NSA Reforms: What Will Change, and What Won’t

None

National Journal
Dustin Volz Marina Koren
Jan. 17, 2014, 8:26 a.m.

{{ BIZOBJ (video: 4663) }}

De­pend­ing on whom you ask, Pres­id­ent Obama’s big-tick­et changes to the way the gov­ern­ment’s spy agen­cies use bulk tele­phone data, re­vealed dur­ing a Fri­day speech, pave the way to­ward ser­i­ous re­form or are merely at­tempts at win­dow dress­ing.

Obama, who stepped in­to his pres­id­ency with a “healthy skep­ti­cism” to­ward fed­er­al sur­veil­lance pro­grams, out­lined meas­ures he took to im­prove or change op­er­a­tions. But what he didn’t do “is stop these pro­grams whole­sale — not only be­cause I felt that they made us more se­cure; but also be­cause noth­ing in that ini­tial re­view, and noth­ing that I have learned since, in­dic­ated that our in­tel­li­gence com­munity has sought to vi­ol­ate the law or is cava­lier about the civil liber­ties of their fel­low cit­izens.”

So what did change, and what didn’t? First, here’s what’s new:

Phone metadata will no longer be housed at the NSA. In the com­ing months, the gov­ern­ment will no longer main­tain own­er­ship of hun­dreds of mil­lions of phone re­cords col­lec­ted from vir­tu­ally all Amer­ic­ans. This is likely the biggest block­buster enu­mer­ated by Obama, and it could draw some ire from mem­bers of the in­tel­li­gence com­munity.

But it will be held some­where else. The bulk col­lec­tion of Amer­ic­ans’ phone re­cords will con­tin­ue, but in­stead it will be done by either private phone com­pan­ies or some hy­po­thet­ic­al, as-yet-un­defined third-party en­tity. Al­though the path for­ward on this (will com­pan­ies be hit with a data-re­ten­tion man­date?) re­mains un­clear, Obama wants a solu­tion by the end of March.

More ju­di­cial ap­prov­al re­quired to search data. Be­gin­ning im­me­di­ately, the U.S. spy agen­cies will need to ob­tain an or­der from the secret For­eign In­tel­li­gence Sur­veil­lance Court for any query it con­ducts.

A new in­de­pend­ent “pan­el” to ad­voc­ate for pri­vacy in the FISA court. The out­side pan­el’s cre­ation re­lies on ac­tion from Con­gress, but this of­fers a chance to sa­ti­ate crit­ics furi­ous that the court ap­prov­ing sur­veil­lance or­ders only hears the gov­ern­ment’s side.

Few­er “hops” al­lowed when search­ing. Also ef­fect­ive im­me­di­ately, the gov­ern­ment will re­duce from three to two the num­ber of “hops,” or de­grees of sep­ar­a­tion, away from a sus­pec­ted tar­get it can jump when ana­lyz­ing com­mu­nic­a­tions data.

Re­stric­tions on spy­ing on our al­lies. Obama and seni­or ad­min­is­tra­tion of­fi­cials said heads of states con­sidered to be “close friends and al­lies” will be off-lim­its to sur­veil­lance. If that sounds vague, that’s be­cause it is. Who qual­i­fies as a close ally is not writ­ten in stone and can pre­sum­ably change to meet per­ceived na­tion­al se­cur­ity threats.

How in­tel­li­gence agen­cies like the FBI use Na­tion­al Se­cur­ity Let­ters will no longer be so se­cret­ive. “I have there­fore dir­ec­ted the at­tor­ney gen­er­al to amend how we use Na­tion­al Se­cur­ity Let­ters so this secrecy will not be in­def­in­ite, and will ter­min­ate with­in a fixed time un­less the gov­ern­ment demon­strates a real need for fur­ther secrecy,” Obama said. These doc­u­ments com­pel cer­tain parties to dis­close in­form­a­tion to the FBI.

Des­pite the changes, pri­vacy ad­voc­ates were quick to say more needs to be done to pro­tect Amer­ic­ans’ civil liber­ties. So, what’s not chan­ging?

The FBI still won’t need to get a court or­der to is­sue sub­poen­as for in­form­a­tion dur­ing in­vest­ig­a­tions. A Decem­ber re­port from a group of Obama-ap­poin­ted ad­visers tasked with ex­amin­ing NSA sur­veil­lance re­com­men­ded that Na­tion­al Se­cur­ity Let­ters, which the FBI uses to com­pel parties to dis­close in­form­a­tion, can be is­sued only after a judge finds that the gov­ern­ment has reas­on­able grounds to be­lieve that the in­form­a­tion it seeks is rel­ev­ant to an in­tel­li­gence in­vest­ig­a­tion. Of this, Obama said, “Here, I have con­cerns that we should not set a stand­ard for ter­ror­ism in­vest­ig­a­tions that is high­er than those in­volved in in­vest­ig­at­ing an or­din­ary crime.”

Neither will FISA. Al­though Obama prom­ised more over­sight, the court re­tains much of its power to com­pel third parties to dis­close private in­form­a­tion to the gov­ern­ment.

From a soft­ware per­spect­ive, how the NSA col­lects data won’t change. “The U.S. gov­ern­ment should ex­am­ine the feas­ib­il­ity of cre­at­ing soft­ware that would al­low the Na­tion­al Se­cur­ity Agency and oth­er in­tel­li­gence agen­cies more eas­ily to con­duct tar­geted in­form­a­tion ac­quis­i­tion rather than bulk-data col­lec­tion.” Obama made no men­tion of tweaks to the agency’s massive drag­net dur­ing his speech.

Lead­er­ship of NSA and Cy­ber Com­mand isn’t chan­ging. The ad­min­is­tra­tion already dis­missed this idea from the re­view pan­el, but Obama made no men­tion of al­low­ing the NSA’s lead­er­ship to change from mil­it­ary to ci­vil­ian con­trol. And the agency will not be sep­ar­ated from Cy­ber Com­mand, the mil­it­ary’s cent­ral cy­ber­war­fare hub, something the Decem­ber re­port pushed. The re­port also re­com­men­ded that the dir­ect­or’s po­s­i­tion should be open to ci­vil­ians and be sub­ject to Sen­ate ap­prov­al.

The NSA is still go­ing to by­pass se­cur­ity en­cryp­tions on the Web. The re­view board said that the gov­ern­ment should be “fully sup­port­ing and not un­der­min­ing ef­forts to cre­ate en­cryp­tion stand­ards” and “mak­ing clear that it will not in any way sub­vert, un­der­mine, weak­en, or make vul­ner­able gen­er­ally avail­able com­mer­cial en­cryp­tion.” The in­tel­li­gence agency, however, has no plans to stop crack­ing oth­ers’ en­cryp­tion codes — it has plans to get bet­ter at it.

The pres­id­ent may have set out to end the NSA’s bulk col­lec­tion pro­gram “as it cur­rently ex­ists,” but there’s no doubt that much still re­mains the same. Phone metadata will still be col­lec­ted and searched. Ul­ti­mately, much of the NSA’s activ­ity will con­tin­ue to be shrouded in secrecy.

What We're Following See More »
TAKING A LONG VIEW TO SOUTHERN STATES
In Dropout Speech, Santorum Endorses Rubio
2 days ago
THE DETAILS

As expected after earlier reports on Wednesday, Rick Santorum ended his presidential bid. But less expected: he threw his support to Marco Rubio. After noting he spoke with Rubio the day before for an hour, he said, “Someone who has a real understanding of the threat of ISIS, real understanding of the threat of fundamentalist Islam, and has experience, one of the things I wanted was someone who has experience in this area, and that’s why we decided to support Marco Rubio.” It doesn’t figure to help Rubio much in New Hampshire, but the Santorum nod could pay dividends down the road in southern states.

Source:
‘PITTING PEOPLE AGAINST EACH OTHER’
Rubio, Trump Question Obama’s Mosque Visit
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

President Obama’s decision to visit a mosque in Baltimore today was never going to be completely uncontroversial. And Donald Trump and Marco Rubio proved it. “Maybe he feels comfortable there,” Trump told interviewer Greta van Susteren on Fox News. “There are a lot of places he can go, and he chose a mosque.” And in New Hampshire, Rubio said of Obama, “Always pitting people against each other. Always. Look at today – he gave a speech at a mosque. Oh, you know, basically implying that America is discriminating against Muslims.”

Source:
THE TIME IS NOW, TED
Cruz Must Max Out on Evangelical Support through Early March
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

For Ted Cruz, a strong showing in New Hampshire would be nice, but not necessary. That’s because evangelical voters only make up 21% of the Granite State’s population. “But from the February 20 South Carolina primary through March 15, there are nine states (South Carolina, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi, and North Carolina) with an estimated white-Evangelical percentage of the GOP electorate over 60 percent, and another four (Texas, Kansas, Louisiana, and Missouri) that come in over 50 percent.” But after that, he better be in the catbird’s seat, because only four smaller states remain with evangelical voter majorities.

Source:
CHRISTIE, BUSH TRYING TO TAKE HIM DOWN
Rubio Now Winning the ‘Endorsement Primary’
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Since his strong third-place finish in Iowa, Marco Rubio has won endorsement by two sitting senators and two congressmen, putting him in the lead for the first time of FiveThirtyEight‘s Endorsement Tracker. “Some politicians had put early support behind Jeb Bush — he had led [their] list since August — but since January the only new endorsement he has received was from former presidential candidate Sen. Lindsey Graham.” Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that fueled by resentment, “members of the Bush and Christie campaigns have communicated about their mutual desire to halt … Rubio’s rise in the polls.”

Source:
7 REPUBLICANS ON STAGE
Carly Fiorina Will Not Be Allowed to Debate on Saturday
1 days ago
THE LATEST

ABC News has announced the criteria for Saturday’s Republican debate, and that means Carly Fiorina won’t be a part of it. The network is demanding candidates have “a top-three finish in Iowa, a top-six standing in an average of recent New Hampshire polls or a top-six placement in national polls in order for candidates to qualify.” And there will be no “happy hour” undercard debate this time. “So that means no Fiorina vs. Jim Gilmore showdown earlier in the evening for the most ardent of campaign 2016 junkies.

Source:
×