HOW THE NSA USES NETWORK CARRIERS TO SPY ON YOU

Part 1. CALEA – Now, Even Starbucks is Required to Spy on You

You probably know about FISA, the wiretap law that’s supposed to protect Americans from warrantless government wiretaps. But, few have heard of the other major domestic surveillance law, the 1994 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA).

CALEA makes it mandatory that all telephone companies, Internet Service Providers (ISPs), and even universities and coffee shop chains that offer public internet access, allow government agencies to track and record your calls and surfing habits. That law initially was written to apply only to voice telephone systems. It even came with a half billion dollar incentive to cooperate for the phone companies which had, in the early 1990s, resisted a law that required they install bugging equipment at all their switching centers as an unfunded mandate and very much unwanted business expense.

But, that was so pre-911. As of May 14 this year, once you log on to your Internet provider or use your laptop at a university, library or other institution that offers a broadcast wireless network, federal law now requires that the network carrier record your terminal's unique IP address, you know, the one assigned to each and every computer that accesses the Worldwide Web.

______________________

The FCC even maintains a handy website where you or your company can check on the latest pronouncements on CALEA compliance requirements. Check it out -- http://www.fcc.gov/calea/ -- there you’ll find a nice, handy introduction to what you, your government, and the company that brews your favorite cup of coffee needs to know to stay out of jail if you want to operate in the Digital Age:



We find a bit further into that page that there are three ways for "telecommunications carriers" – which, apparently, now includes the nearest Starbucks store – to conduct electronic surveillance over you. They may purchase or develop their own Legal Intercept (LI) equipment or contract that out to Trusted Third Parties (TPP), companies that act as middlemen between the Barista and the Spooks, or pay their Internet Service Provider (ISP) to do it:



The world is indeed wired, and the NSA, in fact, has access to virtually all of it. Make a phone call, and your phone company records who owns the phone, who and where you called, for how long you talked, and then bills you accordingly. Similarly, as you surf, Starbucks (or its TPP) now keeps a running tab of the sites you visit, how long you stay there, and whether you exchanged data with other visitors.

Thanks to CALEA, the companies that provide communications networks are required to have devices in place to either divert identifying data about users or else to simply record it, should the government demand a copy of it. Under the Bush Administration’s interpretation of the law, the government is entitled to call records and Internet activity logs because such data are "business records" that it says are in the public domain, and further, the government says that you have no reasonable expectation of privacy about anything you post on-line, including chat-rooms. If you believe that any Internet message is truly anonymous, you are wrong. If you speak or write in Arabic or exchange recipes at sites where someone has posted a picture that turns out to have imbedded diagrams for military bases, or just simply like to talk about Government agencies and programs that touch on national security, your URL history and everything in the public domain about you is safely snuggled away in a data base. The only question is, under "The Program", has a copy of every file in your computer and every phone conversation since late 2001 also been clandestinely copied and uploaded? What’s the line, if indeed there is still a line, and how much of this warrantless surveillance actually started before 9/11?

Apparently, quite a lot, according to court papers filed in the federal prosecution of Richard Nacchio, former President of Qwest Wireless. As early as February 27, 2001, months before the 9/11, Qwest’s lawyers had already raised questions about the "ethics" and legality" of a plan for domestic surveillance program being implemented by NSA in conjunction with Project Groundbreaker, a $10 billion technology transformation program that has essentially turned over the Agency’s domestic surveillance programs and processes to a consortium of defense contractors and telcos. See, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/10/11/17489/086

Between September 2000 and February 2001, something changed in the plans being discussed by NSA leadership and Qwest executives, something which so disturbed the company’s lawyers and management that they were willing to jeopardize $500 million in federal contracts. At the end of July, the Groundbreaker contract was awarded to a consortium of other companies, including Verizon, which was competing for a buyout bid for Global Crossing, a troubled international fiber optic company linking Asia and the United States. Out of grace with the Bush Administration, the SEC blocked Qwest’s takeover offer for Global Crossing. In the end Verizon didn’t buy GC, which filed for bankruptcy. Qwest’s stock plummeted, and Mr. Nacchio was facing stock manipulation charges. When Nacchio tried to raise at trial the issues he raised with Gen. Hayden on February 27, 2001, the presiding judge invoked national security grounds, squelching Nacchio’s defense. See, http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2007/10/what-nacchio-te.html?cid=86217544#comment-86217544 ; http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2007/10/groundbreaker-a.html

The Groundbreaker Project is now in its seventh year, and Verizon, CSC, Grumman, et al, essentially run the NSA’s domestic surveillance and analysis functions. These same companies that accepted the program that Qwest questioned, now want a full grant of immunity for the mass warrantless wiretapping that they implemented.

______________________

It’s bad enough that Starbucks watches where you surf. Further eroding privacy, e-mail and the widespread adoption of Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP) phone messages, obscures the legal and technological lines between Internet traffic (which the NSA simply scoops up at the main switching stations, called node points) and the content of phone messages that go out over wires, the privacy of which are supposed to be protected by the 4th Amendment (and, thus, legally require warrants before the government can intercept them and use them to develop evidence of a crime, terrorism, or foreign intelligence activity).

The NSA is generally not supposed to target and monitor phone calls and other electronic communications inside the U.S. without either a criminal (Title III) warrant or a FISA warrant specifying reasonable cause to conclude that one or both parties are involved in espionage, terrorism or some other serious crime. The legal requirements for obtaining FISA warrants have been smoothed down in recent years, but the basic warrant requirement remains a part of U.S. law, as do the criminal and civil sanctions attached to it.

Nonetheless, like a whale swimming through krill, the NSA today scoops up huge amounts of data from sources within the U.S., 99.999% of it purely domestic messages between U.S. persons who have nothing to do with spying or assisting a foreign power, terrorist organizations, or planning attacks on U.S. military forces and facilities. Under long-standing Presidential Orders, all this mountain of "U.S. person" data is supposed to be minimized, which is NSA speak for erased. Until the Bush Administration, minimization routinely took place after several months. Now, well, nobody knows how long U.S. person data is kept in the closet and what NSA does with it, it’s been said that NSA has sufficient capacity for 13 years data storage and that it’s made available to private contractor to test run new Terrorist Profiling algorithms, it’s been said. Yes, you too can be labeled a terrorist suspect, because you like falafel and read on-line publications to the left of The National Review. Nothing should shock you.

What about your e-mails? E-mail and other electronic messages are a mule of the law and technology – it’s claimed that e-mail, like telephone calls and U.S. postal service mail, is covered by 4th Amendment warrant requirements. All that this means, of course, is that it can’t be used as direct evidence against you in a court of law. But, who gets tried for suspected terrorism anymore?
Six years after 9/11, Americans are just beginning to wake up to the fact that all of our communications are fair game for snooping devices and recorders linked to government computer banks.
__________________

Call it schizophrenic or pragmatic, this is the regulatory framework that has led us to a looming Congressional decision that will decide whether we effectively scrap the constitutional and legal requirement that require warrants to intercept voice communications and electronic messages.

Bush wants to grant the telcos retroactive immunity for violations of federal wiretap statutes and FISA – laws that impose requirements that the telcos and ISPs demand warrants before they allow the Gov’t to tap the specific content of messages between U.S. persons. What would happen if immunity were granted toVerizon, AT&T, and other companies that have reportedly allowed the NSA to intercept millions of voice messages. What incentive would any company ever have to demand a lawful warrant or a letter from the Attorney General explaining in reasonable terms why such warrantless wiretapping is legal – a direct violation of FISA criminal and civil penalties? In a system in which the telcos are supposed to have a stake in lawful procedures, what do you think is going to happen? Carte blanche and free lunch. The Sheriff’s opening the jail doors and buying everyone drinks.

First we pay these private contractors billions of dollars to break the law, and then we give them all Get Out of Jail Free cards. Isn't America a great place to do business, or what?
___________________________________________________
See Part 2: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2057626

they only monitored calls going out of country and into country using military (Army) personnel after obtaining top secret pledges from each man.

The methods have not changed that much over the years - it is still "key words" in many languages, with snips before and after the key word sent to the low level military fellow to listen to and if he is worried he orders up the whole conversation and ships it to the officer in charge. Those football fields of computers under ground at Ft Mead are at least doing something "useful" these days besides code breaking.

something needed by low tech folks at the FBI.

When those in power can 'intercept' the thoughts, ideas, plans of those who might question their authority or run against them in public elections, they can use that information to squelch the hallmark of democracy by targeting those individuals for selective prosecution and the focus of government power to oppose them.

This really is an attack on the core of democracy, and the avenue for establishment of an authoritarian form of government.

I was told by an informant (who has access to insider IT workings) that ALL communications are sent overseas to circumvent the law and Constitution. US law and US Constitutional protections do not apply in Asia, for example. I have more details I will not reveal in this forum, but let me say the information fits this story very well.


It is correctly noted: "Global Crossing, a troubled international fiber optic company linking Asia and the United States" but there is no mention that ALL communication traffic, literally EVERYTHING, can easily be sent outside US jurisdiction, where US law no longer applies. This means that literally every message and conversation, since Bush took office more or less, is still in storage and accessible. This program is commonly known as Total Information Awareness.

This is likely what Qwest was unwilling to engage in, routing all communications outside the country for capture. That negation required ensuring that some other entity have the capability. The history of the Qwest case should be considered with regard to such capability control. Like Haldeman said to Nixon about committing crimes, You have to get people to do this stuff. There are IT people who know what was done when by whom. Politicians do not know how to set up routers!

More on the Qwest issue here:
Nacchio and Qwest: Another Political Prosecution?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2051298

It's not like IT jobs aren't outsourced or anything.....:sarcasm:

All info is good info -- until it's used against you for bad purposes.

Remember, the gummint used Lennon's marijuana use coupled with a deportation threat to end his anti-war activism.

A balance of power requires a balance of knowledge: we need to know at least as much about what our gummint is doing as it knows about us.

Tell your Congress Critters to NOT give away "free passes to Bush's criminal co-conspirators"

ACLU Response to President Bush’s Request for Telecom Amnesty, Civil Liberties Group Lauds House Committee Vote to Reject Telecom Immunity (10/10/2007)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
http://www.aclu.org/safefree/general/32138prs20071010.html

Washington, DC – The ACLU responded to the president’s call for telecom amnesty in the RESTORE Act and two House Committees' vote to reject the immunity provision in mark-ups of the legislation.

The following can be attributed to Caroline Fredrickson, director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office:

"Why is the president of the United States trying to get the telecommunications companies off the hook for their illegal activity? He is supposed to be upholding laws, not encouraging companies to break them. Businesses that break the law should be held accountable. We expect these companies to keep our personal information private, and if they break the law, there should be consequences – not a re-write of the rule book.

"The House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees wisely rejected the president’s efforts to carry the water for the telecom companies and voted down an amendment that would add telecom amnesty to the bill. Members of Congress should not re-write laws just to get giant companies off the hook. They were elected to represent the American people, not big business.

"It is interesting that the president says his litmus test for acceptance of any bill to come from Congress hinges on the nod from Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell, whose numerous exaggerations and misstatements have buoyed the ACLU and the Progressive Caucus’ efforts to get real civil liberties protections in any new FISA fixes."

Thank you!