Slashdot Mirror
NSA Ally Spied on US Law Firm
mendax points out a story at the NY Times about evidence that the Australian Signals Directorate notified the NSA in 2013 that it was spying on discussions between Indonesia and an American law firm. The information gathered by the Directorate included material covered by attorney-client privilege. The Times says:
"Most attorney-client conversations do not get special protections under American law from N.S.A. eavesdropping. Amid growing concerns about surveillance and hacking, the American Bar Association in 2012 revised its ethics rules to explicitly require lawyers to 'make reasonable efforts' to protect confidential information from unauthorized disclosure to outsiders. ... Several newly disclosed documents provide details of the cooperation between the United States and Australia, which share facilities and highly sensitive intelligence, including efforts to break encryption and collect phone call data in Indonesia. Both nations have trade and security interests in Indonesia, where Islamic terrorist groups that threaten the West have bases."
This is the best example which embodies the core question, of who prevails: is it the law that is above the government or is it the government above the law. This particular example of spying the law firm which was representing one side simply demonstrated that the United States has been thrown back to pre-Magna carta era. Basically, if you pose a shred of risk to the establishment and you are in court, you have no chances to privacy and a fair trial. Magna carta basically stated that even the king is not above the law. Now we no longer have the laws that are not being broken by overzealous eunuchs, who are only laughing at the rest of the population . Most interestingly, last year Supreme court rejected the supreme court case brought by the lawyers about the client-attorney confidentiality citing that such fears are "unsubstantiated". Supreme court is presided by judge John G. Roberts. This is the same judge, John G. Roberts, who is appointing FISA judges and is heavily involved "overseeing". So, he said he was not aware of spying.... What a scum seated as chief justice of the country
No, Australia spied on Indonesia, and intercepted communications from US based lawyers representing them in trade negotiations with the US. Australia shared this with the US.
> where Islamic terrorist groups that threaten the West have bases
You know if you don't stand up and say enough of this shit its never going to stop. ATM we have a better chance of getting wipped out by a meteor then we do by some bad ass strapped to a bomb. I get almost side swiped at least once per day while driving on the highway. So what if we get attacked once in a while more people are killed by their diets and the chemicals used in food, there's the governmental outrage about these food terrorist companies that are causing serious damage to out health and economy.
On top of that terrorism is good for the economy and populations control.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
Am I to understand, that a lawyer is complaining about something sleazy and underhanded? Really? A lawyer? The same guys who sleaze their way to the top, then get political jobs so they can sleazy their way to the top again? They are the ones complaining about something possible being sleazy happening to them? Really? Let me get you a tissue.
Also the same guys and girls who are the first to defend the people from government overreach. Who serve nonprofits and NGOs and the public sector and the poor. Some lawyers are assholes. Others dedicate their lives in service.
Either way, do you really think it's a good idea to have the government listening in when you go to get legal advice about your problems with them or someone else?
This is about Australia or didn't you catch that? Slashdot is an AMERICAN site. What about Snowden and the NSA?
"Five Eyes", AC: We have a longstanding agreement with some of our select Freedom Buddies, to engage in 'intelligence sharing' and, when convenient, have one of us do what it would be illegal for another of us to do, then pass the results along, nice and squeaky clean.
I certainly couldn't tell you about the degree to which this is or isn't a wildly unequal partnership, or whether that varies by issue and location; but in this case (Australia volunteering to be oh-so-helpful to the US on a matter between the US and Indonesia), I suspect that team Australia wasn't exactly reigning the NSA in...
Is about material provided in confidence that cannot be used in court.
There's no reason the appropriate authorities can't listen in, if there is reasonable suspicion that the lawyer may be complicit in a future criminal act.
There have been cases where the lawyer became complicit in a later crime. case in point: Lynne Stewart. Who perhaps should have been sentenced to death for her treasonous actions.
Attorney-client privilege protects information pertaining to their case and legal advise. It doesn't protect against prosecution for conspiring with the lawyer, or using the lawyer as a channel to commit further crimes.
Every time you read one of these stories, and are (hopefully) a little bit outraged at how the NSA has dropped every pretense of complying with our Constitution, and has embraced the most despicable aspects of tyrannical rule without any notion of "national defense", you should remember that without the heroic acts of a single young man, and the tireless efforts of a shamefully small handful of journalists and publishers, we would either be ignorant of these monstrous acts or vulnerable to charges of paranoia.
We now have proof, and government doesn't even deign to make false denials. We have government officials calling for the assassination of Edward Snowden and some of the journalists with whom he entrusted these documents. We have everything we need to make a decision about whether we really consent to be governed in this way.
There has never been a perfect hero outside of myth. But there are necessary heroes, and Snowden is one of those.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Depends on the country and what cell phone or "internet" packet systems they bought into, upgraded to. :)
Think of it as Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act access to your countries telco/isp/billing, credit cards, banking, educational, medical, criminal courts, local gov via http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C... been open to Australia and a few other nations
Its the special crypto keys handed over to a countries top law enforcement on buying a national/domestic telco networks for full transparency, decrypting and real time tracking.
Its not any "protocol" its geo location, plain text over all (diverse) products and services, key logging - everything law enforcement and domestic spy agencies need for very complex realtime cases - now in the hands of a few outside governments over many years to enjoy and share all.
Every few years this kind of product use makes the news in some small way:
SISMI-Telecom scandal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...
Greek wiretapping case 2004–05
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...–05
Sadly most govs and their own top crypto experts do not seem to understand the software of the networks they use.
i.e. turnkey delivery with a secure buildings and lots of ways in for other nations.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
The USA is not just "every nation" - they have the rule of law and US lawyers know what legal protections they have when working in the USA or outside the USA wrt to their 'intelligence services"
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
My understanding is that the concern is not about these relatively trivial trade negotiations specifically(though if any of the unnamed 'customers' who found the intelligence products useful were American firms rather than government entities, that would make the US claims of not engaging in economic espionage for the benefit of individual companies rather tenuous); but about the broader question of whether US clandestine activity has the slightest regard for attorney-client relations(in this case, Indonesia had engaged a US law firm, and the Australians noted that the goodies might involve that material).
Some lawyers (particularly the ones dealing with political unlikeables, like the Gitmo remnants) have long suspected that the usual protections for attorney-client privilege were being more or less blatantly violated; but the matter has remained unresolved because, without some evidence, nobody ever has standing, the court finds the plaintiffs' concerns to be merely speculative, etc.
This case, while singularly un-sinister in terms of the matter at hand, strongly suggests that attorney-client communications are open season for the US clandestine services, if they care, which is news given the protections theoretically afforded to such(particularly in light of the revelation of DEA, and possibly other, use of 'parallel construction' to generate non-tainted 'independent' discovery of evidence uncovered by classified surveillance mechanisms that they did not wish to disclose at trial, even to the judge or prosecution, much less the defense).
He's hiding in the corner afraid of making Joe Biden the 45th president.
Seriously, do you think killing a man is really called for? All it would do is make the government demand more constitutional violations in the name of BHO. Remember Obama would become the rallying cry of every American when they carted you non-conformists off to the gulags.. errr I mean gitmo.
What is needed is for congress to grow a pair and pass a law restricting the NSA. And then they need to actually ignore the claims of racism and impeach the bastards who violate it. There is a difference between monitoring foreigners in foreign lands and US citizens in any land. But just in case someone wants to whine that bush did it, we can impeach Bush too. Although rarely is it ever legit to do something you know is wrong or illegal or unconstitutional simply because someone else did it too so I don't really buy into the but so and so did it on something this freaking obvious.
The problem here is not exactly that the US or some other country spied on Indonesia but that in whatever course of events, US citizens who also generally receive special treatment (lawyers) were spied on and this information was passed to the US government where it could have benefited. What effectively happened here is the US government gained information that it is constitutionally and as a matter of US law, barred from gathering and either did use it to their advantage or had the opportunity to do so.
You gain an enormous advantage in knowing what the opposition is doing in any matters of law. Good lawyers study scenarios in order to understand and anticipate the moves of their opposing counsel and recognize when their tactics are working. But knowing first hand could make the difference between winning and losing. That in and of itself does make spying on foreign nations worth while, it just doesn't excuse violating the US constitution and principles of law in the process of doing it. If a normal ordinary person or lawyer were to gain access to this kind of information through a third party (directly or unsolicited), it could cause them to lose their license, case or claim they are representing, or even worse- land them in jail if they used it.
Did the NSA rearrange bits on the law firm's cable-connected computers?
That would be a key constitutional trip line.
The correct word is partner. The reason they have the five eyes )Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States) is so that they can work their ways around laws in one country by having another country do the spying then sharing the information back to the country that wanted the data to begin with. It's all about getting around the laws and as the article said "The bulletin notes only that the counsel’s office “provided clear guidance” and that the Australian agency “has been able to continue to cover the talks, providing highly useful intelligence for interested US customers.”"
That means that the information was provided to American intelligence agencies and that they are violating the clear prohibition against spying on Americans.
"GET / HTTP/1.0" 200 51230 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; Setec Astronomy)"
Many of us never were (and are proud not to be) Americans.
- Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)