> Under this order, we now have the ability to redact all identifying information and protect the identities of users who interacted with disruptj20.org before handing over any data to the court. Chief Judge Morin acknowledged that the government “does not have the right to rummage through the information contained on DreamHost’s website” to “discover the identity of . . . individuals not participating in alleged criminal activity.”
That's interesting. Days before he left office, President Obama gave the NSA permission to share raw internet data with 16 other agencies (because of course he did...). That data should mostly include American citizens' information.
So I wonder if the EFF or ACLU can sue the White House/DoJ over expanding those rules, considering judges seem to not like such mass surveillance, as exemplified in this case.
That's interesting. Days before he left office, President Obama gave the NSA permission to share raw internet data with 16 other agencies (because of course he did...). That data should mostly include American citizens' information.
So I wonder if the EFF or ACLU can sue the White House/DoJ over expanding those rules, considering judges seem to not like such mass surveillance, as exemplified in this case.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/12/us/politics/nsa-gets-more...