Shitty Surveillance
In the past few months, many secrets surrounding the NSA have been revealed by former NSA employee Edward Snowden. Snowden uploaded several classified government documents, including a court order to Verizon and a PowerPoint presentation about PRISM, that revealed that the NSA, through a program called PRISM, was collecting enormous amounts of personal data on millions of people around the world. This revelation has angered even the U.S.’s most stalwart allies and forced many Americans to rethink their ideas about the government. The question arose, “has the government finally gone too far in protecting our security?” Some Americans say that the U.S. needs intelligence programs like PRISM in order to prevent domestic acts of terror, however; the benefits of PRISM are far outweighed by the costs to people’s basic civil rights.
Proponents of the NSA’s and many other intelligence agencies’ actions staunchly defend the belief that privacy is a necessary and acceptable sacrifice for security. They claim that, despite the agency’s questionable tactics, the NSA has helped the American people much more than it has hurt them. A popular statistic spouted by NSA advocates is “this information has thwarted over fifty terrorist attacks both in the U.S. and around the world!” (Elliot and Meyer). While the information collected by PRISM being responsible for stopping fifty different terrorist attacks is an exciting rhetoric to spew, the truth is actually much more mundane: the NSA does not claim to have thwarted fifty different attacks, they state that, “this information has contributed to the U.S.’s understanding of terrorism activities and, in many cases, has enabled the disruption of potential terrorist events” (Elliot and Meyer). Unfortunately, it is impossible to know for sure, as all information regarding data gathered by PRISM is confidential and will likely never be publicly released. Still, there is no denying the NSA has done some good in this world; the only question being how much and whether it outweighs their evil.
Proponents of the NSA’s and many other intelligence agencies’ actions staunchly defend the belief that privacy is a necessary and acceptable sacrifice for security. They claim that, despite the agency’s questionable tactics, the NSA has helped the American people much more than it has hurt them. A popular statistic spouted by NSA advocates is “this information has thwarted over fifty terrorist attacks both in the U.S. and around the world!” (Elliot and Meyer). While the information collected by PRISM being responsible for stopping fifty different terrorist attacks is an exciting rhetoric to spew, the truth is actually much more mundane: the NSA does not claim to have thwarted fifty different attacks, they state that, “this information has contributed to the U.S.’s understanding of terrorism activities and, in many cases, has enabled the disruption of potential terrorist events” (Elliot and Meyer). Unfortunately, it is impossible to know for sure, as all information regarding data gathered by PRISM is confidential and will likely never be publicly released. Still, there is no denying the NSA has done some good in this world; the only question being how much and whether it outweighs their evil.
Many in the public are still unaware of just how much data was being collected by the NSA. Some may argue that the NSA has no way of storing or analyzing all the collected data, therefore; it does not matter what PRISM does because it cannot use the collected data. It would come as a shock to these people that the NSA allegedly records over twenty terabytes of data every minute (Gabriel and Macaskill). The NSA also has a facility estimated to be able to house yottabytes of data (Utah Data Facility). The infographic to the right helps illustrate just how much data can be stored in a yottabyte. The NSA has also been stated to use massive supercomputers with specific algorithms in order to process its wealth of information. This coupled with the estimated amount of data collected should serve to refute any beliefs that the NSA cannot sort or store the massive amount of data it collects.
|
|
For some American citizens, the extent to which the NSA can monitor your private data remains largely unknown. As George Pike points out in his article “The NSA and an Imperfect World,” the NSA has collected information on “phone calls, e-mails, social network communications, online chats, VoIP communications, and internet search data.” The top image on the left shows several common sources of metadata for the NSA and what information would be included in the metadata. One widespread myth is that encrypted content would be protected from PRISM, but as it turns out, in many cases the companies that created the encryptions were forced to hand over the encryption keys, or, if the company refused, NSA computers would simply break the encryption through force (Ackerman, Greenwald, Macaskill Poitras, and Rushe). The middle image on the left shows when PRISM started to mine each company. Despite passages in FISA only allowing the gathering of data from “individuals reasonably believed to be in a foreign country,” it has recently been shown that intelligence analysts are permitted to collect data that has only 51% confidence of coming from foreign country (Schwartz). This is a much lower confidence than most people would consider reasonable, and FISA’s wording allows for U.S. citizens outside the U.S. to be monitored. The bottom figure is a presentation by General Alexander and represents the governments rebuke to domestic spying. Another startling revelation is that the NSA will target an individual if they are within three hops of a suspected terrorist (Gabriel and Macaskill). This means that if you are within three cyber degrees from a terrorist suspect, then the NSA can examine your Facebook page, search history, phone records, e-mails, and almost anything else you may do online. With these facts in mind, it seems very unlikely that you have never had personal data unknowingly accessed by the NSA.
|
The U.S. government’s reaction to Snowden’s actions illustrates just how secretive and important PRISM truly is in the eyes of the government: the U.S. government continued to hunt for Snowden despite “more than 100,000 people signing an online petition asking Obama to pardon Snowden” (“Edward Snowden”). Even though actively hunting for Snowden would cause the government to lose political power, Obama refused to pardon Snowden. This could indicate that the government is trying to make an example of Snowden in order to dissuade other potential whistleblowers from leaking information on other ethically questionable and classified government programs. Some supporters of the government even go so far as to call Snowden a terrorist and an enemy of the state, but Snowden has repeatedly stated that he only leaked the information because he felt that U.S. citizens should know (Herring). The government’s response was a gross over-reaction and exaggeration of Snowden’s slights against the U.S. and may actually hint at further right-infringing government programs.
With all this in mind, there is still a question to be asked, “Did the government break any laws doing this?” While it does seem that the government has violated the Fourth Amendment—the amendment prohibiting unreasonable search and seizures--there are some people who argue that laws should be interpreted in context. Jack Balkin’s cultural software theory proposes that The Constitution’s literal meaning is not used for judicial interpretation, but, rather, the general principles are inferred from historical context and extrapolated to modern culture. (Berkowitz 82). Cultural software theory would suggest that it is current cultural attitudes that allowed the Fourth Amendment’s interpretation to deviate so severely from its original meaning. For instance, the tragedy of 9/11 caused a drastic shift in thinking that changed many people’s attitudes about the necessity of national security, which in turn led to laxer interpretation of the Fourth Amendment. If society wants to retain its rights to privacy, then people must resist the urge to automatically sacrifice civil rights for security after a tragedy.
In order to lessen the damage done by government surveillance in the future, several changes to government and technology must occur. Most importantly, Congress must amend FISA and the PATRIOT ACT to better protect Americans’ civil rights: the NSA should be more than 51% confident that the data is coming from a foreign source. This would ensure that Americans are less likely to be subjected to unlawful search-and-seizures. In addition, Congress ought to write new laws preventing the government from forcing companies to hand over private encryption keys in all but the most extreme cases. Second, FISC should release information about collected data that is no longer relevant. Releasing this information would allow outside parties to determine whether or not the programs do indeed prevent terrorist attacks. Lastly, better encryption methods need to be developed; these new methods should be able to prevent the government from forcibly accessing encrypted data.
Nevertheless, in spite of all the evidence discrediting the NSA’s methods, there still remains the need for some organized effort against national security issues. In this way, the NSA will never be abolished because, even though we may not approve of their methods, the NSA is still the best available answer to terrorism. Still, just because the NSA is the best answer doesn’t mean that it should not be improved upon: changing old laws and writing new ones could help protect our constitutional rights. As technology progresses and the potential reach of the government extends, it will require a significant pushback from both the general public and elected officials to ensure that the U.S. government does not infringe on rights guaranteed to us in the Bill of Rights.
With all this in mind, there is still a question to be asked, “Did the government break any laws doing this?” While it does seem that the government has violated the Fourth Amendment—the amendment prohibiting unreasonable search and seizures--there are some people who argue that laws should be interpreted in context. Jack Balkin’s cultural software theory proposes that The Constitution’s literal meaning is not used for judicial interpretation, but, rather, the general principles are inferred from historical context and extrapolated to modern culture. (Berkowitz 82). Cultural software theory would suggest that it is current cultural attitudes that allowed the Fourth Amendment’s interpretation to deviate so severely from its original meaning. For instance, the tragedy of 9/11 caused a drastic shift in thinking that changed many people’s attitudes about the necessity of national security, which in turn led to laxer interpretation of the Fourth Amendment. If society wants to retain its rights to privacy, then people must resist the urge to automatically sacrifice civil rights for security after a tragedy.
In order to lessen the damage done by government surveillance in the future, several changes to government and technology must occur. Most importantly, Congress must amend FISA and the PATRIOT ACT to better protect Americans’ civil rights: the NSA should be more than 51% confident that the data is coming from a foreign source. This would ensure that Americans are less likely to be subjected to unlawful search-and-seizures. In addition, Congress ought to write new laws preventing the government from forcing companies to hand over private encryption keys in all but the most extreme cases. Second, FISC should release information about collected data that is no longer relevant. Releasing this information would allow outside parties to determine whether or not the programs do indeed prevent terrorist attacks. Lastly, better encryption methods need to be developed; these new methods should be able to prevent the government from forcibly accessing encrypted data.
Nevertheless, in spite of all the evidence discrediting the NSA’s methods, there still remains the need for some organized effort against national security issues. In this way, the NSA will never be abolished because, even though we may not approve of their methods, the NSA is still the best available answer to terrorism. Still, just because the NSA is the best answer doesn’t mean that it should not be improved upon: changing old laws and writing new ones could help protect our constitutional rights. As technology progresses and the potential reach of the government extends, it will require a significant pushback from both the general public and elected officials to ensure that the U.S. government does not infringe on rights guaranteed to us in the Bill of Rights.
Works Cited
Ackerman, Spencer, Glenn Greenwald, Ewen Macaskill, Laura Poitras, and Dominic Rushe. “Microsoft Handed the NSA Access to Encrypted Files.” 2013. The Guardian. Web. 14 November 2013.
Agur, Colin. "Negotiated Order: The Fourth Amendment, Telephone Surveillance, and Social Interactions, 1878-1968." Information & Culture 48.4 (2013): 419-447. Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson). Web. 14 November 2013.
Berkowitz, Peter. "Reading Into The Constitution." Policy Review 173 (2012): 81-88. Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson). Web. 14 November 2013.
Cage, Fielding. “Your Digital Trail.” Figure. 2013. The Guardian. NSA Files Decoded. Web. 14 November 2013.
Caplan, Lincoln. "Leaks And Consequences." American Scholar 82.4 (2013): 20-31. Education Research Complete. Web. 14 November 2013.
Dance, Gabriel, and Ewen Macaskill. “NSA Files Decoded” 2013. The Guardian. Web. 14 November 2013.
"Edward Snowden." 2013. The Biography Channel. Web. 14 November 2013.
Elliot, Justin, and Theodoric Meyer. “Claim on Attacks Thwarted by NSA Spreads Despite Lack of Evidence.” 2013. Propublica.com. Web. 14 November 2013.
Foucault, Michel. Discipline & Punish: The Birth of the Prison. NY Vintage Books, 1995: 195-228. Web. 14 November 2013.
Herring, Mark Y. "Little Red Herrings -- Freedom, Freedom, Freeee-Dom." Against The Grain 25.4 (2013): 62-63. Education Research Complete. Web. 14 November 2013.
“How big is a Yottabyte?.” Figure. n.d.. Blackblaze Blog. NSA Might Want to Borrow Some Blackblaze Pods. blog.blackblaze.com. Web. 14 November 2013.
“Key Myths about FISA Amendments in The Protect America Act.” 2007. Justice.gov. Web. 14 November 2013.
Matz, Chris. "Libraries and The USA Patriot Act: Values in Conflict." Journal of Library Administration 47.3/4 (2008): 69-87. Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson). Web. 14 November 2013.
Orwell, George. 1984. New York: Penguin, 1949. Print.
“Panopticon Diagram.” Figure. 2013. hoodedutilitarian.com. A Pundit in Every Panopticon. Web. 14 November 2013.
Pike, George H.1. "The NSA and an Imperfect World." Information Today 30.9 (2013): 22. Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson). Web. 14 Nov. 2013.
Schwartz, Matthew. “NSA Prism: Inside the Modern Surveillance Society.” 2013. Informationweek.com. Web. 14 November 2013.
“Utah Data Center.” 2013. NSA.gov. Web. 14 November 2013.
Ackerman, Spencer, Glenn Greenwald, Ewen Macaskill, Laura Poitras, and Dominic Rushe. “Microsoft Handed the NSA Access to Encrypted Files.” 2013. The Guardian. Web. 14 November 2013.
Agur, Colin. "Negotiated Order: The Fourth Amendment, Telephone Surveillance, and Social Interactions, 1878-1968." Information & Culture 48.4 (2013): 419-447. Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson). Web. 14 November 2013.
Berkowitz, Peter. "Reading Into The Constitution." Policy Review 173 (2012): 81-88. Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson). Web. 14 November 2013.
Cage, Fielding. “Your Digital Trail.” Figure. 2013. The Guardian. NSA Files Decoded. Web. 14 November 2013.
Caplan, Lincoln. "Leaks And Consequences." American Scholar 82.4 (2013): 20-31. Education Research Complete. Web. 14 November 2013.
Dance, Gabriel, and Ewen Macaskill. “NSA Files Decoded” 2013. The Guardian. Web. 14 November 2013.
"Edward Snowden." 2013. The Biography Channel. Web. 14 November 2013.
Elliot, Justin, and Theodoric Meyer. “Claim on Attacks Thwarted by NSA Spreads Despite Lack of Evidence.” 2013. Propublica.com. Web. 14 November 2013.
Foucault, Michel. Discipline & Punish: The Birth of the Prison. NY Vintage Books, 1995: 195-228. Web. 14 November 2013.
Herring, Mark Y. "Little Red Herrings -- Freedom, Freedom, Freeee-Dom." Against The Grain 25.4 (2013): 62-63. Education Research Complete. Web. 14 November 2013.
“How big is a Yottabyte?.” Figure. n.d.. Blackblaze Blog. NSA Might Want to Borrow Some Blackblaze Pods. blog.blackblaze.com. Web. 14 November 2013.
“Key Myths about FISA Amendments in The Protect America Act.” 2007. Justice.gov. Web. 14 November 2013.
Matz, Chris. "Libraries and The USA Patriot Act: Values in Conflict." Journal of Library Administration 47.3/4 (2008): 69-87. Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson). Web. 14 November 2013.
Orwell, George. 1984. New York: Penguin, 1949. Print.
“Panopticon Diagram.” Figure. 2013. hoodedutilitarian.com. A Pundit in Every Panopticon. Web. 14 November 2013.
Pike, George H.1. "The NSA and an Imperfect World." Information Today 30.9 (2013): 22. Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson). Web. 14 Nov. 2013.
Schwartz, Matthew. “NSA Prism: Inside the Modern Surveillance Society.” 2013. Informationweek.com. Web. 14 November 2013.
“Utah Data Center.” 2013. NSA.gov. Web. 14 November 2013.