[cryptome] Re: Give Me Your Data Without a Warrant

  • From: doug <douglasrankine2001@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 22:41:10 +0000

Hi Александр,

Yup! Keep up the good work...
We know...and we, as you say, have known for some time...and what can we do about it? Not a lot, just talk to anyone who will listen, family, friends colleauges, associates, so that they acknowledge and understand. At some stage, the ramifications will get through to them, and when enough people are affected and become concerned, particularly amongst the decision-making classes; then something will be done about it. There is no point in being paranoid about it either, all that people will see is the paranoia, be constructive, think about it, think it out, examine what it works and what doesn't; what it means for you yourself and for others, what it means for society, what it means for the decision-makers, after all everyone is part of the process, and those that make the decisions are finding themselves in the embarrasing position that they are increasingly being exposed, caught out by hackers, or the state institutions, and that at some time they are going to have to start obeying the law, or work very hard at beating it.

It is why I am so interested in the draft surveillance legislation which the UK government is proposing to put through Parliament on the question and the relationship of the intelligence and security services, law enforcement, warrants specific and general, the collection of mass data, profiling and what rights the individual has to protect his/her information and property; and the balance between the rights of privacy and security for businesses and the individual, against the state's need to know; and the controls on state actors which protects the people as individuals against abuse by civil servants.

Whether we like it or not, there are lots of criminals out there, who are already making money out of the holes in internet security, from targetting individuals to companies like talktalk, or government agencies, banks, financial institutions, children, the weak and vulnerable.

Most of us want to use the internet for legitimate trade, for aquiring knowledge and understanding, for communicating with our families and others and for exploring the world around us in a way which we have never been able to do before.

I think that the internet and the world wide web are great inventions and will help to advance society if they are used properly. There really has been nothing like it in the whole of human history.

On 30/11/2015 19:53, Александр wrote:

​*We knew that - didn't we?*
But most people are simply too lazy or too afraid to stand up against the aggressor or at least to change their own internet behaviour, but often believe they could bigmouth about "Nothing to hide ..." and get away with it.

In all times the dictators could trust in the laziness, ignorance and fear of their sheeple.
While in Fortress Europe now martial law, kin liability and arrest for thought or free speech have been imposed like under Nazi Germany, the USofAmerica are leading us all into WWIII.

*Revealed: *
*FBI can demand web history, phone location data without a warrant*

The FBI can use national security letters (NSLs) to force companies to turn over sensitive user data without a warrant, according to filings.

By Zack Whittaker <http://www.zdnet.com/meet-the-team/us/zack-whittaker/> for Zero Day <http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/> | November 30, 2015 -- 16:35 GMT (08:35 PST) | Topic: Security <http://www.zdnet.com/topic/security/>

The FBI can compel companies and individuals to turn over vast sums of personal data without a warrant, it has been revealed for the first time.

In a case that's lasted more than a decade, a court filing released Monday <https://yale.app.box.com/Nicholas-Merrill-SDNY-Decision>showed how the FBI used secret interpretations to determine the scope of national security letters (NSLs).

Nicholas Merrill, founder of internet provider Calyx Internet Access, who brought the 11-year-old case to court after his company was served a national security letter, won the case earlier this year.

National security letters are almost always bundled with a gag order, preventing Merrill from speaking freely about the letter he received.

While it was known that national security letters can demand customer and user data, it wasn't known exactly what.

In a statement on Monday, Merrill revealed the FBI has used its authority to force companies and individuals to turn over complete web browsing history; the IP addresses of everyone a person has corresponded with; online purchase information, and also cell-site location information, which he said can be used to turn a person's phone into a "location tracking device."

According to a release <https://yale.app.box.com/NSL-Attachment-Unredacted>, the FBI can also force a company to release postal addresses, email addresses, and "any other information which [is] considered to be an electronic communication transactional record."

Merrill said in remarks: "The FBI has interpreted its NSL authority to encompass the websites we read, the web searches we conduct, the people we contact, and the places we go. This kind of data reveals the most intimate details of our lives, including our political activities, religious affiliations, private relationships, and even our private thoughts and beliefs."

Federal district judge Victor Marrero described in his decision that the FBI's position was "extreme and overly broad."

He also found that the FBI's overbroad gag order on Mr. Merrill "implicates serious issues, both with respect to the First Amendment and accountability of the government to the people."

Merrill is the first person who has succeeded in completely lifting a national security letter gag order.

The Patriot Act expanded the reach of national security letters when it was signed into law a month after the September 11 attacks in 2001.

More than ten thousand national security letters are issued by the FBI every year, without a warrant or judicial oversight.

These letters have been surrounded with controversy for years, leading to many unsuccessful attempts to litigate against them. Major companies, including Google <http://www.zdnet.com/article/google-fails-to-strike-down-fbis-unconstitutional-secret-gagging-orders/>, have challenged national security letters, with little luck. Microsoft recently challenged an order, which led to the FBI to withdraw the demand <http://www.zdnet.com/article/microsoft-challenged-an-fbi-national-security-letter-and-won/>.

In 2008, a US court found the National Security Letter statute, amended by the Patriot Act in 2001, was unconstitutional.

In a separate case in 2013, the gag order provision was found to be in breach of the First Amendment <http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/gagging-recipients-of-national-security-letters-found-unconstitutional/>. The government appealed the ruling.

Other related posts: