> In response to outcry over PRISM, the U.S. director of national intelligence has released some details. Among other things, he says the government "does not unilaterally obtain information from the servers of U.S. electronic communication service providers" and that PRISM-related activities are conducted "under court supervision."
“unilaterally” is how the first is true: the providers participate and generate the data dumps for them. “supervision” is how the second is true: supervision is NOT a warrant.
You have to be careful with the wording. I never claimed they had direct access. PRISM is a program that allows them to download account contents via a special app, which is integrated by these companies, with the cooperation of the companies participating.
Google joined the PRISM program on 14 January, 2009, and were assigned the identifier prefix P3.
PRISM collection does not require real search warrants, as it falls under Section 702 authorization, authorized by congress in 2018 until 2023 presently.
https://www.eff.org/702-spying
They do indeed get the account information downloads directly from the participating companies. They do not have direct access to the companies’ servers (outside of the servers that run the PRISM integration, and perhaps not even direct access to those other than being able to submit PRISM data request jobs).
The net effect is the same.
Note that being American or being located in the US is insufficient protection against PRISM due to the way Section 702 works in practice as applied by the NSA. This is one of the reasons cited by Snowden about why he came forward: this secret new interpretation of FISA gutted previous warrantless search protections for Americans, sidestepping them entirely.
No, it isn't. Where did you get this ridiculous notion? PRISM is a data integration program between the NSA and the FBI. It shows this right in Snowden's leaked slides. https://zdnet2.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/r/2014/10/05/c3fe17c5-4c...
The FBI sends a data request for specific accounts' data to the data provider. The data provider's lawyers review the request and if nothing is amiss, they configure a wiretap on those accounts that sends data to the FBI. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/08/technology/tech-companies-...
> Note that being American or being located in the US is insufficient protection against PRISM due to the way Section 702 works in practice as applied by the NSA.
Huh? There is no secret interpretation that allows Section 702 requests to violate the Fourth Amendment. The only program in Snowden's leaks that illegally collected Americans' data was the phone metadata program.
No, they can't. That's a bunch of conspiracy theory gobbledygook not supported by any documents. https://www.cnet.com/news/no-evidence-of-nsas-direct-access-...
If you are an American or in the US, they must obtain a warrant to get your data from Google.