Electronic Surveillance By US Law Enforcement Agencies Rising Steeply

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Electronic Surveillance By US Law Enforcement Agencies Rising Steeply

Posted by samzenpus on Friday September 28, 2012 @12:05AM from the eye-in-the-sky dept.

hypnosec writes "According to data obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), surveillance of emails and other forms of Internet communications without warrants has increased substantially over the last two years. Documents, obtained by the ACLU, reveal that there has been a 361% increase in 'pen register' and 'trap-and-trace' orders between 2009 and 2011. The ACLU has appealed to Congress to bring in more judicial oversight in these warrantless orders."

27 of 105 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

My two cents by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-28 00:14 · Score: 4, Interesting

There is no excuse for such warantless searches. All searches need a warrant. If we're talking about a search sometime shortly before obtaining a warrant (with the risk of not getting one afterwards), that's a gray area, but no warrant afterwards means the evidence should not be used. But in no situation should there be any sort of search without said warrant.
1. Re:My two cents by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · 2012-09-28 00:38 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  It's always (sadly) amusing to me how the Constitution thumpers are all about the Founders Intent and Strict Interpretations and all that - right up until it's time to dispense with all that shit so we can have Yet More authoritarian "law enforcement".
2. Re:My two cents by captainpanic · 2012-09-28 00:40 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  I'll summarize the defense of these searches. Btw, I disagree with all of them... but I thought we can just get this over with quickly.
  Choose:
  - What if it was your child?
  - Don't you want to catch terrorists?
  - Prevention is better than cure.
  - I have nothing to hide.
  - I trust my government.
  - (I probably forgot some...)
  They're either logical fallacies, or just besides the point. Or both.
3. Re:My two cents by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2012-09-28 01:09 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  It's always (sadly) amusing to me how the Constitution thumpers are all about the Founders Intent and Strict Interpretations and all that - right up until it's time to dispense with all that shit so we can have Yet More authoritarian "law enforcement".
  Ah, spoken like a true soft-on-crime liberal who fails to understand the deep intellectual nuances of stricterprertationalism!
  It is really quite a simple matter: Just pretend that the Founding Fathers were a bunch of nit-picking, crabbed, legal technicians(just as you probably are, if you are a promising candidate for a deeper understanding of stricterprertationalism), and that their Intent in writing the bill of rights was not to address contemporary and recent past abuses of state power in light of that 'Enlightenment humanist' political theory nonsense that so many of them wasted their time reading and thinking about; but to put in place a series of precise, legalistic, and highly specific protections of certain types of property and communications media, and only those.
  After all, it's not as though somebody would fail to regulate 'pen registers' just because he was writing in the late 18th century; but because he Intended that pen registers should remain unregulated.
  Then, consult a plastic surgeon for administration of botulism toxins until you can do that with a straight face. See? It's really quite simple.
4. Re:My two cents by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2012-09-28 01:11 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  I think you forgot "Why do you care more about criminals' rights than victims' rights?"
5. Re:My two cents by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2012-09-28 02:03 · Score: 2
  
  To be honest, I made it up and used it mostly because I liked the way it sounded, and didn't want to use one of the names of an actual school of loony-toons constitutionalism, lest a devotee of the same be triggered into attack mode.
  (At least I'm honest about my self-indulgent laziness, right?)
6. Re:My two cents by RabidReindeer · 2012-09-28 02:08 · Score: 2
  
  Why do you hate our freedoms?
7. Re:My two cents by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-28 05:45 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  That's the problem with a 2 party system. Everyone wants to assume that they picked the right side, when in reality an individual in their own regime can easily perform an action they don't agree with. So to somehow explain away the action they begin looking for a way to pass the blame to the other side.
  When in reality, the 2 party system is the dumbest idea ever contrived. By limiting our potions the system has essentially created a method for us to somehow feel like were in control when in reality we don't have any control. Politics is a system for idiots, no matter how good or bad you are at your job you will be like by some and hated by others, have every aspect of your life examined under a microscope, and the only protection you have is the "friends" you acquire on your way up. Even an village idiot can take the role, the only talent you need is the ability to spend an hour saying nothing while mentioning all the topics that everyone cares about.
  It's time for change stop supporting the 2 parties, and stop buying foods from company's that support them. Then actually spend a few hours investigating the background of the individual you are voting for. Check who is paying for their campaign (Remember the comment that the MPAA made "Don't ask me to write a check for you when you think your job is at risk and then don't pay any attention to me when my job is at stake", as this is generally true for all of industry.) Then check how they votes and the comments they made in the past. In all likely-hood they will be nearly identical the the standpoints they make in the future, as these are the comments and viewpoints that got them to where they are. Don't sit here and blame a party, or the president. Until all of us actually stand up and do something it's only going to get worse. We won once against SOPA/PIPA. however, even now the government is hard at work to derail efforts to stop like bills from receiving similar attention. Because these bills are in the interest of their investors. No matter which side you take, just look where the money is coming from. We need to take a larger stand, and give the government some real oversight, place people who actually know what they are doing (and not just giving a good pubic face) in charge.
And it will go down if you get rid of Obama by Overzeetop · 2012-09-28 00:16 · Score: 3, Funny

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Ahhha haha hahaha ha hahahahahahaha hahahaha hahahahah!
Just kidding! Of course it won't. These things only go in one direction!

--
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
1. Re:And it will go down if you get rid of Obama by na1led · 2012-09-28 00:20 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Obama is just the idiot puppet on stage. It's the ones behind the curtain controlling things.
  
  --
  -- By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out.
2. Re:And it will go down if you get rid of Obama by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-28 01:56 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Why beat around the bush?
  Let's call them out!
  Damn... I tried to make a list... but I gave up, since it would be easier to list those who are not in on it.
  - The CIA and their constant propping up of evil dictators, arming of enemies, and the like, in foreign countries as well as in the USA itself. (Basically at least the entire Arabic and north-African world.)
  - The banking conspiracy (unrelated to the "conspiracy theorists", since it's an actual real conspiracy. [Cue the "there are zero conspiracies in the history of humanity and there never will be" conspiracy theorists. ^^)
  - The weapons industry. (For supporting genocide, general mass-murder, and igniting wars to profit off both sides.)
  - The fossil fuel industry. (Duh. [Includes the Bush and Laden clan, Exxon, etc.])
  - The pharma industry. (For making money off of and generally fostering the abuse of hard drugs by most of the population, including young children.)
  - The content distribution and artist extortion Mafia (includes everything that uses the imaginary property lie, like Microsoft, Apple and Joe Biden’s gang.)
  - Monsanto & co. (so evil, they deserve their own personal spot)
  - Dick Cheney and his team of Neocons. (For creating a totalitarian industrial-feudalist faschism. [Do not make the mistake of thinking that team would exclude the democrats.])
  - The churches. (Organizations that abuse the mentally ill and weak for money and power, and rape children by the masses. [At least they partially stopped the inquisition shit.])
  And last but not least:
  - The lethargic and pathetically passive population.
  See? Who the hell is left? Those who now sit in jail because they spoke up, and are now hated by the brainwashed masses? Like Assange?
  "Look how you get raped in the ass! I found proof!”
  "DIE, you treasonous asshole! We don't wanna hear that! Let's focus on how you imaginary-hurt our torturers, cause that is totally not OK!"
  Sorry, you are doomed, and it's your own damn fault!
  You'd hate and murder everyone who would even dare to openly talk about saving you!
Get used to it by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · 2012-09-28 00:29 · Score: 4, Interesting

Let's face it: we now live in a surveillance society. If it's not the government (FBI, NSA, CIA, DHS, etc.), it's a corporation trying to make money (Google (DoubleClick), Microsoft, Apple, etc.) or an IP troll (RIAA, MPAA, Sony, EMI, etc.). We drive down the street, and we're under almost constant video surveillance. Walk into a store, bank, restaurant, dry cleaners, expect to be photographed. Soon we'll have drones overhead. Big Brother is watching. Their excuse is "We're just trying to make money/keep you safe", and their justification is "If you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about.". Get used to it, because there's nothing you can do about it.
1. Re:Get used to it by fustakrakich · 2012-09-28 00:40 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Let's face it: we now live in a surveillance society.
  Only because the majority of the voters want it that way.
  Get used to it, because there's nothing you can do about it.
  Ah, learned helplessness... The door is open yet nobody steps through.
  
  --
  “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
2. Re:Get used to it by usuallylost · 2012-09-28 00:43 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  I agree that, at least in the near term, there is nothing we can do about it. Though I think we still have to try. We still need to complain, sue, protest, put up candidates who are against this etc. If only to slow the spread of this stuff. My problem with the whole "if you're doing doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about" bit is that what is defined as wrong has a habit of changing with the political winds. Historically when Government's made unreasonable demands people would find ways to work around it. That is becoming harder and harder to do as we get closer and closer to continuous surveillance of the population. All it takes is for us to elect one real bad player and all of these tools we aren't worrying about become an electronic leash around our necks.
3. Re:Get used to it by mhajicek · 2012-09-28 01:23 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Unfortunately, omnipresent surveillance is an inevitability. As technology continues to develop it will only get easier and cheaper. The only upside I see is that if it does become so trivial, maybe the watchers can also be watched. And whether you're religious or not, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" is good advice. Societal standards will need to change significantly if we're going to get through this.
4. Re:Get used to it by sl4shd0rk · 2012-09-28 01:46 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Get used to it, because there's nothing you can do about it.
  Precisely. Give in, give up, don't give a single f*ck. That's how we got where we are -- half the the population just said "ah, f*uck it. Nothing I can do about it, so BOHICA"
  "Fighting back" against problem legislation is arduous. For most Americans, they don't want to put in the effort to contact their representatives and voice their opinion. They think someone else will do it. Well, not enough people do and pretty soon we have stuff like military drones in the sky, and some really bat-shit crazy corporate sponsored law makers in office.
  How do you think SOPA/PIPA got beat? Lot's of regular people raising hell about it. Making a big enough deal out of it that the media covered it and it was impossible to pass now because the lawmakers couldn't keep it some clandestine piece of legislation that would get passed quietly.
  Let's face it: There's more everyone could be doing to keep crap like this off the law books.
  
  --
  Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
5. Re:Get used to it by ATMAvatar · 2012-09-28 01:49 · Score: 2
  
  Let's face it: we now live in a surveillance society.
  Only because the majority of the voters want it that way.
  Do not mistake apathy for intent. We have insufficient data to suggest that people want it this way. They just don't care enough to enforce change with political action. I caught myself before saying votes, though, as there are no candidates which have any meaningful chance to affect change in this regard whom anyone could vote for. The only hope at this point is for a new, grass-roots party to form and win elections by landslides.
  
  --
  "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
6. Re:Get used to it by fustakrakich · 2012-09-28 02:11 · Score: 2
  
  The only hope at this point is for a new, grass-roots party to form...
  They don't come to being by themselves. And besides, why is a political 'party' needed? Vote for non-aligned candidates that aren't beholden to any particular party. Try voting for individuals. The problem is not the government. I will take apathy as consent. If people don't care, that only means they approve of the situation. If they don't, they have to show it.. with action. Their words of complaint mean nothing otherwise.
  
  --
  “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
7. Re:Get used to it by Hatta · 2012-09-28 02:55 · Score: 2
  
  Get used to it, because there's nothing you can do about it.
  Sure there is. Tor, AdBlock, NoScript, Ghostery, Jitsi, GPG, etc.
  
  --
  Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
8. Re:Get used to it by grenadeh · 2012-09-28 04:39 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Let's face it != "Things are the way they are and we should accept them." No. Not because it's a strict constructionist point of view, not just that. The constitution says this shit isn't ok. Did they foresee predator drones? No they did not. They foresaw that government, like it has always done in the past because government is people and people are flawed, will try to do things it shouldn't be doing - based on governmental theory and based on the philosophys floating around since the Enlightenment and Renaissance. This is the type of BS books were written about - 1984, Anthem, etc. etc. The kind of BS movies like Equilibrium show. There shouldn't be any discussion about this without a disclaimer beforehand that everyone is fully aware this is unacceptable. And yea, there's a lot we can do about it. We can do what Jefferson all but told us to do, rise up and slay them. From time to time the tree of liberty must be refreshed with the blood of patriots and tyrants. He wrote extensively about revolution as a tool.
9. Re:Get used to it by ibsteve2u · 2012-09-28 06:13 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Let's face it: we now live in a surveillance society.
  Only because the majority of the voters want it that way.
  Do not mistake apathy for intent. We have insufficient data to suggest that people want it this way. They just don't care enough [...]
  I would dispute that, too. My belief is the evolving totalitarian state isn't a matter of voter desire or voter apathy; it is simply misplaced trust; too many Americans project themselves and their own behavior onto their elected officials. I.e., they wouldn't sell their friends and neighbors out, so they cannot envision a scenario wherein their elected officials would, either. Even though it keeps happening.
  
  On top of which you have to add a lack of awareness of the scope of the systems that are already in place and, further, a lack of the imagination required to conceptualize how those systems might be used to first curtail and then crush individual liberty...which again comes back to the American people's provincialism: They've never seen just how bad it can get...they're not aware of just how far so-called "conservatives"/totalitarians are not just willing but eager to go.
  
  Ignorance isn't bliss...as anyone who has ever seen a cow contentedly chewing its cud as it walks up the ramp to the slaughterhouse may already have concluded.
  
  --
  Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
useless number by O('_')O_Bush · 2012-09-28 00:38 · Score: 3, Insightful

The summary should have posted the raw number instead. Increasing by 361% doesn't really mean much. 100 to 461 isn't impressive, compared to, say, 100000 to 461000.

--
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
Re:Funny how the people who plaint over this the m by mhajicek · 2012-09-28 01:25 · Score: 2

Then again, if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to worry about it.
"If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him."
Re:You got it. by ATMAvatar · 2012-09-28 01:52 · Score: 5, Insightful

That's a cute way to ignore that the surveillance is completely bipartisan. This is neither strictly Obama's fault nor any meaningful change from the last administration. Were McCain elected, we would not be any better off in this regard. Should Romney be elected, we will be no better off. Both parties want this desperately, because it is a springboard to consolidating even more power in their hands.

--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Re:Tell the person spied on by Hatta · 2012-09-28 02:59 · Score: 3, Informative

National Security Letters are issued without judicial oversight and contain a gag order by default. Yes, it's that bad.

--
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Re:You got it. by Hatta · 2012-09-28 03:15 · Score: 3, Interesting

That's a cute way to ignore that the surveillance is completely bipartisan.
That's a generous way to put on it. To put a finer point on it, the US government is monopartisan.

--
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
my suspicion is by nimbius · 2012-09-28 03:43 · Score: 2

that people are beginning to realize just how little their lives are impacted or affected by terrorism. out of sheer desparation, the government drive to catch anything remotely related to the ideas or sentiments of terrorism or terrorists is now becoming apparent.
if we dont have 'terror,' then an entire industry that employs millions of americans collapses during an intractable recession. Seeing an increase in wiretaps and so forth is merely observing this industrial organism defensively fight for its survival. As for its government custodian, in this case, i suspect its easier to keep up appearances than to face the fact that peanut allergies killed more americans last year than terrorism, and obesity killed more americans than 9/11 by a long shot.

--
Good people go to bed earlier.