Slashdot Mirror


ACLU and EFF Endorse Weaker USA Freedom Act Passed By Committee

First time accepted submitter sumakor (3571543) writes "The House Judiciary Committee has advanced a weakened version of the USA Freedom Act (HR3361). The amended compromise version allows collection of phone call records up to two hops away from a target, potentially including millions of customer records, and allows for collection without a judge's order in emergency cases. The amended bill also drops the requirement for a privacy advocate who can appeal the rulings of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and extends the controversial Section 215 of the Patriot Act from 2015 through 2017.

Despite these significant changes the amended bill has been endorsed by the ACLU and the EFF as a first step and the most promising path towards reigning in government surveillance. The two organizations called for further Congressional measures to tighten control of surveillance authorities including an explicit definition of the term 'selector,' a reduction in the number of hops from 2 to 1 under most circumstances and the closing the loophole that allows searches of Americans' data inadvertently collected thru Section 702.

The bill now proceeds to the House Intelligence Committee, who has advanced its competing bill, the FISA Transparency and Modernization Act (HR 4291). The committee will mark up both bills on the same day, beginning at 10am Thursday, behind closed doors."

18 of 107 comments (clear)

  1. Two things... by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 5, Informative

    1) This bill basically changes nothing - they can do whatever they want by declaring an "emergency", and there is no effective oversight.

    2) "Reining in", NOT "reigning in". The expression refers to slowing horses down, not kings at home.

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    1. Re:Two things... by NotDrWho · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I would add:

      3) It doesn't fucking matter what they pass anyway, since neither Congress nor the President has any real oversight of the CIA or NSA, or any way of knowing if they're breaking the law or stopping them if they are.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    2. Re:Two things... by Andrewkov · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We are in a constant state of emergency due to the war on terror.

    3. Re:Two things... by NotDrWho · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The whole "emergency" thing is just an excuse that exploits the widespread belief that the CIA/NSA frequently face scenarios where the clock is ticking and Jack Bauer/James Bond MUST get someone's phone data RIGHT NOW or PEOPLE ARE GOING TO DIE IN 20 MINUTES!!!! The fact that such scenarios almost never occur in real life is irrelevant, since the public doesn't know that.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    4. Re:Two things... by GargamelSpaceman · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Bill is a joke

      Yeah, even though the bill doesn't seem to grant more power to the government than it has already grabbed for itself, having a law around what was illegally done, legitimizes it after the fact, and puts the onus to create new law forbidding the abuses on those who would end them.
      and so are the groups that endorse it

      Except that the bill at least defines what can and can not be done. The status quo is no definition which means it's free to slide anywhere, by not being prosecuted crimes become norms.

      One of the biggest things they should hash out in the courts IMHO is the idea that copying data to a hard drive and not having humans look at it is somehow not unreasonable search. A machine you operate needs to be considered your agent, as machines will only get more intelligent. Indexing is understanding and machines do this. If your agents understand the information gleaned, then the information has been effectively searched. To obtain a copy of information your machine agents have had to handle every bit of the information and save it. Having a copy is the most basic version of understanding information. It equals search. Indexing just compounds the crime.

      --
      ...
    5. Re:Two things... by erikkemperman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Precisely. In fact, blame Hollywood at least as much as Washington. There's way more fictional terrorists and serial killers and so on than real ones. And they need the public to be much more afraid than is actually warranted, or they might push back against some of this madness.

      I reserve a dedicated level of contempt especially for their fusion: the military-entertainment complex. Pentagon sponsoring series and films -- with strings attached of course so effectively outsourced propaganda -- has a much broader effect than just those productions. Companies might keep their content government-friendly for fear of missing out on future projects' funding.

      Fear is the mind killer.

      --
      Gosh, thanks. That must be why the other ships call me Meatfucker -- GCU Grey Area (Eccentric)
  2. "Freedom Act" by GameboyRMH · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Holy hell look at that name...this bill must be full of draconian nightmare laws!

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    1. Re:"Freedom Act" by NotDrWho · · Score: 5, Funny

      I've always said that when the bill to re-institute slavery comes, it will be called the "Full Employment and Housing for Minorities Act."

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    2. Re:"Freedom Act" by Hillgiant · · Score: 4, Funny

      Finally a jobs bill that republicans can get behind.

      --
      -
    3. Re:"Freedom Act" by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Funny

      Slavery? Are you fucking nuts? You have to house and feed slaves, did you look recently at the housing cost in most areas? Wages are way cheaper!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  3. Doesn't do a thing really by jonwil · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The only way to stop this mess is to completly outlaw ANY logging or surveillance by ANY agency (FBI, CIA, NSA, DEA, Homeland Security or whoever else) or by ANY private company on behalf of the government except where the surveillance or logging is being done on a specific identifiable entity (e.g. a Facebook account or a Google account or an ISP account or a cellphone number/account or whatever) AND a judge has granted a warrant.

    Even the worst possible hypothetical attack (e.g. a terrorist with a nuclear bomb powerful enough to turn the entire eastern seaboard into a smoking crater) is not bad enough to justify any kind of monitoring, surveillance or logging of the communications of people who have not been classified as a threat by an independent judge.

  4. No limits at all really... by sjbe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The amended compromise version allows collection of phone call records up to two hops away from a target, potentially including millions of customer records, and allows for collection without a judge's order in emergency cases. The amended bill also drops the requirement for a privacy advocate who can appeal the rulings of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and extends the controversial Section 215 of the Patriot Act from 2015 through 2017.

    This is the "weaker" version? This basically is a bill with no limits.

    Two hops? That just means if you ever called the phone company, a utility, UPS/Fedex etc then they can "hop" to you. It's no real limitation at all. It also means that they can just declare something an emergency whenever they want. No real oversight. No advocate for the citizenry.

  5. The oversight doesn't care by sjbe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    since neither Congress nor the President has any real oversight of the CIA or NSA

    I think the President has a very good idea what the NSA is up to since the reports they generate ultimately come to him and his direct reports. I'm pretty sure the Congressional leadership also has a fairly good idea what is going on. However I do not think their interests align with those of the citizenry and so they have little to no incentive to exercise what you or I would consider proper oversight. They benefit from the violation of our civil rights.

    1. Re:The oversight doesn't care by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm sure people whisper in their ears, "Ya know, if there's a terrorist attack and the biggest thiing you and your party did recently was make it harder for the NSA, well, what will the voters think?"

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  6. The US government... Give a micron... by Chas · · Score: 3, Informative

    Take whatever the fuck they want.

    They can basically operate however they want until someone snitches on them.

    At that point, there's a big kerfuffle in DC as people dive out of the line of fire. Then...nothing.

    Shortly afterwards, the informant is renditioned or flees and is declared an enemy of the state.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  7. Dear Congress, by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 4, Informative

    Unless you provide criminal penalties for those who would break this law, don't bother. You know what I mean - you do this for *every* other prohibitive law which doesn't target government, but always seem to forget that part when you're trying to reign in government.

    While you're at it, make a breach of this law also be a civil cause of action.

    Seriously.

    Otherwise, don't bother. If there's no penalties for breaking this law, it'll be ignored like all the rest of them.

  8. Section 215 means they can collect everything by bigpat · · Score: 3, Informative

    "extends the controversial Section 215 of the Patriot Act from 2015 through 2017."

    Section 215 is the provision which they have interpreted to mean every and all records collected by a business... server logs, router logs, email logs, credit card transactions, cable tv viewing data, car transponder data, car location data (as now collected by private companies and bought by the police), bank records, facebook friends lists, pictures you upload, library records etc etc etc. Basically everything that any company you do business with or knows about you could possibly think of putting in a database.

    Putting a 2 hop limitation on phone records misses 99.9% of the types of records government surveillance will be interested in collecting and aggregating moving forward. Might as well put a telegraph limitation in there or a horse and buggy surveillance limitation and call it "restraint".

  9. Section 215 is the problem by bigpat · · Score: 3, Informative

    The real problem is section 215 or anything like it. Which is what the government has been using to confiscate all sorts of records that companies that you do business with might keep. Limiting just phone calls misses 99.9999% of what the government might want to collect moving forward.

    Section 215 is the provision which they have interpreted to mean every and all records collected by a business... server logs, router logs, email logs, credit card transactions, cable tv viewing data, car transponder data, car location data (as now collected by private companies and bought by the police), bank records, facebook friends lists, pictures you upload, library records etc etc etc. Basically everything that any company you do business with or knows about you could possibly think of putting in a database.

    So on the face of this Congress really needs to enumerate the things that can be collected instead of leaving in a provision that seems to allow them to collect everything and then only restrict one particularly type of record

    Maybe the ACLU and EFF are just trying to make a career out of this law. Because in another couple years we are going to hear about how they are collecting another type of data under section 215 and then the ACLU and EFF are going to be up in arms over it and fundraising to stop it. Guys, just hold the line and oppose section 215 or any insidious replacement of it. You can still support the two-hop limitation, but oppose the bill.