[dave at farber.net: [IP] NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls]

[Tyler Durden]

No surprise, really. Points to one main thing, though: Without technically 
opening a message NSA can garner large amounts of useful information. 
Between source/destination addresses, application, existence of encryption 
and other details they can take a good guess as to whether it would be 
worthwhile to (technically) break the law and actually have a human read the 
message.

And of course, no one's asking what it means when NSA says they haven't 
"read" the message. Does this mean by a human? If only by humans, how much 
of the letter can machines digest and act upon it before it's considered 
"read"? If a machine reads a message stating that Mohammed Al-Qaeda will be 
on the corner of Roosevelt Avenue and 56th street, and then that machine 
sends a message to the guys in dark suits to pick up Mohammed for "probing", 
does NSA (or anyone else in this country) consider that a violation of the 
law?

-TD


>From: Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org>
>To: cypherpunks at jfet.org
>Subject: [dave at farber.net: [IP] NSA has massive database of Americans'  
>phone calls]
>Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 14:55:04 +0200
>
>Full text pasted below.
>
>----- Forwarded message from David Farber <dave at farber.net> -----
>
>From: David Farber <dave at farber.net>
>Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 08:40:06 -0400
>To: ip at v2.listbox.com
>Subject: [IP] NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls
>X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.749.3)
>Reply-To: dave at farber.net
>
>
>
>Begin forwarded message:
>
>From: Richard Forno <rforno at infowarrior.org>
>Date: May 11, 2006 7:01:54 AM EDT
>To: Dave Farber <dave at farber.net>
>Subject: NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls
>
>
>It's a BIG Article, but here's a snippet....
>
>
>"It's the largest database ever assembled in the world," said one
>person,
>who, like the others who agreed to talk about the NSA's activities,
>declined
>to be identified by name or affiliation. The agency's goal is "to
>create a
>database of every call ever made" within the nation's borders, this
>person
>added.
>
>
>http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm
>
>
>
>
>-------------------------------------
>You are subscribed as eugen at leitl.org
>To manage your subscription, go to
>  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
>
>Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
>
>----- End forwarded message -----
>
>The National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call 
>records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, 
>Verizon and BellSouth, people with direct knowledge of the arrangement told 
>USA TODAY.
>
>The NSA program reaches into homes and businesses across the nation by 
>amassing information about the calls of ordinary Americans b most of whom 
>aren't suspected of any crime. This program does not involve the NSA 
>listening to or recording conversations. But the spy agency is using the 
>data to analyze calling patterns in an effort to detect terrorist activity, 
>sources said in separate interviews.
>
>QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS: The NSA record collection program
>
>"It's the largest database ever assembled in the world," said one person, 
>who, like the others who agreed to talk about the NSA's activities, 
>declined to be identified by name or affiliation. The agency's goal is "to 
>create a database of every call ever made" within the nation's borders, 
>this person added.
>
>For the customers of these companies, it means that the government has 
>detailed records of calls they made b across town or across the country b 
>to family members, co-workers, business contacts and others.
>
>The three telecommunications companies are working under contract with the 
>NSA, which launched the program in 2001 shortly after the Sept. 11 
>terrorist attacks, the sources said. The program is aimed at identifying 
>and tracking suspected terrorists, they said.
>
>The sources would talk only under a guarantee of anonymity because the NSA 
>program is secret.
>
>Air Force Gen. Michael Hayden, nominated Monday by President Bush to become 
>the director of the CIA, headed the NSA from March 1999 to April 2005. In 
>that post, Hayden would have overseen the agency's domestic call-tracking 
>program. Hayden declined to comment about the program.
>
>The NSA's domestic program, as described by sources, is far more expansive 
>than what the White House has acknowledged. Last year, Bush said he had 
>authorized the NSA to eavesdrop b without warrants b on international 
>calls and international e-mails of people suspected of having links to 
>terrorists when one party to the communication is in the USA. Warrants have 
>also not been used in the NSA's efforts to create a national call database.
>
>In defending the previously disclosed program, Bush insisted that the NSA 
>was focused exclusively on international calls. "In other words," Bush 
>explained, "one end of the communication must be outside the United 
>States."
>
>As a result, domestic call records b those of calls that originate and 
>terminate within U.S. borders b were believed to be private.
>
>Sources, however, say that is not the case. With access to records of 
>billions of domestic calls, the NSA has gained a secret window into the 
>communications habits of millions of Americans. Customers' names, street 
>addresses and other personal information are not being handed over as part 
>of NSA's domestic program, the sources said. But the phone numbers the NSA 
>collects can easily be cross-checked with other databases to obtain that 
>information.
>
>Don Weber, a senior spokesman for the NSA, declined to discuss the agency's 
>operations. "Given the nature of the work we do, it would be irresponsible 
>to comment on actual or alleged operational issues; therefore, we have no 
>information to provide," he said. "However, it is important to note that 
>NSA takes its legal responsibilities seriously and operates within the 
>law."
>
>The White House would not discuss the domestic call-tracking program. 
>"There is no domestic surveillance without court approval," said Dana 
>Perino, deputy press secretary, referring to actual eavesdropping.
>
>She added that all national intelligence activities undertaken by the 
>federal government "are lawful, necessary and required for the pursuit of 
>al-Qaeda and affiliated terrorists." All government-sponsored intelligence 
>activities "are carefully reviewed and monitored," Perino said. She also 
>noted that "all appropriate members of Congress have been briefed on the 
>intelligence efforts of the United States."
>
>The government is collecting "external" data on domestic phone calls but is 
>not intercepting "internals," a term for the actual content of the 
>communication, according to a U.S. intelligence official familiar with the 
>program. This kind of data collection from phone companies is not uncommon; 
>it's been done before, though never on this large a scale, the official 
>said. The data are used for "social network analysis," the official said, 
>meaning to study how terrorist networks contact each other and how they are 
>tied together.
>
>Carriers uniquely positioned
>
>AT&T recently merged with SBC and kept the AT&T name. Verizon, BellSouth 
>and AT&T are the nation's three biggest telecommunications companies; they 
>provide local and wireless phone service to more than 200 million 
>customers.
>
>The three carriers control vast networks with the latest communications 
>technologies. They provide an array of services: local and long-distance 
>calling, wireless and high-speed broadband, including video. Their direct 
>access to millions of homes and businesses has them uniquely positioned to 
>help the government keep tabs on the calling habits of Americans.
>
>Among the big telecommunications companies, only Qwest has refused to help 
>the NSA, the sources said. According to multiple sources, Qwest declined to 
>participate because it was uneasy about the legal implications of handing 
>over customer information to the government without warrants.
>
>Qwest's refusal to participate has left the NSA with a hole in its 
>database. Based in Denver, Qwest provides local phone service to 14 million 
>customers in 14 states in the West and Northwest. But AT&T and Verizon also 
>provide some services b primarily long-distance and wireless b to people 
>who live in Qwest's region. Therefore, they can provide the NSA with at 
>least some access in that area.
>
>Created by President Truman in 1952, during the Korean War, the NSA is 
>charged with protecting the United States from foreign security threats. 
>The agency was considered so secret that for years the government refused 
>to even confirm its existence. Government insiders used to joke that NSA 
>stood for "No Such Agency."
>
>In 1975, a congressional investigation revealed that the NSA had been 
>intercepting, without warrants, international communications for more than 
>20 years at the behest of the CIA and other agencies. The spy campaign, 
>code-named "Shamrock," led to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act 
>(FISA), which was designed to protect Americans from illegal eavesdropping.
>
>Enacted in 1978, FISA lays out procedures that the U.S. government must 
>follow to conduct electronic surveillance and physical searches of people 
>believed to be engaged in espionage or international terrorism against the 
>United States. A special court, which has 11 members, is responsible for 
>adjudicating requests under FISA.
>
>Over the years, NSA code-cracking techniques have continued to improve 
>along with technology. The agency today is considered expert in the 
>practice of "data mining" b sifting through reams of information in search 
>of patterns. Data mining is just one of many tools NSA analysts and 
>mathematicians use to crack codes and track international communications.
>
>Paul Butler, a former U.S. prosecutor who specialized in terrorism crimes, 
>said FISA approval generally isn't necessary for government data-mining 
>operations. "FISA does not prohibit the government from doing data mining," 
>said Butler, now a partner with the law firm Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld 
>in Washington, D.C.
>
>The caveat, he said, is that "personal identifiers" b such as names, 
>Social Security numbers and street addresses b can't be included as part 
>of the search. "That requires an additional level of probable cause," he 
>said.
>
>The usefulness of the NSA's domestic phone-call database as a 
>counterterrorism tool is unclear. Also unclear is whether the database has 
>been used for other purposes.
>
>The NSA's domestic program raises legal questions. Historically, AT&T and 
>the regional phone companies have required law enforcement agencies to 
>present a court order before they would even consider turning over a 
>customer's calling data. Part of that owed to the personality of the old 
>Bell Telephone System, out of which those companies grew.
>
>Ma Bell's bedrock principle b protection of the customer b guided the 
>company for decades, said Gene Kimmelman, senior public policy director of 
>Consumers Union. "No court order, no customer information b period. That's 
>how it was for decades," he said.
>
>The concern for the customer was also based on law: Under Section 222 of 
>the Communications Act, first passed in 1934, telephone companies are 
>prohibited from giving out information regarding their customers' calling 
>habits: whom a person calls, how often and what routes those calls take to 
>reach their final destination. Inbound calls, as well as wireless calls, 
>also are covered.
>
>The financial penalties for violating Section 222, one of many privacy 
>reinforcements that have been added to the law over the years, can be 
>stiff. The Federal Communications Commission, the nation's top 
>telecommunications regulatory agency, can levy fines of up to $130,000 per 
>day per violation, with a cap of $1.325 million per violation. The FCC has 
>no hard definition of "violation." In practice, that means a single 
>"violation" could cover one customer or 1 million.
>
>In the case of the NSA's international call-tracking program, Bush signed 
>an executive order allowing the NSA to engage in eavesdropping without a 
>warrant. The president and his representatives have since argued that an 
>executive order was sufficient for the agency to proceed. Some civil 
>liberties groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, disagree.
>
>Companies approached
>
>The NSA's domestic program began soon after the Sept. 11 attacks, according 
>to the sources. Right around that time, they said, NSA representatives 
>approached the nation's biggest telecommunications companies. The agency 
>made an urgent pitch: National security is at risk, and we need your help 
>to protect the country from attacks.
>
>The agency told the companies that it wanted them to turn over their 
>"call-detail records," a complete listing of the calling histories of their 
>millions of customers. In addition, the NSA wanted the carriers to provide 
>updates, which would enable the agency to keep tabs on the nation's calling 
>habits.
>
>The sources said the NSA made clear that it was willing to pay for the 
>cooperation. AT&T, which at the time was headed by C. Michael Armstrong, 
>agreed to help the NSA. So did BellSouth, headed by F. Duane Ackerman; SBC, 
>headed by Ed Whitacre; and Verizon, headed by Ivan Seidenberg.
>
>With that, the NSA's domestic program began in earnest.
>
>AT&T, when asked about the program, replied with a comment prepared for USA 
>TODAY: "We do not comment on matters of national security, except to say 
>that we only assist law enforcement and government agencies charged with 
>protecting national security in strict accordance with the law."
>
>In another prepared comment, BellSouth said: "BellSouth does not provide 
>any confidential customer information to the NSA or any governmental agency 
>without proper legal authority."
>
>Verizon, the USA's No. 2 telecommunications company behind AT&T, gave this 
>statement: "We do not comment on national security matters, we act in full 
>compliance with the law and we are committed to safeguarding our customers' 
>privacy."
>
>Qwest spokesman Robert Charlton said: "We can't talk about this. It's a 
>classified situation."
>
>In December, The New York Times revealed that Bush had authorized the NSA 
>to wiretap, without warrants, international phone calls and e-mails that 
>travel to or from the USA. The following month, the Electronic Frontier 
>Foundation, a civil liberties group, filed a class-action lawsuit against 
>AT&T. The lawsuit accuses the company of helping the NSA spy on U.S. phone 
>customers.
>
>Last month, U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales alluded to that 
>possibility. Appearing at a House Judiciary Committee hearing, Gonzales was 
>asked whether he thought the White House has the legal authority to monitor 
>domestic traffic without a warrant. Gonzales' reply: "I wouldn't rule it 
>out." His comment marked the first time a Bush appointee publicly asserted 
>that the White House might have that authority.
>
>Similarities in programs
>
>The domestic and international call-tracking programs have things in 
>common, according to the sources. Both are being conducted without warrants 
>and without the approval of the FISA court. The Bush administration has 
>argued that FISA's procedures are too slow in some cases. Officials, 
>including Gonzales, also make the case that the USA Patriot Act gives them 
>broad authority to protect the safety of the nation's citizens.
>
>The chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Pat Roberts, 
>R-Kan., would not confirm the existence of the program. In a statement, he 
>said, "I can say generally, however, that our subcommittee has been fully 
>briefed on all aspects of the Terrorist Surveillance Program. ... I remain 
>convinced that the program authorized by the president is lawful and 
>absolutely necessary to protect this nation from future attacks."
>
>The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Pete Hoekstra, 
>R-Mich., declined to comment.
>
>One company differs
>
>One major telecommunications company declined to participate in the 
>program: Qwest.
>
>According to sources familiar with the events, Qwest's CEO at the time, Joe 
>Nacchio, was deeply troubled by the NSA's assertion that Qwest didn't need 
>a court order b or approval under FISA b to proceed. Adding to the 
>tension, Qwest was unclear about who, exactly, would have access to its 
>customers' information and how that information might be used.
>
>Financial implications were also a concern, the sources said. Carriers that 
>illegally divulge calling information can be subjected to heavy fines. The 
>NSA was asking Qwest to turn over millions of records. The fines, in the 
>aggregate, could have been substantial.
>
>The NSA told Qwest that other government agencies, including the FBI, CIA 
>and DEA, also might have access to the database, the sources said. As a 
>matter of practice, the NSA regularly shares its information b known as 
>"product" in intelligence circles b with other intelligence groups. Even 
>so, Qwest's lawyers were troubled by the expansiveness of the NSA request, 
>the sources said.
>
>The NSA, which needed Qwest's participation to completely cover the 
>country, pushed back hard.
>
>Trying to put pressure on Qwest, NSA representatives pointedly told Qwest 
>that it was the lone holdout among the big telecommunications companies. It 
>also tried appealing to Qwest's patriotic side: In one meeting, an NSA 
>representative suggested that Qwest's refusal to contribute to the database 
>could compromise national security, one person recalled.
>
>In addition, the agency suggested that Qwest's foot-dragging might affect 
>its ability to get future classified work with the government. Like other 
>big telecommunications companies, Qwest already had classified contracts 
>and hoped to get more.
>
>Unable to get comfortable with what NSA was proposing, Qwest's lawyers 
>asked NSA to take its proposal to the FISA court. According to the sources, 
>the agency refused.
>
>The NSA's explanation did little to satisfy Qwest's lawyers. "They told 
>(Qwest) they didn't want to do that because FISA might not agree with 
>them," one person recalled. For similar reasons, this person said, NSA 
>rejected Qwest's suggestion of getting a letter of authorization from the 
>U.S. attorney general's office. A second person confirmed this version of 
>events.
>
>In June 2002, Nacchio resigned amid allegations that he had misled 
>investors about Qwest's financial health. But Qwest's legal questions about 
>the NSA request remained.
>
>Unable to reach agreement, Nacchio's successor, Richard Notebaert, finally 
>pulled the plug on the NSA talks in late 2004, the sources said.
>
>Contributing: John Diamond
>
>--
>Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
>______________________________________________________________
>ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820            http://www.ativel.com
>8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE