Re: CRIME Legal info on carnivore

From: r.esser@private
Date: Mon Aug 05 2002 - 17:17:51 PDT

  • Next message: George Heuston: "RE: CRIME Legal info on carnivore"

    I can second that as a former SIGINTer (please don't ask 
    for a definition of SIGINT. I'd hate to have another 
    classified thought since I don't have a clearance any 
    more :>  I feel your pain too Mike. I had less than a 
    fun time finding defense work outside DC).
    
    In fact, there were stories of people getting in serious 
    doo-doo for searching NSA owned *news* databases for 
    info on sports stars -- the db is officially an 
    intelligence source since it's owned & operated by "the 
    community". (Can't remember the name either, but there 
    was a series of hearings & Congressional investigation 
    that resulted in the Intel Oversight program.)
    
    Also, the way I always understood it, these rules only 
    apply to collectors of foreign intelligence (CIA, NSA, 
    etc), and not the FBI since its charge is (was?) 
    domestic terrorism intel.
    
    --
    Randy Esser, CISSP
    Business Development Owner -- Security
    Computer Associates
    > OK, this is how it breaks out according to the Intelligence Oversight
    > Program, which is a DoD policy and also followed by the NSA:
    > 
    > It's illegal to collect intelligence information on any US person, a US
    > person being defined as a citizen, a person who claims to be a citizen,
    > or a corporation with the majority of interests in the US.
    > 
    > The following are exceptions:
    > 
    > -The US Attorney General can authorize collection on any US person
    > similar to a search warrant (ie, there has to be evidence to warrant
    > collection)
    > 
    > -Material collected has a 90-day grace period for evaluation if it is
    > unclear whether the source is a US person or not.  If at any time it is
    > discovered that the source is a US person, then the material has to be
    > destroyed.
    > 
    > -"Accidental" collection (ie, during routine spectrum scanning) of a
    > terrorist act, assassination, or other similar acts is reportable, as
    > long as it isn't the result of a long-term collection effort.
    > 
    > The intent of the law is to protect the privacy of the US persons, so
    > sometimes the following happens:
    > Alice (US person) calls Bob (foreign national)
    > Bob tells Alice that he's ordering 54 RPG's and 120 anti-tank mines
    > Eve (working for an intelligence agency) reports that Bob told " a US
    > person" that he ordered 54 RPG's and 120 anti-tank mines.
    > At no time does Eve mention Alice's name, location, or anything else that
    > would violate her privacy.
    > 
    > And yes, at one time I was Eve (anybody looking to hire a former
    > intelligence operative who knows Unix? ;^) ).  Violations of the
    > Intelligence Oversight Program are immediate career-stoppers in the
    > intelligence organizations because at one time (1960's and before) we did
    > conduct active collection efforts on US persons and there was a
    > Congressional Commission on intelligence (can't remember the name of it
    > off the top of my head) brought these abuses to the public forefront.
    > Shortly thereafter, legislation was passed to prevent this collection.
    > The policy that reflects the legislation is in the form of the
    > Intelligence Oversight Program.
    > 
    > The rules for the FBI probably are different since they aren't officially
    > an intelligence organ, but a law enforcement organization.  I think that
    > gives them the same status as the local cops wrt search and seizure laws.
    > 
    > Cheers
    > --Mike
    > 
    > Shaun Savage wrote:
    > 
    > > The last few months has seen an avalanche of new laws concerning
    > > govermental spying ( inteligence gathering) on "terrorist".
    > > ~ What are the new laws concerning carnivore and echlon, (personal
    > > private data interception)?
    > > ~ What are the different types of information gathering and what legal
    > > requirment are needed for the different types.
    > > Who has juristdiction to do  what?
    > >
    > > I understand the tech side but the legal aspect is dificult to filter
    > > out to get to the heart what really can be done, legally.
    > >
    > > Shaun
    > 
    > --
    > "Ask a Soviet engineer to design a pair of shoes and he'll come up with
    > something that looks like the boxes that the shoes came in; ask him to
    > make something that will massacre Germans, and he turns into Thomas
    > *Fscking* Edison."  --Neal Stephenson, Cryptonomicon
    > 
    > 
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Aug 05 2002 - 18:22:38 PDT