
Source: Obama Considering Releasing NSA Court Order - Libertatea
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/06/15/191822828/source-obama-considering-releasing-nsa-court-order
======
espeed
Has anyone considered that the NSA PRISM program coming to light could be a
long-term win for the Internet giants?

Joseph Nacchio
([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nacchio](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nacchio))
was the only telcom CEO to refuse the NSA's demands for access, and now he is
in prison.

Even though we probably don't know what level of access the NSA has today,
it's likely it will want more tomorrow. This is probably not a situation the
tech giants want to be in. So what's the solution?

If any individual Internet company stood up to the NSA and refused access, its
CEO would be risking a fate similar to Joseph Nacchio. However, the Snowden
leak provides a way for the Internet companies to bring PRISM to public light
in a unified way -- where everyone is implicated -- while reducing the
blowback risks to each individual company.

In the Snowden interview, he says that the only thing that prevents the NSA
from doing something is policy -- not legality.

In the short run, bringing PRISM to light may hurt the tech companies, but it
hurts them all equally. However, in the long run, it may be the necessary
catalyst to build public demand for policy changes to prevent these type of
programs from escalating.

If the tech companies wanted out, this may be the way out.

~~~
asperous
I agree, the publicity now may be bad, but the focus is mostly on the
government anyway. I have no doubt that the companies would prefer
transparency and keeping the data to themselves (Google has been pushing for
that all along), but perhaps they aren't making it front page like sopa*
because want to draw the bad publicity back to themselves.

*except Mozilla I guess, but they weren't targeted in the NSA slides

~~~
tmzt
Mozilla is encrypting user data using a user provided passphrase/PIN as part
of Firefox Sync. Personna also has it's own browser-based crypto. Both systems
have public specifications.

------
jpdoctor
So classic damage control strategy would dictate something like the following:
Make it seem like you've caved to demands, and give up meaningless things
(while trumping them up to seem meaningful.)

Releasing a court order to invade the privacy of your citizens is not anywhere
near ordering the cessation of privacy invasion.

I have to say: It's a good PR move, and will placate all sorts of people who
don't understand what just happened.

------
ferdo
"But do consider that in Eastern Germany, for instance, it was the fear of a
machine of surveillance that people believed watched them at all times —
rather than the machine itself — that drove compliance and passivity. From the
standpoint of the police state and its interests — why have a giant Big
Brother apparatus spying on us at all times — unless we know about it?"

-Naomi Wolf

[http://www.cryptogon.com/?p=35659](http://www.cryptogon.com/?p=35659)

------
ubernostrum
Anybody remember the West Wing episode where a reporter wants a story about
the President calling a lame-duck session of Congress?

He asks the press secretary "has he considered it", which she knows is a trap
-- sooner or later the reporter can escalate it into her asking the President
if he's considered it. And as soon as she asks him that, it will be factually
true that he will have "considered it", since the thought of that as an option
will have been in his mind. At which point the reporter can write the story he
wanted to write, saying "the President has considered calling a lame-duck
session of Congress..."

~~~
TillE
Of course in reality they'd just answer "no" and be done with it. The White
House doesn't play silly games unless it's to their benefit.

I'm all for extreme transparency, but the public doesn't really have any right
to know every thought that passes through the President's mind.

~~~
wavefunction
I don't give a flying f about the President's thoughts, just his actions.

Thoughts, meaningless. Actions, concrete.

~~~
dllthomas
Thoughts can be somewhat predictive of future concrete actions, and I may want
to take concrete actions in the present that reflect that. This is not to say
that we therefore have a right to read the president's mind, just that
"meaningless" isn't quite right...

------
revelation
What the hell is going on. Why is the name of this mysterious "senior
administration official" not released? He is completely mirroring the Obama
line. It's not like hes blowing the whistle on any secret information and his
name needs to be kept in the dark.

This has been a trend all over the press. It is time they realize they are
taken for a ride in what is just another completely mundane, coordinated
attempt by the government to control the public opinion.

~~~
lakethun
In Switzerland we rarely have unattributed statements from the government. It
would be considered unethical.

Unlike the US with private news providers most Swiss news (television and
radio but not print) are mostly funded by the government with fees like in the
UK. Government views are well represented but directly.

~~~
charonn0
I think most Americans would view government-run media with extreme distrust;
the fourth estate needs to be independent of the government if it's going to
be an effective check on the government's power.

------
temp9251
"the NSA does not use that program to keep geolocation data"

How does this mesh with the Verizon court order specifically demanding trunk
identifiers for calls, which can be resolved to geographical locations for
cell phones?

------
malandrew
All lot of the language in this document explains why we've seen the
government refer to many domestic activist organizations, no matter how
peaceful, as terrorist organizations. By simply adopting the term terrorist to
describe any group, the government can at least semantically defend the
wiretapping of any individual. Want to wiretap someone? Simply find any single
organization they belong to or have belonged too that can be labeled as
"terrorist", no matter how tenuous any connection to actual terrorism there
is.

------
charonn0

        The source said even though the NSA may have that power
        to collect the geolocation data under the law and the 
        secret court's rulings, the NSA does not use it.
    

I think this gets to the heart of the misunderstanding between the
administration and the critics of these programs: the administration assures
us that they _have not_ and _will not_ abuse the program, whereas most critics
argue that abuse _will_ occur (eventually) if such abuse is not actively
prevented, rather than merely forbidden by policies.

