Report: Yahoo Challenged PRISM In 2008

[ProSense]

Report: Yahoo Challenged PRISM In 2008

When Yahoo refused to help the government spy on foreign users it forced the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to compel the company and others like it to either turn over user data or break the law, the New York Times reported Thursday.

A heavily redacted 2008 court ruling shows that an internet company argued FISA requests constituted unreasonable search and seizure of its users' data protected by the Fourth Amendment. Sources confirmed to the Times that Yahoo was the petitioner in that case.

The court wrote that "notwithstanding the parade of horribles trotted out by the petitioner, it has presented no evidence of any actual harm, any egregious risk of error, or any broad potential for abuse," adding "efforts to protect national security should not be frustrated by the courts."

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/report-yahoo-challenged-prism-in-2008

Secret Court Ruling Put Tech Companies in Data Bind

By CLAIRE CAIN MILLER

SAN FRANCISCO — In a secret court in Washington, Yahoo’s top lawyers made their case. The government had sought help in spying on certain foreign users, without a warrant, and Yahoo had refused, saying the broad requests were unconstitutional.

The judges disagreed. That left Yahoo two choices: Hand over the data or break the law.

So Yahoo became part of the National Security Agency’s secret Internet surveillance program, Prism, according to leaked N.S.A. documents, as did seven other Internet companies.

Like almost all the actions of the secret court, which operates under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the details of its disagreement with Yahoo were never made public beyond a heavily redacted court order, one of the few public documents ever to emerge from the court. The name of the company had not been revealed until now. Yahoo’s involvement was confirmed by two people with knowledge of the proceedings. Yahoo declined to comment.

- more -

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/14/technology/secret-court-ruling-put-tech-companies-in-data-bind.html

Two things strike me about this report: 1) A "heavily redacted court order" of 2008 challenge to PRISM was made public and 2) It was a challenge to warrantless "spying on certain foreign users."

First, if the document was made public, why are we hearing about it for the first time? Secondly, it confirms the foreign-target aspect of PRISM.

Here is information on the FISA law including the 2008 amendments.

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 Amendments Act of 2008

Specifically, the Act:[19]

• Prohibits the individual states from investigating, sanctioning of, or requiring disclosure by complicit telecoms or other persons.
  
  
• Permits the government not to keep records of searches, and destroy existing records (it requires them to keep the records for a period of 10 years).
  
  
• Protects telecommunications companies from lawsuits for "'past or future cooperation' with federal law enforcement authorities and will assist the intelligence community in determining the plans of terrorists". Immunity is given by a certification process, which can be overturned by a court on specific grounds.[20]
  
  
• Removes requirements for detailed descriptions of the nature of information or property targeted by the surveillance if the target is reasonably believed to be outside the country.[20]
  
  
• Increased the time for warrantless surveillance from 48 hours to 7 days, if the FISA court is notified and receives an application, specific officials sign the emergency notification, and relates to an American located outside of the United States with probable cause they are an agent of a foreign power. After 7 days, if the court denies or does not review the application, the information obtained cannot be offered as evidence. If the United States Attorney General believes the information shows threat of death or bodily harm, they can try to offer the information as evidence in future proceedings.[21]
  
  
• Permits the Director of National Intelligence and the Attorney General to jointly authorize warrantless electronic surveillance, for one-year periods, targeted at a foreigner who is abroad. This provision will sunset on December 31, 2012.
  
  
• Requires FISA court permission to target wiretaps at Americans who are overseas.
  
  
• Requires government agencies to cease warranted surveillance of a targeted American who is abroad if said person enters the United States. (However, said surveillance may resume if it is reasonably believed that the person has left the States.)
  
  
• Prohibits targeting a foreigner to eavesdrop on an American's calls or e-mails without court approval. [22]
  
  
• Allows the FISA court 30 days to review existing but expiring surveillance orders before renewing them.
  
  
• Allows eavesdropping in emergencies without court approval, provided the government files required papers within a week.
  
  
• Prohibits the government from invoking war powers or other authorities to supersede surveillance rules in the future.
  
  
• Requires the Inspectors General of all intelligence agencies involved in the President's Surveillance Program to "complete a comprehensive review" and report within one year

Effects

• The provisions of the Act granting immunity to the complicit telecoms create a roadblock for a number of lawsuits intended to expose and thwart the alleged abuses of power and illegal activities of the federal government since and before the September 11 attacks.[citation needed]
  
  
• Allows the government to conduct surveillance of "a U.S. person located outside of the U.S. with probable cause they are an agent of a foreign power" for up to one week (168 hours) without a warrant, increased from the previous 48 hours, as long as the FISA court is notified at the time such surveillance begins, and an application as usually required for surveillance authorization is submitted by the government to FISA within those 168 hours[21]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act_of_1978_Amendments_Act_of_2008#Provisions

Notice that targeting Americans in the U.S. is prohibited, and targeting Americans abroad with probable cause was always part of the law, but the time frame for such surveillance increased from 48 hours to one week.

The court rejected Yahoo's argument that targeting foreigners is unconstitutional.

Court Challenge To NSA Surveillance Programs Moves Forward
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023009232

[ProSense]

1. Kick! n/t

[Monkie]

2. instead of bumping your own posts why not respond to what was said about the secret briefings

"What we learned in there," Sanchez said, "is significantly more than what is out in the media today."
...
"I can't speak to what we learned in there, and I don't know if there are other leaks, if there's more information somewhere, if somebody else is going to step up, but I will tell you that I believe it's the tip of the iceberg," she said.

seriously, if you cheer-lead this spying, read that, and respond to the discussion here about the real issues if you dare.
why is it the threads that contain direct information from lawmakers who have been to these secret briefings is ignored by the cheerleaders of oppression.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023002263

[ProSense]

3. Welcome back. How's the weather in Europe?

"seriously, if you cheer-lead this spying, read that, and respond to the discussion here about the real issues if you dare.
why is it the threads that contain direct information from lawmakers who have been to these secret briefings is ignored by the cheerleaders of oppression. "

Members of Congress claimed they're weren't briefed when the were briefed.

Harry Reid: If Lawmakers Didn't Know About NSA Surveillance, It's Their Fault
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022995784

Dem. Senator Merkley Skipped Briefing On NSA Program He Said He Didn’t Know About To Go On HARDBALL
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023005285

This is not to say that members of Congress don't have legitimate concerns, but surprise shouldn't be one of them.

I mean, the OP is about a challenge to the law and documents were made public. How is it that members of Congress weren't aware of this?

[Monkie]

4. sunshine is the best disinfectant, and the sun is shining.

how about you do as i suggested and watch the cspan clip of your democratic rep. speaking about the secret briefings and what they contain, and compare it to the calm way snowden talked for example.

the funny thing is the threads that do bring real new information about the extent of the programs and the coverups, they are completely free from cheerleaders like you, i wonder why that is.....

[ProSense]

5. So

"the funny thing is the threads that do bring real new information"

...members of Congress making statements is "real new information," but the NYT report on a 2008 challenge to the law isn't?

[Monkie]

6. no surprise or news that the NYT is shilling for corporations collaborating with spying

these were the guys that covered up the warrantless wiretapping by bush for a year, until after the election?
i know the US says all this is perfectly legal, what the STASI did was legal too, what Iran does is legal according to Iran, etc, etc.
in the US its perfectly legal but secret.
anyways, done with this thread, if you wish to discuss this further hows about we do that in one of the threads that is in desperate need of some government spying cheer leading.

[ProSense]

7. "no surprise or news that the NYT is shilling for corporations"

[ProSense]

8. I want to hear more about the NYT "shilling." n/t

[ProSense]

9. Thanks for the info. n/t