A senior federal law enforcement official tells ABC News the government is tracking the phone numbers we call in an effort to root out confidential sources.

"It's time for you to get some new cell phones, quick," the source told us in an in-person conversation.

!!!

...within the large pointless program there exists a small, sharply focused program that delivers something the White House really wants.

They aren't looking for Terrorists. They're trying to quash whistle blowers!

Below, Noteworthy ties together a slew of earlier datapoints that hinted at this program, but I must underline this quotation that particularly pisses me off:

White House spokeswoman Dana M. Perino denied that the administration was misleading when it described the NSA program as narrowly drawn.

"It is narrow," she said. "The president has been very specific and very accurate in all of his comments. He said that the government is not trolling through personal information and that the privacy of Americans is fiercely guarded."

When they say "the privacy of Americans is fiercely guarded" what they mean is that they have a team of lawyers who have fiercely produced arguements that what they are doing is legal. Covering your ass is not the same thing as guarding my privacy, god damnit! There is a time when press interview management and spin control is no longer funny, and this is that time. This nation is not made up of little children. The administration has serious questions to answer and they ought to be answering those questions in a serious way.

Going back to Orin Kerr's legal analysis, I'm troubled by how easily the 4th amendment is dismissed here. If the 4th amendment doesn't prevent wholesale data mining of phone call information then what the hell does it prevent!? Even if we find it reasonable that phone users might expect the phone company to share dialed numbers with the government, but not share call content, an arguement I find questionable to begin with, I think we might still expect that the phone company would only do this in special circumstances, and wouldn't be doing it with every single call.

Noteworthy's post is everything below this line:

As illustrated by Negroponte's remarks last week, administration officials have been punctilious in discussing the NSA program over the past five months, parsing their words with care and limiting comments to the portion of the program that had been confirmed by the president in December.

In doing so, the administration rarely offered any hint that a much broader operation, involving millions of domestic calls, was underway. Even yesterday -- after days of congressional furor and extensive media reports -- administration officials declined to confirm or deny the existence of the telephone-call program, in part because of court challenges that the government is attempting to derail.

I continue to be surprised that no one else has recommended Black Arts, by Thomas Powers, more than a year after its publication and appearance on MemeStreams. For this reason, I will reiterate his closing statement for you:

About the failure everyone now agrees. But what was the problem? And what should be done to make us safe?

It wasn't respect for ... [ Read More (0.1k in body) ]

Negroponte Had Denied Domestic Call Monitoring

Decius chimes in on dc0de's situation:

Dc0de has joined what we have started referring to as "the club." People we know who have received legal threats for saying true things in a public place. This seems to happen a lot to computer security people.

In the United States, you're supposed to have a right to freedom of speech. This isn't just a matter of what the law technically says or means. As Rattle has pointed out before, freedom of speech is a core value in our society. It is a value that transcends what the law merely requires, providing a model for how a mature society addresses all sorts of conflicts: The appropriate way to respond to critics is within the realm of ideas and not within the realm of coersion.

People who use the legal system to squash critics instead of appropriately addressing their criticism in print are operating in a manner that is out of sync with the core values of this nation. I hold this sort of behavior in very poor esteem.

However, this happens all the time, so a more fundamental fix is required. The legal system should not allow itself to be used by wealthy parties as a weapon to coerce people who do not have the resources to defend themselves. This is fundamentally unjust. The legal system must be reformed.

For a smart analysis of these issues see this paper about two other members of "the club," Billy and Virgil.

dc0de wrote:
Part of the presentation includes a slide that shows the Insider Attack Variables, including, Corporate environment and culture. Since the IDR's previous incident was caused by someone not performing their due diligence on 50 fraudulent companies, thereby allowing these companies to freely PURCHASE data from the IDR and commit fraud, I used their loss as an example...

The company that I work for now is terminating me, and claiming that I have to sign the IDR's document, (that they negotiated as part of their settlement), and of course, another document, forbidding me to speak about this issue.

There is no protection for whistle-blowers in the security industry. This is a major problem. There is a nitch for a lobby here that should be filled.

RE: Telling the Truth hurts...

Contracts are being canceled, deals are drying up, prices are starting to drop. The psychology is shifting even as thousands of new homes and condos join the for-sale listings each day - so the downward pressure will only get worse.

Speculators who bought overpriced condos in hope of a quick killing are going to get hosed.

No one is going to be able to say they didn't see this coming.

Welcome to the dead zone

k wrote:
I wouldn't bet on it. What bullshit. I'd like to believe there was a good reason, such as a credible threat or lead, but these days, I really just don't have that much faith in our government or legal system.

Its highly likely that this is actionable. Its not generally legal to shut down websites in police raids in the United States. Its approximately equivelent to shutting down a newspaper printing press. Unless the whole thing is pretty much devoted to illegal content they cannot pull the plug on it. In this case they probably didn't realize they were taking out a shared hosting server. However, each and every one of those people who runs a website that was impacted and wasn't the target of the investigation can press criminal charges against the police agency involved if they get a hold a knowledgable lawyer.

See this link and this one.

It shall be unlawful for a government officer or employee, in connection with the investigation or prosecution of a criminal offense, to search for or seize any work product materials possessed by a person reasonably believed to have a purpose to disseminate to the public a newspaper, book, broadcast, or other similar form of public communication, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce.

(The exception in this act for child pornography cases is close enough to litigate but Congress did not envision shared hosting websites when they crafted this exception. I think there is a strong arguement that the exception does not apply when the majority of the people using the printing press in question have nothing to do with the crime being investigated. The government CAN be more granular in their seizure and respect for this rule requires it.)

RE: The Department of Homeland Security Has Shut Us Down

Our popular culture, our dirt-ball street culture teaches us from childhood that the CIA is listening to *all* of our telephone calls and reading *all* of our email anyway.

I keep seeing that in the lower discourse of the Internet, people saying, "Oh, they're doing it anyway." In some way our culture believes that, and it's a real problem, because evidently they haven't been doing it anyway, and now that they've started, we really need to pay attention and muster some kind of viable political response.

Boing Boing: William Gibson on NSA wiretapping

A new bill called DOPA (Deleting Online Predators Act) will require schools and libraries that receive federal funding to block access to social networking sites like MySpace and FaceBook, and is written so broadly that it plausibly could encompass blogs, mailing lists, and sites like Flickr.

All this news is trite in relation to the NSA revelation, but if you're looking for more bullshit, consider warrantless searches for individuals crossing borders with pirate DVDs.

Boing Boing: Proposed law requires schools to censor MySpace, LJ, blogs, Flickr

Is Bush going to write him back? Ahmadinejad and Bush should become pen pals.

Dear President Bush...

"I had thought I would be sentenced to death based on the emotions and anger toward me for the deaths on Sept. 11, but after reviewing the jury verdict and reading how the jurors set aside their emotions and disgust for me and focused on the law and the evidence ... I now see that it is possible that I can receive a fair trial even with Americans as jurors."

I must fully concur with the two opinions expressed so far in the thread. This, right here, is the win.

We couldn't have asked him to say something better..

Moussaoui Asks to Withdraw Guilty Plea - Yahoo! News

This just in from Decius:

I just received fairly reliable word that the Georgia Private Investigator Felony Statute has been vetoed by the Governor. Unfortunately I don't have a press link on that, so if anyone out there has a secondary source they can confirm this through, that would be helpful, but it seems like the Governor has heard the message from the technology community and understood the ramifications of this law. Thank you to everyone who communicated with them!

The bill summary does not show that it has been vetoed yet. There does not appear to be any press engaging the story yet either... There is a recent AP story referring to 20 bills the Governor vetoed, but nothing about this bill yet.

Confirmed:

The existing definition of “private detective business,” continued in this bill, in conjunction with the applicable exemptions in the law, fails to exclude from the private investigator licensing requirement many professions that collect information or may be called as expert witnesses in court proceedings. To expand the penalty from a misdemeanor to a felony without revision of the existing definitions in the law could result in unintended consequences; I therefore VETO HB1259.

HB 1259 Vetoed!