NSA (partially) Declassified

Lally Singh writes "Posted yesterday on the National Security Archives was the NSA's "Transition 2001" report, prepared as an introductory report for President Bush (II)'s incoming administration. "The largest U.S. spy agency warned the incoming Bush administration in its 'Transition 2001' report that the Information Age required rethinking the policies and authorities that kept the National Security Agency in compliance with the Constitution's 4th Amendment prohibition on 'unreasonable searches and seizures' without warrant and 'probable cause,' according to an updated briefing book of declassified NSA documents posted today on the World Wide Web.""

Comments

oblig. sneakers quote

[Anonymous Coward]

Dick Gordon: National Security Agency.
Martin Bishop: Ah. You're the guys I hear breathing on the other end of my phone.
Dick Gordon: No, that's the FBI. We're not chartered for domestic surveillance.
Martin Bishop: Oh, I see. You just overthrow governments. Set up friendly dictators.
Dick Gordon: No, that's the CIA. We protect our government's communications, we try to break the other fella's codes. We're the good guys, Marty.
Martin Bishop: Gee, I can't tell you what a relief that is, Dick.

Well..

[yuriismaster]

I can only assume the information declassified might intersect that which is already known...

Yes the gove does need to rethink the 4th

[argoff]

The 4th clearly wasn't tough enough. It is simply all to esay to make up phony causes "like the war on drugs", like "catching terrorists" as an excuse to do anything they want. The 4th should have been much more demanding, and demanded harsh punishment for those who do anything that has the effect of weakening it.

Re:Yes the gove does need to rethink the 4th

[garcia]

those that drafted those never thought that our fellow citizens would have the apathy for tyrrany that we currently do.

Re:Yes the gove does need to rethink the 4th

[Sheepdot]

It's ironic that the founding fathers were questioning even *having* a bill of rights. Their reason? You should be allowed to do anything, and putting down in words what you have a right to do would eventually limit people to only those things.

The federal government was never intended to be as large as it is now. I don't think a single founding father would look at the federal government today and say, "Good job", unless they were being sarcastic.

Oh well, at least we still have the Libertarians.

Re:Yes the gove does need to rethink the 4th

[Jim Starx]

The founding fathers never imagined an industrialized society either. The type of government the founding fathers envisioned could never hope to effectively govern the US as it is today.

Re:Yes the gove does need to rethink the 4th

[sjames]

Humankind has remained mostly unchanged for thousands of years. To presume (without evidence) that Americans of 200+ years ago were somehow vastly different in mode of thought is just silly.

The mode of thought may not be much different, but the circumstances are much different. At one time, most of the U.S. was rural, and owned a gun. Private conversations happened behind the barn, and there was no such thing as a shotgun mike. A stranger seen breaking in was subject to being shot on sight. There was no thought of databasing everyone's personal information because there was no practical way to store and retrieve it (for that matter, it's questionable if there was enough paper and ink available for that). There were no photo IDs or fingerprints. In essence, you were who you said you were, perhaps backed up by other people agreeing.

The fault is that they never imagined such an invasive government to be technically possible.

Re:Yes the gove does need to rethink the 4th

[sjames]

The type of government the founding fathers envisioned could never hope to effectively govern the US as it is today.

The type of government they imagined would have done better. Consider that each of the states was to handle anything within that state, and that they are about the same size as many countries in the E.U.

The Federal Government was meant to be literally a Federation of state governments, overseeing interstate commerce, organizing the state militias into a common force, and providing absolute limits on the power any state government could weild against it's citizens.

Re:Yes the gove does need to rethink the 4th

[Elwood P Dowd]

those that drafted those never thought that our fellow citizens would have the apathy for tyrrany that we currently do.

Whatever.

there is at least a marginal concern for the 4th

[MC68000]

from page 32 (38 in PDF viewer of nsa25.pdf)

Make no mistake, NSA can and will perform its missions consistent with the fourth amendment and all applicable laws.

There is some concern at least. This would mean nothing if it were a public statement, but it's a bit reassuring that they think this even in documents not meant for public consumption

Re:The 4th is already void

[Anonymous Coward]

Not true. Delayed warrants go back to the late seventies.

The Supreme Court has held the Fourth Amendment does not require law enforcement to give immediate notice of the execution of a search warrant. The Supreme Court emphasized "that covert entries are constitutional in some circumstances, at least if they are made pursuant to a warrant." In fact, the Court stated that an argument to the contrary was "frivolous." Dalia v. U.S., 441 U.S. 238 (1979)

Re:What nonsense

[robertjw]

1984 seems to be approaching faster than I would like

Well, actually, it's 21 years late already. Can't hold it off forever.

No shit...

[Anonymous Coward]

The parent makes a good, if sad point. Read this if you want to understand:

Guantanamo Bay Detention of prisoners:

Three British prisoners released in 2004 without charge have alleged that there is ongoing torture, sexual degradation, forced drugging and religious persecution being committed by U.S. forces at Guantánamo Bay and have released a 115-page dossier detailing these accusations [1] (http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/aug2004/guan-a0 6.shtml). They also accuse British authorities of knowing about the torture and failing to respond. Their accounts have been confirmed by two former French prisoners, a former Swedish prisoner, and a former Australian prisoner. In response to accusations, US Navy Secretary Gordon England has claimed that a Navy inspector general has performed a review of the practices at Guantánamo and concluded that it was "being operated at very high standards."

Former Guantanamo detainee Moazzam Begg, freed last month after nearly three years in captivity, has accused his American captors of torturing him and other detainees arrested in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Mr Begg, in his first broadcast interview since his release, claimed that he "witnessed two people get beaten so badly that I believe it caused their deaths".

On November 30, 2004, The New York Times published excerpts [2] (http://nytimes.com/2004/11/30/politics/30gitmo.ht ml?ei=5094&en=8d107165e454d8b6&hp=&ex=1101877200&a dxnnl=1&partner=homepage&adxnnlx=1101843681-+nTyVV Jpq8yXt1yEg4X28g) from an internal memo leaked from the US administration, referring to a report from the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). The report points out several activities which, it said, were "tantamount to torture": exposure to loud noise or music, prolonged extreme temperatures, or beatings. It also reports the existence of a behavior science team (BSCT), also called "Biscuit", and the fact that the physicians of the base communicate confidential medical information to the interrogation teams (weaknesses, phobias, etc.), resulting in the prisoners losing confidence in the medical team of the base. Access of the ICRC to the base was conditional, as is normal for ICRC humanitarian operations, to the confidentiality of their report; sources have reported that heated debates had taken place at the ICRC headquarters, as some of those involved wanted to make the report public, or confront the US administration. The newspaper said the administration and the Pentagon had seen the ICRC report in July but rejected its findings. AP (Guardian) (http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,128 0,-4645430,00.html), Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=top News&storyID=6951969). The story was originally reported in other newspapers when the report was leaked in May. [3] (http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,, 1213640,00.html). The ICRC reacted to the article ICRC comments (http://www.icrc.org/Web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/iwpList4 /C5667B446C9A4DF7C1256F5C00403967).

See also:

Camp X-Ray
and:
Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse

No, it's not about SS and Gestapo in Nazi Germany, it's about our US Army. I wish it never happened but it did and we as real patriots have the responsibility to talk about it.

Y2K bug

[dago]

Hum, it seems the y2k bug stroke at least once, see doc 25, page 33 :

"The need for action was underscored in January 2000 when NSA experienced a catastrophic network outage of 3 1/2 days. This outage greatly reduced the signals intelligence information available to national decision makers and military commanders. As one result, the President's Daily Briefin - 60% of which is normally based on SIGINT - was reduced to a small portion of its typical size."

Oh, an a few paragraph above, they presented their favoured solution : outsourcing (to the industry).

Weird but True.

[Anonymous Coward]

I have only had a few discussions with those in the government security community as a civilian moderator on a government security forum. What I have learned is the following:

1) The NSA is the most likely to be concerned about "unreasonable searches and seizures" and other Bill of Rights issues. The FBI and CIA routinely take the "extreme circumstance" route and use common loopholes to justify citizen and non-citizen monitoring. I would argue, however, that I have yet to see an ill-intented abuse of their power.

2) Members from all branches of the Department of Defense are active Slashdot readers and contributers. They just never talk about what they do and some use "Tor" to post from work.

3) The NSA has an extremely bright team of civilians that do the bulk of their cryptoanalysis work. One of which is famous, and not for the work he does in cryptology. You'd actually laugh aloud if you knew. I guess it is his hobby, but someone is taking him seriously.

4) The FBI is nothing like you see in the movies. The brightest agents last about 2 years before moving to a different area. Internally, the FBI has some serious issues with "dinosaurs" and "micro-management".

5) There is one member of the CIA that is single-handedly responsible for saving us from the plan devised by Jose Padilla. Unfortunately, they will never get the credit they deserve. It only took one person to say, "Why is this American talking with Abu Zubaydah twice?".

6) If you join the NSA, you voluntarily give up your rights to unreasonable searches and seizures. In fact, you have to agree to have your phone tapped and everything you do is monitored 24/7. It's a life-long career choice, but they take care of you "very well".

Re:Weird but True.

[demachina]

Rack one up for gullible Slashdot readers who moderated this guy's B.S. as interesting, I guess as B.S. goes it is interesting, but it is B.S. or a troll. I'll let half of this obnoxious grand standing go but these deserve some attention:

"1) The NSA is the most likely to be concerned about "unreasonable searches and seizures" and other Bill of Rights issues. The FBI and CIA routinely take the "extreme circumstance" route and use common loopholes to justify citizen and non-citizen monitoring. I would argue, however, that I have yet to see an ill-intented abuse of their power."

You must be working a technicality, like you haven't physically "seen" the abuse but the DOD, NSA, FBI and CIA have all engaged in well documented and proven abuses of their powers over the years. They haven't been nailed lately but that is only because we are living in, for all practical purposes, a one party state, and the Republican's especially since 9/11 has been literally letting these agencies get away with murder. For example the Pentagon last week investigated itself and amazingly found itself innocent of ordering or condoning torture, though there are documented cases of varying degress of torture going on across the globe, far to widespread to be rogue national gaurdsmen. When abuse is this wide spread in the military either the chain of command is ordering or condoning it, or there is massive deriliciton of duty in the chain of command, the officers and civilian leadership, in letting it happen on such a large scale.

When you say something this blatantly and provably false it so undermines your credibility, we can safely assume the rest of your post is either a troll or B.S. too.

"2) Members from all branches of the Department of Defense are active Slashdot readers and contributers. They just never talk about what they do and some use "Tor" to post from work."

Not sure I follow why they anyone in the DOD would be using Tor to post to this silly little web site. Not like anyone on Slashdot is tracking their IP address. If someone is using Tor from a DOD facility with DOD's blessing, and posting on Slashdot or anywhere else, it tends to suggest they must be part of the DOD's rapidly growing propaganda machine, so you can't believe a thing they say. I have no doubt people from all branches of government read and post here, SO WHAT. If they post anything controversial or sensitive, from a government facility, they are just begging to be fired. I'm sure the DOD can read everything they are posting, and Tor isn't going to make any difference. Not sure I've ever read any post on Slashdot that rose to a level of importance the DOD would ever care.

"5) There is one member of the CIA that is single-handedly responsible for saving us from the plan devised by Jose Padilla. Unfortunately, they will never get the credit they deserve. It only took one person to say, "Why is this American talking with Abu Zubaydah twice?"."

Whatever Padilla was planning, if anything, wasn't nearly as dangerous as the precedent being set by the Bush administration in how they've abused his most basic civil liberties in arresting and detaining indefinitely, in isolation in a military brig in South Carolina. The Bush administration is seeking, through Padilla, to establish a precedent where the executive branch can arrest any American citizen, anywhere and deprive him or her of all of the most basic constitutional protections we thought we had in this country. In particular American citizens have a right to an attorney, a right to be charged, and a right to a speedy trial, and to be imprisoned only if found guilty by a jury of their peers. If Padilla is guilty of something, charge him, prove it, get a conviction or let him go.

The Supreme Court, spineless politicians that they are have passed on hearing his case on technicalities leaving this precedent in place for two years. A federal judge a week or two ago ruled the executive branch has NO constitutional authority to arrest, and hold in ind

A little more than that, perhaps

[CarpetShark]

I'm assuming that, if they're declassifying parts of the NSA, there is another, more classified organisation taking over from it. I think they did something like that with Area 51 -- shifting everything important to new locations -- when it became so well-known to the public.

Forever and ever.

[AnZhiLan]

Freedom is never "won". It's not a battle that you fight, win, and from then on people can enjoy the victory.

It's always, ALWAYS hanging by a thread.

Every generation will have to keep fighting for it, over and over, until the end of time.

Those who look at things like Nazism as freak accidents are only fooling themselves. Oppressive governments are the rule, not the exception in history. People are easily convinced, either quickly in harsh circumstances, or in slow, careful and quiet measures in good times, to at first not care about others, and then not care about themselves.

Even if you're lucky enough to live in a country whose founding is based on some good ideals, you've still got to realize, that country will spend the rest of its history struggling to get anywhere near living up to those ideals.

Better

[SuperBanana]

Martin: "You know, I could have joined the NSA, but they found out my parents were married"

Dick: "Heh...." (holds back Wallace) "Hey, we're all FRIENDS here..."

Oh, and:

Carl: "The young lady with the Uzi. Is she single?"
Martin: "Carl. This is the brass ring."
Carl: "I just want her phone number"
Martin: "How about a lunch date? You can chaparone. The FBI will give 'em twins."
Abbott: "NO!"
Mary: "You could have anything in the world and you want my phone number?"
Carl: "....yes."
Mary: "342-4525. Area code 701" (sorry, I don't remember her number :-)
Carl: "I'm Carl."
Mary(giggles): "I'm Mary."
Abbott: "I'm going to be sick."

Will the real terrorists please stand up

[Anonymous Coward]

I find it interesting that with all of the flag waving, and beating of drums to "protect America", we never hear urgent discussion of the greatest threat this country has ever faced.

If blowing up a building is terrorism, surely attempting to evicerate the Constitution and sacrificing every thing that makes the U.S. worth protecting is high treason!

If the terrorists goal is to destroy the American way of life, what does that say about those federal agencies and Congresscritters that are so anxious to dismantle the principles of the American way of life?

If terrorism is the deliberate creation of fear in the civillain population to further a political goal, what does that say about DHS's perminant orange alert telling us to be afraid.

What does the fact that I wonder if I should post this anonymously say?

Re:there is at least a marginal concern for the 4t

[Homology]

Make no mistake, NSA can and will perform its missions consistent with the fourth amendment and all applicable laws. There is some concern at least. This would mean nothing if it were a public statement, but it's a bit reassuring that they think this even in documents not meant for public consumption

The accellerating attacs on civil liberties and human rights, in particular under Bush II, are very worrysome. The new General Attorney is the very same man that wrote in a memorandum that the Geneva Convention is obsolete when it come to "the war on terror". That torture could be done. Who are now the bad guys? It's sure is getting confusing :

"This so-called ill treatment and torture in detention centers, stories of which were spread everywhere among the people, and later by the prisoners who were freed ... were not, as some assumed, inflicted methodically, but were excesses committed by individual prison guards, their deputies, and men who laid violent hands on the detainees."

Most people who hear this quote today assume it was uttered by a senior officer of the Bush administration. Instead, it comes from one of history's greatest mass murderers, Rudolf Hoess, the SS commandant at Auschwitz. Such a confusion demonstrates the depth of the United States' moral dilemma in its treatment of detainees in the war on terror.

Re:Finally

[houghi]

"algorithms from the NSA are considered a sort of alien technology: They come from a superior race with no explanations."

If you think Belgians are alien, you are right. However there ARE explanations for the algoritms used: AES Algorithm (Rijndael) Information

this might not be popular here, but....

[argStyopa]

...let's keep in mind that the NSA exists for a reason, and that reason is important.

In the same sense that tinfoil-hatters are constantly alert to the possibilty that "they are watching us", the NSA exists because there are countries and organizations and individuals whose interests ARE inimical to the United States. It shouldn't have to be said this shortly after the Cold War, or even Sept 11, but the security agencies of the United States have a serious and IMPORTANT function.

Do they go overboard? Once in a while, no question they exceed their mandate, usually from an overzealous interpretation of their duties. Yes, it's important to find a careful compromise between secrecy and oversight REQUIRED by a free society.

However, I think occasionally /. tends to drift into Pollyanna-land where the only thing we have to fear is those 'debbils' in government that want to take our freedoms away. No. Let's keep our priorities straight and remember that while overzealous policemen certainly need to be disciplined and corrected, they are STILL the "good guys" as long as you are realistic and remember the really BAD alternatives out there.

Re:this might not be popular here, but....

[crush]

You're a classic example of a drift into "pollyanna /. land" as you call it. The evidence of history shows clearly that the "intelligence agencies" have a long and negative history of distorting the political landscape in the USA (whether that's the harrassment of civil rights activists in the 60's or the FBI planting a carbomb in environmental activist Judi Barri's car), or the external activities of scum like the CIA helping rightwing terrorists to power in Latin America.

As soon as I see some example of "correction" of any sort operating on these misdeeds I'll accept that there's a working system in place to regulate this dangerous and anti-democratic part of the state apparatus.

Re:this might not be popular here, but....

[crush]

We have the CIA and the NSA because we do have enemies abroad. Look at Iran.

And Iran is our enemy because we supported an anti-democratic fascistic dictator (the Shah) instead of allowing the people there to get on with their own lives and evolve towards democracy. At around the same time we supported other anti-democratic fascists in the Ba'ath party and look where that got us. The CIA supported that Ba'ath Party coup in Iraq.

Then later on the CIA fucked around supporting directly the Mujaheddin while they were busy dealing drugs, raping little boys and women and being allround asshats. Look where that got us.

The CIA are crap at preventing problems from external enemies: they seem to create all the external enemies. For a good read (after you've come down from your "external enemy" hysteria high, you could have a read of Chalmers Johnston's "Blowback" or Alexander Cockburn's "Whiteout: The CIA, Drugs and the Press".

If you still believe that the CIA are more effective at preventing terror than creating it by their cack-handed and immoral interventions abroad then I'll eat your hat.

What 4th amendment?

[GISGEOLOGYGEEK]

The NSA warned Bush that action must be taken to protect the 4t amendment.

Bush then passed the Patriot Act, with effectively suspends the 4th amendment (and 6th).

And the American people said ..

"thank you thank you! please take more of my inaliable rights away from me so I can feel safe from the enemies my government makes for itself!"

The average american decided it was ok to allow their fellow citizens to be arrested and held without charge, without being allowed to see a lawyer or even notify family. As long as the thousands of citizens that were now being abused was not them personally, then who cares.

When really, they should have carried out their own Constitutional Responsibility to fight for those rights to the point of overthrowing Bush.

But the average american stopped thinking they need to act on their responsibilities a few decades ago when suing everyone for any stupid reason became the norm.

America has died at the hands of its own people. Welcome back to 1930's Germany.

Bush did not *pass* the Patriot Act

[Anonymous Coward]

The House of Representatives did. The US Senate did by a margin 98-2 or similar. Even John Kerry voted for it and never went back to vote against it.

Kinda like the Kyoto Accords - they went down in the US Senate 95-0.

Hell, the US declaration of war against Japan after Pearl Harbor had more opposition.

Let me set you straight

[Anonymous Coward]

I work there. You've got it backwards.

The rules for access to data are extremely strict and the NSA takes the 4th Amendment very seriously.

The governing directive is USSID 18 (here is an older declassifed version). Anyone requiring access to certain types of data is thoroughly briefed on this (even if you're a developer and just need data to work with).

If you're an analyst requiring an account on one of the search tools you get the above mentioned briefing and a more tailored briefing. In addition, before an account is granted two auditors at a supervisory level must be identified. Those auditors get a weekly report of every search you conduct.

People have lost their clearances over misusing the databases (which also means the loss of the job). No one at the NSA is cavalier with the data and access is tightly controlled. The NSA definitely works hard to remain within the law, and any violations are incidental, not some sort of secret big brother program.

Besides, anything found through the illegal use of data couldn't be used in court, and the loss of the public trust would hurt the NSA far more than catching you downloading "The Family Guy". The real bad guys (legitimate and lawful targets) though, we work very hard to take down.

Re:there is at least a marginal concern for the 4t

[quigonn]

Anybody who understands the historical context of the Geneva Convention would agree that it is obsolete. Read the bloody document, then come back and participate in the discussion.

I read it. It's not obsolete. It's only called "obsolete" by certain people who want to justify their "need" for systematical torture.

The Geneva Convention was designed for exactly the kind of crisis that we face, namely large-scale conflicts where a lot of people are threatened by certain forces. While it wasn't specifically written for the case of terrorism, its teleological ideas of human rights hold up, and it's the duty of democrat (as in "believes in the democratic system", not as in the political party) to rise up against a government pulling human rights through the dirt, for a very unspecific "war on terror" with badly defined targets.

Make no mistake, times will come where the US government will be punished for their self-righteousness they currently show to the world.