DISQUS

eee_eff · 3 years ago

The reason is that to carry out content-triggered wiretaps, we have to build an infrastructure that makes all communications available to devices managed by the authorities. This infrastructure enables new kinds of abuse, for example the use of content-based triggers to detect political dissent or, given enough storage space, the recording of every communication for later (mis)use.

This is actually a bit of an understatement of the problem. If such an infrastructure were to exist, because of the kinds of abuse it could be put to, it would attract to power those who would like to abuse it.

This would be an accident that we could not afford.

Duncan Frissell · 3 years ago

"no wiretaps unless you have a warrant issued by a judge."

Interestingly, most of the recent controversies have involved things other than classic wiretaps.

The NASA case was "pen register" data. Who calls who and the SWIFT case is wire transfers outside the US.

Pen Registers aren't wiretaps and wire transfers or other financial record held by third parties aren't wiretaps.

As someone who's been fighting for financial privacy since before the Privacy Act of 1970 (which restricted privacy) I think it's funny that institutions like the New York Times that never had a problem with any program (administrative subpeonas, FINCEN, "money laundering" investigations, regulatory searches, etc.) designed to collect taxes or regulate businesses are complaining about national security uses of the exact same techniques.

Anyone who supports the current investigatory powers of the IRS, is logically estopped from whining about the NSA.