[bestbits] Update on NSA reform/PCLOB reports
Emma Llanso
ellanso at cdt.org
Fri Jan 17 12:13:54 EST 2014
And a few more links related to today's speech (which just concluded):
Text of the speech:
http://www.lawfareblog.com/2014/01/text-of-the-presidents-remarks-on-nsa-and-surveillance/
"Fact sheet" from the White House summarizing the President's review and
planned/proposed reforms:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EREkBVf9I5HQEkjRASDPkgIPOZ38lBKpEr8xh4sV9LY/preview?sle=true&pli=1
The Presidential Policy Directive that will implement some of the
reforms:
https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/1006318/2014sigint-mem-ppd-rel.pdf
Best,
Emma
--
Emma J. Llansó
Director, Free Expression Project
Center for Democracy & Technology
202-407-8818 | @cendemtech <https://twitter.com/#%21/CenDemTech> |
@ellanso <https://twitter.com/#%21/ellanso>
On 1/17/14, 10:58 AM, Deborah Brown wrote:
> Here is a link for the livestreaming of Obama's speech for those
> interested:
>
> _http://www.whitehouse.gov/live/president-obama-speaks-signals-intelligence-programs_
>
> Starting in a few minutes.
>
> Embargoed copy attached.
>
> Best,
> Deborah
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Eddan Katz <eddank at aya.yale.edu
> <mailto:eddank at aya.yale.edu>> wrote:
>
> And at the intersection of global and local, the Oakland Privacy
> Working Group is setting its sights on shutting down funding for
> the Domain Awareness Centers and their Fusion Centers. We're in
> the finally month of opposition and think we have a chance
> to severely cut this off in Oakland City Council in an upcoming
> Public Safety Committee vote.
>
> Here's our petition:
> https://www.change.org/petitions/the-mayor-and-city-council-of-oakland-ca-don-t-sell-out-the-people-of-oakland-to-the-department-of-homeland-security-don-t-vote-to-fund-the-domain-awareness-center
>
>
> We're hoping that some attention from digital rights networks will
> be decisive in swaying the key votes. We are trying to get as many
> signatures as possible in the very short term so that this story
> can reach its tipping point and ride on the heels of the
> announcements from the Executive Branch tomorrow. We are also
> paying close attention to the potential impact of the CA Senate
> Bill 828 4th Amendment Protection Act enabling legal cover for
> non-cooperation with the NSA
> (http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2014/01/new-california-state-legislation-seeks-to-thwart-nsa-spying/).
>
>
> sent from eddan.com <http://eddan.com>
>
> On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 at 8:37 PM, Eddan Katz wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: *Deborah Brown* <deborah at accessnow.org
>> <mailto:deborah at accessnow.org>>
>> Date: Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:31 PM
>> Subject: [bestbits] Update on NSA reform/PCLOB reports
>> To: "<bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
>> <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>>"
>> <bestbits at lists.bestbits.net <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>>
>>
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> There are a few developments from the U.S. that may be of
>> interest (and I don't think have been circulate here yet):
>>
>> * President Obama is expected to make a major speech on NSA
>> reform this Friday (17 January) at 11:00 EST (time TBC). I
>> assume it will be streamed.
>> * The U.S. Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board will be
>> issuing two separate reports, instead of one, as initially
>> anticipated.
>> o The first report will focus on metadata collection under
>> Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act and the Foreign
>> Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). It should be
>> officially released on 23 January and "public and
>> unclassified".
>> o The second report will focus on the targeting of
>> "non-U.S. persons", Section 702 of the FISA Amendments
>> Act. While this report will be public, it will rely on
>> analysis of classified material and may have a classified
>> annex. Classifying critical elements of the report could
>> make it more difficult to advocate for reform of Section
>> 702, i.e. the targeting of so-called non-U.S. persons.
>> AFAIK the release date on this report is not yet known.
>>
>> Back in July, a number of participants in the Best Bits network
>> endorsed a letter (http://bestbits.net/pclob/) submitted to
>> PCLOB, during its public comment period, urging the body to make
>> recommendations to ensure that surveillance of communications
>> conducted under Section 702 meets international human rights
>> standards.
>>
>> Below is a blog from Access with some more information.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Deborah
>>
>>
>>
>> https://www.accessnow.org/blog/2014/01/14/anticipated-pclob-reports-classified-toothless
>>
>>
>> Anticipated PCLOB reports: Classified? Toothless?
>>
>>
>> 11:56am | 14 January 2014 | by *Drew Mitnick*
>> <https://www.accessnow.org/blog/authors/43/Drew%20Mitnick>
>>
>> /*Update:* We have since learned that the report on Section 702
>> will be public, though it may have a classified annex. Thanks to
>> our friends at OpenTheGovernment.org
>> <http://www.openthegovernment.org/> for this information./
>>
>> Last week, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board
>> <http://www.pclob.gov/> (PCLOB) released a statement
>> <http://www.pclob.gov/SiteAssets/newsroom/PCLOB%20Press%20Statement_1.8.14.pdf> detailing
>> plans to release not just one, but two reports on NSA
>> surveillance programs. The Board will release one report on
>> metadata collection under PATRIOT Act Section 215 and the Foreign
>> Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC), expected in late January
>> or early February, and a second report on the targeting of non-US
>> persons under FISA Section 702, with an indeterminate release
>> date. These reports come on the heels of a parallel report
>> <https://www.accessnow.org/blog/2014/01/09/review-groups-privacy-recommendations-for-non-u.s.-persons-lack-teeth>
>> by the President’s Review Group on Intelligence and
>> Communications Technologies, released in December 2013.
>>
>> PCLOB’s release last week raised a number of questions for our
>> team. First and foremost, will the PCLOB reports have the bite of
>> specific recommendations that were lacking
>> <https://www.accessnow.org/blog/2014/01/09/review-groups-privacy-recommendations-for-non-u.s.-persons-lack-teeth>
>> in the Review Group’s report? Critically, will the report on FISA
>> 702 be public or classified? If the PCLOB does release strong
>> reports, will the Obama administration listen? There’s plenty of
>> evidence that none of these answers are yes.
>>
>> *Will the PCLOB recommendations have teeth?*
>>
>> Unlike the President’s Review Group, which was convened under the
>> Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the PCLOB is an
>> independent agency. It was created in 2004 to advise the
>> President on civil liberties in light of efforts to combat
>> terrorism, but has so far been underutilized
>> <https://www.accessnow.org/blog/cautious-optimism-as-us-privacy-oversight-board-finally-confirms-chair> and
>> hamstrung
>> <https://www.accessnow.org/blog/privacy-board-awakens-after-nsa-spying-is-revealed>.
>> The Senate failed to even approve a chairman, the Board’s only
>> full-time position, until May of last year
>> <http://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/sjc-chairman-leahy-hails-confirmation-of-privacy-board-chairman>.
>> PCLOB’s work marginally increased after the Snowden revelations,
>> but have been hampered by a lack of budget, staff, subpoena
>> power, and requisite security clearances
>> <https://www.accessnow.org/blog/privacy-board-awakens-after-nsa-spying-is-revealed>.
>> And even if these structural deficits were resolved, a
>> fundamental fact remains: despite its oversight mandate, the
>> PCLOB has zero enforcement power
>> <https://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security-technology-and-liberty/what-powers-does-civil-liberties-oversight-board-have>
>>
>> The PCLOB’s disadvantaged position was only underscored by its
>> treatment by the recent report by the Review Group, which tacitly
>> acknowledged the PCLOB was not up for the task of effective
>> oversight as currently structured. The Review Group’s
>> Recommendation 27 included a call to increase PCLOB’s power by
>> recrafting it into an oversight body with the name of the Civil
>> Liberties and Privacy Protection Board (CLPP -- or perhaps,
>> “clipboard”). The changes would expand the PCLOB’s narrow
>> authority from terrorism-related policy issues to encompass
>> foreign intelligence, in order to better align with the mandate
>> of FISA programs.
>>
>> *Will we see a public report on Section 702?*
>>
>> The decision by the PCLOB to release two reports segmenting the
>> reviews of Section 215 and 702 programs was quietly announced
>> <http://www.pclob.gov/SiteAssets/newsroom/PCLOB%20Press%20Statement_12.18.13.pdf>
>> in December. Why two? The language of the most recent statement
>> may provide a hint: It indicates the report on Section 215 and
>> the FISC will be “public and unclassified,” but its report on
>> Section 702 makes no mention of a public release, while stating
>> that the report will address “classified materials.” The programs
>> conducted under Section 702 are the ones with the greatest impact
>> on non-U.S. persons, and are the ones we still know the least
>> about. Some of the weakest parts
>> <https://www.accessnow.org/blog/2014/01/09/review-groups-privacy-recommendations-for-non-u.s.-persons-lack-teeth> of
>> the President’s Review Group’s recommendations were the sections
>> on treatment of non-US persons under Section 702. If the PCLOB
>> report remains classified, efforts to reform these programs will
>> be severely hindered. We urge PCLOB to release an unclassified
>> version of its report on Section 702 programs.
>>
>> *Will Obama even listen?*
>>
>> Unfortunately, regardless of the classification levels of the
>> reports, there’s little to indicate the Obama administration will
>> give weight to their recommendations. President Obama has
>> announced he will make a speech on his proposed surveillance
>> reforms on January 17th,just days before the first PCLOB report
>> drops
>> <http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-08/obama-to-preempt-privacy-board-on-altering-nsa-spying.html>.This
>> timing will allow the administration to get out ahead of any
>> criticisms the PCLOB report may make on the Section 215 programs,
>> while simultaneously allowing the White House to appear to be
>> leading on reform efforts. And as for the PCLOB’s recommended
>> reforms on the Section 702 programs? Without a public report, and
>> with a release date of weeks after the President’s speech, these
>> may be long lost to the newscycle -- a grim scenario for the
>> rights of non-US persons.
>>
>> *What does this mean?*
>>
>> In preparing its report, the PCLOB held an open notice and
>> comment
>> <http://www.noticeandcomment.com/PCLOB-2013-0005-0048-fcod-338145.aspx> period
>> this past autumn. We submitted a comment containing a number of
>> recommendations, including some recommending greater rights
>> protections for non-US persons, specifically pertaining to the
>> Section 702 programs. At the time, we expected that our inputs --
>> and those of dozens of others -- would be the basis for a
>> transparent public review and recommendations. A secret review of
>> a secret program is unacceptable: a classified report reinforces
>> the cloak of secrecy around the global scope of the NSA's mass
>> surveillance programs under Section 702, is entirely at odds with
>> the public debate that precipitated the review, and will almost
>> certainly fail to effect any meaningful or accountable change.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Deborah Brown
>> Senior Policy Analyst
>> Access | accessnow.org <http://accessnow.org>
>> rightscon.org <http://rightscon.org>
>>
>> @deblebrown
>> PGP 0x5EB4727D
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>.
>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>>
>>
>> Attachments:
>> - message-footer.txt
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>
>
>
>
> --
> Deborah Brown
> Senior Policy Analyst
> Access | accessnow.org <http://accessnow.org>
> rightscon.org <http://rightscon.org>
>
> @deblebrown
> PGP 0x5EB4727D
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20140117/964d12bf/attachment.htm>
More information about the Bestbits
mailing list