Posts Tagged ‘Data collection’
In this, our fifth annual Who Has Your Back report, we took the main principles of the prior reports and rolled them into a single category: Industry-Accepted Best Practices. We’ve also refined our expectations around providing users notice and added new categories to highlight other important transparency and user rights issues.
We designed this report to take the basic principles of Who Has Your Back up a notch and see which companies were still leading the pack. Already, our newest report has had a similar effect on the industry as a whole, encouraging companies large and small to strive for more when it comes to standing by their users. In the months since we first told the companies what this year’s criteria would be, we’ve seen significant improvement in company practices. And we hope—and expect—that over the next year, we’ll see even more.
Download the complete Who Has Your Back? 2015: Protecting Your Data From Government Requests report as a PDF.
[*Passive NSA Acknowledgement of Over-reaching It’s Own Authority?]
By JAMES RISEN and LAURA POITRAS
Published: November 22, 2013
WASHINGTON — Officials at the National Security Agency, intent on maintaining its dominance in intelligence collection, pledged last year to push to expand its surveillance powers, according to a top-secret strategy document.
United States Can Spy on Britons Despite Pact, N.S.A. Memo Says (November 21, 2013)
In a February 2012 paper laying out the four-year strategy for the N.S.A.’s signals intelligence operations, which include the agency’s eavesdropping and communications data collection around the world, agency officials set an objective to “aggressively pursue legal authorities and a policy framework mapped more fully to the information age.”
Written as an agency mission statement with broad goals, the five-page document said that existing American laws were not adequate to meet the needs of the N.S.A. to conduct broad surveillance in what it cited as “the golden age of Sigint,” or signals intelligence. “The interpretation and guidelines for applying our authorities, and in some cases the authorities themselves, have not kept pace with the complexity of the technology and target environments, or the operational expectations levied on N.S.A.’s mission,” the document concluded.
Using sweeping language, the paper also outlined some of the agency’s other ambitions. They included defeating the cybersecurity practices of adversaries in order to acquire the data the agency needs from “anyone, anytime, anywhere.” The agency also said it would try to decrypt or bypass codes that keep communications secret by influencing “the global commercial encryption market through commercial relationships,” human spies and intelligence partners in other countries. It also talked of the need to “revolutionize” analysis of its vast collections of data to “radically increase operational impact.”
See Also: Supporting Intel 2020: Presented by Mr. Henry Muller, Director, Intelligence & Information Warfare Directorate: Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) S&T Challenges Given on 20 Sep 2013
The Patriot Act must not be used to violate the rights of law-abiding citizens | Ron Wyden and Mark Udall
Secret data collection does not strike the ‘right balance’ between protecting US security and protecting Americans’ privacy
guardian.co.uk, Friday 7 June 2013 18.04 EDT
… We also disagree with the statement that the broad Patriot Act collection strikes the “right balance” between protecting American security and protecting Americans’ privacy.
In our view, it does not.
When Americans call their friends and family, whom they call, when they call, and where they call from is private information.
We believe the large-scale collection of this information by the government has a very significant impact on Americans’ privacy, whether senior government officials recognize that fact or not.
Finally, we have long been concerned about the degree to which this collection has relied on “secret law”.
Senior administration officials have stated on multiple occasions that the Patriot Act’s “business records” authority is “analogous to a grand jury subpoena”. And multiple senior officials have stated that US intelligence agencies do not collect information or dossiers on “millions of Americans”.
We appreciate the recent statement from the director of national intelligence, which declassified certain facts about this collection, including its breadth.
Now that the fact of bulk collection has been declassified, we believe that more information about the scale of the collection, and specifically whether it involves the records of “millions of Americans” should be declassified as well.
The American people must be given the opportunity to evaluate the facts about this program and its broad scope for themselves, so that this debate can begin in earnest.
- NSA officials ‘not always accurate’ in public statements over surveillance (guardian.co.uk)
- CLN – Two Senators Say The NSA Is Still Lying To Congress – 26 June 2013 (lucas2012infos.wordpress.com)