the author: lu tree away
PRISM door cause
this week, the American and British the guardian of the Washington post broke out an internal PPT (top secret level), the national security agency disclosed including Google, Microsoft, apple, Facebook and 9 large Internet service provider in the United States, and the national security agency (NSA) relationship between data. NSA from nine giant user data, and data mining (data mining,).
then various media, the cause for citizens “privacy” panic.
President Obama to respond, acknowledged monitoring, but this kind of monitor is the purpose of collecting intelligence on terrorism, completely legal. House and senate members informed about this. And this kind of intelligence is not against citizens of the United States or live in the United States. Obama also welcomed a thorough debate on this issue.
in addition, nine technology companies to respond, very careful wording, claims that the media reports untrue, science and technology company did not provide to the NSA access to their server “direct access” (direkt access), has not heard of the PRISM.
Google CEO larry page, Facebook CEO mark zuckerberg gave users statement, denied “direct access”, declare all data submitted to strictly follow the law. Page also called for a more transparent mode.
monitoring legal, what is the method?
from the current media, NSA behavior are still within the limits prescribed by law, the law is the FISA (foreign intelligence surveillance law) and its amendments. The law and its amendments authorize intelligence to extensive foreign intelligence “listening”. At the same time a special court – intelligence to monitor and review this listening behavior.
Google and other media said why I don’t know the PRISM?
the PRISM is media NSA information to monitor the internal code of the plan. Perhaps these companies really didn’t have heard of the code, but doesn’t mean they don’t offer the NSA information.
did Google user data submitted to the government?
specifically: yes. Google and Microsoft transparency report, released every year, the report will list the governments and institutions to Google’s request. Including the United States government requirements. Other companies are also hard to avoid has a similar situation.
but… The NSA intelligence such as data submission requirements are not included in the report of transparency. Because according to according to the FISA and its amendment, was asked to data of company can’t mention this requirement.
is there such as Google to the NSA them direct access to the database server?
the guardian author Greenwald insisted direct access “direkt access”, that is so write the PPT.
the author of the post Gellman did not insisted that direct access. Did he think the permissions are not important, direct entry permission is a very professional term, referring to the behavior of the very limited. And these technologies have a plenty of other means to submit data, there is no need to take to directly access the NSA.
how to submit data is that Google?
technical details is not clear at present.
personal opinion, only supplies the reference: there is no direct entry permission, but data submission. NSA basis FISA court authorized and special intelligence, go to Google and other companies information to be obtained, Google is very difficult to refuse, because it is all procedures and regulations.
of course, legal may not conform to the ordinary people’s moral. Because a lot of people have a higher moral expectations on Google (Don ‘t be evil), so psychologically difficult to accept.
still need to clarify now is:
the NSA’s intelligence gathering specific technical details? (NSA won’t say, because of “national security”, can only look forward to the media revealed)
the NSA behavior beyond the FISA and limits of authority as prescribed by the amendment?
in the end, is also the core of the problem: the NSA for excessive authorization “real” violated the rights of citizens? (unconstitutional).
media kicked the ball out, but in the end, everything will return to the judicial process (congressional investigation and judicial challenge).
PRISM is 911 sequela
under the democratic system of intelligence agencies are often the most vulnerable places. Especially when comparing, external tension. Legislation and justice to the executive branch due to panic too much (especially the intelligence agencies) authorization. Natural tend to abuse their authorization and intelligence agencies. Check out the cases involving history of the United States intelligence agencies are very much.
a panic reaction is an old topic. The Japanese in world war ii isolation, McCarthyism in the early of the cold war, and so on.
this round of the PRISM, can be seen as 911 sequelae. Strengthen intelligence surveillance during the bush era, the Obama era. (do not believe the reader can go to see the amendment of the foreign intelligence surveillance act)
911 over the past 12 years, terrorism, although not completely faded, but has not as nervous as he used to be. May be time to balance the place.
TV drama “homeland” has been expressed in the point of view: nobody can unscathed from the war came. Maybe it doesn’t hurt your body, but very persistent spirit, the influence of the mind. Terrorist attacks on a social system and the same is true of psychology.
as Obama said, is the contradiction between freedom and security/privacy, can only take its balance. Terrorist attack, war would be safe, but normal days back, political error correction procedures (the check and balance, movement, the network media freedom, citizen should pull it to the free end.
media reported the exaggerated
the current media reports some exaggerated intelligence agencies. But the media is always in this way, “do not fear to the biggest malicious speculation that the government”, the media is always can try to get a little evidence, it is their privilege. These reports must be exaggerated in composition.
but can’t let the media bear the full burden of proof, because if so, the freedom of the press does not exist, because the government has a very convenient means to control the media. The pentagon is secret papers case example.
defended Google last few words
if Google volunteer to intelligence agencies providing information, it doesn’t make sense. It was against their own interests, and violation of Google’s consistent value expectations (free, open network). And Google has always been to the bush administration the patriot act are critical.
but Google should have been the NSA requirements (authorized by FISA) to submit data, Google reluctant, also have to pay.
Google wants 100% to protect the privacy of our users, of course, there was no data. But in a complex real world, safety is the human positive demand, intelligence agencies, legitimate access to information on terrorism, and it can’t simply say it’s bad behavior. Terrorism should not? Google can’t be not a little responsibility in this respect.
Google more active of the perpetrators, rather it is a passive victim.
I hope this time can open congressional investigation, a deeper perspective the fog of information behavior. Secret or similar the pentagon papers case such classic case, through judicial precedents set rules and owned by bunch of 911 after expanding the power of the government.
this paper hunting contribute cloud network readers, hyperlinked reprint please indicate the source and the original author