Never has there been any dispute that the NSA can freely read what non Americans are doing without any sort of legal authorization. One would assume that access is given to Customs & Dept of Homeland Security too. Some of the NSA leakers think this is wrong, but I have not heard any elected government official state otherwise.
Too some extent, this NSA story should be of equal or greater disturbance to non-Americans.
Using Facebook's private messaging, with or without NSA spying, is very stupid because we know Facebook stores all of this forever, including after you "delete" your account. That could make it accessible even in a non-criminal civil dispute.
> Never has there been any dispute that the NSA can freely read what non Americans are doing without any sort of legal authorization. One would assume that access is given to Customs & Dept of Homeland Security too.
This makes no sense whatsoever.
Even if PRISM allowed at-will searches across the FB accounts of would-be au-pairs, there is frankly no way the NSA would be sharing this with low level customs officials. At most there would be a simple flag on her record, at which point she would be shipped back without explanation.
Frankly, the fact that a significant number of commenters in this thread are taking this non-story at face value is bewildering. BS alarms should be going off left right and center, here.
So let me get this straight... you know that at least two agencies (FBI & NSA) have total access to your Facebook data. We don't know what their exact method is or who they may pass the data along to, but we know they do this with no warrant.
Now you're questioning whether Homeland Security, an agency originally created to pool information from all intelligence agencies to screen for terrorists, has access to the same information?
It makes sense to read private communications to find out if she's a threat to the homeland. What doesn't make sense is your disbelief in the face of clear evidence that this kind of thing has been going on for years - just with a different agency name.
> So let me get this straight... you know that at least two agencies (FBI & NSA) have total access to your Facebook data. We don't know what their exact method is or who they may pass the data along to, but we know they do this with no warrant.
"They [NSA] could get most of it, but they couldn't get it all. So in order to get all the data, they had to go to the service providers to fill in the blanks. That's what the PRISM program is for—to fill in the blanks. It also gives the FBI basis for introducing evidence into court."
"PRISM was first publicly revealed on June 6, 2013 [...] The documents identified several technology companies as participants in the PRISM program, including (date of joining PRISM in parentheses) Microsoft (2007), Yahoo! (2008), Google (2009), Facebook (2009), Paltalk (2009), YouTube (2010), AOL (2011), Skype (2011), and Apple (2012)."
Oh jesus christ. Fine, i'll do the reading for you. I'll just skip to sections with the word "Facebook" to make it easier.
Facebook provides data:
"Facebook: "We do not provide any government organization with direct access to Facebook servers. When Facebook is asked for data or information about specific individuals, we carefully scrutinize any such request for compliance with all applicable laws, and provide information only to the extent required by law."[23]"
Facebook has met with a US General on how to make data collection and reporting more efficient:
"The other companies held discussions with national security personnel on how to make available data more efficiently and securely.[29] In some cases, these companies made modifications to their systems in support of the intelligence collection effort.[29] The dialogues have continued in recent months, as General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has met with executives including those at Facebook"
Facebook custom built a system for delivering data to the government:
"the companies were effectively asked to construct a locked mailbox and provide the key to the government, people briefed on the negotiations said.[29] Facebook, for instance, built such a system for requesting and sharing the information.[29]"
The Director of National Intelligence says they have been using Facebook to collect information on foreigners for six years. I THINK THIS IS KIND OF A SMOKING GUN, BUT I COULD BE WRONG.
" Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, on June 7 released a statement confirming that for nearly six years the government of the United States had been using large internet services companies such as Google and Facebook to collect information on foreigners outside the United States as a defense against national security threats."
In the future, please just read the page instead of trolling me to do the research for you.
I think you're the one who's trolling, and are also frankly acting like an ass. More to the point, none of the passages you cited even support your original claim. You're making unsubstantiated claims about the scope of the surveillance, and obfuscating away the barriers between the federal agencies and the data being collected.
Specifically, you have made and defended the claim that the NSA & FBI have total access to joe anybody's Facebook account. You then went on to cite passages from Wikipedia detailing the PRISM mailbox put in place by [FB / Google]. What you did not mention is how the mailbox is actually populated.
> The data shared in these ways, the people said, is shared after company lawyers have reviewed the FISA request according to company practice. [1]
> FISA orders can range from inquiries about specific people to a broad sweep for intelligence, like logs of certain search terms, lawyers who work with the orders said. There were 1,856 such requests last year, an increase of 6 percent from the year before. [1]
This is from the NYT article cited in the Wikipedia page, which you indirectly cited twice. These requests are routed through a FISA court and limited in number, which is a far cry from "total" access. Your claim is incorrect.
Either way, this is a pretty unproductive discussion and I doubt we'll see eye to eye on this. You're also being belligerent and rude. Have a nice day.
Are you suggesting that the TSA agent interviewing this woman called up some TSA hotline who called up someone at Facebook who just gave it to them, sans warrant, all within the span of a couple hours? Words fail me for an adjective to describe how unlikely that sounds.
The far, far, far simpler explanation would that she had a printout of the conversations because it had an address or directions or that she voluntarily handed over a device (or, possibly, was bullied into doing so, which is in the rights of border control to do).
> Are you suggesting that the TSA agent interviewing this woman called up some TSA hotline who called up someone at Facebook who just gave it to them, sans warrant, all within the span of a couple hours?
Pretty much, only "filled in a form on a web page" not "called up someone", "made a request to the api" not "called up someone at Facebook" and "the software ran" not "just gave it to them". Get with the times.
> Words fail me for an adjective to describe how unlikely that sounds.
Indeed. A friend of mine was sent home after customs searched her luggage, read her diary and noticed she was planning on working in the US under the table, in a bar.
I think Germany is part of the Visa Waiver Program, so she would have had to apply via ESTA before she flew out.
It wouldn't surprise me now if there was a system in place that used the ESTA information to query the NSA/CIA/etc for anything that might be an issue for immigration control.
If she's been talking about working in the USA and hasn't got a visa (ESTA is only for personal visits, not business IIRC), that's enough for the TSA to refuse her entrance for lying to them.
As far as I'm aware, there is a big difference between travelling to the US (and many other countries) to conduct business, and seeking employment. I think it's the first one that is covered by ESTA...
One would assume that access is given to Customs & Dept of Homeland Security too. Some of the NSA leakers think this is wrong, but I have not heard any elected government official state otherwise.
Someone leaks information about PRISM, and the primary response is TREASON! TREASON! ARREST THE TRAITOR AND DEAL WITH HIM!
Given that, do you really expect that A) random border agents are in on it, and B) feel free to just randomly disclose that sort of surveillance to someone who has no need to know about it?
Snowden had proof and plenty of it. A random border agent that finds some documents on his desk in the morning, to be used that day, does not have much proof.
Secondly, a lot of people knew, but kept quiet. I see no reason to expect a random border agent from talking, given it took years and someone like Snowden to finally talk.
One would assume that access is given to Customs & Dept of Homeland Security too.
Maybe, but even so, from giving access to the department, to allowing border officers to prove to foreign citizens that they can read their PMs goes a long way.
Using Facebook's private messaging, with or without NSA spying, is very stupid because we know Facebook stores all of this forever, including after you "delete" your account. That could make it accessible even in a non-criminal civil dispute.
She lives in Germany, which has a widely different fact gathering process, being much more restrictive and protective of the defendant's privacy.
Moreover, she's 18 and from a country which is probably much less lawsuit-happy than the US. It doesn't seem stupid to me at all that she didn't consider being sued when sending PMs to her host.
Never has there been any dispute that the NSA can freely read what non Americans are doing without any sort of legal authorization. One would assume that access is given to Customs & Dept of Homeland Security too.
Even if that were true, she was exchanging messages with the father of the American family she was planning to stay with. I doubt they only read the messages sent by the German girl.
Well, only 15% of profiles are by Americans, so if you have an FB profile there is an 85% chance you are not an American. That's a bit above the 51% confidence the NSA requires ;-)
Too some extent, this NSA story should be of equal or greater disturbance to non-Americans.
Using Facebook's private messaging, with or without NSA spying, is very stupid because we know Facebook stores all of this forever, including after you "delete" your account. That could make it accessible even in a non-criminal civil dispute.