Subject: Cyber Security and Surveillance: Bulk Data/Metadata
Summary:
The recent leaks, disclosures, and actions of government agencies – namely the National Security Administration (NSA) – have caught the public’s attention and focused it on the protection of privacy and civil liberties. The NSA participates in a bulk data collection program that has accumulated phone data over the past five years in order to track persons suspected of threat to the nation. This collection of mass data without issued warrants violates the Fourth Amendment and brings the potential abuses with this program into view. Not to mention possible cyber security threats: if a subcontractor was able to commandeer this information and leak it, what is stopping hackers from doing the same, or worse.
One of the factors at stake is the perception of the United States government to both the national and international community. The U.S. is typically seen as the “land of the free” but these leaks suggest otherwise and create distrust with the government. Also, the information collected is only as secure as the program designed; meaning, where will this data go and who is able to access it. The administration should consider addressing these issues quickly to prevent cyber security concerns, at the very least, from escalating.
The main focus should be on how to proceed and move forward in terms of the NSA data collection program. There are three options: 1) Authorize or renew the current program; 2) Transfer the data to a phone company or third party within legal constraints; 3) End the program completely.
Background:
The events of 9/11 brought out the issue of attack prevention and the transformation of America’s intelligence community. These technology adva...
... middle of paper ...
...nt: the U.S. still has enemies and threats, so how could the intelligence agencies go about in confronting them? Attacks or cyber threats cannot be prevented without some capabilities to pierce communication.
There could be public discussion about the balance between security and liberty to allow for a potentially better public understanding. A new and/or different program could be created with transparency in the initiatives and legalities.
Next Steps:
More research should be conducted in finding potential phone companies and/or third parties who could take on this massive and important responsibility. Cyber security measures would need to be strengthened and any sort of gap would need to be addressed. The urgency lies in potential threats to the collected data from outside hackers or enemies of the U.S. – this deems it urgent since it could lead to cyber warfare.
The pros of electronic surveillance are extensive. The ability for agents of the United States Intelligence Community (IC) to intercept and process communications and information from foreign powers, agents of foreign powers, international terrorist organizations, and others who seek to engage in activities with such groups, provides the ...
The aftereffects of the September 11, 2001 attacks led to Congress passing sweeping legislation to improve the United States’ counterterrorism efforts. An example of a policy passed was Domestic Surveillance, which is the act of the government spying on citizens. This is an important issue because many people believe that Domestic Surveillance is unconstitutional and an invasion of privacy, while others believe that the government should do whatever is possible in order to keep the citizens safe. One act of Domestic Surveillance, the tracking of our phone calls, is constitutional because it helps fight terrorism, warns us against potential threats, and gives US citizens a feeling of security.
The Department of Homeland Security faces challenges of failure to coordinate and cooperate in the latest fight against computer crimes as well as more general intelligence-gathering operations. (...
The people’s apprehensiveness does not come from the government’s ability to monitor their phone calls. It is the idea that they are listening to their individual conversations. The government needs to communicate to its citizens on the capabilities of the program. Most of the information on the limits of PRISM has come from the data leaks of Edward Snowden. The common consensus is that the government is able to access information by merely advising a meeting with a judge that is not withheld to the public. However, contrary to the popular belief that they are listening to phone calls, they are merely collecting the date and length of each phone call (Stray).
The feeling that someone is always watching, develops the inevitable, uncomfortable feeling that is displeasing to the mind. For years, the National Security Agency (NSA) has been monitoring people for what they call, “the greater good of the people” (Cole, February 2014). A program designed to protect the nation while it protects the walls within as it singles people out, sometimes by accident. Whether you are a normal citizen or a possible terrorist, the NSA can monitor you in a variation of ways. The privacy of technology has sparked debates across the world as to if the NSA is violating personal rights to privacy by collecting personal data such as, phone calls and text messages without reason or authorization (Wicker, 2011). Technology plays a key role in society’s day to day life. In life, humans expect privacy, even with their technology. In recent news, Edward Snowden leaked huge pieces from the NSA to the public, igniting these new controversies. Now, reforms are being pressed against the government’s throat as citizens fight for their rights. However, American citizens are slammed with the counterargument of the innocent forte the NSA tries to pass off in claims of good doing, such as how the NSA prevents terrorism. In fear of privacy violations, limitations should be put on the NSA to better protect the privacy of our honest citizens.
With the introduction of the internet being a relatively new phenomenon, the act of cyber espionage is not something that has been properly acknowledged by society. The American Government has done a stand up job of keeping its methods in the shadows and away from the eyes of its people since its documented domestic surveillance began on October 4th, 2001; Twenty three days after the Twin Towers fell President George Bush signed an order to begin a secret domestic eavesdropping operation, an operation which was so sensitive that even many of the country's senior national security officials with the...
According to John W. Whitehead, “The fact that the government can now, at any time, access entire phone conversations, e-mail exchanges, and other communications from months or years past should frighten every American.” (Whitehead). The NSA
In early June 2013, Edward Snowden, a 29-year-old former defense contractor who had access to NSA database while working for an intelligence consulting company, leaked classified documents reports that the National Security Agency (NSA) is recording phone calls of millions of Americans along with gathering private data and spying foreign Internet activity. The Washington Post later broke the news disclosed PRISM, a program can collect data on Internet users. The leaked documents publicly stated a vast objection. Many people were shocked by the scale of the programs, even elected representatives were unaware of the surveillance range. A nationwide debate over privacy rights have been sparked. Although supporters claim that the NSA only does its best to protect the United States from terrorists as well as respecting Americans' rights and privacy, many civil rights advocates feel that the government failed to be clear about the limit of the surveillance programs, threatening Americans' civil...
...e administration plans to introduce legislation that would alter the N.S.A’s privacy breaches and end its illegal data collections. Citing an identical argument, that the government cannot indicate terrorist attacks that have been stopped by the intelligence gathering programs, a review group of the Administration “called for major changes to the program; the latter also concluded that the bulk collection is illegal.”3
The emergence of new and innovative technology can be used in many deceitful or secretive ways by law enforcement agencies to convict a suspect. The Fourth Amendment of the Bill of Rights has had a large influence in regulating the ways that law enforcement agencies may use technology against the everyday citizen. Technology can be used to obtain information on an individual without the individual being aware of the invasion of their privacy: e-mail accounts can be hacked, IP addresses can be traced, phones can be tapped and tracked, cars can be bugged.
Swartz and Allen both offer valuable perspectives on expectation of privacy and legal limitation of cell phone data tracking use. As consumers of technology, Americans use cells phone not always by choice, sometimes by necessity. Both authors advise us to question our stand on the government’s unwarranted involvement in our lives. I would encourage us all to be aware of all technology around us. Albeit convenient, we must be willing to accept our part in its use.
The government gives each American citizen a set of unalienable rights that protect them from the government’s power. These rights cannot be broken, yet the government violates the Fourth Amendment daily to find ways to spy on the American public under the guise of protecting against terrorism. In 2007 President Obama said the American administration “acts like violating civil liberties is the way to enhance our securities – it is not.” Americans need to understand that their privacy is worth the fight. The people need to tell their neighbors, their congressmen, and their senators that they will not allow their internet privacy to be violated by needless spying. American citizens deserve the rights given to them and need to fight for the right to keep them by changing privacy laws to include Internet privacy.
The National Security Administration’s (NSA) domestic surveillance program was implemented by President George W. Bush soon after the September 11, 2001 attacks. Bush authorized the NSA to start conducting various surveillance activities. Many of these activities authorized had previously been barred by certain laws and agency policy. A small part of the program implemented by the administration was nicknamed “The Terrorist Surveillance Program”. This part of the program allows the NSA to monitor the communications between five hundred to one thousand people in the United States suspected of having connections to Al Qaeda. Other parts of this Program were not aimed at just specific individuals but also millions of innocent Americans, many never suspected of any crime. Although the U.S. government considers this program to be classified, information has been leaked by several whistleblowers. Congressional hearings have taken place and government officials have admitted to the truthfulness of the leaked program information. United States citizens, legal scholars and lawmakers have raised questions about the legality of the National Security Agency (NSA) conducting warrantless wiretapping (Stray). A brief history of wiretapping brings to light some controversial issues with the NSA and their actions.
The internet is wondrous; it can be a source of great recreation, with entertaining videos, games, and online communities that have similar interests. It can be an amazing tool for learning, with vast amounts of free information and how-to videos. The internet is also great for replacing the now out-dated ways of communicating and staying in touch with family and friends, with e-mail and social networking websites. Sharing information has been made easier than ever; consequently, the collection of information has been made all that much easier. When there is so much information out there one would have to be crazy not to hoard as much of it as possible, right? This is of course referring to the United States’ very own NSA (National Security Agency). The NSA seems to have a hoarding complex as well as no regard for the any person’s privacy on the internet, including U.S. citizens. Having an agency dedicated on collecting information on foreign citizens is bad for foreign relations; some countries have even started to take action. Having that same agency also spy on their own citizens is tremendously worse for domestic relations, protests and rallies have been organized to raise awareness and attempt to put a stop to these heinous acts of privacy invasion. What is worse is that the United States government has been actively trying to pass bills and acts, in secret courts, to make the collection of all this data easier. The government attempts to justify these acts of privacy invasion by claiming that it is really for the protection of society. If there was a benefit to this mass collection of data it would be moot in comparison to all the unlawful activity and detriments spying on pretty much everyone causes. At this point the inter...
A major reason the U.S. needs to increase restrictions on the type and amount of data collected on individuals from the internet is due to the fact that the United States government can track communications and browsing histories of private citizens without warrant or cause. After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, ...