FBI Wants Access To Internet Browser History Without A Warrant In Terrorism And Spy Cases

[Purveyor]

Source: Washington Post

The Obama administration is seeking to amend surveillance law to give the FBI explicit authority to access a person’s Internet browser history and other electronic data without a warrant in terrorism and spy cases.

The administration made a similar effort six years ago but dropped it after concerns were raised by privacy advocates and the tech industry.

FBI Director James B. Comey has characterized the legislation as a fix to “a typo” in the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, which he says has led some tech firms to refuse to provide data that Congress intended them to provide.

But tech firms and privacy advocates say the bureau is seeking an expansion of surveillance powers that infringes on Americans’ privacy.


Read more: http://inhomelandsecurity.com/fbi-wants-access-to-internet-browser-history/

---

[phazed0]

1. I'm so looking forward to this for the next 4-8 years... more of the same...

still riding that 9/11 wave...

[askeptic]

18. Aside from surveillance state, can't this be overcome by a VPN or proxy?

There seems to be some notion in the FBI that only sheepherders with no knowledge of computer technology are involved in terrorism. It seems to me that any person even mildly concerned with their being watched would use a VPN or anonymous proxy (if you can find one) to do their browsing with. So this would seem to only catch those that are pretty bumbling and careless in the first place, it seems to me.

So to me, it appears to actually accomplish nothing but edging us closer to being a total surveillance state...

[phazed0]

20. Not easily.. or at all...

VPN's were never meant for anonymity so they suffer some flaws when using it as such. The Snowden leaks pretty much confirm that most, if not all, VPN's are monitored or hacked or at the least can be. Proxy's can help the situation but they are not fool proof either. Using Tor can potentially help as well, but it looks like the Tor network may be backdoored by the NSA, too.

ARSTechnica: NSA has VPNs in Vulcan death grip—no, really, that’s what they call it

Motherboard: How the NSA (Or Anyone Else) Can Crack Tor's Anonymity

NSA Authorized Monitoring of Pirate Bay and Proxy Users - TorrentFreak

[askeptic]

24. So then they just use public hotspots

where it's really hard to trace a browser running on a USB-based OS. Ooops, giving them ideas they prolly never had before...

[phazed0]

25. Lol, yeah, in reality it is farcical...

Just make sure to not use Windows (use linux) and make sure that you use macchanger to change the MAC address. Oh, and make sure you use a LiveCD, too, so your identity isn't scraped from Web browser cookie requests. (Auto-logins to gmail/facebook are ID giveaways!)

[billhicks76]

2. So Does Every Law Enforcement Agency

[Bernardo de La Paz]

3. Soon every case will be deemed "terrorism" / "spy case", or way too many.

Will evidence found be allowed in other non-terrorism cases?

Deem a case "terrorism" and cast a very wide net and see what is dredged up?

[That Guy 888]

9. I seem to remember someone posted a story about "parallel prosecutions" um... last year?

The story said that law enforcement already does this illegally. Something along the lines of: while wire tapping a second or third tier* terrorist contact, they hear about other unrelated criminal activity like drug smuggling, the agency involved then tips off state or local law enforcement about the details of the drug smuggling. The local law enforcement then plays it off as an anonymous tip or acting on a hunch. Legally I think it violates the Forth Amendment, since the drug smuggling wouldn't be covered by the terrorism warrant, unless the proceeds where funding terrorism, but I'm not a lawyer.



*Under bush's surveillance, I think they were called "tiers" or "points of contact" something like that. If you or I called a pizza place that had also been called by a suspected terrorist, we would have been placed under electronic scrutiny as well. Obama knocked it back to two: only people the hypothetical terrorist had direct contact with.


Hopefully this post makes sense, too tired to search for the "good read" story that was posted.

[cstanleytech]

16. I doubt it as it would be about impossible for the government to defend the law in court

for misusing that label in order to avoid getting a warrant.

[dickthegrouch]

4. I though Obama was a "Constitutional Scholar"

I've never called into question his birth place.
I will call into question his degree if he doesn't squelch this, in person.
The Fourth amendment has not yet been repealed.

[Feeling the Bern]

5. Why not just wipe your ass on the entire constitution at one whole time rather than on amendment

by amendment?

This country has turned into a farcical self-parody. And there are so many people on DU that will agree with this bullshit.

[pansypoo53219]

6. MORE haystacks? have they found any pins?

[PoliticalMalcontent]

7. Kick and Rec for awareness.

This is not something I support. It is complete crap that our freedoms are further and further eroded and it mostly happens without input from the public. Same thing with the TTP.

I was against it when Bush okay'd warrant-less wiretaps and this is no different. We've already seen this play out before, right? These broad-stroke powers always seemingly end up abused at some point.

The thing that kills me is that the democratic party is supposed to be the party that is more liberal and yet look where we are...

Edit: The thing that REALLLLY gets me is that we had a chance at a presidential candidate who most likely wouldn't have stood for garbage like this and yet huge numbers of people voted for more of the same.

Perhaps I shouldn't be surprised. I just can't figure the logic without assuming the worst about society. Most people don't make for well educated voters.

[OnyxCollie]

8. And the Presumptive Democratic Nominee proposes no changes.

Looks good!

[Scuba]

10. Terrorism? You mean like chanting, making leaflets and writing with chalk on the sidewalk ?

http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2009/07/13/first-case-under-animal-enterprise-terrorism-act-heard-san-jose-ca

SAN JOSE, Calif. - Today, the Animal
Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA) was put on trial by attorneys with the Center
for Constitutional Rights, the Civil Liberties Defense Center, and co-counsel
who demanded it be struck down as unconstitutional. The challenge comes in
defense of four animal rights activists who are accused of chanting, making
leaflets and writing with chalk on the sidewalk in front of a senior
bio-researcher's house, as well as using the internet to research the
company whose actions they planned to protest. This case is the first to be
prosecuted under the November 2008 law. Under the AETA, the activists are
charged with acts of animal enterprise terrorism.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

11. Watch out for Double-Secret Hopscotch activation instructions in chalk.

Those kids are all trained operatives.

[Warren Stupidity]

12. hows about they gets themselves a damn warrant instead?

I know, filling out paper work is BORING, amirite?

[IronLionZion]

13. Because warrants are too hard to come by?

what's wrong with requiring some checks and balances? This can be abused a little too easily.

I disagree with the administration on this issue.

[Locrian]

14. part of the creeping facism

That's SOP tactic. If you have a system that can be used at anytime on anyone - you can bring anyone you want "to tow the line".

Many countries purposely have conflicting laws, or don't care they do - which means EVERYBODY has broken or will break them. It just depends on who they want to go after.


Have any downloaded mp3's? Files? Software? Watch a movie on ?? Visit the "wrong" site or use the "wrong " keyword search? Etc Etc.

[Odin2005]

15. "Terrorist" = Any person the government doesn't like.

[herding cats]

17. If there's evidence to support it being necessary then they can get a warrant.

If not, then they don't need the access.

[geek tragedy]

19. I'm sure this would never be abused. nt

[valerief]

21. Do people save their internet browser histories?

Doesn't everyone use private browsing mode?

What will they do with this info? Sell it to marketing firms? I can't see any other use for it.

[sofa king]

22. Guilty until electronically exonerated....

What could possibly go wrong?

[napi21]

26. Sorrry folks, but I cant get too upset over this.

I was taught, YEARS AGO, that you don't post or search anything on the net that you wouldn't want in the headline of the newspaper tomorrow morning. IF these damn fools really want to waste their time reviewing my internet activity, I say "Have a great time guys. You'll be having a very boring time."

I suspect that would be the case with the majority of users. IF you spend your time researching how to make bombs, get away with murder, or joining an ISIS group, then you best find a better way to do that, cause you're gonna get caught.