"This law does not allow the targeting of any US citizen or of any person
located within the United States."
Note the wording of this denial: the *target* of collection may not be a US
citizen or a person located in the US. But if the *target* is, say, Al Qaeda
and affiliated organisations, does the law prevent data about US citizens and
persons located in the US from being collected and retained?
Cheers,
Michael
Eugen Leitl wrote:
>
>http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data
>
>NSA taps in to internet giants' systems to mine user data, secret files
>reveal
>
>• Top secret PRISM program claims direct access to servers of firms including
>Google, Facebook and Apple
>
>• Companies deny any knowledge of program in operation since 2007
>
>Glenn Greenwald and Ewen MacAskill
>
>The Guardian, Thursday 6 June 2013 23.05 BST
>
>A slide depicting the top-secret PRISM program
>
>The National Security Agency has obtained direct access to the systems of
>Google, Facebook, Apple and other US internet giants, according to a top
>secret document obtained by the Guardian.
>
>The NSA access is part of a previously undisclosed program called PRISM,
>which allows officials to collect material including search history, the
>content of emails, file transfers and live chats, the document says.
>
>The Guardian has verified the authenticity of the document, a 41-slide
>PowerPoint presentation – classified as top secret with no distribution to
>foreign allies – which was apparently used to train intelligence operatives
>on the capabilities of the program. The document claims "collection directly
>from the servers" of major US service providers.
>
>Although the presentation claims the program is run with the assistance of
>the companies, all those who responded to a Guardian request for comment on
>Thursday denied knowledge of any such program.
>
>In a statement, Google said: "Google cares deeply about the security of our
>users' data. We disclose user data to government in accordance with the law,
>and we review all such requests carefully. From time to time, people allege
>that we have created a government 'back door' into our systems, but Google
>does not have a back door for the government to access private user data."
>
>Several senior tech executives insisted that they had no knowledge of PRISM
>or of any similar scheme. They said they would never have been involved in
>such a program. "If they are doing this, they are doing it without our
>knowledge," one said.
>
>An Apple spokesman said it had "never heard" of PRISM.
>
>The NSA access was enabled by changes to US surveillance law introduced under
>President Bush and renewed under Obama in December 2012.
>
>
>The program facilitates extensive, in-depth surveillance on live
>communications and stored information. The law allows for the targeting of
>any customers of participating firms who live outside the US, or those
>Americans whose communications include people outside the US.
>
>It also opens the possibility of communications made entirely within the US
>being collected without warrants.
>
>Disclosure of the PRISM program follows a leak to the Guardian on Wednesday
>of a top-secret court order compelling telecoms provider Verizon to turn over
>the telephone records of millions of US customers.
>
>The participation of the internet companies in PRISM will add to the debate,
>ignited by the Verizon revelation, about the scale of surveillance by the
>intelligence services. Unlike the collection of those call records, this
>surveillance can include the content of communications and not just the
>metadata.
>
>Some of the world's largest internet brands are claimed to be part of the
>information-sharing program since its introduction in 2007. Microsoft – which
>is currently running an advertising campaign with the slogan "Your privacy is
>our priority" – was the first, with collection beginning in December 2007.
>
>It was followed by Yahoo in 2008; Google, Facebook and PalTalk in 2009;
>YouTube in 2010; Skype and AOL in 2011; and finally Apple, which joined the
>program in 2012. The program is continuing to expand, with other providers
>due to come online.
>
>Collectively, the companies cover the vast majority of online email, search,
>video and communications networks.
>
>
>
>The extent and nature of the data collected from each company varies.
>
>Companies are legally obliged to comply with requests for users'
>communications under US law, but the PRISM program allows the intelligence
>services direct access to the companies' servers. The NSA document notes the
>operations have "assistance of communications providers in the US".
>
>The revelation also supports concerns raised by several US senators during
>the renewal of the Fisa Amendments Act in December 2012, who warned about the
>scale of surveillance the law might enable, and shortcomings in the
>safeguards it introduces.
>
>When the FAA was first enacted, defenders of the statute argue
