Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

Re:Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys" by rayiner on Wednesday November 06, 2013 @10:17AM (#6683082)

Sure, there are certain things that can be achieved by technological means. My point is that when it comes to certain areas of NSA activity, you're dealing with more than just simple legislative fixes. The specific example mentioned by Mike Hearn, the NSA tapping into international leased lines, is really illustrative. Our whole government is structured around the assumption that the executive branch is supreme when it comes to activities outside the U.S. To make it illegal,[1] for the NSA to tap into foreign leased lines would require more than just legislation, it would require Congress to decide to regulate the NSA's activity abroad in the first place. And in doing so Congress would run up against separation of powers issues, because in our system, it's not really Congress's place to dictate to the President how he carries out foreign security activities.

[1] I think as it is it might be a 4th amendment violation, but it's not contrary to any statute that I'm aware of, at least not any American statute.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys" by twoodfin on Wednesday November 06, 2013 @10:52AM (#6683274)

And in doing so Congress would run up against separation of powers issues, because in our system, it's not really Congress's place to dictate to the President how he carries out foreign security activities.

I agree with you completely, but when the political will is there, Congress can dive head first into separation of powers fights. Look at the War Powers Resolution. It's almost certainly unconstitutional in a strict sense, or at least extra-constitutional. But the Supreme Court will likely never touch it, and Presidents take its requirements seriously.

One potential avenue for limiting foreign intelligence gathering short of an amendment would be ratifying a treaty to that effect. But that seems as unlikely as any other route, since, as has been pointed out a few times, most Americans care not a lick about foreign SIGINT, and to the extent they do would like it to be as effective as possible.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys" by rayiner on Wednesday November 06, 2013 @11:04AM (#6683342)

Those are both excellent points. A treaty would be a good idea, but first we need a President willing to negotiate such a treaty.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys" by Zigurd on Wednesday November 06, 2013 @10:51AM (#6683266)

That depends on the meaning of "how."

Congress can very well pass laws that dictate foreign policy: You shall/shall not bug the Germans.

Though it's dubious, Congress can also say "You shall not spend money on fiber taps. You shall have money for satellites."

The bottom line is that the Congress can get into NSA's pants as much as they want to.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys" by twoodfin on Wednesday November 06, 2013 @10:53AM (#6683279)

Congress can very well pass laws that dictate foreign policy: You shall/shall not bug the Germans.

They can pass them, but they'd almost certainly be as unconstitutional as a law from 1944 that mandated the invasion of Calais rather than Normandy.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys" by einehexe on Wednesday November 06, 2013 @11:02AM (#6683330)

It is beyond even that. Even if you get legislation making illegal for the NSA to spy outside the US you also have to pass a law saying they can't receive data from the GHCQ who were the ones who tapped Google and Yahoo in Europe and then shared the data with the US.

[ Parent | on HN ]