 2009. They detail the procedures the NSA is required to follow to target "non-US persons" under its foreign intelligence powers and what the agency does to minimize data collected on US citizens and residents in the course of that surveillance.

The documents show that even under authorities governing the collection of foreign intelligence from foreign targets, US communications can still be collected, retained and used.

The procedures cover only part of the NSA's surveillance of domestic US communications. The bulk collection of domestic call records, as first revealed by the Guardian earlier this month, takes place under rolling court orders issued on the basis of a legal interpretation of a different authority, section 215 of the Patriot Act.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/20/fisa-court-nsa-without-warrant

[DirkGently]

1. Interesting.

The top secret documents published today detail the circumstances in which data collected on US persons under the foreign intelligence authority must be destroyed, extensive steps analysts must take to try to check targets are outside the US, and reveals how US call records are used to help remove US citizens and residents from data collection.

However, alongside those provisions, the Fisa court-approved policies allow the NSA to:

• Keep data that could potentially contain details of US persons for up to five years;

• Retain and make use of "inadvertently acquired" domestic communications if they contain usable intelligence, information on criminal activity, threat of harm to people or property, are encrypted, or are believed to contain any information relevant to cybersecurity;

So again, the story is that even the interpretations of what the laws mean, by both FISA courts and by government agencies which then interpret those interpretations, is at issue.

Just at first glance, this is very, very broad stuff. "Harm to people or property, or 'any information relevant to cybersecurity' " leap out. And of course, we don't know what level of oversight there is on agencies' interpretations of these rules. I can imagine the NSA or another agency -- say, the FBI -- having a pretty easy time claiming just about anything fit under some of these provisions. OWS for example, might be considered a threat of "harm to property" at all times, given that a minority of destructive protesters are ever present.

[Poll_Blind]

3. I'm sure the President will come clean. A little bit at a time, as needed.

How fucking depressing.

PB

[PSPS]

5. "a legal interpretation of ..."

Yes, we have such clear cut guidelines and controls, no? This really amounts to carte blanche. But we'll soon hear from the reliable cadre of worshipers on how it's good that we live in a country where the government spies on its citizens.

[Th1onein]

6. Let's see.....

FIRST, they said, oh, we look at this stuff, but only foreigners' stuff.
THEN, when that was proven to be false, they said, oh, yeah, we DO look at American's communications, but only with a warrant.
THEN, when that was proven to be false, they said, well, yeah, we DO look at American's communications without a warrant, but only metadata.
THEN, when that was proven to be false, they said, oh um, yeah, we DO look at content, but we don't store it.
NOW, we find that to be untrue.

Is there ANYTHING that these people say that is truthful? ANYTHING?

[ReRe]

7. No.

... They lie out of both sides of their mouth.

[Harmony Blue]

8. Their goal is to try to make sure this goes away

what they don't realize is that this story is sticking around.

[OnyxCollie]

9. Oops!

We "inadvertently acquired" all of your emails, Google searches, financial transactions, Facebook likes, and telephone metadata for the past seven years.

We would ask if you mind if we search all of it for "patterns" and such, but we figure you'll say, "Fuck no," so we won't bother to ask.

[struggle4progress]

10. Anybody, who didn't know about the five-year retention and

the of "inadvertently acquired" domestic communications, simply wasn't paying attention

Shame on Greenwald for pretending to follow so-called "security issues" and not knowing that

[blkmusclmachine]

11. .

[steve2470]

12. k&r nt