organization:foreign intelligence surveillance court

  • The NSA’s Hidden Spy Hubs in Eight U.S. Cities
    https://theintercept.com/2018/06/25/att-internet-nsa-spy-hubs

    The NSA considers AT&T to be one of its most trusted partners and has lauded the company’s “extreme willingness to help.” It is a collaboration that dates back decades. Little known, however, is that its scope is not restricted to AT&T’s customers. According to the NSA’s documents, it values AT&T not only because it “has access to information that transits the nation,” but also because it maintains unique relationships with other phone and internet providers. The NSA exploits these relationships for surveillance purposes, commandeering AT&T’s massive infrastructure and using it as a platform to covertly tap into communications processed by other companies.

    It is an efficient point to conduct internet surveillance, Klein said, “because the peering links, by the nature of the connections, are liable to carry everybody’s traffic at one point or another during the day, or the week, or the year.”

    Christopher Augustine, a spokesperson for the NSA, said in a statement that the agency could “neither confirm nor deny its role in alleged classified intelligence activities.” Augustine declined to answer questions about the AT&T facilities, but said that the NSA “conducts its foreign signals intelligence mission under the legal authorities established by Congress and is bound by both policy and law to protect U.S. persons’ privacy and civil liberties.”

    Jim Greer, an AT&T spokesperson, said that AT&T was “required by law to provide information to government and law enforcement entities by complying with court orders, subpoenas, lawful discovery requests, and other legal requirements.” He added that the company provides “voluntary assistance to law enforcement when a person’s life is in danger and in other immediate, emergency situations. In all cases, we ensure that requests for assistance are valid and that we act in compliance with the law.”

    Dave Schaeffer, CEO of Cogent Communications, told The Intercept that he had no knowledge of the surveillance at the eight AT&T buildings, but said he believed “the core premise that the NSA or some other agency would like to look at traffic … at an AT&T facility.” He said he suspected that the surveillance is likely carried out on “a limited basis,” due to technical and cost constraints. If the NSA were trying to “ubiquitously monitor” data passing across AT&T’s networks, Schaeffer added, he would be “extremely concerned.”

    An estimated 99 percent of the world’s intercontinental internet traffic is transported through hundreds of giant fiber optic cables hidden beneath the world’s oceans. A large portion of the data and communications that pass across the cables is routed at one point through the U.S., partly because of the country’s location – situated between Europe, the Middle East, and Asia – and partly because of the pre-eminence of American internet companies, which provide services to people globally.

    The NSA calls this predicament “home field advantage” – a kind of geographic good fortune. “A target’s phone call, email, or chat will take the cheapest path, not the physically most direct path,” one agency document explains. “Your target’s communications could easily be flowing into and through the U.S.”

    Once the internet traffic arrives on U.S. soil, it is processed by American companies. And that is why, for the NSA, AT&T is so indispensable. The company claims it has one of the world’s most powerful networks, the largest of its kind in the U.S. AT&T routinely handles masses of emails, phone calls, and internet chats. As of March 2018, some 197 petabytes of data – the equivalent of more than 49 trillion pages of text, or 60 billion average-sized mp3 files – traveled across its networks every business day.

    The NSA documents, which come from the trove provided to The Intercept by the whistleblower Edward Snowden, describe AT&T as having been “aggressively involved” in aiding the agency’s surveillance programs. One example of this appears to have taken place at the eight facilities under a classified initiative called SAGUARO.

    In October 2011, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which approves the surveillance operations carried out under Section 702 of FISA, found that there were “technological limitations” with the agency’s internet eavesdropping equipment. It was “generally incapable of distinguishing” between some kinds of data, the court stated. As a consequence, Judge John D. Bates ruled, the NSA had been intercepting the communications of “non-target United States persons and persons in the United States,” violating Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. The ruling, which was declassified in August 2013, concluded that the agency had acquired some 13 million “internet transactions” during one six-month period, and had unlawfully gathered “tens of thousands of wholly domestic communications” each year.

    The root of the issue was that the NSA’s technology was not only targeting communications sent to and from specific surveillance targets. Instead, the agency was sweeping up people’s emails if they had merely mentioned particular information about surveillance targets.

    A top-secret NSA memo about the court’s ruling, which has not been disclosed before, explained that the agency was collecting people’s messages en masse if a single one were found to contain a “selector” – like an email address or phone number – that featured on a target list.

    Information provided by a second former AT&T employee adds to the evidence linking the Atlanta building to NSA surveillance. Mark Klein, a former AT&T technician, alleged in 2006 that the company had allowed the NSA to install surveillance equipment in some of its network hubs. An AT&T facility in Atlanta was one of the spy sites, according to documents Klein presented in a court case over the alleged spying. The Atlanta facility was equipped with “splitter” equipment, which was used to make copies of internet traffic as AT&T’s networks processed it. The copied data would then be diverted to “SG3” equipment – a reference to “Study Group 3” – which was a code name AT&T used for activities related to NSA surveillance, according to evidence in the Klein case.

    #Surveillance #USA #NSA #AT&T

  • Obama Readies Revamp of NSA - WSJ.com
    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303754404579311051971481812

    The #NSA -review panel recommended that 1/the U.S. should extend to non-U.S. citizens the protections of the Privacy Act of 1974 . The president is leaning toward accepting that proposal, the senior administration official said. Details of how the privacy protections would be applied were unclear.
    #surveillance

    Applying privacy protections to non-U.S. citizens would be a significant shift in U.S. posture that wasn’t proposed seriously until the uproar overseas in response to disclosures by Mr. Snowden, which suggested that the NSA had built a global surveillance operation that regularly scooped up communications of citizens of countries around the world, including friendly ones.

    Another recommendation would create 2/ the post of advocate for privacy issues, who would argue before the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. The court now approves surveillance requests based only on arguments from the government’s perspective .

    Mr. Obama proposed such a change himself in August. Details of the post are still being fleshed out.

    3/ A key reform proposal is the restructuring of the phone-data program. Currently, the NSA collects all the data and houses it in its database. The review panel had said the data should be held by the phone companies or a third party, not by the NSA.

    “It is absolutely being seriously considered,” the senior administration official said of the proposal. “We are studying it really carefully and hope that we’ll have a decision that the president can announce on how we want to move forward on that.”

    The scope of the eventual NSA overhaul, however, will depend on what the president decides on other key proposals.

    4/T he review panel recommended that U.S. phone data only be searched with the approval of a court. Currently, NSA searches are based on a standard it calls “reasonable, articulable suspicion,” which is determined internally.

  • Les pistes pour une réforme de la NSA
    http://www.lemonde.fr/technologies/article/2013/12/17/les-pistes-pour-une-reforme-de-la-nsa_4335969_651865.html

    Le WSJ indique également que le groupe d’étude préconise que les données provenant de la surveillance massive des métadonnées téléphoniques (durée des appels, numéros appelés) soient conservées par les opérateurs téléphoniques ou une organisation tierce, et non par la NSA. Cela permettrait de mettre un terme à la pratique dite de bulk collection (« collecte en vrac »). L’agence de renseignement soutient qu’elle ne pioche dedans que pour des besoins précis et dans des circonstances codifiées dans l’immense masse de données qu’elle collecte chaque jour.

    Ça c’est de la réforme ! Transférer la charge de la conservation des métadonnées de la NSA aux opérateurs, où, bien sûr, l’agence pourrait taper à sa guise — pardon, après avis de la FISA Court .

    Il fallait y penser !

  • La NSA a « continuellement » enfreint la loi pour collecter des données
    http://www.lemonde.fr/technologies/article/2013/11/19/la-nsa-a-continuellement-enfreint-la-loi-pour-collecter-des-donnees_3516061_

    Face aux révélations sur la surveillance des télécommunications égrenées depuis plusieurs mois sur la base des documents de l’ancien consultant du renseignement américain Edward Snowden, l’Agence de sécurité nationale américaine (NSA) se retranchait jusqu’alors derrière la légalité de ses programmes. Deux ordonnances non publiques de la Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), révélées mardi 19 novembre par The Guardian, permettent pourtant de mettre ses affirmations en doute.

    La FISC, une « cour secrète » créée en 1978, est censée surveiller la légalité des activités de la NSA en lui délivrant des mandats. Or les deux documents non datés, rédigés par deux ancients présidents de la FISC, Colleen Kollar-Kotelly (2002-2006) et John Bates (2006-2013), dénoncent la violation "systématique" et « continuelle » par la NSA des limites légales fixées à ses programmes.

    Les deux juges semblent faire référence au programme de collecte massive de métadonnées téléphoniques et internet, mis en place depuis au moins 2001 par la NSA sous le nom de code « Stellar Wind ». Arrêté fin 2011, après que la FISC eut jugé ses méthodes anticonstitutionnelles, il semble avoir été remplacé par un programme très similaire : « EvilOlive ».

    Mais le rôle de Bates est moins glorieux qu’il n’y parait selon Emptywheel,

    John Bates’ TWO Wiretapping Warnings : Why the Government Took Its Internet Dragnet Collection Overseas | emptywheel
    http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/11/20/john-bates-two-wiretapping-warnings-why-the-government-took-its-internet

    In short, Bates said the government could use the illegally collected data so long as it remained ignorant that it was illegally collected, but darnit, don’t pretend to be ignorant just to be sure you can use data you collected illegally.

  • The Switchboard: The FISA Court just approved bulk collection of phone records, again
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/10/14/the-switchboard-the-fisa-court-just-approved-bulk-collection-of-phon

    FISC approves phone metadata collection yet again. “The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court has once again approved the blanket collection of telephony metadata from American phone companies,” reports Peter Bright at Ars Technica. This is the same program that came to light after documents were leaked by former #NSA contractor #Edward_Snowden.

    • Mais cette fois-ci, on le sait, cf. http://seenthis.net/messages/184455

      Dans le WP :

      Speaking of the phone records program, our Washington Post colleagues Carol Leonnig and Ellen Nakashima, remind us that a key document on the program is still missing from the public disclosures: “the original — and still classified — judicial interpretation that held that the bulk collection of Americans’ data was lawful.” Sources told them that the original document is about 80 pages and was written by Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, then the chief judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

  • #NSA, énorme changement de politique : dans un souci de transparence, le gouvernement états-unien annonce qu’il ne change strictement rien…

    USA : la collecte de données téléphoniques par les renseignements renouvelée
    http://www.lemonde.fr/technologies/article/2013/10/12/usa-la-collecte-de-donnees-telephoniques-par-les-renseignements-renouvelee_3

    Le tribunal secret chargé de statuer sur les programmes américains de surveillance a renouvelé le programme de collecte de données téléphoniques qui était arrivé à expiration vendredi 11 octobre, a indiqué le directeur des services de renseignement.
    Dans un communiqué publié tard vendredi, les services du directeur des renseignements (DNI) James Clapper, qui chapeaute 16 agences dont la NSA, « a décidé de déclassifier et de rendre public le fait que le gouvernement a demandé au tribunal Fisa (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court) de renouveler la collecte en vrac de métadonnées téléphoniques, et que ce tribunal a renouvelé son autorisation ».

  • Au rayon #transparence pro bono, je demande les #tech_companies en matière d’échanges de données avec la #NSA

    Tech Companies Escalate Pressure on Government to Publish National Security Request #Data - NYTimes.com
    http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/09/tech-companies-escalate-pressure-on-government-to-publish-nation

    On Monday, Yahoo and Facebook each filed suit in the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to ask the government for permission to reveal information about the number and types of national security requests for user data that the companies receive. Meanwhile, Google and Microsoft, which filed suit in June to ask for this permission, amended their petitions Monday to compel the government to publish even more detail about the requests.

    Les voix (faussement dissonantes ?) de la #silicon_army

  • In Secret, [ FISA ] Court Vastly Broadens Powers of N.S.A. - NYTimes.com
    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/07/us/in-secret-court-vastly-broadens-powers-of-nsa.html?hp

    La « Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court » est pratiquement devenue une « Cour Suprême parallèle »,

    The 11-member Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, known as the FISA court, was once mostly focused on approving case-by-case wiretapping orders. But since major changes in legislation and greater judicial oversight of intelligence operations were instituted six years ago, it has quietly become almost a parallel Supreme Court, serving as the ultimate arbiter on surveillance issues and delivering opinions that will most likely shape intelligence practices for years to come, the officials said.

    une cour qui a décidé que dans de nombreux cas le quatrième amendement ne peut s’appliquer,

    Last month, a former National Security Agency contractor, Edward J. Snowden, leaked a classified order from the FISA court, which authorized the collection of all phone-tracing data from Verizon business customers. But the court’s still-secret decisions go far beyond any single surveillance order, the officials said.

    “We’ve seen a growing body of law from the court,” a former intelligence official said. “What you have is a common law that develops where the court is issuing orders involving particular types of surveillance, particular types of targets.”

    In one of the court’s most important decisions, the judges have expanded the use in terrorism cases of a legal principle known as the “special needs” doctrine and carved out an exception to the Fourth Amendment’s requirement of a warrant for searches and seizures, the officials said.

    The special needs doctrine was originally established in 1989 by the Supreme Court in a ruling allowing the drug testing of railway workers, finding that a minimal intrusion on privacy was justified by the government’s need to combat an overriding public danger. Applying that concept more broadly, the FISA judges have ruled that the N.S.A.’s collection and examination of Americans’ communications data to track possible terrorists does not run afoul of the Fourth Amendment, the officials said.

    une cour qui a une interprétation très étendue de ses prérogatives...

    That legal interpretation is significant, several outside legal experts said, because it uses a relatively narrow area of the law — used to justify airport screenings, for instance, or drunken-driving checkpoints — and applies it much more broadly, in secret, to the wholesale collection of communications in pursuit of terrorism suspects. “It seems like a legal stretch,” William C. Banks, a national security law expert at Syracuse University, said in response to a description of the decision. “It’s another way of tilting the scales toward the government in its access to all this data.”

    ... notamment une interprétation très étendue de ce qui relève de l’étranger,

    “The definition of ‘foreign intelligence’ is very broad,” another former intelligence official said in an interview. “An espionage target, a nuclear proliferation target, that all falls within FISA, and the court has signed off on that.”

    une cour qui n’auditionne que l’accusation (ce qui ressemble fortement aux frappes de drones basées sur le comportement- « signature strike »-, la victime pouvant être innocentée à titre posthume)

    Unlike the Supreme Court, the FISA court hears from only one side in the case — the government — and its findings are almost never made public. A Court of Review is empaneled to hear appeals, but that is known to have happened only a handful of times in the court’s history, and no case has ever been taken to the Supreme Court. In fact, it is not clear in all circumstances whether Internet and phone companies that are turning over the reams of data even have the right to appear before the FISA court.

    une cour qui a été créée a l’origine pour surveiller les abus du gouvernement en matière d’écoute...

    Created by Congress in 1978 as a check against wiretapping abuses by the government, the court meets in a secure, nondescript room in the federal courthouse in Washington.

    ... mais qui ne refuse jamais rien à la NSA,

    None of the requests from the intelligence agencies was denied, according to the court.

    une cour qui s’insurge qu’on dise d’elle qu’elle n’est pas une cour mais une simple couverture...

    The FISA judges have bristled at criticism that they are a rubber stamp for the government, occasionally speaking out to say they apply rigor in their scrutiny of government requests.

    • US must fix secret Fisa courts, says top judge who granted surveillance orders | Law | guardian.co.uk
      http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2013/jul/09/fisa-courts-judge-nsa-surveillance

      James Robertson, who retired from the District of Columbia circuit in 2010, was one of a select group of judges who presided over the so-called Fisa courts, set up under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which are intended to provide legal oversight and protect against unnecessary privacy intrusions.

      But he says he was shocked to hear of recent changes to allow more sweeping authorisations of programmes such as the gathering of US phone records, and called for a reform of the system to allow counter-arguments to be heard.

      Speaking as a witness during the first public hearings into the Snowden revelations, Judge Robertson said that without an adversarial debate the courts should not be expected to create a secret body of law that authorised such broad surveillance programmes.

      A judge has to hear both sides of a case before deciding ,” he told members of a Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB) recently appointed by President Obama.

      “What Fisa does is not adjudication, but approval. This works just fine when it deals with individual applications for warrants, but the 2008 amendment has turned the Fisa court into administrative agency making rules for others to follow.”

      “It is not the bailiwick of judges to make policy,” he added.

      The comments, during the morning session of a PCLOB public workshop held in a Washington hotel, are the most serious criticism yet from a recently serving Fisa judge.

      Until now, Fisa judges have mainly spoken anonymously to defend the court process.

    • The Laws You Can’t See - NYTimes.com
      http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/09/opinion/the-laws-you-cant-see.html?_r=1&

      In the month since a national security contractor leaked classified documents revealing a vast sweep of Americans’ phone records by the federal government, people across the country have disagreed about the extent to which our expectation of personal privacy must yield to the demands of national security.

      Under normal circumstances, this could be a healthy, informed debate on a matter of overwhelming importance — the debate President Obama said he welcomed in the days after the revelations of the surveillance programs.

      But this is a debate in which almost none of us know what we’re talking about.

      ...

      When judicial secrecy is coupled with a one-sided presentation of the issues, the result is a court whose reach is expanding far beyond its original mandate and without any substantive check. This is a perversion of the American justice system, (...).

      (...)

      This court has morphed into an odd hybrid that seems to exist outside the justice system, even as its power grows in ways that we can’t see.

  • Obama administration collecting phone records of tens of millions of Americans - World Socialist Web Site

    http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/06/07/phon-j07.html

    Obama administration collecting phone records of tens of millions of Americans
    By Joseph Kishore
    7 June 2013

    The Obama administration is engaged in a secret and illegal dragnet to accumulate detailed phone records of tens and perhaps hundreds of millions of US residents in a program organized by the National Security Agency (NSA).

    On Wednesday, the British Guardian newspaper published a secret court order, issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, instructing a branch of the telecommunications giant Verizon to turn over, on an ongoing and daily basis, all “metadata” relating to the calls of all of its customers. Verizon has some 121 million customers, and the branch specifically targeted—Verizon Business Services—has 10 million lines.

    #surveillance #contrôle #big_brother #libertés

  • Government Surveillance Requests Up In 2011
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/04/government-surveillance-requests_n_1478426.html

    The federal government submitted 1,745 applications in 2011 to a secret intelligence court to investigate — mostly through wiretapping — suspected cases of terrorism and espionage, a 10.5 percent increase over the year before, according to a Justice Department report released Friday.

    The annual report said that 1,676 applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court were solely for electronic surveillance. The rest asked permission to conduct physical searches or a combination of wiretapping and physical searches. The FISA court approved every surveillance warrant.

    #surveillance #USA #terrorisme