
FBI misused surveillance data, spied on its own, FISA ruling finds - headalgorithm
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/10/unsealed-fisa-ruling-slaps-fbi-for-misuse-of-surveillance-data/
======
spinlock
I feel like the real problem is the technology not the law. The technology is
kept by the intelligence agencies who then ask the courts to give them
permission to use their own systems.

Here's my fix: put the systems under the control of the Judicial branch. This
way, Intelligence is not asking for permission, they are asking for access.
The tech who does the search is going to answer to the branch of government
that cares about the law rather than the branch of government that has the
conflicts which create the rush to misuse the systems.

~~~
autoexec
> I feel like the real problem is the technology not the law.

In the end you don't propose changing the tech at all only the procedure for
getting the data (the law). It's not a bad idea to be honest.

In my opinion the problem is the mass surveillance of Americans in the first
place. End that, and suddenly they can't look into their co-worker's lives or
stalk women. They'd only have foreign intelligence information available.
You'd also get the benefit of government upholding the people's constitutional
rights for a change.

------
newguy1234
The snowden leaks revealed this years ago. He said the NSA/CIA and anyone else
with access to the tools was routinely using them to spy on people they knew
(lovers, family, friends etc.) and some of them would use the tools to look
for sexting images or nude images in email. Then they would show them to other
staff as a sort of game.

The reality is if you want to keep your privacy you need to use end-to-end
encryption on your devices and make sure your devices don't have malware on
it. All big tech or major corporation will just comply with requests for data
from any alphabet agency which is why you need to use end-to-end encryption on
everything.

~~~
87er43
Why do you think Google renamed itself "Alphabet"?

~~~
mikelyons
Truth may be stranger than fiction in this regard ...

------
dmix
Just ten thousands violations, you know just regular old mistakes on a massive
scale. No mention of anyone getting fired.

~~~
xkcd-sucks
The people at the top didn't _do_ anything, they just wrote up a process.

The people at the bottom aren't _responsible_ for anything, they were just
following their process

------
sayusasugi
Surprising absolutely nobody.

~~~
ceejayoz
I'm surprised the FISA court objected, given their rubber-stamp nature.

~~~
jonnybgood
> given their rubber-stamp nature.

How do you know this? My understanding is that the agencies will try not to
submit anything to the FISA court that they know will be rejected as it would
be a wasteful use of time and money.

~~~
ceejayoz
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Foreign_Intellig...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Court)

> Over the entire 33-year period, the FISA court granted 33,942 warrants, with
> only 12 denials – a rejection rate of 0.03 percent of the total requests.

I really tend to doubt the agencies are _that_ good at threading the needle.

(It's also a unique court, in that there's no opposing side. Just the
government asking. I'd be much more comfortable with a setup where a group
like the ACLU is permitted to object, while still being subject to security
clearance and non-disclosure requirements.)

~~~
wmil
The rate is misleading since there's a back and forth with the judge before
final submission.

eg the judge will look it over and says that there's no specific crime listed
like the law requires, two weeks later there are money laundering allegations
also listed, the judge approves it without asking where the new allegations
came from.

~~~
ceejayoz
The same article states:

> Fewer than 200 requests had to be modified before being accepted, almost all
> of them in 2003 and 2004.

------
kevin_thibedeau
EO12333 effectively suspends the fourth amendment for people subject to
background investigations. FBI is just following this guidance.

[https://www.cia.gov/about-cia/eo12333.html](https://www.cia.gov/about-
cia/eo12333.html)

------
techntoke
The thought police will be indefinitely detaining its own citizens soon, it
they're not already.

~~~
newguy1234
They won't detain you unless they have a reason to go after you. If you try to
work for NSA/CIA or similar agency then they will probably ask what you meant
by x statement on your facebook etc.

~~~
87er43
>They won't detain you unless they have a reason to go after you.

Anyone can give a reason for anything.

