Mediaboss Marketing

Early last month, Director of National Intelligence Dan CoatsDan CoatsGranting NSA permanent bulk surveillance authority would be a mistake Sessions, deputy AG to tour Guantanamo Bay prison The Memo: GOP pushes Trump to curb Mueller attacks MOREreneged on a promisethat the National Security Agency would provide an estimate of just how many Americans have seen their communications collected under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. It was the same broken promise made to Congress by his predecessor, James Clapper.

Indeed, for the past six years, the NSA has flummoxed congressional oversight with its reluctance to give lawmakers this kind of hard data. And yet, despite this pattern of obfuscation of promising transparency and then dialing back said promisesCongress is now debating a bill that would give immense power to that same agency.

The legislation, which has left many privacy advocates aghast, comes in the form ofa proposalby Sen. Tom CottonTom CottonOvernight Finance: GOP goes after arbitration rule | Bill allocates .6B for Trump border wall | Fed officials cautious on rate hike | McConnell aiming for debt vote before August recess Overnight Regulation: GOP senator aims to repeal arbitration rule | Feds to rethink fuel efficiency fines | EPA moves to roll back restrictions on Alaska mine Lawmakers press Sessions over online gambling MORE (R-Ark.) for a so-called "clean" reauthorization that would leave the current Section 702 intact. Of course, it isn't actually clean, in that Cotton's bill would remove the sunset provision that forces the program to expireDec. 31unless Congress explicitly re-authorizes it. In other words, even as Coats now deems it infeasible that the NSA will ever tell Congress how many Americans have been surveilled under Section 702a number that likely would shock the conscienceCotton wants to ensure 702 is never up for debate again.

Coatsexplainedto the Senate Intelligence Committee last month that the NSA ended about collectionthat is, the practice of collecting digital communications in which a foreign target is mentioned, but is not the sender or recipientdue to technical limitations on the agency's ability to protect wholly domestic communications. However, he didnt rule out resuming about collection if the agency discovers a technological fix. Paul Morris, deputy general counsel for operation at the NSA,toldthe Senate Judiciary Committee several weeks later they might decide to come back to it anytime. NSA representatives also havewarnedthey would oppose a permanent legislative ban on this type of collection.

A recurring theme from law-enforcement and intelligence community representatives in recent House and Senate hearings is that technological developments can drastically change how government conducts surveillance. But even as agency representatives tell us how rapidly surveillance methods change, a permanent reauthorization of current surveillance methods presumes that future revolutions in technology won't affect Americans relative privacy. Not long ago, few could have conceived of an email or that it would become a major tool of communication.

If the intelligence community decides to resume about collection, a method proven to have violated Americans rights in the past, Congresss oversight role should not be hamstrung by a permanent reauthorization. Eliminating the law's sunset provision would limit Congress's ability to revisit these questions and examine exactly how surveillance methods might change in the future. With far-reaching technological change always looming, Congress must periodically revisit the legal authority behind these intelligence tools both to ensure they remain effective at protecting the nation, and that adapting an old law to new technologies doesnt open the door to abuse.

Establishing a sunset for the program shouldnt be anathema to those who are primarily concerned with national security. To the contrary, it is the best way to ensure the program remains viable and accomplishes the purpose of keeping Americans safe. Permanent reauthorization would limit any attempts to modify surveillance. It also increases the risk of another leak and public outcry, which easily leads to a knee-jerk reaction. Intelligence agencies could shy away from reasonable and effective procedures, absent any obligation to report to congressional oversight.

A kid genius working from a basement today may change the way our systems work tomorrow, crippling the effectiveness of Section 702 or opening the door to abuse. Giving law enforcement and the intelligence community's great power without built in opportunities to revisit that authorization would be a disservice to the security and civil rights of the American people. In the end, the most critical reform to Section 702 might already be part of thestatus quo.

Arthur Rizer(@ArthurRizer)is the national security and justice policy director at the R Street Institute, and Ashkhen Kazaryan (@Ashkhen) is an affiliated fellow at the non-profit TechFreedom.

The views expressed by contributors are their own and are not the views of The Hill.

Go here to see the original:
Granting NSA permanent bulk surveillance authority would be a mistake - The Hill (blog)

The parent company of The Intercept online news outlet announced Tuesday that it is helping the legal defense of the Augusta suspect in the National Security Agency leak investigation. At the same time, The Intercept admitted some fault in Reality Winners predicament.

The ongoing criminal case prevents us from going into detail, Intercept editor-in-chief Betsy Reed wrote online Tuesday, but I can state that, at several points in the editorial process, our practices fell short of the standards to which we hold ourselves for minimizing the risks of source exposure when handling anonymously provided materials.

The U.S. Justice Department has accused Winner of leaking to The Intercept a top-secret NSA report about Russias meddling in the 2016 presidential election. The Intercept published the report, which says Russian military intelligence officials tried to hack into the U.S. voting system just before last Novembers election.

Owned by First Look Media, The Intercept provided federal officials a copy of the classified information, court records show. Investigators said the pages appeared "folded and/or creased, suggesting they had been printed and hand-carried out of a secured space." They quickly identified six people who had printed the materials, including Winner, and found she had email contact with the news agency.

The government has until Aug 2. to translate 302 pages from the former government contractor's handwritten notes from Farsi into English.

Read the original:
Owner of The Intercept assisting accused NSA leaker's legal defense - Atlanta Journal Constitution

NEW DELHI: Union home minister Rajnath Singh called a high-level meeting on Tuesday to review the situation in the wake of the killing of Amarnath pilgrims by terrorists and decided to focus on upgrading the technology used to gather intelligence and security apparatus of the country.

NSA Ajit Doval, top officials of the home ministry, intelligence agencies and central paramilitary forces attended the meeting.

Security experts present in the meeting said registration of vehicles carrying Amarnath pilgrims and a relook at the way forces were deployed in various parts of J&K were among the top priorities for the Centre. What is also important is that there should be no backlash in any part of the country. We have asked all states to monitor that, a senior official said.

Immediately after the meeting, NSA briefed PM Modi about the deliberations as well as steps taken to enhance security on the Amarnath route (see map), sources said. A high-level team led by MoS for home Hansraj Ahir visited J&K to assess the security situation. MHA officials also said they were in regular touch with Gujarat to ensure the families of the dead and injured were informed and assisted with necessary help.

Earlier in the day, J&K deputy CM Nirmal Singh admitted to security lapses, and said officials would investigate why the bus was allowed to travel after 5 pm. The security protocol for the annual pilgrimage bars vehicles from moving after sundown.

See the article here:
Rajnath, NSA assess situation at high-level security meeting - Economic Times

Donald Trump Jr. is an odd fellow. Like his father, President Trump, Trump Jr. spends much of his time sending out emotional and somewhat confusing tweets.

Earlier today, however, Trump Jr. released emails confirming Trump campaign efforts to collude with the Russian government. We can say this with confidence because of his tweet below.

Note the email line from Rob Goldstone: "This obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump helped along by Aras and Emin."

That line has relevance for three reasons.

First, because Aras and Emin Agalarov (father and son) are well-known intermediaries (or "cutouts, the formal intelligence community term) for the Kremlin. But this email indicates they were intermediaries for the most sensitive element of Russia's 2016 election intelligence operation: communications with the Trump campaign regarding the anti-Clinton effort.

As I explained last week, Russian intelligence, and Putin in particular, thrive on using cutouts to conduct sensitive intelligence activities. In effective terms, one could replace "helped along by Aras and Emin" with "helped along by Igor and Sergey" (the heads of Russia's GRU intelligence service).

Second, Goldstone's clarification ("part of Russia and it's government's support for Mr. Trump") is offered at face value. That strongly implies Goldstone already knew that Trump Jr. knew what the Russians were doing.

Third, the meeting took place after this email exchange. That's the crunch point. It shows that Trump Jr. was willing to meet with a hostile foreign government in the pursuit of information that would damage a U.S. political opponent.

Now don't get me wrong here, I recognize that campaigns often seek out "dirt" on opponents. But the difference in this case is quite simple. It's the Russian government. Only an idiot or a traitor would seek to form an alliance with Russian intelligence and hope it ends up positively.

There's one final takeaway here: The nature of Agalarov publicist and former British journalist, Rob Goldstone. Why is he relevant? Again, for intelligence reasons.

As I've noted before, there are major differences between the U.S. intelligence relationship with the Five-Eyes intelligence alliance and, say, France. But because Goldstone has a sustaining relationship with Russian intelligence intermediaries (Agalarovs), he has almost certainly been under the attention of British intelligence services.

Based on his failure to secure his Facebook profile, I would assess that Goldstone is not a very operationally secure man. Correspondingly, it is very likely that every phone and email conversation Goldstone had was recorded by GCHQ, the British equivalent of the NSA. There is likely much more to this story than we currently know.

What does all this mean?

As former NSA officer John Schindler, put it to Washington Examiner, "we are still in the early stages" of what will eventually become public. Still, Schindler adds that this is big news for a simple reason.

We've never had a key person in any administration a core person in Trump's business empire and the current First Family admit to collusion with a hostile government in a presidential election. Considering that government and its intelligence services are known by our spy agencies to have illegally and clandestinely aided in Trump's election in 2016, the implications of this revelation are obvious and deeply troubling.

Read the rest here:
How the intelligence community is decoding Donald Trump Jr.'s emails - Washington Examiner

In a lawsuit filed during the Obama administration, plaintiff Elliott J. Schuchardt claims surveillance programs compromised his Gmail, Facebook and Dropbox accounts. (Darkside354 / Wikimedia)

Elliott J. Schuchardt is suing Donald Trump for violating Schuchardts rights under the Fourth Amendment. The Tennessee lawyer has filed a civil lawsuit in Pennsylvania against the president of the United States, the director of the Office of National Intelligence, the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the director of the National Security Agency who is also chief of the Central Security Service. Schuchardt contends that the defendants are unlawfully intercepting, accessing, monitoring and/or [his] private communications.

The lawsuit represents a longstanding legal battle Schuchardt has waged against top U.S. intelligence officials that started when Barack Obama was president. William Binney, a former U.S. intelligence official and NSA whistleblower, is supporting Schuchardts most recent legal case.

The plaintiff claims that his Fourth Amendment rights have been violated by government surveillance programs. According to Ars Technica, Schuchardt argued in his June 2014 complaint that both metadata and content of his Gmail, Facebook, and Dropbox accounts were compromised under the PRISM program as revealed in the documents leaked by former National Security Agency (NSA) contractor Edward Snowden.

That case was dismissed for lack of standing, but Schuchardt has continued to file amended complaints related to U.S. intelligence activities.

Im making an allegation that no one else is making: Im contending that the government is collecting full content of e-mail, Schuchardt told Ars Technica in 2014. Im contending that theyre not doing it by PRISM but via [Executive Order] 12333. Im not saying that this is being done on a case by case basis but that theyre grabbing it all. Where is that email residing? Is it back at the Google servers? Im contending that this is on a government server. I am the only person in the U.S. who is objecting to those set of facts.

Schuchardt, whose legal works focuses on civil litigation, corporate law, personal injury, bankruptcy, divorce and child custody cases, felt compelled to challenge the highest levels of American government.

Ive been following the issue before Snowden came forward, Schuchardt said three years ago. Then I started to watch it for that first year, and then when Congress was dragging its feet, I decided I was going to file the case when nothing got done, and when nothing got done, I decided to move forward.

Last week, Binney, the NSA whistleblower, gave an affidavit in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Pennsylvania, opposing the defendants renewed motion to dismiss the second amended complaint.

2. I have reviewed the complaint in the complaint in the above-captioned civil lawsuit. It is my understanding, based on the Complaint, that the Plaintiff, Elliott Schuchardt, contends that the Defendants are unlawfully intercepting, accessing, monitoring and/or storing [his] private communications. (Complaint, 50.)

3. It is my understanding, based on the complaint, that Mr. Schuchardt is a consumer of various types of electronic communication, storage and internet-search services. These include the e-mail services provided by Google and Yahoo; the internet search service provided by Google; the cloud storage services provided by Google and Dropbox; the e-mail and instant message services provided by Facebook; and the cell phone and text communication service provided by Verizon Communications. (Complaint, 49.)

4. The allegations in the Complaint are true and correct: Defendants are intercepting, accessing, monitoring and storing the Plaintiffs private communications.

Read Binneys complete affidavit below.

Click the following links to see Exhibits 1, 3 and 6 from Binneys affidavit.

To read Schuchardts complaint, click here. To read a copy of the brief filed Monday, click here. To read exhibits A and B from Mondays brief, click here and here.

LISTEN: Robert Scheer Talks With William Binney About Blowing the Whistle on the NSA

Posted by Eric Ortiz.

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Read this article:
In a Lawsuit Affidavit, NSA Whistleblower William Binney Confirms US Government Spies on Citizens - Truthdig