Obama Administration Quietly Allowed National Counterterrorism Center To Keep Database Of Info On Innocent Americans

from the total-information-privacy-breach dept

The arguments are still ongoing concerning whether or not Congress will reauthorize the FISA Amendments Act, which has enabled -- via a secret interpretation of the law, that even many members of Congress are not told about -- law enforcement to collect huge chunks of private info on Americans with no oversight or warrants. However, in a move that should raise significant concerns about allowing such widespread trolling of private info, a report in the Wall Street Journal by Julia Angwin uncovered that the Obama administration quietly changed the rules back in March concerning the National Counterterrorism Center -- allowing it to retain a giant database of information on innocent Americans. This was done over the objections of many in the administration, including the "Chief Privacy Officer" for the Department of Homeland Security.

The National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) is where all intelligence agencies were told to send their leads, after it was determined that there was an intelligence failure that allowed the so-called underwear bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, to get on a plane a few years ago. Then came some interagency squabbling over information:
Unfortunately, NCTC didn't have the resources to "exhaustively" pursue the torrent of leads it began receiving. So it fell behind. Late last year, after Homeland Security had given NCTC a database on condition that it purge the names of all innocent persons within 30 days, things came to a head. Homeland Security eventually revoked NCTC's access to the data and NCTC decided it needed to operate under different rules. In particular, it wanted unlimited access to all government agency information for as long as it needed it, including both suspects and non-suspects alike. In March, after discussion at the White House, Eric Holder granted their request.
In a separate blog post, Angwin breaks down the specific rule changes from the 2008 document to the 2012 document. They detail just how a system that was initially limited to protect privacy has now turned into the exact opposite of that. Among the rule changes: it used to require a focus on terrorism information. No longer. And then there are the following two changes:

  • Dropping the requirement to remove innocent U.S. person information. The 2008 guidelines required NCTC to remove US person information that is “not reasonably believed to be terrorism information.” In 2012, the guidelines were updated to allow NCTC to keep U.S. person information for “up to five years” and to “continually assess” the information to determine whether it constitutes terrorism information.
  • Adding the ability to do “pattern-based queries” of entire datasets. The 2008 guidelines explicitly prohibit analysts from conducting “pattern-based” queries that are not based on known terrorism datapoints. The 2012 guidelines explicitly allow pattern-based queries that are not based on known terrorism data points. Pattern-based queries are still prohibited for databases that NCTC has not copied in its entirety.
  • Or, as the original article noted:
    Now, NCTC can copy entire government databases—flight records, casino-employee lists, the names of Americans hosting foreign-exchange students and many others. The agency has new authority to keep data about innocent U.S. citizens for up to five years, and to analyze it for suspicious patterns of behavior. Previously, both were prohibited.
    This all comes out almost exactly a decade after it was revealed that the feds were planning a "Total Information Awareness" program to troll through all of its databases to try to hunt down evidence of terrorism at work. That resulted in widespread public backlash and an eventual backing down from the program. This time around, since the whole thing was debated outside of the public eye (and they didn't given it an Orwellian name -- or an equally creepy logo), apparently it's just fine.

    But, if you actually believe in things like basic civil liberties, the 4th Amendment and a right to privacy, this is all downright scary. It's the type of stuff that we're told over and over again the US government isn't supposed to do. And then it goes and does it anyway.


    Reader Comments (rss)

    (Flattened / Threaded)

    •  
      icon
      Chris Rhodes (profile), Dec 13th, 2012 @ 9:33am

      Shocking

      And the fourth consecutive term of George W Bush continues . . .

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Jay (profile), Dec 13th, 2012 @ 10:36am

        Re: Shocking

        I know people don't like talking about ideologies, but liberalism is indeed a pro-imperialist ideology.

        http://socialistworker.org/2012/12/06/dead-end-of-liberalism

        The fact is, people should remember that Harry Truman dropped the bomb in Japan. It isn't a stretch to see Obama doing a similar attempt at terror to FDR with investigations into communism or Truman trumping the rights of socialists.

        I think the argument should be in how we get or government back from those that look to spread terror instead of stopping it.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Chris Rhodes (profile), Dec 13th, 2012 @ 11:50am

          Re: Re: Shocking

          I think the argument should be in how we get or government back from those that look to spread terror instead of stopping it.
          That's like asking "How do we take the mafia back from the violent extortionists?"

          Government is not corrupt by accident, but by nature.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Jay (profile), Dec 13th, 2012 @ 11:56am

            Re: Re: Re: Shocking

            Don't believe that... Governments aren't inherently evil if they are democracies. The US unfortunately lost its democracy since Reagan corrupted it. W just need more people to wake up to the dangers of plutocracy and the excesses of a government that doesn't listen to its people.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              Chris Rhodes (profile), Dec 13th, 2012 @ 12:12pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Shocking

              Our unwavering belief in the virtue of "democracy" is our core issue. People believe they can make immoral acts moral simply by using a ballot box.

              Is a gang rape moral merely because more people voted for it than against it?

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                icon
                Jay (profile), Dec 13th, 2012 @ 3:01pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Shocking

                I have no idea why people think of direct democracy rather than the representative democracies that are important in converting ideas...

                First, our morality is usually reflected in the policies that are brought into the House and Senate. I have no idea why you bring up such an extreme example that has no bearing on the conversation, but let's take you to a real life example.

                Eric Cantor is currently opposing the "Violence against Women" Act, which helps Native American women find justice from their rapists. Last, I checked, rape was immoral. Yet, a gerrymandered Congress which disproportionately represents conservatives and their libertarian view that the government is the enemy is in charge.

                We in the US have no proportional representation like in New Zealand or Europe.

                We have a very bad electoral system that discourages third parties from winning and works to send the country far more right wing than it should be.

                If the US had a true democracy instead of the corruptive influences of fascism from Reagan that destroyed the country in 1929, maybe you would have an argument. But in a true democracy, we, the people govern. Period. That can't be taken away by just stating the government is the enemy.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                •  
                  icon
                  Chris Rhodes (profile), Dec 16th, 2012 @ 4:54pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Shocking

                  Left/right and Republican/Democrat are false dichotomies. There is only one party: the big government party.

                  And why are laws passed by representative democracies inherently more legitimate than direct democracies? Why do you believe that the morality of an action depends on whether more than 50% of some group of people vote on it, regardless of who that group is?

                   

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              John Fenderson (profile), Dec 13th, 2012 @ 12:32pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Shocking

              Governments aren't inherently evil if they are democracies.


              Government isn't inherently evil even if it's not a democracy.

              Government is an inevitable consequence of the human condition.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                icon
                Chris Rhodes (profile), Dec 13th, 2012 @ 12:51pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Shocking

                Government is an inevitable consequence of the human condition.
                In the sense that in any society, there will always be a largest criminal organization.

                But there's no reason we should lionize it.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                •  
                  icon
                  John Fenderson (profile), Dec 13th, 2012 @ 12:56pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Shocking

                  No, in the sense that to have a society at all, people must organize. As soon as that organization happens, you have a government.

                   

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  •  
                    identicon
                    Anonymous Coward, Dec 13th, 2012 @ 7:41pm

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Shocking

                    Not necessarily.

                    Nature shows us there are other ways to deal with the situation without a central control point.

                    Ants and bees are an example of that, nobody others nothing, they just know what they need to do and the rules are simple.

                     

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                identicon
                Anonymous, Dec 13th, 2012 @ 2:32pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Shocking

                Government IS inherently evil.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                identicon
                Anonymous Coward, Dec 13th, 2012 @ 7:39pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Shocking

                Not inevitable is just people don't know a different kind.

                I read that ants work all by themselves they know what to do and they do it on an individual basis the whole works perfectly fine for them, the ant queen doesn't command anything but it is protected at all costs and cared for.

                Now I wonder how mindless little things can work together and thrive without any central plan whatsoever?

                Maybe we should learn with them, just establish a set of simple rules that every one knows by heart and the rest sure will fall in place.

                Of course people will have to get a hold of their hedonistic tendencies first since those rules will be for good and bad times and will not work 100% of the time but should work more than half the time.

                People should clean the laws in their countries start looking hard at how many times a law is use it and if it is not used and fall below a certain threshold it should automatically be discarded, if the needs arise for it again people can always vote for it again.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              identicon
              Anonymous Coward, Dec 13th, 2012 @ 3:02pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Shocking

              Please, FDR's 4-Term Kingship(threats to stack SCOTUS, ramming legislation thru) and Hoover threatening the shit out of everyone with FDR's approval did more to corrupt democracy that anyone you can name.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                icon
                Jay (profile), Dec 13th, 2012 @ 3:39pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Shocking

                Actually, the Taft-Hartley Act did more...

                Or Nixon's sabotage of the peace accord in 1968...

                Or Reagan's "Two-Santa theory" as mentioned by Jude Waninski...

                Or Bush's tax cuts that did even more damage than Reagan...

                I mean, hell... What have consevatives done for the country besides work to undermine it based on their ideological beliefs? At least liberals try to follow the rules.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                •  
                  identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, Dec 13th, 2012 @ 5:10pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Shocking

                  Please search TechDirt for Obama Admiration's abuses of "the rules" you moron. There are HUNDREDS of examples.

                   

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  •  
                    icon
                    Jay (profile), Dec 14th, 2012 @ 2:05am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Shocking

                    I could swear there was an admittance that Truman as well as Obama were pro-imperialist. Did you not read the article linked above?

                     

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                    •  
                      identicon
                      The Real Michael, Dec 14th, 2012 @ 5:16am

                      Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Shocking

                      Both political parties are merely two sides of the same coin. Both are working to undermine our values, freedoms and privacy. If I'm wrong then so is this article.

                      The government's favorite method of "fighting against terrorists" is to eliminate our rights. Maybe if we're all enslaved by a hostile government, the terrorists will no longer hate us for our freedoms.

                       

                      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                      •  
                        icon
                        Jay (profile), Dec 14th, 2012 @ 8:40am

                        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Shocking

                        I never quite cared for the hardcore centrist route myself. Both parties are not the same. One is extremely authoritarian while the other is socially liberal and fiscally conservative. One party wants to take away women's rights. The other wants to strengthen it. One party cares enough to try to have conversations about different issues. The other merely sells out to the highest bidder based on their ideological beliefs.

                        Both parties are not the same. You should look up the differences yourself instead of believing a media machine aimed at corporate interest over public interest.

                        Finally, terrorism is a tactic. It worked successfully because there has been no true dialogue about the damage we've done to other countries. Maybe if we stop bombing innocents, we can begin to figure out how to get our country back. But that won't happen so long as the US takes ash over-aggressive martial response to everything in front of them.

                         

                        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  •  
                    icon
                    Jay (profile), Dec 14th, 2012 @ 2:06am

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Shocking

                    I could swear there was an admittance that Truman as well as Obama were pro-imperialist. Did you not read the article linked above?

                     

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Dec 13th, 2012 @ 7:30pm

          Re: Re: Shocking

          Could we drop the labels and just see what we need and don't need and name that thing later?

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      velox (profile), Dec 13th, 2012 @ 9:35am

      Poindexter's Legacy

      Admiral Poindexter may be dead, but his objectives appear to have been accomplished by others.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Robert (profile), Dec 13th, 2012 @ 9:40am

      Doesn't matter

      It doesn't matter who is in office, the erosion of civil liberties will continue.

      The only way to stop it is to fight back, gradually and peacefully. I think it would be best to remove those people from power, give them a cushy useless job with a nice pension, get them out of power! Then we can start the gradual change back to sanity. First will be the limiting of the revolving door between industry and government, along with the influence.

      Gradual is the key, quick changes are quickly reversed, but a carefully planned, gradual introduction is more difficult to detect and fight (which is how the erosion of civil liberties took place).

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Dec 13th, 2012 @ 9:57am

        Re: Doesn't matter

        You say that like the alternatives are going to be any different.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Dec 13th, 2012 @ 10:10am

        Re: Doesn't matter

        The problem is that the top civil servants need to be replaced, and they have access to the data which may make it difficult to elect the politicians required to make the change.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Dec 13th, 2012 @ 9:47am

      This looking like Nixon all over again.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      velox (profile), Dec 13th, 2012 @ 9:57am

      "We are, like, that far from a turnkey totalitarian state." [holding thumb and finger close together]
      -- William Binney, former NSA cryptographer and mathematician
      ref: Bamford, The Shadow Factory: The NSA from 9/11 to the Eavesdropping on America

      If you haven't done so, I recommend you listen to this Binney interview from April of this year.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Mesonoxian Eve (profile), Dec 13th, 2012 @ 10:07am

      If people knew what the retail segment of this country has on them, it'll make this government database a joke.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Nastybutler77 (profile), Dec 13th, 2012 @ 1:36pm

        Re:

        As long as the government doesn't have access to it, I'm fine with Google and Amazon knowing my deepest darkest secrets. It's when the government confiscates the data from the retailers and starts using that to look for "suspicious" patterns that we're screwed.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          John Fenderson (profile), Dec 13th, 2012 @ 4:29pm

          Re: Re:

          You're talking like there's any real difference between major corporations and the government, and I don't think there is.

          Either way, though, as soon as Amazon, Google, or any other major corporation has it, so does the government. Your information is even less safe in their hands because you don't have any constitutional protections from the actions of a corporation.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          That Anonymous Coward (profile), Dec 13th, 2012 @ 8:16pm

          Re: Re:

          You understand some sections of the Government have been buying data from other sources to avoid the rules against them acquiring it themselves right?

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            velox (profile), Dec 14th, 2012 @ 7:18am

            Re: Re: Re:

            The insidious part of this is that once service providers begin selling their customers' data to the government, it becomes a regular budgeted income stream for them. The providers become accustomed to having this income stream, and are thereafter driven by typical profit incentive to promote even greater data sales volume.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Dec 13th, 2012 @ 12:07pm

      This is not some small thing, this will lead to the spark of inevatable violence towards governments worldwide, as every grievances over the many years, towards governments will come at them in one go, once the house of cards starts showing signs of falling, and they dont care, which makes it even more worse......either through ignorance or maliciousness our representatives are leading us away from liberty and to death

      The writting on the wall is hard to ignore, i hope that an honest, truthfull, profound, and peacefull solution is finally pushed far enough that those fighting it have no more cards to play,

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Dec 13th, 2012 @ 12:45pm

      It's official, America is now run by an authoritarian regime that no longer operates under the US Constitution or the Bill of Rights.

      It's official, America is now run by an authoritarian regime that no longer operates under the US Constitution.

      The Bill of Rights was ratified on December 15, 1791. The US PATRIOT Act was ratified on February 1, 2002. So 2002 - 1791 = 211 years of true Democracy, before America slid back into an Authoritarian Regime. So the 'Great Experiment' lasted for two lifetimes, before collapsing. Somehow I think our Founding Fathers are rolling in their graves, knowing that they sacrifiesed so many American lives fighting the British, only to have their great experiment fail 200 years later.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        The Real Michael, Dec 14th, 2012 @ 5:29am

        Re:

        The so-called Patriot Act is a piece of worthless crap, as is FISA. Our own government has betrayed us. The NSA may as well put huge swastika emblems on their buildings because that's what they truly represent. So long as Washington decimates whatever's left of our Constitution and Bill of Rights, every American soldier who fought for this country did so in vain.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      lakhvir singh, Jan 28th, 2014 @ 6:08am

      Blah blah blah
      really

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


    Add Your Comment

    Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
    Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
    Save me a cookie
    • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
    • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
    Follow Techdirt
    A word from our sponsors...
    Essential Reading
    Techdirt Reading List
    Techdirt Insider Chat
    A word from our sponsors...
    Recent Stories
    A word from our sponsors...

    Close

    Email This