Slashdot Mirror


The Executive Order That Led To Mass Spying, As Told By NSA Alumni

An anonymous reader writes with this Ars piece about the executive order that is the legal basis for the U.S. government's mass spying on citizens. One thing sits at the heart of what many consider a surveillance state within the US today. The problem does not begin with political systems that discourage transparency or technologies that can intercept everyday communications without notice. Like everything else in Washington, there's a legal basis for what many believe is extreme government overreach—in this case, it's Executive Order 12333, issued in 1981. “12333 is used to target foreigners abroad, and collection happens outside the US," whistleblower John Tye, a former State Department official, told Ars recently. "My complaint is not that they’re using it to target Americans, my complaint is that the volume of incidental collection on US persons is unconstitutional.” The document, known in government circles as "twelve triple three," gives incredible leeway to intelligence agencies sweeping up vast quantities of Americans' data. That data ranges from e-mail content to Facebook messages, from Skype chats to practically anything that passes over the Internet on an incidental basis. In other words, EO 12333 protects the tangential collection of Americans' data even when Americans aren't specifically targeted—otherwise it would be forbidden under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978.

38 of 180 comments (clear)

  1. 1981 by Travis+Mansbridge · · Score: 5, Funny

    Three years early!

  2. Reagan is alive! by markringen · · Score: 3, Insightful

    that man is responsible for every disaster on the globe since he ever was president..

    1. Re:Reagan is alive! by SpockLogic · · Score: 3

      that man is responsible for every disaster on the globe since he ever was president..

      No, no, the right will clam that their beloved President Alzheimer was non compos mentis when he signed 12333 and cannot be held responsible for fucking over the population.

    2. Re:Reagan is alive! by Beck_Neard · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually that's kind of the point, to some degree. It's now clear he was suffering from symptoms of dementia throughout his entire term, and they became especially pronounced near the end. His suggestibility and deteriorating mental health made him easy prey for those who wanted laws changed in their favor.

      --
      A fool and his hard drive are soon parted.
  3. Re:Need a big leak by master5o1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If it's just Facebook, then it'll be claimed as a Facebook security breach and not anything related to NSA.

    You would want some sort of release of data that collates Facebook accounts to traffic offenses and something to do with cellphone data.

    --
    signature is pants
  4. Alumni? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    You've misspelled illuminati.

  5. Haply so, but exec orders and agencies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    President and agencies still swear to uphold the Constitution and have no business violating it, executive orders or not.
    Any orders ought to be followed to the extent the Constitution allows, not beyond, and those going beyond deserve
    to be punished. That should include Presidents, though such sanctions are pretty broken.

    1. Re:Haply so, but exec orders and agencies by Feces's+Edge · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes you should have to impeach someone to get them to follow the Constitution.

      They swear to follow the constitution, so they should do that of their own volition.

      Metadata isn't considered to be a part of your "effects" since it is third party information so it has nothing to do with the constitution. Collection of third party information without a warrant has been around since forever.

      Bull-fucking-shit, government bootlicker. The government has absolutely no constitutional authority to conduct such surveillance on citizens without a warrant. If this sort of surveillance had been used against the founders, they would have taken steps to prevent the newly-formed government from doing the same thing, just like they did on a number of others issues that they faced at the time, and since the spirit of the constitution is what matters, that's really what's relevant.

      The idea that the government can get around the constitution by letting corporations collect the data first and then getting the data from them is absolutely ludicrous. And a lot of this spying is just sapping up information as it travels to its destination. Anyone who says this is even remotely constitution is an authoritarian of the highest caliber and despises freedom.

    2. Re:Haply so, but exec orders and agencies by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If this sort of surveillance had been used against the founders, they would have taken steps to prevent the newly-formed government from doing the same thing, just like they did on a number of others issues that they faced at the time, and since the spirit of the constitution is what matters, that's really what's relevant.

      So what did they do against the Alien and Sedition Acts?

    3. Re:Haply so, but exec orders and agencies by Feces's+Edge · · Score: 2

      Violate their own constitution. But what they wrote was still there, regardless.

    4. Re:Haply so, but exec orders and agencies by Feces's+Edge · · Score: 2

      The bill of rights was also applied to the states via the 14th amendment.

      And if you really think the constitution is interpreted literally by the courts, you need to educate yourself.

    5. Re:Haply so, but exec orders and agencies by penix1 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Did you even read the executive order?

      First of all, it has been modified many, many times since Ronald Reagen the last that I can find was in 2008. http://fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/...

      Second, and more to your points, sprinkled throughout the document are statements like, any intelligence collected concerning United States citizens must go through the FBI / Attorney General. This is so they can begin criminal investigations using the tools (read WARRANTS) to gain physical evidence of a crime. And the collection of that data, according to the order, is tangential to foreign intelligence gathering. As an example, here is 1.1(a)

      (a) All means, consistent with applicable Federal law and this order, and with full consideration of the rights of United States persons, shall be used to obtain reliable intelligence information to protect the United States and its interests.

      [Emphasis added]

      This is 20(A):

      (A) The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall coordinate the clandestine collection of foreign intelligence collected through human sources or through human-enabled means and counterintelligence activities inside the United States;

      [Emphasis added]

      So sticking to the topic at hand, namely that this order authorizes warrantless surveillance of United States citizens, is patently false. That may be the way it is used but that goes counter to the executive order's language.

      By the way, the "human enabled means" is the metadata you are talking about.

      --
      This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
  6. There's no "led to" by Kohath · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Everyone involved made specific, intentional choices. It didn't happen on autopilot.

    1. Re:There's no "led to" by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 2

      That's a pretty provocative few sentences. What job is it that you're quitting?

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
  7. It isn't due to an EO by hsmith · · Score: 2

    EO's have no real weight to create policy. They are simply instructions for federal agencies (which the President is in control of since he is the executive) to do.

    Congress then up until now allowed it and the blame lies on their shoulders alone for creating the surveillance state.

  8. Different era by mi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That data ranges from e-mail content to Facebook messages, from Skype chats to practically anything that passes over the Internet on an incidental basis.

    None of those things existed, when the order was signed, though. And if none of the subsequent Presidents — including the current "tech-savvy" wonder — have abolished it since then (when the explosive use of computers made it truly dangerous), then is Reagan really to blame?

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:Different era by AF_Cheddar_Head · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes, Yes he is.

      Union breaker
      Deficit balloons
      Trickle Down
      Sandinistas
      Iran-Contra
      Ollie North
      Nancy making decisions when he gets Alzheimer's

      You fucking got me started

    2. Re:Different era by Feces's+Edge · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He also ramped up the war on drugs, something that so many freedom-hating scumbags in our government have done. So he wasn't a good president, and he definitely didn't want "small government."

      But what does that have to do with him being to blame for this specific issue?

    3. Re:Different era by mi · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yes, Yes he is.

      Because?..

      Union breaker .... You fucking got me started

      I wish, you had anything on-topic to offer, when you get "started"... The topic, in this case, being the abuse of the Executive Order 12333 by the intelligence community decades after the order was signed.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    4. Re:Different era by Le+Marteau · · Score: 3

      > Ollie North - Marine helping to get weapons to Contras so they can kill communists. Good.

      Congress said "don't do it". North ignored the will of congress, which represents the people. And in doing so, therefore ignored the will of the people. He ignored my representative, therefore, he ignored ME by proxy. I didn't take kindly to such things then, and I don't take kindly when Obama does it now.

      The man was no patriot. He was an outlaw. Fuck Oliver North.

      --
      Mod down people who tell people how to mod in their sigs
    5. Re: Different era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Fuck you. You seriously believe this "job creator" myth? And all that other crap?

      The only thing keeping Ronald Reagan from being the worst president in US history is W.

    6. Re:Different era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      This started long before this order every happened.

      THE FBI, CIA, a host of known and (still) unknown agencies. About 100 years ago, check your history on the "war on communism" civil rights leaders and just about anyone who spoke out against their political leaders or people that were rich and influential were being target. Howard Hughes, MLK Jr, John Kennedy (a little irony in a president being considered a communist who was battling communists) I could keep going with the list of famous people let alone everyday Jane's/Johns.

      Really this all started back sometime in the 1920-30's and it only snowballed from there. And that spying was illegal but also kept secretive for some-time until people began to suspect they were purposely being targeted then it became public.

    7. Re:Different era by khallow · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Union breaker

      Amazing how putting this on the front of your list just discredited your entire post instantly. Public labor unions are a particularly nasty parasite. The union in question, the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Union got overly greedy and demonstrated an epic level of hubris.

      The results were not so good. Not only did they get burned permanently (the strikers weren't only fired, but banned permanently from employment with the Federal government), but they also set back all labor unions by swinging public opinion massively against labor unions in general.

    8. Re:Different era by sociocapitalist · · Score: 2

      He also ramped up the war on drugs, something that so many freedom-hating scumbags in our government have done. So he wasn't a good president, and he definitely didn't want "small government."

      But what does that have to do with him being to blame for this specific issue?

      Whoops, no it wasn't Carter...it was Reagan:
      On December 4, 1981 President Ronald Reagan signed Executive Order 12333, an Executive Order intended to extend powers and responsibilities of US intelligence agencies and direct the leaders of U.S. federal agencies to co-operate fully with CIA requests for information.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...

      So yes he is to blame for this specific issue.

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
  9. Executive Orders Need to Expire, and Quickly by turp182 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is crazy. It seems Executive Orders are non-legislation afforded the impact of law.

    Executive Orders should expire after a couple of years, or when a Presidential inauguration occurs, whichever comes first. Continuation should require Congress to pass it as ACTUAL law. And changes outside of that period MUST be ACTUAL LAW!!!!!

    WTF!?!?!?!?

    Sorry for the caps, I RTFA and it pissed me off.

    I would suggest Executive Orders be done away with completely, they are an "I am the King" method of ruling. Not leading, ruling, controlling.

    --
    BlameBillCosby.com
    1. Re:Executive Orders Need to Expire, and Quickly by justcauseisjustthat · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If the president had to go through congress to do everything, nothing would get done. I think the Obama administration is still trying to get appointments through congress from 2 years ago.

      On the other hand the expiration idea has merit.

    2. Re:Executive Orders Need to Expire, and Quickly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If the president had to go through congress to do everything, nothing would get done.

      I'd rather nothing get done than allow one man to be able to use 'I am king' orders.

    3. Re:Executive Orders Need to Expire, and Quickly by turp182 · · Score: 2

      So be it. I would take nothing over the Executive Orders. Congress passed the Patriot Act (terrible, terrible legislation), they would support some things.

      No action is better than enforced action "requested" by a very small group (or a single person). Regardless of the implications (freedom an liberty before "risk" type stuff).

      Checks and balances appear to be nothing more than bank notes and the ability to stand upright.

      --
      BlameBillCosby.com
    4. Re:Executive Orders Need to Expire, and Quickly by Patent+Lover · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually executive orders are orders that excercise lawful powers given to the President by Congress. The problem is that there are always lawyers making up their own interpretation of a vague law passed by Congress. C'est La Vie.

    5. Re:Executive Orders Need to Expire, and Quickly by penix1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A typical executive order simply designates procedures and requirements to be followed by people working for the Executive branch of the government.

      Which is EXACTLY what this executive order does. It is implementing at the Executive Branch the legislation to which it is based, namely the National Security Act of 1947 as amended. It even says so at the start of the order:

      by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the National Security Act of 1947, as amended, (Act) and as President of the United States of America, in order to provide for the effective conduct of United States intelligence activities and the protection of constitutional rights, it is hereby ordered as follows:

      http://fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/...

      Also, nothing in this executive order "led to" the warrantless wiretapping as alleged in the story. In fact, there are several places in the order that state that if US citizens are involved, it MUST go through the FBI / Attorney General. Read it. You will see what I mean.

      --
      This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
  10. YATDRA by mbone · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yet Another Decent Thing Destroyed by the Reagan Administration.

    I should have known.

  11. NSA was collecting data in the 1960s by garyebickford · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A friend of my sister's worked for NSA for eight years in the 1960s. At that time the fact of its existence was classified - insiders said the acronym stood for "No Such Agency". He spent most of those eight years in a shack on a hill in Japan, listening and recording phone calls and telegraphs in and out of Japan. He came out of those eight years imbued with an extreme level of paranoia that he never did shake off. It cost him his marriage among other things.

    So 1981 wasn't the beginning. I would be more likely to think that the directive in question was created to paper over and legalize what had been going on for decades before. The agency was founded by Harry Truman in 1952 based on signals intelligence units from WWI, per Wikipedia. I saw an article recently which asserted that spying on foreign (and some domestic) entities really came out of the period before and after World War I, and it made sense.

    Having said all that, I recently learned that the NSA is not just "spooks peeking into our bedrooms" and getting everyone upset. That is just one of three branches.

    - Signals Intelligence Directorate is the one that has been upsetting people, and may in fact be as crazy as people think they are;

    - Information Assurance Directorate one might consider the "good guys" - they are working with US industry and agencies to prevent security breaches - one might consider this the "anti-spy" group, and you'll see guys from IAD at conferences regarding improvement of the security infrastructure of the net, to prevent spying and other problems. By all accounts the Information Assurance Directorate is working very hard to protect us, and has had some successes preventing or stopping serious hacking and other incidents against both public and private organizations in recent years that they, of course, can't ever tell anyone.

    - Technical Directorate, which I assume is the people inventing the HW and SW the rest of the gang uses.

    TL;DR - don't paint the whole of NSA with the same tar and feathers. Some, at least, are out there actively helping with things like Tor as we read recently - spy agencies including NSA have regularly helped Tor find and fix bugs, even while other groups in the same agency are trying to exploit them.

    --
    It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/
  12. Clearly Bush's fault. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I mean, really, he was once head of the CIA, and once he became VP, why not persuade the President this was good for America?

  13. Please RTFA by whoever57 · · Score: 4, Informative
    Read the FA. THe summary doesn't explain exactly what is happening. EO 12333 originally allowed for collection of data abroad, but today, the collection happens in the USA -- in domestic Internet hubs. Naturally, the vast majority of the data scooped up this way is purely domestic and concerns US citizens, but the NSA claims that this is purely incidental. That's right -- the majority of the collection is "incidental". Yeah, right.

    FISA? That rubber stamp is bypassed while collecting masses of data on US citizens.

    "This program was started at least back in 2001 and has expanded to between 80 and 100 tap points on the fiber optic lines in the lower 48 states," he said by e-mail. "Most of these fiber optic tap points are not on the East or West coast. This means that the primary target of this collection is domestic... Most collection of US domestic communications and data is done under EO 12333, section 2.3 paragraph C in the Upstream program. They claim, near as I can tell, that all domestic collection is incidental. That's, of course, the vast majority of data."

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  14. Executive Orders Need to Expire, and Quickly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The simple fact is that *most* executive orders are perfectly valid, and discontinuing them would serve no purpose.

    A typical executive order simply designates procedures and requirements to be followed by people working for the Executive branch of the government. (Such as requiring that they not enter contracts with companies discriminating against employees for various reasons.)

    This, however, is not a typical executive order. It is, quite simply, unconstitutional, and an explicit violation of laws written and passed by Congress. This is something that Congress, the States, and the People, *should* be getting upset about. Unfortunately, it won't happen, because roughly 50% of the country doesn't want to acknowledge anything that will make Republicans look bad, and roughly another half doesn't want to acknowledge anything that makes Democrats look bad. That leaves a few rational stragglers stuck in the middle, saying "WTF is up with you boneheaded ****wads?!!"

  15. Only government workers and contractors by wiredlogic · · Score: 2

    It's good to see that EO12333 has been placed in the spotlight. It always irked me how it tries to run around the constitution. The whole order is filled with phony "prohibitions" on government power with open-ended exceptions that can be invoked at any time.

    My favorite parts:

    2.3Collection of Information.
    (e) Information needed to protect foreign intelligence or counterintelligence sources or methods from unauthorized disclosure. Collection within the United States shall be undertaken by the FBI except that other agencies of the Intelligence Community may also collect such information concerning present or former employees, present or former intelligence agency contractors or their present or former employees, or applicants for any such employment or contracting;

    So basically any government agency can be tasked to collect domestic information without the pesky oversight the FBI has to deal with.

    2.4Collection Techniques. Agencies within the Intelligence Community shall use the least intrusive collection techniques feasible within the United States or directed against United States persons abroad. Agencies are not authorized to use such techniques as electronic surveillance, unconsented physical search, mail surveillance, physical surveillance, or monitoring devices unless they are in accordance with procedures established by the head of the agency concerned and approved by the Attorney General. Such procedures shall protect constitutional and other legal rights and limit use of such information to lawful governmental purposes. These procedures shall not authorize:

    (b) Unconsented physical searches in the United States by agencies other than the FBI, except for:
    (1) Searches by counterintelligence elements of the military services directed against military personnel within the United States or abroad for intelligence purposes, when authorized by a military commander empowered to approve physical searches for law enforcement purposes, based upon a finding of probable cause to believe that such persons are acting as agents of foreign powers; and
    (2) Searches by CIA of personal property of non-United States persons lawfully in its possession.
    (c) Physical surveillance of a United States person in the United States by agencies other than the FBI, except for:
    (1) Physical surveillance of present or former employees, present or former intelligence agency contractors or their present of former employees, or applicants for any such employment or contracting; and
    (2) Physical surveillance of a military person employed by a nonintelligence element of a military service.

    They've tried to be clever and hide what they did here with a double negative spread across two clauses. Effectively all defense contractor employees are subjected to domestic spying which was part of the rationale for justify creating the surveillance apparatus. They don't disclose that when you sign the contract suspending your rights when you apply for a security clearance. Note that that much of the internet enabled surveillance programs were instituted pre-9/11 under Clinton and not by Bush2 and this was going on before the PATRIOT act madness.

    2.5Attorney General Approval. The Attorney General hereby is delegated the power to approve the use for intelligence purposes, within the United States or against a United States person abroad, of any technique for which a warrant would be required if undertaken for law enforcement purposes, provided that such techniques shall not be undertaken unless the Attorney General has determined in each case that there is probable cause to believe that the technique is directed against a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power. Electronic surveillance, as defined in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, shall be conducted in accordance with that A

    --
    I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
  16. "otherwise it would be forbidden "? by jcr · · Score: 2

    Bullshit. It's ILLEGAL, period. Executive orders don't trump acts of congress, and acts of congress don't override the constitution. Every NSA minion involved in collecting this data without a warrant issued by a judge naming a specific person and stating what they're looking for and why, is a CRIMINAL.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  17. Ending of the Cold War by Ronin+Developer · · Score: 2

    What is interesting is that order was executed in the final years of the Cold War. There was no "Internet" so it is doubtful that this was the intent. However, we were still in a Cold War with the Soviet Union. And, there were communist sympathizers here in the US who would be subject to this surveillance. Additionally, the drug cartels and weapons trade were in high gear (ala Iran/Contra). So, given this context, it is understandable WHY this order was created and issued in the first place.

    I doubt President Reagan envisioned the rise of the internet and the privacy concerns that the budding .com businesses would generate.

    Where the fault does lay is that when these avenues did arise, is with the continued existence and extension of the initial order. This finger points directly at GHB, Clinton, GWB and now Obama. And, I would focus more on GHB given his close affiliation and vested interest with the intelligence communities. The dangers were well known by Clinton/Gore with the desire to push the Skipjack encryption algorithm into everything...right until it was revealed that the LEA (Law Enforcement Access Key...ala LEAK) key code could be forged rendered it a non-starter - it didn't meet National security needs once that was revealed and the common folk and business community would never accept it. RSA Laboratories was the key vendor of secure encryption at this point and fought against Skipjack. With that battle lost, sights turned elsewhere and we KNOW RSA's new overloads (EMC) sold us out for $10M. It was the perfect subject of a compromise given the pervasiveness of their products. I would venture their right to continue to exist was at stake and the $10M was simply a means to cover up the coehersion.

    Ultimately, nobody but the brakes on this surveillance and we know where it has since led.