"The government assumes that any communication entering or leaving the country has a foreigner on one end — and thus is eligible for warrantless searching. As the new Brennan Center report makes clear, the implications of this position are especially dire given the global structure of the Internet, where even Americans’ domestic communications may be routed or stored abroad without the parties to those communications even knowing. "
He's correct. This position is dire. It also works in reverse. Any communication between two non-US residents that happens to transit the US is also subject to surveillance. Given the way global packet networks function, that means that almost any communication could be subject to surveillance under this legal theory.
As US networking companies' foreign customers have understood, that's an unacceptable -- and sometimes illegal -- risk. These policies haven't been good for US network business.
And, pretty soon the NSA could have T. Cruz or D. Trump at the head of the government they control.
Is there some reason the US security apparatus can't legislate in public? Is there some reason they can't make the case "here's why we are trustworthy"? They haven't even TRIED to make that case.
> Any communication between two non-US residents that happens to transit the US is also subject to surveillance.
Of course but we (USians) don't care, spying on everyone else is the NSA's job and every country does it. I'm more concerned about these issues than the average USian but even I don't care much about applying things like the 4th Amendment to non-USians who are physically outside the country. Well, I don't care about it from a justice perspective, I do care about possible consequences like the Internet becoming balkanized.
> Is there some reason the US security apparatus can't legislate in public?
Why would they, how would it benefit them? Their answer would be that it's critical that they keep secret their "sources and methods," so the bad guys don't know what they're doing and also what they're not doing, whether it's because they don't have the capability or they're legally restricted from doing it.
"The government assumes that any communication entering or leaving the country has a foreigner on one end — and thus is eligible for warrantless searching. As the new Brennan Center report makes clear, the implications of this position are especially dire given the global structure of the Internet, where even Americans’ domestic communications may be routed or stored abroad without the parties to those communications even knowing. "
He's correct. This position is dire. It also works in reverse. Any communication between two non-US residents that happens to transit the US is also subject to surveillance. Given the way global packet networks function, that means that almost any communication could be subject to surveillance under this legal theory.
As US networking companies' foreign customers have understood, that's an unacceptable -- and sometimes illegal -- risk. These policies haven't been good for US network business.
And, pretty soon the NSA could have T. Cruz or D. Trump at the head of the government they control.
Is there some reason the US security apparatus can't legislate in public? Is there some reason they can't make the case "here's why we are trustworthy"? They haven't even TRIED to make that case.