
Timeline of NSA Domestic Spying - espeed
https://www.eff.org/nsa-spying/timeline
======
ck2
I love how it starts with this, which is so crystal clear but has obviously
been violated on every conceivable level from your local police to the NSA.

 _The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and
effects,_

 _against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated,_

 _and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or
affirmation,_

 _and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or
things to be seized._

So what part of "persons" "effects" "unreasonable" and "particular" has every
level of government decided to purposely not understand?

~~~
ivanca
Definitely "unreasonable", when you're a crazy paranoid government full of
weapons nothing seems unreasonable.

~~~
andrewpi
Basically whatever 5 justices of the Supreme Court decide is "reasonable."

------
tghw
The EFF is doing some great work. I just made my annual donation, a bit early
this year. Will likely make another one.

[https://supporters.eff.org/donate/](https://supporters.eff.org/donate/)

------
espeed
One thing that in hindsight may be related that's not on the timeline is the
DoJ losing its lawsuit against Google in January 2006.

"Google Resists U.S. Subpoena of Search Data"
([http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/20/technology/20google.html?p...](http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/20/technology/20google.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0))

"Judge tells DoJ 'No' on search queries"
([http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2006/03/judge-tells-doj-no-
on...](http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2006/03/judge-tells-doj-no-on-search-
queries.html))

According to the slides
([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Prism_slide_5.jpg](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Prism_slide_5.jpg)),
the PRISM timeline begins the next year on 9/11/2007, and Google is added on
January 14, 2009, almost 3 years to the day after the the DoJ ruling and only
a few days before Obama takes office.

In a Q&A after a talk at Stanford in 2006, Marissa Mayer is asked, "How much
information does Google share with the Federal Government?"

Here is her answer:
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soYKFWqVVzg#t=1819](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soYKFWqVVzg#t=1819)

~~~
fsckin
~30:15 for those with devices that dont skip to the linked time.

------
forlorn
Why does nobody remember the story of 1998 when NSA and Microsoft were caught
at including backdoors into Windows?

CNN article (1998) [
[http://edition.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9807/27/security.idg/](http://edition.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9807/27/security.idg/)
]

Heise article (1999) [
[http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/5/5263/1.html](http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/5/5263/1.html)
]

~~~
mhurron
Because those of us that remember also remember it was basically a hoax.

Here is a rundown of 'incident' happened -

Researcher finds variable named _NSAKEY ... ...

That's it. From there we go to the la la land of conspiracy theories based
entirely on the name of a variable.

But I'm just some guy on the internet. There's also this -
[http://www.schneier.com/crypto-
gram-9909.html#NSAKeyinMicros...](http://www.schneier.com/crypto-
gram-9909.html#NSAKeyinMicrosoftCryptoAPI)

------
Steko
How is 1978 to 2000 blank? Were all the cool kids who added random NSA filter
bait to their usenet and email sigs in the 90's just watching too much
x-files?

Maybe this is why I lack the same level of outrage as the kids do over
Snowden's disclosures: I've pretty much always assumed the NSA has always had
pretty much everything (along with the Russians and the Chinese and I guess
the Time Warner Corporation and now Google).

~~~
belorn
In the cold war, US needed to maintain a image of being free'er than the
oppressive international communism. They also suspected evey shrubbery to have
a spy in them.

As such, I think covert activities had a natural upper limit on how much
activity it could do without upsetting things. Incidents could be hushed (and
at a very more effective manner than doay), but too much, and you get a
Watergate scandal. As a result, 80s and 90s US didnt have that many scandals
in the same league as wikileaks and Snowden's disclosures.

~~~
mjn
There was more solid delineation of turf between the FBI and CIA/NSA for some
decades as well: the former was responsible for domestic intelligence and the
latter for foreign operations. Hence most of the domestic abuses you read
about in that period, like COINTELPRO, came from the FBI.

------
ddoolin
Wow. An amazingly thorough timeline that, while unfortunately reads in a weird
format, is definitely chilling the more you read. You can easily see how
post-9/11 had changed pretty much everything. It all happened so fast after
that.

------
codex
This would be more useful if it didn't omit certain key developments in order
to further the EFF agenda: for example, missing is the October 2011 ruling in
which the FISA court declared some aspects of the NSA's programs
unconstitutional. In November 2011 it allowed the programs to continue after
required changes were made.

In other words, it omits events where the FISA court was actually doing it's
job of regulating the NSA. As the timeline stands, it's hard to take
seriously.

------
ck2
Incredible summary of information.

Not crazy about the random left/right text but okay I can deal with it.

Was the report that Bush ignored, "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike US", a
product of the NSA? Should it be on that timeline?

Someone should make this horizontal, I am sure someone will.

------
tks2103
I believe I read somewhere that Edward Snowden tried to express his concern
over the extent of domestic surveillance to his boss at the NSA, and in
response his boss revoked his access to key systems.

I can no longer find anything that indicates that. I also do not see it listed
in this timeline.

Does anyone know if Snowden went to his boss at the NSA before leaking to the
Guardian?

Also, I heard that Snowden posted a rant to a blog post about his concerns
under his internet handle. I cannot find that anymore either.

------
cldwalker
July 14, 2004 "Secret Surveillance Court, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Court, Signs First Order" \- The day collecting bulk internet metadata
continues without interruption.

Finally, a reference to easily point out the ignorance in those who try to
politicize NSA spying. Both sides suck when it comes to this issue - deal with
it.

------
gyepi
For those of you asking why some related item is excluded:

 _All of the evidence found in this timeline can also be found in the Summary
of Evidence we submitted to the court in Jewel v. National Security Agency
(NSA)_

There is clearly more information that simply cannot be admitted as evidence
in a legal case.

------
krstck
I wonder what the current state of domestic spying would look like if the 9/11
attacks had never happened or had been thwarted.

~~~
jacquesm
The war on drugs or the war on (child)pornography would have been stepped up
instead. But terror is so much more effective.

------
delinka
Took me a moment: scroll to the bottom if you want to read chronologically.

~~~
nxn
There is an "Oldest First" button that resorts the timeline.

~~~
delinka
I completely missed this. Thanks.

