Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FBI Access To NSA Surveillance Data Expands In Recent Years

Posted by timothy on from the simply-shocked dept.

itwbennett writes The FBI's access to email and other data collected from overseas targets in the NSA's Prism program has been growing since 2008, according to a 2012 U.S. Department of Justice inspector general's report declassified last Friday by the DOJ in response to a Freedom of Information Act request by the New York Times. Here are some of the milestones mentioned in the report: In 2008, the FBI began reviewing email accounts targeted by the NSA through the Prism program. In October 2009, the FBI requested that information collected under the Prism program be 'dual routed' to both the NSA and the FBI so that the FBI 'could retain this data for analysis and dissemination in intelligence reports.' And in April 2012, the FBI began nominating email addresses and phone numbers that the NSA should target in it surveillance program, according to the document.

52 comments

  1. "Overseas" Targets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Overseas" Targets My Ass.

    1. Re:"Overseas" Targets? by morgauxo · · Score: 1

      Sure, if you fly over both the Atlantic and the Pacific, there you are!

    2. Re:"Overseas" Targets? by zlives · · Score: 3, Insightful

      nah we just call hops in chicago,LA, NY... "seas" and once data travels over "seas" its good to go.

  2. In other news, the sky is blue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tell me something I don't know.

  3. Scope creep ... by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As usual, we get the scope creep beyond what they told us it would be used for.

    I think at this point we can safely conclude the FBI and the NSA (and every other TLA) are actively fighting against the rights of people, as well as undermining the law.

    They're more than happy to become the total surveillance state.

    And what's really pathetic is people seem to think this is OK.

    Papers please, comrade. But don't think for a minute we're not listening.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:Scope creep ... by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      A political catch 22.
      We say NSA is overreaching it needs to be stopped.
      The feds send in the FBI to investigate.
      We say the FBI is just as bad as the NSA.

      The thing is the FBI, NSA etc... They are not trying to actively get rid of our rights. However their mandate is our security. Unfortunately Liberty and Security don't play nice with each other, more Liberty means people get to do more what they want and that could mean infringing on others security.

      These groups are doing their jobs when they try to get more information. However what we lack is proper leadership to stand up and make the tough decision of saying, you are reaching too far, and we need to insure we keep personal liberty.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:Scope creep ... by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 1

      It's worse than "papers please" -- there are a lot of laws making it illegal to cover your face or disguise your appearance. Facial recognition software is not good enough yet to really track everyone -- but they've laid the groundwork.

      Total Information Awareness means that all things are known about all people. Being that there are so many laws, I'm very sure we are all guilty of something. Prosecution therefore, is selective and can be used to target anyone getting in the way of people with power and three letter agencies.

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    3. Re:Scope creep ... by SirGeek · · Score: 1

      A political catch 22. We say NSA is overreaching it needs to be stopped. The feds send in the FBI to investigate. We say the FBI is just as bad as the NSA.

      The thing is the FBI, NSA etc... They are not trying to actively get rid of our rights. However their mandate is our security. Unfortunately Liberty and Security don't play nice with each other, more Liberty means people get to do more what they want and that could mean infringing on others security.

      These groups are doing their jobs when they try to get more information. However what we lack is proper leadership to stand up and make the tough decision of saying, you are reaching too far, and we need to insure we keep personal liberty.

      No they're NOT doing their jobs. More Data != Better.

      They have access to information, their problem isn't that they need more data, They need to understand the data they DO HAVE so that they can analyze it properly for any threats. THEN when they have a specific threat they can request the additional data they need.. BUT only once they've actually identified a REAL target.

      --
      UPS Sucks
    4. Re: Scope creep ... by Rujiel · · Score: 1

      "they are not actively trying to get rid of our rights" *Not wanting an end to privacy *Wanting every possible scrap of info about every one of us Choose one.

    5. Re:Scope creep ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The question is what bargaining power does a citizen have when they have no secrets of their own. If you can't surprise your government it will be status quo forever.

    6. Re:Scope creep ... by Strangely+Familiar · · Score: 1

      NO. Just no. Stop parroting this false choice. If you lived in a glass house, how secure would you feel? Do you really think giving up all your privacy is security? It is not. I want opaque walls! I don't want every criminal out there looking into my house and seeing everything I do on my computer! Obviously, no one is immune from law breaking. Not the guy on the street, not the government man, not the corporate man. You give up your rights, and you give up your protection. In other words, you give up your security from the world at large. If society as a whole has more rights and more privacy, it also has more security. That means security from all threats, especially including governments and corporations. The most insidious thing is that usually, unlike in this situation, the governments just break the laws by literally breaking the laws (repealing them, passing loopholes, etc.), so that stealing your money, your property, and your privacy is not illegal. Here, the government is just being lazy, and failing to repeal the fourth amendment before blatantly violating it.

      --
      Join the IParty!
    7. Re:Scope creep ... by Frobnicator · · Score: 1

      It's worse than "papers please" ... I'm very sure we are all guilty of something. Prosecution therefore, is selective and can be used to target anyone getting in the way of people with power and three letter agencies.

      As a history buff, one of the recurring themes of revolution, both as a cause of the revolution and as a key result, is the opportunity to wipe the slate of the old laws.

      It is very rare for an old empire to survive more than a few hundred years without either a revolution that resets the legal slate, or some serious reformation work to clean up all the accumulated cruft. The few old empires with old established law (like the UK) have had many major rewrites of the legal infrastructure.

      The US is rapidly approaching the critical mass for such an event, either a major reformation and reduction in laws or people getting upset enough to hit the big "reset the government" button.

      --
      //TODO: Think of witty sig statement
    8. Re:Scope creep ... by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      The people of East Germany faced the same tracking if they had ideas about getting to the West or protesting.
      In the end all the files did was link the 2nd and third hops connecting informants in groups to each other.
      The other aspect is a rapid expansion in the numbers of informants and the security officials needed to handle them and their flow of information.
      A huge boondoggle for contractors and government employees trying to keep the data useful, filter existing data set and add more data.
      The other aspect is people now know that all the equipment was not for the Soviet Union or Russia. People now understand collect it all, the tame brands, junk encryption and data kept for generations in a searchable NSA "lock box".
      The time spent trying to shield or having to discover and then undo the tracking of informant and undercover staff becomes a huge task.
      In the past paper work at a regional and local level could ensure the perfect cover for an informant or staff deep undercover .
      Now with local records been networked all data is open to all investigators at a State and federal level. Will that name and date of birth linked to a web 2.0 account hold up at a State level? Who is that person? A good fake identity? Undercover for ten years? A spy? Cult member? A rich foreigner who paid cash 20 years ago for a very good set of documents? Sooner of later entire teams have to protect entire sections of the wider population from unrelated State and federal database searches that find life story inconsistencies.
      Facial recognition from a city or private CCTV network?
      The "papers please" and scope creep will find a lot of interesting paperwork :) The UK is facing just that issue.
      Half of all undercover police officers in UK are ‘off the books’ and not on national database (Tuesday 14 October 2014)
      http://www.independent.co.uk/n...

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    9. Re:Scope creep ... by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      BUT only once they've actually identified a REAL target.

      You mean like specifically targeted email addresses in project PRISM as stated above?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    10. Re:Scope creep ... by Agripa · · Score: 1

      We say the FBI is just as bad as the NSA.

      At least the NSA does not shoot your wife, set you on fire, or shoot bystanders without positive identification.

  4. A few years ago it seems they wanted thir own. by ron_ivi · · Score: 2
    http://www.cnet.com/news/fbi-w...

    Director says he wants laws to give FBI power to monitor private-sector networks, going beyond existing system that conducts surveillance of .gov networks
    ...
    Mueller seemed to suggest that the bureau should have a broad "omnibus" authority to conduct monitoring and surveillance of private-sector networks as well.
    ...
    The surveillance should include all Internet traffic, Mueller said, "whether it be .mil, .gov, .com--whichever network you're talking about." (See the transcript of the hearing.)

    Guess the NSA beat them for funding that project?

    1. Re:A few years ago it seems they wanted thir own. by Spritzer · · Score: 1

      Who says the project was funded with NSA dollars?

    2. Re:A few years ago it seems they wanted thir own. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Budgets and Politics make me think that's unlikely.

      I imagine it's harder to do some cross-top-level-agency (DoD & DoJ) cost-sharing than it would be to get DoD and DoJ to each fund redundant projects.

  5. No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    No, it was very specifically overseas targets, and the NSA put a lot of effort into hand filtering to ensure that no information on a "US Person" (citizen, permanent resident or corporation) was included in the information passed to the FBI. But, that part doesn't grab the headlines.

    1. Re: No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? How do you know that? The said so? All they do is lie.

    2. Re:No by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      No, it was very specifically overseas targets, and the NSA put a lot of effort into hand filtering to ensure that no information on a "US Person" (citizen, permanent resident or corporation) was included in the information passed to the FBI. But, that part doesn't grab the headlines.

      And always, some Americans always get mixed in because they hide the fact they're American and have a right to be filtered out...

      That's one of the ironies...

    3. Re:No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it was very specifically overseas targets, and the NSA put a lot of effort into hand filtering to ensure that no information on a "US Person" (citizen, permanent resident or corporation) was included in the information passed to the FBI. But, that part doesn't grab the headlines.

      So as soon as the CIA processes the data, it no longer has any information on US Persons. Great. Except for

      agency gaining access to collected but unprocessed data in 2009, according to a report released by the government.

      and

      The Prism program isn’t supposed to target U.S. communications, but some domestic communications are inadvertently collected, according to oversight reports.

      The FBI is collecting & reviewing data collected on US Persons without a warrant. The FBI collecting & reviewing information on US persons without a warrant is unconstitutional & illegal. Simple as that.

  6. Stasi by fremsley471 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have complete confidence that my phone calls, email and web traffic are all 100% monitored and have been for sometime. Now the people who used to try and refute this accusation and call you a tinfoil hat wearer, just shout "Barbarians at the gate".

    The next game has started. It's your devices' outputs they now want. If Orwell could have imagined the ubiquity of networked cameras and microphones, he'd never have had to invent the telescreen. If you've nothing to hide...

  7. FBI also does counter intelligence by LordZardoz · · Score: 3, Informative

    The FBI has counter intelligence responsibilities (ie, dealing with foreign spies in the US), and some portion of related counter terrorism responsibilities, so they do have a legit need for the data.

    While this does not exclude the possibility of general misuse of the data by the FBI, it is worth keeping in mind.

    END COMMUNICATION

    1. Re:FBI also does counter intelligence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so they do have a legit need for the data.

      No they don't. If they have a suspect, they can get a warrant and investigate them. They do not need to assume everyone is guilty and gobble up everything they can in hopes of one day finding a criminal.

      I know it is hard to believe, but some of us appreciate our rights.

    2. Re:FBI also does counter intelligence by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, I notice how many foreign agents and bankers the FBI gets.

      I'd like for once the FBI not to arrest someone from Green Peace, a protestor with Occupy Wall Street, a group of homeless men who had an FBI handler who put them up to it.

      Eric Holder could take the Fed Chairman and the heads of Goldman Sachs and prosecute them for all sorts of crimes -- anyone paying attention will know about the abuse that one company has made. Why is this not happening?

      There is nothing "legit" going on -- merely agencies preserving the status quo and a government owned by the people who they have to borrow from to get into office.

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    3. Re:FBI also does counter intelligence by mitcheli · · Score: 1
      The problem is when someone like Senator McCarthy comes along and decides that some group of people (Communists) are a threat to our society and need to be systematically monitored, imprisoned, etc... Question is, how will the protections by the Church commission come into play in this broadened surveillance scheme?

      With the increasingly violent actions of some of the radical offshoots of Islam like ISIS and BOKO HARAM, how long do you think it will be before we have Senators asking for ISIS to be kept in check? And what if that look for ISIS extends to inside the US? Then what?

      --
      Select from tblFriends where interesting >= 4;
  8. Yes, "overseas targets" my ass by Rujiel · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Americans' web access often involves several hops abroad. Your reassurances of safeguards are undermined by every new news story indicating the NSA has broken its own rules countless times when spying on Americans. You sound like a shill.

    1. Re:Yes, "overseas targets" my ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i am serial, they only target emails on the internet.

  9. hmmm by Charliemopps · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What happened in 2008 that allowed them to change their policies?

    Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

    1. Re:hmmm by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 3

      If I remember, didn't Obama run on a platform that included implementing the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission? The same 9/11 Commission that concluded the attacks happened because the FBI and the various intelligence agencies weren't talking to each other and sharing information?

      And there's nothing inherently bad about that. The problem isn't that the agencies are sharing information, it's that they're sharing information that's outside their lane. And that occurs not because they're sharing information, but because they're outside their lanes to begin with. I'd much rather have agencies that are focused on not sifting through every American's data, than ones that do that but don't share it with each other.

    2. Re:hmmm by Charliemopps · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If I remember, didn't Obama run on a platform that included implementing the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission? The same 9/11 Commission that concluded the attacks happened because the FBI and the various intelligence agencies weren't talking to each other and sharing information?

      Watch and learn: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      And there's nothing inherently bad about that.

      Yes there is. Go read the constitution. It's spelled out very plainly there. There is no ambiguity.

      The problem isn't that the agencies are sharing information, it's that they're sharing information that's outside their lane. And that occurs not because they're sharing information, but because they're outside their lanes to begin with. I'd much rather have agencies that are focused on not sifting through every American's data, than ones that do that but don't share it with each other.

      You've no idea how this works do you? They are collecting everything so that should a crime happen, they can retroactively comb though everything you've ever done to find evidence against you. It's like the local police placed cameras in your home and then said it wasn't a search because they wont look at the tapes unless there's a crime. But in reality, they really are looking at the tapes, but that's beyond the scope of this conversation.

      But know this: This really is the nightmare scenario of 1984. There is direct and solid documented proof that they are doing exactly what all the conspiracy nuts were terrified of. It's not myth, its real. The only difference is, our government has not yet used this insane power to subvert the publics interest that we know of. But remember, at no time in human history has a government ever refused to exercise dictitorial power. It's only a matter of time until we elect the next Nixon or Stalin... and that person will use the NSA powers to make you wish this was just some sort of joke. But it's not. You should be horrified that your government feels it's Legal to do this.

    3. Re:hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
      I'm surprised you didn't mention the other use for the data: parallel construction.

      Have no doubt if they see any evidence of any crime in the data, and they have an interest in getting you off the street, they will investigate an alternate theory of how they obtained the data, so they can prosecute you.

    4. Re:hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obama didn't take office until 2009.

    5. Re:hmmm by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 1

      I think you may be misunderstanding what I'm saying. I'm in full agreement that abuses by the FBI/etc are a serious problem, my point is that it's the abuses that are the issue, not them sharing information. Stop the abuses, and all that's left is the stuff we'd want them to be sharing.

      The FBI, the NSA, the CIA and others all have legally established roles and responsibilities that they were created to fulfill. When the FBI arrests an interstate kidnapper, or someone who was spying on the US for Russia/China/etc, they're doing their job. When the CIA spies on Kim Jong-un or the North Korean military, they're doing their job. I've yet to hear anyone, even Edward Snowden, suggest that any of that is inherently unconstitutional.

      The problems arise when agencies like that exceed their purview, or use unconstitutional means to achieve their legitimate goals. For instance, if the FBI starts reading everyone's mail in order to find out if someone is spying for Putin, or decides to search someone's house without bothering to get a warrant from a judge to do so. As I said, the problem is not inherently that these agencies are sharing information. If the CIA or NSA learns, through legitimate means, that Country X has a mole in the Department of Redundancy, and tells that to the FBI, so the FBI can start an investigation, then that's perfectly fine.

      Why do I make such a big deal about this distinction? Because it doesn't help the argument against the illegitimate activity if we allow the two to be conflated. The entire point of the argument is that they do not need to do any of these things in order to accomplish their goal - that we are no "less safe", or at the very least that the tradeoff is not worth the liberty that we would have to give up.

    6. Re:hmmm by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Re "What happened in 2008 that allowed them to change their policies?" Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 Amendments Act of 2008
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      How the NSA Almost Killed the Internet (01.07.14)
      http://www.wired.com/2014/01/h...
      "The FISA Amendments Act of 2008 carved out a new section of the law, 702, which gave legal cover to the warrantless surveillance programs operated in total secrecy under President Bush; queries are often called 702s.
      The NSA cites the FISA Amendments Act as the specific legal basis for Prism."

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    7. Re:hmmm by cavreader · · Score: 1

      Your comparing Nixon to Stalin? Nixon was ousted from office but other than that he was really not a bad President. He ended US involvement in Vietnam with the Paris Peace Accords, He opened diplomatic relations with China. He initiated a detente with the Soviet Union that led to the SALT treaty. He established the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and signed into law the Clean Air Act and National Environmental Policy Act. On the other hand Stalin was a certified psychopath that makes Saddam Hussein look like a fluffy pink bunny.

    8. Re:hmmm by Agripa · · Score: 1

      They are collecting everything . . .

      I prefer to avoid their selected euphemism. They are siezing (and searching) everything but apparently that is not a violation of the 4th amendment.

  10. Easter Bunny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, it was very specifically overseas targets, and the NSA put a lot of effort into hand filtering to ensure that no information on a "US Person" (citizen, permanent resident or corporation) was included in the information passed to the FBI. But, that part doesn't grab the headlines.

    The parent is absolutely correct. The Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy both told me so.

    I also made this incredible investment and I am about to tell my boss to fuck himself because I am the new owner of the Brooklyn Bridge and I even have an extended warranty on it!

  11. The land of the free by msobkow · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Freedom to be surveilled.

    Freedom to be arrested.

    Freedom to be jailed.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
  12. Snowden f'd up by buck-yar · · Score: 0

    Nobody cares and part of it is because he slow released everything.

    Put a frog in boiling water, it jumps out. Slowly increase the temp...

    1. Re:Snowden f'd up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slowly increase the temp...
      it still jumps out.

  13. Hey, since the FBI gets access to the NSA's data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not make it all public? That way everyone in the world can read anyone's email and listen to anybody's phone calls? That would solve that privacy issue right there.

  14. Look, been spying on US citizens in US since 70s by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 2

    Look, I hate to break your "Oh It Just Happened In 2000 and later" bubble, but we've been spying on US citizens in the continental US (and all others) since the 70s.

    Without warrants.

    That you think it started on 9-11 is a pleasant fiction.

    Is it Unconstitutional? Of course.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  15. Specific overseas targets? (nope) by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 2

    No, it was very specifically overseas targets, and the NSA put a lot of effort into hand filtering to ensure that no information on a "US Person" (citizen, permanent resident or corporation) was included in the information passed to the FBI. But, that part doesn't grab the headlines.

    This is not a factual statement.

    We have been spying on American citizens in America for a lot longer than that, and without warrants.

    A lot longer.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  16. Abolish them both. by jcr · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The FBI and the NSA routinely commit felonies by the billions.

    When an entire organization violates the oath of office that all of its employees must swear to, it can't be fixed.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  17. Look, there's *NOTHING* folks can do... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since they apparently "own" the courts & politicians, so let's just hope they do a GOOD JOB from today forward!

    By good job, I mean targetting ONLY who is legitimately a suspect for "terrorism" etc.!

    Now, the *ONLY ISSUE* I take here, is that people who aren't such suspects were targetted (to the point of the folks in those agencies spying on their ex-wives/girlfriends, etc. - et al) & that their "return on investment" for the BILLIONS SPENT on it, are *NOT* good... e.g. they claimed iirc, 54 caught, & when it all came right down to it? Only 1 (if that).

    * That's not sensible... it's illogical! *IF* the boys in power have *ANY* brains (their corporate sponsors who funded them do, especially on money)?? They'd realize that too... of course, assuming they WERE only after terrorists vs. instead, really after creating a GIANT "blackmail machine database"... - since based on 'results' like theirs? That's the impression I get.

    APK

    P.S.=> The politicians have "sounded off" on it, & I remember when it came to vote, BOTH Pres. Obama AND General Keith Alexander came "rushing to washington", emergency-wise, & then 'suddenly', the vote to do away with this was BEATEN BY ONLY 2 VOTES - sorry folks: That SCREAMS to me they "twisted someone's arm" & by either blackmail, or career-coercion (nobody SANE wants to be spied upon after all - ESPECIALLY politicians) - I pointed that out to my representatives & iirc, they voted AGAINST this (& I am sure I wasn't the only one pointing out what the world THEY LIVE IN, politics, is largely bribery, blackmail, & other forms of coercion... they're probably sick of it themselves)... apk

  18. Re:Look, been spying on US citizens in US since 70 by gmhowell · · Score: 2

    The 1770's...

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  19. Re:Look, been spying on US citizens in US since 70 by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    The 1770's...

    I can't speak to that from any personal knowledge, even if my dad was in a precursor to the NSA since before I was born.

    But the British Empire did spy on Americans then, one of the reasons why we have three specific Rights that are in the Constitution not permitting such actions against US citizens in the US.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  20. Re:Hey, since the FBI gets access to the NSA's dat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would it? Think about how asymmetrical this would be.

  21. Data collected from overseas targets .. by lippydude · · Score: 1

    "The FBI's access to email and other data collected from overseas targets in the NSA's Prism program has been growing since 2008"

    And GCHQ spies on Americans in England, and ASD spies on Americans in Australia, and CSEC spies on Americans in Canada, and GCSB spies on Americans in New Zealand and finally GCHQ spies on Americans in the USA ...