Mediaboss Marketing

OAKLAND, Calif.A federal judge spent over four hours on Friday questioning lawyers from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and from the Department of Justice in an ongoing digital surveillance-related lawsuit that has dragged on for more than six years.

During the hearing, US District Judge Jeffrey White heard arguments from both sides in his attempt to wrestle with the plaintiffs July 2014 motion for partial summary judgment. He went back and forth between the two sides, hearing answers to his list of 12 questions that were published earlier this week in a court filing.

That July 2014 motion asks the court to find that the government is "violating the Fourth Amendment by their ongoing seizures and searches of plaintiffs Internet communications." The motion specifically doesnt deal with allegations of past government wrongdoing, nor other issues in the broader case.

The case, known as Jewel v. National Security Agency (NSA), was originally brought by the EFF on behalf of Carolyn Jewel, a romance novelist who lives in Petaluma, California, north of San Francisco. For years, the case stalled in the court system, but it gained new life after the Edward Snowden disclosures last summer.

In the 2008 original complaint (PDF), Jewel and the other plaintiffs alleged that the government and AT&T were engaged in an "illegal and unconstitutional program of dragnet communications surveillance conducted by the National Security Agency and other Defendants in concert with major telecommunications companies." The evidence stemmed from materials leaked by former San Francisco AT&T technician Mark Klein in 2006. As Jewel was and remains an AT&T customer, her communications were intercepted by the company on behalf of the NSA, her attorneys argue.

Much of the language invoked by both sides revolves around what the EFF has called a four-stage process as illustrated in the July 2014 motion (as shown above).

Richard Wiebe, one of the plaintiffs lawyers, countered: "The government can't circumvent the Fourth Amendment simply by automating its searches and seizures."

"If suddenly our homes were being searched by drones, that wouldn't be permissible under the Fourth Amendment?" he added later.

"What really matters is not what the government gains but what the plaintiffs lose: they lose privacy and control of their communications. That's really what we're talking about. The Fourth Amendment protects us all against mass surveillance of our papers."

Eventually, Wiebe concluded:

Link:
EFF: Feds cant get around Fourth Amendment via automated data capture

NSA Souda Bay Service Members Participate in Strong Man Competition - USA
US Military Power (2014) HD United States Armed Forces 2014 - US: The World #39;s Police? - U.S Military power 2014 HANGAUMY.COM] US MILITARY POWER, USA MILITARY POWER, UNITED ...

By: usa

Read more here:
NSA Souda Bay Service Members Participate in Strong Man Competition - USA - Video

DEF CON 22 - NSA Playset - PCIe
DEF CON 22 Hacking Conference Presentation By Joe FitzPatrick Miles Crabill NSA Playset - PCIe.

By: SecurityRelated

View post:
DEF CON 22 - NSA Playset - PCIe - Video

A federal judge on Friday questioned the strength of a key lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the governments Internet surveillance program known as upstream data collection.

Judge Jeffrey White heard oral arguments by attorneys from the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which filed the suit, and the government, during a hearing in a federal district court in Oakland, California. The EFF says its suit is the first challenge in public court to the governments upstream data program, which copies online data from the main cables connecting Internet networks around the world.

The EFF first filed its suit in 2008 after an AT&T technician provided evidence that the company routed copies of its Internet traffic records to the NSA.

The National Security Agency program is unconstitutional because it collects communications, including content such as email, of people without ties to issues of national security, EFF attorney Richard Wiebe told the judge. Thats an overly broad dragnet that violates the Constitutions Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure, he said.

U.S. Justice Department attorney James Gilligan did not deny the government taps the Internets backbone to gather data. But the government uses filtering mechanisms to automatically destroy certain communications records within milliseconds, he said.

Judge White could declare the upstream collection program unconstitutional, a ruling the government would probably appeal. But on Friday, he questioned whether there was enough evidence on either side to say whether the program is constitutional.

The judges ruling might take months, judging from the number and complexity of questions he asked Friday.

What evidence is there that its all international communications [gathered], not just communications with suspected terrorists or hot spots? he asked EFF attorney Wiebe.

Wiebe cited a top-secret 2009 report by the NSA inspector general detailing the governments email and Internet data collection, published by The Guardian. Other documents, including AT&Ts first surveillance transparency report, published earlier this year, provide evidence of the programs reach, he said.

But the government has never confirmed nor denied the 2009 secret report, Gilligan said, and AT&Ts report only pertains to legal court orders received under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

Link:
Judge questions evidence on whether NSA spying is too broad

Provided by IBT US Hackers infiltrate US companies from abroad

This is going to get worse before it gets better.

Thats largely the message from cybersecurity experts and former U.S. cyber officials who say that the alarming hack against Sony Pictures Entertainment underscores not only the lack of corporate Internet security, but also law enforcements struggle to prevent similar data breaches from occurring again.

A hacking group calling itself the Guardians of Peace first claimed responsibility for the attack on Sony on Nov. 24. The weeks since have seen the unauthorized disclosure of a trove of embarrassing emails sent between Sony executives, the leak of unreleased movies and, earlier this week, a reference to the September 11th terrorist attacks. Yet for all the hackers bluster, and Sonys apparent paralysis, theres so far been sparse talk of meaningful American retaliation.

Jim Penrose, a former directorate of Signals Intelligence and chief of Operational Discovery at the National Security Agency, said forensic investigators are still largely trying to determine the best method to prevent attacks. Recent attacks at Home Depot, Target, JP Morgan and others also prove that, when it comes to prosecuting international crime, police have no choice but to enter a web of geopolitics that rarely, if ever, results in the perpetrators apprehension.

After filling various posts within the NSA over a 17-year period, Penrose now serves as executive vice president of Cyber Intelligence at Darktrace, a United Kingdom-based cybersecurity firm that protects Virgin trains and Drax Power, which provides electricity for 14 percent of Western Europes population.

International Business Times caught up with Penrose this week to get his thoughts on the Sony situation and the state of cybersecurity in general.

IBTimes: Pretend youre one of the FBI investigators on the front lines of the Sony case. Whats going through your mind right now?

Jim Penrose: I think the main thing investigators would like to get to the bottom of is how this initially happened, what was the way in, was there an insider who helped or was it really just from the outside-in? That would be an interesting conclusion to find out. Youd also like to figure out by which way they spread the malware. Was that malware unique? Is that malware attributable to specific actors?

This is an area where law enforcement breaks down. Theres no ally to go to get a warrant served, or extradite someone and try to bring them to justice. The military has its own legal regime but this is different, cyberspace isnt as well governed as the ships in the sea or planes in the sky.

Go here to read the rest:
Former NSA Insider: More Cyberattacks To Come