Got a tip for Noah?
SEND IT!
(Guaranteed Confidential)
Subscribe

Subscribe via RSS

Archives by Date
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006

See all Archives
Archives by Category
'Canes
Ammo and Munitions
Armor
Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
Bizarro
Blimps
Blog Bidness
Bomb Squad
Cammo Green
Chem-Bio
Cloak and Dagger
Comms
Cops and Robbers
Data Diving
Dissent Tech
Drones
Eat My Dust
Eye on China
FCS Watch
FOS Files
Gadgets and Gear
Ground Vehicles
Guns
Homeland Security
Info War
Iraq Diary
Lasers and Ray Guns
Less-lethal
Logistics
Los Alamos and Labs
Medic!
Mercs
Missiles
Money Money Money
Net-Centric
Nukes
Planes, Copters, Blimps
Politricks
Rapid Fire
Raptor Watch
Red Team
Retro-Futuro
Roll Your Own
Sabra Tech
Ships and Subs
Space
Strategery
Terror Tech
The Deadlies
Those Nutty Norks
Training and Sims
War Update
You can run...

See all Archives
Related Links
News and Intel
Military.com News
Aviation Week
Natl Defense Mag
Strategy Page
Global Security Newswire
Soldiers for the Truth
Security News
Defense Review
Fed Comp Week

Security Sources
GlobalSecurity.Org
Fed Am Sci
CSIS
Ctr for Defense Info
Defense & Natl Interest
Instit for Sci & Intl Secy
Secrecy News
POGO
Cryptome
The Memory Hole
Natl Security Archive

Geeks and Mad Scientists
Slashdot
Wired News
Security Focus
The Register
Gizmodo
Geek Press
Robots.Net
Cosmic Log
Space Daily
New Scientist
TechCentralStation
Engadget
Space.Com
Technology Review
Gyre
Near Near Future
Fed Dev Blog

Bloggers and Buddies
Phil Carter
Global Guerillas
Jeffrey Lewis
Milblogging
OPFOR
Laura Rozen
Larisa Alexandrovna
Juan Cole
Ryan Singel
Josh Marshall
Cursor
Boing Boing
InstaPundit
Winds of Change
Tapped
TalkLeft
Brad DeLong
Mountain Runner
Gene Healy
Clive Thompson
Greg Djerejian
Jeff Quinton
Workbench
Electrolite
Jim Henley
War in Context
Kathryn Cramer
Wash Park Prophet
Blogs of War
Tom Shachtman

Official Dispatches
DARPA
AF Research Lab
Marine War Lab
Soldier Systems Ctr
Naval Research
Army Research Lab
UK Def Sci Lab
NASA News
DoJ Cybercrime

Military Network
Military Benefits
Veteran Employment
GI Bill Express
Personnel Locator
Free ASVAB
The Few
Fred's Place
Army Insider
Navy Insider
Air Force Insider
Marine Corps Insider
Coast Guard Insider



Edited by Noah Shachtman | Contact

NSA Wiretaps Brought Under Law (Updated Again)

wiretap.jpgGreat news: The NSA's domestic spying program is finally being brought within the bounds of the law, more than a year after it was revealed.

The Justice Department has decided to let the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court -- the traditional, and legal, monitor of government wiretap programs -- start examining the spy efforts. Before, the Bush Administration said no such review was needed -- a legal reading that even former NSA chiefs said was wildly off-base.

The court has already "approved one request for monitoring the communications of a person believed to be linked to al-Qaida or an associated terror group," the AP says.

It's a huge (and welcome) turnaround for an administration that said previously that the president had the power to order almost anything in the name of fighting terror. (And "still believes that," according to flack-in-chief Tony Snow.) So why the change? Snow mumbled something about the court's increased "agility." But you can bet your ass the new Congress had a whole lot to do with it.

UPDATE 3:28 PM: Shocker. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, in his letter describing the rule change, appears to be lying through his teeth shading the truth, saying that the administration has been trying to put the wiretaps under the court's authority since the spring of 2005. If that's the case, Glenn Greenwald asks, "why didn't they say so when the controversy arose?"

UPDATE 3:35 PM: Patrick Keefe, author of Chatter: Dispatches from the Secret World of Global Eavesdropping, is taking a wait-and-see approach to Gonzales's announcement. "It's just not clear what it means," he tells Defense Tech.

There have already been proposals for the FISA court to grant blanket retroactive approval to the program, and if that's what this is, then it's not much of a concession from the administration. If, on the other hand, it's actually case-by-case approval by FISA judges we're talking about, I'm not sure how that's going to square with the reported scope of the program. The ostensible grounds for circumventing the FISA in the first place were that this program didn't fit in the FISA framework. And given that it reportedly does a kind of mile-wide-and-inch-deep network analysis that is antithetical to the personalized, legally sanctioned surveillance contemplated by the FISA, I'm not sure how you can make the two procedures fit. Unless what they're really saying here is that they're abandoning the program altogether, and returning to one-target-at-a-time, retail-rather-than-wholesale surveillance. Which somehow I doubt.

UPDATE 3:35 PM: "It sounds to me like this court just re-wrote the law and made a second category of wiretaps (one that is easier to get but only targeted at overseas communications)," writes Ryan Singel.

He also notes that Gonzales's announcement comes just a day before he is supposed to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee. "Pretty sneaky, sis," Ryan says.

UPDATE 4:51 PM: "Another question raised by Gonzales’ letter — indeed, in the first sentence — is which FISC judge issued this order?" surveillance scoopmaster Shane Harris tells Defense Tech.

The letter states that “a judge” issued the order. Does Gonzales mean the court’s presiding (or chief) judge, Colleen Kollar-Kotelly? Presumably he would have said so if that were the case. Kottelly has been briefed on the NSA program previously. She reportedly has been concerned that information obtained without warrants under the NSA program could taint other warrant applications before the court.

The FISC is made up of 11 sitting federal judges hailing from judicial districts across the country. Did the administration select a particular judge to approach for this order? Here’s the breakdown on how many judges were appointed by a particular president:

Jimmy Carter: 1

Ronald Reagan: 4

George H.W. Bush: 3

Bill Clinton: 2

George W. Bush: 1

Latest Comments

It's funny listening to the hue and cry on this site over President Bush' nefarious plans to spy on terrorists here in America -- like that's a bad thing.

I was watching television the other night and was reminded of something a little more broad than Bush' terrorist spying.

Anyone remember when Clinton and Gore tried to shove the clipper chip down the nation's throat? Yessir, a government mandated chip in EVERY COMPUTER ACROSS THE LAND for the express purpose of being able to spy on every single citizen whenever it wanted.

Kinda makes Bush look like an amateur.

Posted by: John at January 19, 2007 6:18 PM


One reader writes in to say...


The only slight problem with overseeing the program that's been going on since the mid-60s; a security blanket can cover a judicial investigation. Of course, they couldn't actually do the search for keywords or much anything else with the volume of data until about 15 years later.

I wasn't totally sure that I was correct, despite coming from a family with TS clearances--until I met online a former NSA programmer, who verified what I'd been told--first within the family and then verified...variously (I was in a somewhat peculiar position where 'need-to-know' didn't apply on a fairly large database for ComSeventhFlt).

However, I am rather frankly enjoying the comedy. Illegal actions are the rule in various sectors of governmental business unless the whole tone has changed. I mean, it's possible it has in the last ten years.

...Right?

Posted by: Noah Shachtman at January 19, 2007 2:06 PM


RTLM! You finally see the light Cowboy!

An intrusive government is intrusive no matter what administration is in power.
I don't want to expand the discussion on this thread, but what do you think would ensure America's security more...
A. More wiretaps internally or
B. Securing our southern border???

We have more than enough laws, and regulations to properly ensure our security now. As far as Clinton and his "spying" was concerned, it was all about right wing groups that he thought hostile. Now its under the guise of protecting us against terrorism. My point is- the end results are the same. More government spying on its citizens. I just don't feel comfortable with an expansive federal bureaucracy.


"Let your plans be dark and impenetrable as night,
and when you move, fall like a thunderbolt."
SUN TZU ON THE ART OF WAR

Posted by: Solomon at January 18, 2007 2:12 AM


No Link Tags
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/aug2000/wire-a02_prn.shtml

http://archives.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/11/22/carnivore.report/index.html

Posted by: RTLM at January 18, 2007 1:20 AM


What if Clinton wanted the same powers???? I bet you'd be going crazy then huh??? Sorry RTLM, but no Emperor President for me.

Posted by: Solomon at January 18, 2007 12:14 AM
Pssst here. And here.
Pssst here. And here.

Posted by: RTLM at January 18, 2007 1:18 AM


» View All 8 Comments

» Post a Comment