NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad
[ NNSquad ] Beware of Bogus NSA "Reforms"
Beware of Bogus NSA "Reforms"
http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/001065.html
Politicians are well known for "blowing in the wind" of the perceived
public opinions of the moment, and especially when politicos seem to
suddenly change their own stated opinions, it's usually time to
figuratively get a good grip on your wallet.
This doesn't apply only to financial matters, either.
The spectacle of congressmen who until recently were gung-ho in favor
of pervasive NSA surveillance programs suddenly changing their tunes
may seem like a good sign, but there is every reason to be deeply
suspicious of where this might lead in the longer term.
It's easy to forget that in the aftermath of 9/11, George W. Bush
received astoundingly high approval ratings for his pushing through of
the PATRIOT and Homeland Security Acts, which enabled expansive NSA
warrantless domestic surveillance and greatly expanded the use of
National Security Letters and rubber-stamped actions of the FISA
court.
Swings of the "reform" pendulum are especially noteworthy in U.S.
history. Just to name three relatively contemporary examples, we saw
notable attempts to reign in "secret" activities after the release of
"The Pentagon Papers," fallout from President Nixon's "Watergate"
mess, and in the aftermath of President Reagan's "Iran-Contra" affair.
Few if any of the resulting "reforms" were long lasting. Over time,
everything went pretty much back to "business as usual" for the spooks
and their allies, despite snapshot polling showing public support for
reforms, and political gamesmanship by politicians at the times of
these scandals.
There is every reason to anticipate that any reforms this time around
short of major, structural alterations, will also fade over time. If
there's a significant new attack on U.S. soil, all bets are instantly
off, and we'd likely see large majorities demanding that congress
decimate our remaining civil rights in the name of ostensible public
safety.
Of particular note today are the politicians who enthusiastically
supported Bush-era NSA and other surveillance programs that today
they're attempting to condemn under Obama. Their dissembling has been
raised almost to an art form, as they weave and squirm and try to
claim that their pro-PATRIOT votes weren't what they seem, that they
somehow misunderstood what they were voting for -- or argue that Obama
has run wild.
The reality is much clearer if you look at their old pro-PATRIOT
speeches, and videos of their attacking anyone who dared to speak out
against massive surveillance expansions domestically and
internationally. On the GOP side in particular, there may have been
some true changes of heart, but it's obvious that what's mostly going
on is the usual GOP game plan: "Get Obama any way you can, don't let
the facts or history stop you!"
With all this as preamble, what about the actual "reforms" now being
proposed? Are they meaningful? Would they last even under optimistic
scenarios?
It's a decidedly mixed bag.
I'm relatively (emphasis on "relatively") optimistic that we may see
useful reforms in terms of "procedural transparency."
We need to know more about what programs NSA and other agencies have
in force, and what kinds of information those programs are gathering.
That is, stop trying to hide the programs themselves (we're not
talking about operational data) from the American people.
Reforms in this area would be more transparency in the FISA court, and
especially allowing Internet firms to report on the numbers (at least
in terms of numeric ranges) of FISA actions and other data demands
with which they are served. Firms like Google, Apple, and Microsoft
(telecoms like AT&T and Verizon seem far less interested) have been
virtually begging the federal government for the right to explain in
broad terms what is actually happening, so that they can fight back
against hyperbolic, unsubstantiated, false claims. The government's
refusal so far to permit such reasonable reporting is doing genuine
and completely unfair damage to these firms, like forcing them to try
play baseball on the international stage with their arms handcuffed
and their legs shackled.
This is an intolerable situation, created and enforced by the
government as a result of callously and hypocritically not trusting
the American people to understand national security issues.
Once we move beyond basic transparency to more operational matters,
the risks of being suckered by essentially "fake" reforms rise
dramatically.
For example, there's much talk now about changing the NSA phone call
metadata program so that rather than the government holding the
database, it would be maintained by the telcos themselves or perhaps
some "independent" third party.
Sounds good at first glance, but given the level of access NSA would
likely demand to that data -- no matter where it physically resides --
there's a major chance that this "reform" would in practice be little
more than shuffling deck chairs on ... well ... you know.
The upshot of all this is pretty easy to see. Government in general
and intelligence agencies in particular have legitimate security and
surveillance needs, which historically grow out of control, are pulled
back a bit by a swing of the pendulum, but over time seem to always
expand in the long term.
And these agencies and politicians -- we will stipulate for ostensible
good motives -- have also become experts in playing a gigantic version
of "three-card Monte" with the public. Like the old "shell game," we
think we know what's going on, but lack of information combined with
purposeful diversions conspire to separate us from our money almost
every time.
None of this is to suggest that we should not pursue every opportunity
for meaningful reforms of NSA and affiliated agencies (and the same
can be said of similar agencies around the world operated by other
countries). And this is especially true in the case of serious,
structural reforms that might have at least a chance of lasting past
the next major election.
We've been fooled before -- many times before -- both by disingenuous
actions and the simple march of time causing abuses to fade in the
public's mind.
We may be unable to escape this same fate today. History suggests
that this will indeed be the case.
But we can at least try to prove history wrong this time.
--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein (lauren@vortex.com): http://www.vortex.com/lauren
Co-Founder: People For Internet Responsibility: http://www.pfir.org/pfir-info
Founder:
- Network Neutrality Squad: http://www.nnsquad.org
- PRIVACY Forum: http://www.vortex.com/privacy-info
Member: ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
Google+: http://google.com/+LaurenWeinstein
Twitter: http://twitter.com/laurenweinstein
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800 / Skype: vortex.com
_______________________________________________
nnsquad mailing list
http://lists.nnsquad.org/mailman/listinfo/nnsquad