
NSA Reports Improper Surveillance of Americans - vermontdevil
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-12-24/spy-agency-to-release-reports-documenting-surveillance-errors
======
jellicle
The idea here from a public relations viewpoint is to reveal a small crime to
conceal a large one.

Individuals will be described to have violated the NSA's strict internal rules
and snooped on their cheating spouse or whatever. One, two, three incidents.
Look, we've come clean!

Not mentioned will be the wholesale storage of every communication of every
American, which the NSA does not deem to be surveillance until they
specifically search on your name while knowing you are an American.

This is pretty much the exact same playbook as we observed with Abu Ghraib.
Rape rooms run by the government are NOT illegal; that's official US
government rape, and covered by memos saying it is legal, so everything is
fine. And if over 100 people are killed by U.S. official torture and rape,
that too is just fine.

But if overenthusiastic PFCs make prisoners lay on top of each other and give
a thumbs-up, that's an error that needs to be disclosed and heavily punished.

The idea in each case is to make the unobservant member of the public think
that all the abuses have been disclosed, and they are minor, and the
individuals responsible have been punished.

~~~
Zigurd
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_hangout](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_hangout)

~~~
dmix
Indeed, the brilliant part of immoral espionage is that they are the best
people on the planet at not getting caught. As John Le Carre would say: the
only rule of espionage is that it works. They often don't have to deal with
the complex moralities of the public world.

------
ceejayoz
> In a 2012 case, for example, an NSA analyst “searched her spouse’s personal
> telephone directory without his knowledge to obtain names and telephone
> numbers for targeting,” according to one report. The analyst “has been
> advised to cease her activities,” it said.

How is this not a crime? It they can come over you from downloading off JSTOR
using legitimate access, why is this person still employed at the NSA rather
than behind bars?

~~~
Htsthbjig
"How is this not a crime?"

It is. But a crime does not need to be punished if those that commit it are
powerful enough.

People in the NSA know lots of secrets of everybody. They know if the
president has a mistress. They know if members of congress or their family do
take drugs. They know who is corrupt and who does not. They know all the
mistakes people did for getting where they are.

Remember that the NSA records and stores all telephone conversations so they
can years later analyze and make sense of it.

So telling the person not to be a bad boy again is the best solution for
everyone involved. Angry employees are not good here.

~~~
jacquesm
> Angry employees are not good here.

On the contrary they're good for everybody.

------
randomfool
Christmas Eve. Great job attempting to sweep it under the rug, NSA. I hope the
papers all wait until after New Years to report.

~~~
staunch
It's amazing how much this says about them that they would try to hide this
report. They're in dire need of a real leader.

~~~
alfiedotwtf
> They're in dire need of a real leader

You spelled scrapped incorrectly.

------
cyphunk
Releasing such documents, even if fully redacted, is important for State
Agencies when dealing with a branding windfall. This, along with for example
Obama's recent memo to the US Intelligence community asking them to be more
considerate of civil liberties for allied nations, do nothing to actually
address the problem but they do give off the appearance of caring.

Compare this to how a corporation deals with a negative branding windfall.
Take the case of GM this year in dealing with their ignition switch recall.
The controversy increased as their response was based on rationalization
without dealing with the fallout of trust. Eventually the increased negativity
brought their CEO to practically beg the public for forgiveness.

The US Gov, perhaps just another corporation, stands in contrast by conducting
a rational response like Toyota, albeit slower, but it has no reason to
consider the wider trust fallout, apart from measures this article mentions.
It feels there is no reason to prosecute anyone for torture (Obama's look
forward not backward argument). This protection of their gangsters [1] is a
mentality that trickles down through the whole system of governance including
how wrongful acts by the police are handled.

When Toyota's trust was damaged they had to beg to keep customers. When the US
Gov's trust is damaged... meh, you're not going anywhere.

1\. [http://youtu.be/tQhIRBxbchU?t=2m9s](http://youtu.be/tQhIRBxbchU?t=2m9s)

~~~
zmmmmm
I'm confused how you could consider this situation to be a "windfall" for
these agencies in any sense? A windfall is a positive thing, the surveillance
story is a negative for them surely?

~~~
MaysonL
Windfall, as a word, is a fossilized metaphor. A windfall is that which falls
from a tree as the result of wind. It can be fruit, small branches, or the
whole tree. It can be good, or it can be bad: think of a tree falling on your
car or house.

~~~
DigitalJack
The common usage has a good connotation.

From Websters:

Synonyms: benediction, benefit, boon, felicity, godsend, good, manna, blessing

Antonyms: affliction, bane, curse, evil, plague, scourge

~~~
dalke
And has for a long time. The 1818 version of Johnson's "A Dictionary of the
English Language" has "an unexpected legacy; any unexpected advantage", with
no negative connotations.
[https://books.google.com/books?id=zsI_AQAAMAAJ&pg=PT1100&dq=...](https://books.google.com/books?id=zsI_AQAAMAAJ&pg=PT1100&dq=windfall&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3NGcVP_UMOGtygPxnIGoCw&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=windfall&f=false)

The original 1755 version only had "Fruit blown down from the tree" \-
[http://johnsonsdictionaryonline.com/?page_id=7070&i=2282](http://johnsonsdictionaryonline.com/?page_id=7070&i=2282)
. Etymonline says 'Figurative sense of "unexpected acquisition" is recorded
from 1540s' \-
[http://etymonline.com/index.php?term=windfall&allowed_in_fra...](http://etymonline.com/index.php?term=windfall&allowed_in_frame=0)
.

It's also used in the 1800s as the tornado track. See
[https://books.google.com/books?id=1GQJAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA324&dq=w...](https://books.google.com/books?id=1GQJAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA324&dq=windfall&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3NGcVP_UMOGtygPxnIGoCw&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=windfall&f=false)
.

------
aaron987
"The heavily-redacted reports include examples of data on Americans being
e-mailed to unauthorized recipients, stored in unsecured computers and
retained after it was supposed to be destroyed, according to the documents."

Therein lies one of the major problems with these mass surveillance programs.
Not only are they collecting information on millions of innocent Americans,
but now it appears that they are not properly securing that data. This whole
thing just makes my blood boil.

~~~
pXMzR2A
> Not only are they collecting information on millions of innocent Americans,
> but now it appears that they are not properly securing that data.

I cannot tell whether you're being paid for by these folk, or just plain
politically naive, or suffer from induced helplessness.

Your argument of "outrage" has levels built into it.

L1: collect information

L2: of innocent

L3: americans

L4: properly securing data

L1+L2+L3+L4 => boiling your blood.

For one, why do you even care about L4? Who cares if they secure data
properly, they are already doing L1+L2+L3

Why do you care that it is Americans? Would it be better if they focused only
on non-Americans, would you have cared less? They are already doing L1+L2.

What is the reason you are hanged up on "innocent"? What does that even mean?
Who and how do you determine if someone is innocent? Are you that devoid of
critical thinking that you fail to see the rhetoric of "innocents" legitimizes
whatever is to be done to those deemed not innocent? They are already doing
L1.

They are doing L1. That by itself should have boiled your blood without any
regard for L2+L3+L4, which are false arguments inserted into the debate in
order to legitimize the actual assault on human rights under the disguise of
"better security" by the same agencies that always turn these kind of tricks
time and time again.

~~~
semi-extrinsic
I, for one, think it's awfully naive to think that all collection of
information by the intelligence community is an outrage. Authorities
collecting information has been going on for about as long as our species has
had language.

~~~
EdSharkey
Collecting, yes. Storing, indexing, warehousing all meaningful communication,
movement, and transactions of all humanity indefinitely - that is the new and
condemnable part. I call that absolute power.

------
asdrty
" The NSA’s inspector general last year detailed 12 cases of “intentional
misuse” of intelligence authorities from 2003 to 2013... "

... if you don't count the millions of Americans' phone records that were
logged

------
happyscrappy
What about the spying on Europeans or are they not considered people?

~~~
krapp
Presumably, as Europeans are by definition not subject to American laws, they
are not relevant to a case involving an American intelligence agency breaking
American laws limiting American intelligence agencies' ability to spy on
American citizens.

Because of course, spying on people outside one's own country is what
intelligence agencies are _supposed_ to do.

~~~
paralelogram
_Europeans are by definition not subject to American laws_

This isn't true.

"Richard O'Dwyer, a computing student at Sheffield Hallam University, faces a
potential 10-year term in a US jail despite never having been to America or
using web servers based in the country."

[http://www.theguardian.com/law/2012/jan/13/piracy-student-
lo...](http://www.theguardian.com/law/2012/jan/13/piracy-student-loses-us-
extradition)

~~~
krapp
Arguably, this only applies to the degree that the UK allows, but that is a
good point.

