CategoriesJoin Us At:
|
NSA Data-Mining: What We Know, So Far
As someone who follows the government's ravenous appetite for data collection and mining - I feel it's important to remember that the NSA's warrentless wiretapping program, (and any other classified programs Gonzales may or may not have referred to in his Congressional testimony) is not the only instance of our government pushing data-mining technology.
First, start with the NSA wiretapping program that permits our government to freely analyze and listen in to the communications of folks on American soil chatting with folks overseas. Add to that the recent news about the FBI's 2008 proposed budget item for Communications Exploitation, including funds for a Telecommunications Data Collection Center, which would partner with three of our nation's telecoms to:
(Thanks to Threat Level for posting the budget proposal, and check out Ryan Singel's coverage on this). Starting next year, if we fly from Europe to the U.S., airlines have to give our info to the Department of Homeland Security, who will keep the records for 15 years. According to The Washington Post, sensitive personal information may also be accessed in "exceptional cases:"
So the government appears to be either outright asking for its own duplicate copy of our data, or is paying companies to keep the warehouse the data for them. And if the government automatically receives a copy of our information, it doesn't need to present a warrant or court-order to the internet provider/airline/phone company every time it wants to access and analyze someone's information. Law enforcement would have its own duplicate copy to mine without having to prove probable cause. Finally we have to realize that we have absolutely no idea what the NSA is doing with all this information, except that it goes far beyond just listening to phone calls. That, my friends, is a problem.
Tags: Civil Liberties News |
|
© ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 |
One important law in that regard is the prohibition on politically partisan activity. Given our nonprofit status, we may not endorse or oppose candidates for elective office. That means we cannot host comments on our site that show a preference for one candidate or party. Although we in no way wish to discourage you from that activity elsewhere, we ask that you not engage in that activity on our website (or include links to other websites that do so). Additionally, given that we are subject to very specific rules concerning the collection of personally identifying information through our website (names, email addresses, home address, financial information, etc.), we ask that you not use the comments portion of this blog to solicit this information from users of our website. We also ask that you not use the comments portion for advertising or requests for legal assistance, and do not add to your comment links to other websites, as we cannot be responsible for the content on other websites.
We are not able to respond to unsolicited inquiries, complaints or requests for assistance sent to this blog. Please direct your complaint or request for assistance to the ACLU affiliate in your state. Requests for legal assistance left in the blog comments will not receive a response or be published.
Finally, the ACLU cannot guarantee the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information in the comment section and expressly disclaims any liability for any information in this section.