Slashdot Mirror


House Panel Advances Bill on Key Surveillance Measure (axios.com)

The House Intelligence Committee approved a bill Friday along party lines that would reauthorize a central surveillance law, the Washington Post reports. From a report: It does change the law -- known as Section 702 -- but doesn't satisfy surveillance reform advocates, including in the tech industry. The law is used to authorize the surveillance of electronic communications by foreign nationals abroad, but advocates worry about the programs picking up communications involving Americans as well.

38 of 70 comments (clear)

  1. Re:POTUS non-incumbents will _all_ be wiretapped! by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 1

    "We" did? Where did we say that?

    --
    Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
  2. Changes nothing, does it? by adosch · · Score: 1

    All this tells me is the definition, act and collection is now 'more legal' on paper. Some bill with words on it isn't going to make me put blinders on --- there just there to make the general population feel good at the end of the day that it isn't going on at the magnitude or level it is; it's still always happening at a level beyond what Snowdon exposed and then some and, unfortunately, it will continue.

    Can't really get all that upset, all of us that use any sort of free service online or any amount of social media anything have been 'the product' in every faction of our lives for years, and can't start raising your pitch forks and chucking your molotov cocktails at the White House fence, if you're not willing to do it in Mountain View, Cupertino and Melno Park as well.

    1. Re:Changes nothing, does it? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Four hops from any foreign nationals and that US citizens constitutional protections are not going to offer any protection from domestic collect it all.
      The domestic collection that was to stop after what the Church Committee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... told the US about got a free pass under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).
      Now its all about the color of law under the Section 702.
      Decades of color of law domestic collection given legal cover by using the word foreign over a few decades.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  3. Call it the All Data Recorded Indefinitely Act. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Be more honest and get to the point, right in the title:
    All Data Recorded Indefinitely Act

  4. Re:POTUS non-incumbents will _all_ be wiretapped! by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    It's legal: You said so when it was Obama tapping Trump. It will be legal when it's Trump tapping Warren.

    The difference is that Warren isn't a traitor.

    https://www.reuters.com/articl...

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  5. Re:POTUS non-incumbents will _all_ be wiretapped! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This. Democrat or Republican rule, it's six of one, half dozen of the other. No real difference except agenda. They all want the same control. We, the people, cede control to government in the name of "security", and look what this has wrought. Since 9-11, the Internet is a different animal, travel is untenable, everyone is up in your grill. I'm surprised there is not yet a national ID card.

    For years people decried "we're heading for socialism!". I told them, no, not even--we're headed for facism. The recent election has merely introduced the next level of this progression. The unholy alliance between big government and corporations is only placing the wedge between them and us citizens. A man cannot even head down to the corner store and buy something without you bank, carrier, apps, etc. know where you are, what you bought, whom you may have met. This is only going to grow more pronounced because the average person is simply apathetic. They've got their entertainment, their food, their pleasures, and their faces solidly within the glow of their electronic leash handsets. Bread and circuses. We're doomed...

    CAPTCHA: "inquiries"

  6. So easy to fix and yet, nothing is done right by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    I am continuing to push several of my CONgress critters to change some of our bills. In particular, I would like it to be that anything that is CLEAR TEXT, either saved on a system or sent over the net, is fair game for American intelligence. The reason is that it is similar to sending a postcard. It is also the fact that China and Russia also have easy access to this so should ours.
    Then anything that is ENCRYPTED means that there is an ACTIVE attempt to block others from seeing the data. As such, we then require a warrant for our intel world to see the data (basically decrypt it).
    If we pass this, it will no doubt anger a number of ppl here because it gave America's intel world the same carte blanche that the rest of the world have. This will no doubt cause MS, Google, Yahoo, etc to push through encryption on nearly everything.
    At the same time with this bill, I am pushing for USPO to offer up personal digital keys that are FULLY VETTED (i.e. like passport, pix and fingerprint) and they would then have a distributed network of the key-servers. And when it is trivial for somebody to obtain a single digital-key, then e-mail, blogs, etc will become not just secured, but will also be less spam, and BS that we see even in in /.
    With this approach, it will really push for the world to encrypt our data.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:So easy to fix and yet, nothing is done right by eaglesrule · · Score: 1

      I am pushing for USPO to offer up personal digital keys that are FULLY VETTED (i.e. like passport, pix and fingerprint) and they would then have a distributed network of the key-servers. And when it is trivial for somebody to obtain a single digital-key, then e-mail, blogs, etc will become not just secured, but will also be less spam, and BS that we see even in in /.

      Such a personal digital keys would inevitably translate into becoming a national id card with a chip to be stored therein. It would definitely be better than the antiquated system of using personal info to verify identity, which we know to be utterly compromised.

      It'll be a critical piece for the dystopian hell I'm sure we're headed towards, since congress has long since abandoned the interests of the public to the tender mercies of rapacious corporations. When you get banned for being a persona non grata, things really will get interesting.

    2. Re:So easy to fix and yet, nothing is done right by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      u miss the point.
      U can obtain your digital key whereever you want. BUT, having the USPO offer up a VETTED digital key is perfect for doing our general communications, communications with businesses, and even blog sites that want to give higher points to somebody that is VETTED. For example, /. might say that if u have a vetted key, that you start off with 3. If you come in as an unvetted digital key, then you are a 1. If AC, well, -1 in my book.
      When it comes to e-mail, I would simply stop accepting any emails, unless it comes from a key source. I would open up vetted quickly, while unvetted would be set aside and looked at later. Basically, allow the emailers time to determine if a certain unvetted digital key is actually spam, virus, etc or not.
      With the unvetted digital key, it allows for being anonymous, without having to deal with the issues of spam, virus, etc.

      Hopefully, that helps. BTW, I picked USPO PURPOSELY, because it is a business, gov is at arms length for getting access to our mail (requires warrants), and they have offices all over the states. They make sense for America.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    3. Re:So easy to fix and yet, nothing is done right by eaglesrule · · Score: 1

      No, I understand the point you're making about a vetting process. It seems to be like a certificate authority, but for personal identification rather than facilitating ssl encryption. I like the idea, as we need a reliable method of identification that isn't based on biometrics.

      I'm just reminded how at one time it was actually promised that social security numbers would never be used for identification purposes, and well, we know how that turned out. So such a system would start out voluntary and optional and benign at first, then slow morphing to the point where it becomes mandatory and a tool for control, and by its very nature allowing for perfect enforcement. Have a look at the 'social credit system' being implemented in China right now for an example of something that would give even give George Orwell nightmares, and see how a method of state run cryptographic identification would compliment that.

      You're right; we need a system like the one you're proposing. It just is such a shame that we can't trust it'll be implemented with the checks and balances it would require so as not to be abused.

    4. Re:So easy to fix and yet, nothing is done right by Agripa · · Score: 1

      I am continuing to push several of my CONgress critters to change some of our bills. In particular, I would like it to be that anything that is CLEAR TEXT, either saved on a system or sent over the net, is fair game for American intelligence. The reason is that it is similar to sending a postcard. It is also the fact that China and Russia also have easy access to this so should ours.

      I would also include mass surveillance for law enforcement purposes but see below

      Then anything that is ENCRYPTED means that there is an ACTIVE attempt to block others from seeing the data. As such, we then require a warrant for our intel world to see the data (basically decrypt it).

      The problem with this is that under law and jurisprudence, encryption does *not* provide any expectation of privacy.

      https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/p...

      Allowing a warrant to force encryption will become no different than no encryption. That is how the FISA court works now limited only by technical measures.

      If we pass this, it will no doubt anger a number of ppl here because it gave America's intel world the same carte blanche that the rest of the world have. This will no doubt cause MS, Google, Yahoo, etc to push through encryption on nearly everything.

      That is basically my thought as well. I add that law enforcement might as well do it also because they are going to do it anyway whether through their own efforts, because the national intelligence agencies are doing it for them which currently happens, or by corporations doing it for them which is often the case now and then they will cover it up with parallel construction. The situation where warrants are required or national intelligence agencies or law enforcement are limited as far as mass surveillance just serves to decease those who believe mass surveillance is not occurring. The solution is technical; encrypt absolutely everything.

      The preferred solution for law enforcement and national intelligence is false confidence that private data is secure by law limiting demand for strong encryption and security which is the current situation.

      At the same time with this bill, I am pushing for USPO to offer up personal digital keys that are FULLY VETTED (i.e. like passport, pix and fingerprint) and they would then have a distributed network of the key-servers. And when it is trivial for somebody to obtain a single digital-key, then e-mail, blogs, etc will become not just secured, but will also be less spam, and BS that we see even in in /.

      If any agency other than the individual controls the private keys, then they are not secure. If the design is not open and verifiable, then it is not secure.

      With this approach, it will really push for the world to encrypt our data.

      Amen.

    5. Re: So easy to fix and yet, nothing is done right by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Any ideas on how to deal with it? Myself, I was thinking that by allowing ppl to decide when to use what form of DK, would solve that.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    6. Re:So easy to fix and yet, nothing is done right by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      keep in mind that USPO (US Post Office is NOT a branch of the gov. Technically, it is its own business.
      Now, with that said, the idea behind using USPO is for the vetting. They can generate PPK, OR, I should be able to give them the public key that I generated at home, and we still have a VETTED PK.

      But, there are plenty of applications where a vetted PK is ideal. Not only encryption of email, but also blogging, elections, etc.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    7. Re: So easy to fix and yet, nothing is done right by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      If the feds has a warrant, I'm fine with it. What is needed is to control the law makers.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  7. Re:POTUS non-incumbents will _all_ be wiretapped! by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    The same time we said that all criticism of Obama was racist, duh!

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  8. Re:POTUS non-incumbents will _all_ be wiretapped! by WindBourne · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Obama never tapped Trump. You far righ wing nuts really have to get over all of the BS that you read.
    The intel world was doing their jobs and tapping into Russia, CHina, North Korea, etc. The fact that Trump's ppl contacted Russia and China to cut deals ahead of time was seen ONLY because Trump's ppl contacted ppl that were under ACTIVE surveillance. And the fact that Trump Jr, and SiL, BOTH requested from the Russians that they provide a different SECURED path for communications, says they KNOW that they were committing treason by cutting deals.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  9. Blame Democrat party. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Remember this could have been stopped this with allowing someone other than the Shillary Clinton (lock her up) to run. Instead they BROKE the law and COLLUDED against the socialist Bernie Sanders to undermine his popalarity. Remember democrat party also brought to power Mike Flynn who has now been charged with lying to FBI. Shillary Clinton is the next dominow to fall in that crazy conspirasy theory. I am American and even I can see that Democrat party is to blame. This is why I donate regular to Trump 2020 and NRA. Protect our American freedom, always vote the Republican side and end sanctions against mother Russia.

    1. Re:Blame Democrat party. by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      hey, good job comrade.
      Your servant trump will thank you.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    2. Re:Blame Democrat party. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This is why I donate regular to Trump 2020 and NRA. Protect our American freedom, always vote the Republican side and end sanctions against mother Russia.

      Oops, I think you've revealed yourself there. Nice try comrade, but next time, try harder to keep the nationalistic furors separate.

  10. Re:POTUS non-incumbents will _all_ be wiretapped! by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    Technically, neither will Trump. Not that it matters.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  11. Re:POTUS non-incumbents will _all_ be wiretapped! by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    Sorry, my bad.

    'Obama tapping Trump' is equally nightmare fuel.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  12. Re:POTUS non-incumbents will _all_ be wiretapped! by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    Funny that Hillary's team was also constantly talking to the Ruskys, but nobody's phone was tapped.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  13. Re:POTUS non-incumbents will _all_ be wiretapped! by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    what proof do you have that Hillary's team was talking to the Russian? Because if so, that is also treason and those ppl will also be prosecuted for Logan act at a minimum.

    Or, are you just doing the normal GOP thing and lying through your teeth?

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  14. Re:POTUS non-incumbents will _all_ be wiretapped! by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

    Neither is Trump.

    Well, it's not looking good for him at the moment.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/0...

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  15. Re:POTUS non-incumbents will _all_ be wiretapped! by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    "The House Intelligence Committee is made up of elected Representatives."

    Unfortunately intelligence is not a prerequisite to be a member.

  16. Re:POTUS non-incumbents will _all_ be wiretapped! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The difference is Warren isn't communicating with Russian spies, unlike the Trump campaign.

  17. Re:POTUS non-incumbents will _all_ be wiretapped! by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    They don't even deny it. Just claim it was a law firm they paid six million to do it for them, so 'no foul'. First we need to shoot all the lawyers...

    We'll see how it turns out once the law firm is shown to have been acting criminally, hence no privilege.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  18. Don't worry by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    Soon, Circle accounts will be mandatory.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  19. What does it matter what's "legal"? by TheDarkener · · Score: 1

    Seems the U.S. funded intel agencies are gonna do whatever the fuck they want to anyway. This bill, whether repealed or sustained, is moot in reality.

    We need to bring the morals of these agencies into check if we want real change. Hopefully Snowden, Klein & others have done this to an extent. It sucks that these types of acts are what makes the most difference.

    --
    It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    1. Re:What does it matter what's "legal"? by Agripa · · Score: 1

      We need to bring the morals of these agencies into check if we want real change. Hopefully Snowden, Klein & others have done this to an extent. It sucks that these types of acts are what makes the most difference.

      Irrelevant.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

  20. Changes by this bill: warrant required, unmasking by raymorris · · Score: 1

    In case anyone wants to talk about the actual bill, as opposed to just cramming their nose up some politician's ass, here's what the bill changed.

    First, a quick review of what sectionnot702 is. Section 702 relates to eavesdropping on foreign communications. Programs under 702 are not to be used to target Americans. When one party to a conversation is an American, their identity is to be masked, referring to them as "person A", "person B", etc. So the record would show a conversation between Putin, Ahmadinejad, and Person A.

      With that background, this bill makes the following two changes:

    The committeeâ(TM)s bill would require government agencies to get a court order before viewing the content of communications to or from Americans in the National Security Agencyâ(TM)s database of information collected under the authority, known as Section 702, in criminal cases.

    Rules relating to "unmasking" the identity of US citizens would be tightened. Certain officials have authority to unmask based on certain criteria. The bill would reduce the number of people who can authorize unmasking and tighten the conditions under which unmasking is allowed.

    In general, the idea is to further the idea that section 702 is a national security tool tool to be used for international national security purposes, not for domestic criminal prosecutions, or worse, political purposes against US citizens not accused of any crime.

  21. Re:POTUS non-incumbents will _all_ be wiretapped! by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    what law firm is saying that they contacted the Russian for hillary to discuss acts of treason?

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  22. Re:POTUS non-incumbents will _all_ be wiretapped! by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

    Neither is Trump.

    Sure he is. He pardoned someone specifically convicted of violating the constitution.

    That pretty much makes him a traitor, since he promised to defend the constitution.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  23. Re:POTUS non-incumbents will _all_ be wiretapped! by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

    WTF? Obama's people sent a foreign agent to Russia to meet with senior Russian government officials and get false Intel on Trump. This dossier was used to justify a warrant for surveillance on Trump Tower. This happened..

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  24. Re:Everything has a socialist component. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    Adam Smith was a time traveller. Capitalism rests on arguments put forward 100 years later! You read it here first!

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  25. Re:POTUS non-incumbents will _all_ be wiretapped! by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    They're predictably saying: 'privilege, privilege, privilege.' Which will last until the shysters are shown to have been acting criminally themselves. Then they will throw whoever they have to under the bus.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  26. Re:POTUS non-incumbents will _all_ be wiretapped! by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    Coincidently: All non-incumbent presidential candidates in future will be 'crooks and lying douchebags' under law enforcement investigation.

    That is unless someone goes to prison for wire tapping Trump.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  27. Re:POTUS non-incumbents will _all_ be wiretapped! by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

    First I've heard of this one. Link please? Google didn't turn anything up. I tried searching for this and found nothing.