DOCSLIB.ORG

Data Epistemologies / Surveillance and Uncertainty Sun Ha Hong University of Pennsylvania, [email protected]

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Data Epistemologies / Surveillance and Uncertainty Sun Ha Hong University of Pennsylvania, Sunha.Hong@Gmail.Com University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 1-1-2016 Data Epistemologies / Surveillance and Uncertainty Sun Ha Hong University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the Communication Commons, Other Sociology Commons, and the Philosophy of Science Commons Recommended Citation Hong, Sun Ha, "Data Epistemologies / Surveillance and Uncertainty" (2016). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 1766. http://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1766 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. http://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1766 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Data Epistemologies / Surveillance and Uncertainty Abstract Data Epistemologies studies the changing ways in which ‘knowledge’ is defined, promised, problematised, legitimated vis-á-vis the advent of digital, ‘big’ data surveillance technologies in early twenty-first century America. As part of the period’s fascination with ‘new’ media and ‘big’ data, such technologies intersect ambitious claims to better knowledge with a problematisation of uncertainty. This entanglement, I argue, results in contextual reconfigurations of what ‘counts’ as knowledge and who (or what) is granted authority to produce it – whether it involves proving that indiscriminate domestic surveillance prevents terrorist attacks, to arguing that machinic sensors can know us better than we can ever know ourselves. The present work focuses on two empirical cases. The first is the ‘Snowden Affair’ (2013-Present): the public controversy unleashed through the leakage of vast quantities of secret material on the electronic surveillance practices of the U.S. government. The es cond is the ‘Quantified Self’ (2007-Present), a name which describes both an international community of experimenters and the wider industry built up around the use of data- driven surveillance technology for self-tracking every possible aspect of the individual ‘self’. By triangulating media coverage, connoisseur communities, advertising discourse and leaked material, I examine how surveillance technologies were presented for public debate and speculation. This dissertation is thus a critical diagnosis of the contemporary faith in ‘raw’ data, sensing machines and algorithmic decision-making, and of their public promotion as the next great leap towards objective knowledge. Surveillance is not only a means of totalitarian control or a technology for objective knowledge, but a collective fantasy that seeks to mobilise public support for new epistemic systems. Surveillance, as part of a broader enthusiasm for ‘data-driven’ societies, extends the old modern project whereby the human subject – its habits, its affects, its actions – become the ingredient, the raw material, the object, the target, for the production of truths and judgments about them by things other than themselves. Degree Type Dissertation Degree Name Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) Graduate Group Communication First Advisor Carolyn Marvin Keywords data, knowledge, new media, surveillance, technology, uncertainty Subject Categories Communication | Other Sociology | Philosophy of Science | Sociology This dissertation is available at ScholarlyCommons: http://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1766 This dissertation is available at ScholarlyCommons: http://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1766 DATA EPISTEMOLOGIES / SURVEILLANCE AND UNCERTAINTY Sun-ha Hong A DISSERTATION in Communication Presented to the Faculties of the University of Pennsylvania in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2016 Supervisor of Dissertation __________________________________ Carolyn Marvin, Frances Yates Professor of Communication Graduate Group Chairperson __________________________________ Joseph Turow, Robert Lewis Shayon Professor of Communication Dissertation Committee Sharrona Pearl, Assistant Professor of Communication Marwan Kraidy, Anthony Shadid Chair in Global Media, Politics & Culture DATA EPISTEMOLOGIES / SURVEILLANCE AND UNCERTAINTY COPYRIGHT 2016 SUN-HA HONG This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/ iii Acknowledgements. The present work is entirely my own; yet in everything I write lies a debt to another. To the following, and to many others, I present this text as my thanks. Carolyn Marvin Sharrona Pearl | Marwan Kraidy Lauren Berlant | John Durham Peters Kelly Gates | Amit Pinchevski | José van Dijck Sandra Ristovska | Aaron Shapiro | Yoel Roth | Bo Mai Michel Foucault | Gilles Deleuze | Maurice Merleau-Ponty My family – past, present and future and Jessica for their many sacrifices iv ABSTRACT DATA EPISTEMOLOGIES / SURVEILLANCE AND UNCERTAINTY Sun-ha Hong Carolyn Marvin Data Epistemologies studies the changing ways in which ‘knowledge’ is defined, promised, problematised, legitimated vis-à-vis the advent of digital, ‘big’ data surveillance technologies in early twenty-first century America. As part of the period’s fascination with ‘new’ media and ‘big’ data, such technologies intersect ambitious claims to better knowledge with a problematisation of uncertainty. This entanglement, I argue, results in contextual reconfigurations of what ‘counts’ as knowledge and who (or what) is granted authority to produce it – whether it involves proving that indiscriminate domestic surveillance prevents terrorist attacks, to arguing that machinic sensors can know us better than we can ever know ourselves. The present work focuses on two empirical cases. The first is the ‘Snowden Affair’ (2013-Present): the public controversy unleashed through the leakage v of vast quantities of secret material on the electronic surveillance practices of the U.S. government. The second is the ‘Quantified Self’ (2007-Present), a name which describes both an international community of experimenters and the wider industry built up around the use of data-driven surveillance technology for self-tracking every possible aspect of the individual ‘self’. By triangulating media coverage, connoisseur communities, advertising discourse and leaked material, I examine how surveillance technologies were presented for public debate and speculation. This dissertation is thus a critical diagnosis of the contemporary faith in ‘raw’ data, sensing machines and algorithmic decision-making, and of their public promotion as the next great leap towards objective knowledge. Surveillance is not only a means of totalitarian control or a technology for objective knowledge, but a collective fantasy that seeks to mobilise public support for new epistemic systems. Surveillance, as part of a broader enthusiasm for ‘data-driven’ societies, extends the old modern project whereby the human subject – its habits, its affects, its actions – become the ingredient, the raw material, the object, the target, for the production of truths and judgments about them by things other than themselves. vi Table of Contents. INTRODUCTION. ..................................................................................................... 1 METHODS AND AIMS ............................................................................................... 16 ‘RAW DATA’ ............................................................................................................. 22 1. RECESSIVE OBJECTS. ....................................................................................... 31 THE SNOWDEN FILES ............................................................................................... 42 RECESSIVE OBJECTS .................................................................................................. 72 THE LONE WOLVES ................................................................................................. 91 2. DATA’S INTIMACY. ........................................................................................ 108 DATA’S INTIMACY.................................................................................................. 120 DATA’S PRIVILEGE ................................................................................................. 133 DATA SKEPTICISM .................................................................................................. 147 KNOW THYSELF ..................................................................................................... 157 3. KNOWLEDGE SIMULATIONS. .................................................................... 171 SUBJUNCTIVITY....................................................................................................... 176 FABRICATION ......................................................................................................... 194 INTERPASSIVITY ...................................................................................................... 207 ZERO-DEGREE RISK ............................................................................................... 230 JUST-IN-CASE POLITICS .......................................................................................... 244 4. HONEYMOON OBJECTIVITY. ..................................................................... 246 DATA-SENSE .......................................................................................................... 252 HONEYMOON OBJECTIVITY ..................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • What Is Xkeyscore, and Can It 'Eavesdrop on Everyone, Everywhere'? (+Video) - Csmonitor.Com
    8/3/13 What is XKeyscore, and can it 'eavesdrop on everyone, everywhere'? (+video) - CSMonitor.com The Christian Science Monitor ­ CSMonitor.com What is XKeyscore, and can it 'eavesdrop on everyone, everywhere'? (+video) XKeyscore is apparently a tool the NSA uses to sift through massive amounts of data. Critics say it allows the NSA to dip into people's 'most private thoughts' – a claim key lawmakers reject. This photo shows an aerial view of the NSA's Utah Data Center in Bluffdale, Utah. The long, squat buildings span 1.5 million square feet, and are filled with super­ powered computers designed to store massive amounts of information gathered secretly from phone calls and e­mails. (Rick Bowmer/AP/File) By Mark Clayton, Staff writer / August 1, 2013 at 9:38 pm EDT Top­secret documents leaked to The Guardian newspaper have set off a new round of debate over National Security Agency surveillance of electronic communications, with some cyber experts saying the trove reveals new and more dangerous means of digital snooping, while some members of Congress suggested that interpretation was incorrect. The NSA's collection of "metadata" – basic call logs of phone numbers, time of the call, and duration of calls – is now well­known, with the Senate holding a hearing on the subject this week. But the tools discussed in the new Guardian documents apparently go beyond mere collection, allowing the agency to sift through the www.csmonitor.com/layout/set/print/USA/2013/0801/What-is-XKeyscore-and-can-it-eavesdrop-on-everyone-everywhere-video 1/4 8/3/13 What is XKeyscore, and can it 'eavesdrop on everyone, everywhere'? (+video) - CSMonitor.com haystack of digital global communications to find the needle of terrorist activity.
    [Show full text]
  • Jus Algoritmi: How the NSA Remade Citizenship
    Extended Abstract Jus Algoritmi: How the NSA Remade Citizenship John Cheney-Lippold 1 1 University of Michigan / 500 S State St, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, United States of America / [email protected] Introduction It was the summer of 2013, and two discrete events were making analogous waves. First, Italy’s Minister for Integration, Cécile Kyenge was pushing for a change in the country’s citizenship laws. After a decades-long influx of immigrants from Asia, Africa, and Eastern Europe, the country’s demographic identity had become multicultural. In the face of growing neo-nationalist fascist movements in Europe, Kyenge pushed for a redefinition of Italian citizenship. She asked the state to abandon its practice of jus sanguinis, or citizenship rights by blood, and to adopt a practice of jus soli, or citizenship rights by landed birth. Second, Edward Snowden fled the United States and leaked to journalists hundreds of thousands of classified documents from the National Security Agency regarding its global surveillance and data mining programs. These materials unearthed the classified specifics of how billions of people’s data and personal details were being recorded and processed by an intergovernmental surveillant assemblage. These two moments are connected by more than time. They are both making radical moves in debates around citizenship, though one is obvious while the other remains furtive. In Italy, this debate is heavily ethnicized and racialized. According to jus sanguinis, to be a legitimate part of the Italian body politic is to have Italian blood running in your veins. Italian meant white. Italian meant ethnic- Italian. Italian meant Catholic.
    [Show full text]
  • SURVEILLE NSA Paper Based on D2.8 Clean JA V5
    FP7 – SEC- 2011-284725 SURVEILLE Surveillance: Ethical issues, legal limitations, and efficiency Collaborative Project This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no. 284725 SURVEILLE Paper on Mass Surveillance by the National Security Agency (NSA) of the United States of America Extract from SURVEILLE Deliverable D2.8: Update of D2.7 on the basis of input of other partners. Assessment of surveillance technologies and techniques applied in a terrorism prevention scenario. Due date of deliverable: 31.07.2014 Actual submission date: 29.05.2014 Start date of project: 1.2.2012 Duration: 39 months SURVEILLE WorK PacKage number and lead: WP02 Prof. Tom Sorell Author: Michelle Cayford (TU Delft) SURVEILLE: Project co-funded by the European Commission within the Seventh Framework Programme Dissemination Level PU Public X PP Restricted to other programme participants (including the Commission Services) RE Restricted to a group specified by the consortium (including the Commission Services) CO Confidential, only for members of the consortium (including the Commission Services) Commission Services) Executive summary • SURVEILLE deliverable D2.8 continues the approach pioneered in SURVEILLE deliverable D2.6 for combining technical, legal and ethical assessments for the use of surveillance technology in realistic serious crime scenarios. The new scenario considered is terrorism prevention by means of Internet monitoring, emulating what is known about signals intelligence agencies’ methods of electronic mass surveillance. The technologies featured and assessed are: the use of a cable splitter off a fiber optic backbone; the use of ‘Phantom Viewer’ software; the use of social networking analysis and the use of ‘Finspy’ equipment installed on targeted computers.
    [Show full text]
  • SSO FAIRVIEW Overview
    TOP SECRET//SI/OC//NOFORN SSO FAIRVIEW Overview TOP SECRET//SI/OC//NOFORN TOP SECRET//SI/OC//NOFORN AGENDA • (U) FAIRVIEW DEFINED • (U) OPERATIONAL AUTHORITIES/CAPABILITIES • (U) STATS: WHO IS USING DATA WE COLLECTED • (U) FAIRVIEW WAY AHEAD AND WHAT IT MEANS FOR YOU • (U) QUESTIONS TOP SECRET//SI/OC//NOFORN TOP SECRET//SI/OC//NOFORN International Cables (TS//SI//NF) (TS//SI//NF) TOP SECRET//SI/OC//NOFORN Brief discussion of global telecommunications infrastructure. How access points in the US can collect on communications from “bad guy” countries (least cost routing, etc.) TOP SECRET//SI/OC//NOFORN WHERE SSO IS ACCESSING YOUR TARGET (TS//SI//NF) SSO TARGET UNILATERAL PROGRAMS CABLE MAIL, VOIP, TAP CLOUD SERVICES CORP PARTNER RAM-A RAM-I/X RAM-T RAM-M DGO SSO WINDSTOP BLARNEY SSO CORP MYSTIC AND PRISM FAIRVIEW STORMBREW OAKSTAR TOPI PINWALE XKEYSCORE TURMOIL (TS//SI//NF) TOP SECRET//SI/OC//NOFORN TOP SECRET//SI/OC//NOFORN FAIRVIEW DEFINED • (TS//SI//NF) Large SSO Program involves NSA and Corporate Partner (Transit, FAA and FISA) • (TS//SI//REL FVEY) Cooperative effort associated witH mid- point collection (cable, switch, router) • (TS//SI//NF) THe partner operates in tHe U.S., but Has access to information tHat transits tHe nation and tHrougH its corporate relationships provide unique accesses to otHer telecoms and ISPs (TS//SI//NF) 5 (TS//SI//NF) TOP SECRET//SI/OC//NOFORN TOP SECRET//SI/OC//NOFORN Unique Aspects (C) Access to massive amounts of data (C) Controlled by variety of legal authorities (C) Most accesses are controlled by partner (C) Tasking delays TOP SECRET//SI/OC//NOFORN (TS//SI//NF) Key Points: 1) SSO provides more than 80% of collection for NSA.
    [Show full text]
  • Data Epistemologies / Surveillance and Uncertainty
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 2016 Data Epistemologies / Surveillance and Uncertainty Sun Ha Hong University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the Communication Commons, Other Sociology Commons, and the Philosophy of Science Commons Recommended Citation Hong, Sun Ha, "Data Epistemologies / Surveillance and Uncertainty" (2016). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 1766. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1766 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1766 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Data Epistemologies / Surveillance and Uncertainty Abstract Data Epistemologies studies the changing ways in which ‘knowledge’ is defined, promised, problematised, legitimated vis-á-vis the advent of digital, ‘big’ data surveillance technologies in early twenty-first century America. As part of the period’s fascination with ‘new’ media and ‘big’ data, such technologies intersect ambitious claims to better knowledge with a problematisation of uncertainty. This entanglement, I argue, results in contextual reconfigurations of what ‘counts’ as knowledge and who (or what) is granted authority to produce it – whether it involves proving that indiscriminate domestic surveillance prevents terrorist attacks, to arguing that machinic sensors can know us better than we can ever know ourselves. The present work focuses on two empirical cases. The first is the ‘Snowden Affair’ (2013-Present): the public controversy unleashed through the leakage of vast quantities of secret material on the electronic surveillance practices of the U.S. government. The second is the ‘Quantified Self’ (2007-Present), a name which describes both an international community of experimenters and the wider industry built up around the use of data-driven surveillance technology for self-tracking every possible aspect of the individual ‘self’.
    [Show full text]
  • Article Surveillance Hegemony
    Article Surveillance Hegemony Jason Keiber Otterbein University, US. [email protected] Abstract The National Security Agency activity disclosed by Edward Snowden plugs into a larger information ecology made possible by US surveillance hegemony. While the revelations of the NSA’s international spying ambitions have astonished, there is more to US surveillance than secretive programs carried out by its intelligence community. The US also assiduously conducts surveillance on individuals abroad through public programs negotiated with other states. These more public efforts are made possible by institutions and hortatory norms that support international surveillance. This triad of capabilities, norms, and institutions reflect US surveillance hegemony. Hegemony greases the wheels of US-led international surveillance and fosters an information ecology that feeds, and is fed by, secretive programs like those of the NSA and more public surveillance alike. This article unpacks elements of US surveillance hegemony and situates the NSA activity within the resulting information ecology. Introduction In 2013 Edward Snowden began revealing how busy the US National Security Agency (NSA) has been scooping up information on individuals worldwide. The capacity—and, frankly, the boldness—of the NSA makes very clear the seriousness with which the US conducts surveillance on individuals abroad. In dragnet style the NSA scoops up information and communications content from large swaths of the world’s population. In order to situate the NSA activity within the broader context of US surveillance abroad, the paper makes two claims. First, the US exercises surveillance hegemony. Hegemony requires material power (e.g. technological capability) and a normative and institutional framework that supports and provides legitimacy to that power.
    [Show full text]
  • Nsa Surveillance Since 9/11 and the Human Right to Privacy
    NSA SURVEILLANCE SINCE 9/11 AND THE HUMAN RIGHT TO PRIVACY G. Alex Sinha* ABSTRACT Since shortly after 9/11, if not earlier,the National Security Agency (NSA) has been collecting massive amounts of data about American citizens and permanent residents, ostensibly with the aim of preempting future terrorist attacks. While the NSA's program has invited substantial scholarly attention, specifically concerning its compliance with the United States Constitution and various domestic statutes, the academic debate about its merits entirely omits one crucial fact: the United States is also legally obliged to protect a human right to privacy, as codified in Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). This Article seeks to eliminate the blind spot caused by that omission, illustrating the relevance of human rights for assessing the legality and propriety of NSA surveillance. It argues that even under conservative assumptions about the scope of the NSA program and the coverage of the ICCPR, there is good reason to think that the program violates the covenant. At the very least, as this detailed case study of the NSA program demonstrates, more clarity from the Human Rights Committee on the right to privacy is essential in a world characterized by increasing government surveillance. Section I of this Article provides a brief history of domestic * Aryeh Neier Fellow, Human Rights Watch and the American Civil Liberties Union. The research for and writing of this Article took place prior to my affiliation with HRW or the ACLU, and the views expressed here do not necessarily reflect the positions of either organization.
    [Show full text]
  • Through a PRISM, Darkly
    LinuxCabal September 2014 Through a PRISM, Darkly Kurt Opsahl Deputy General Counsel, EFF LinuxCabal September 2014 What we’ll talk about today • The Background – History, codenames, spying laws • The Programs – Facts we know about spying under: • FISAAA and the Patriot Act (PRISM, MARINA) • Executive Orders (MUSCULAR, BULLRUN) • Fight Back – What we can do to stop the spying LinuxCabal September 2014 The Background • After 9/11, President Bush unleashed the full power of the dark side • A subset of the President’s Surveillance Program was later labeled the TSP • PSP was without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying LinuxCabal September 2014 US Companies Sit on Wire LinuxCabal September 2014 Showdown at the Hospital • March 2004 – Acting Attorney General Comey refused to sign off on the PSP • Gonzales and Comey race to hospital • Threats of resignation LinuxCabal September 2014 Public Disclosure • 2005: NY Times revealed the existence of PSP, focus on content collection • 2006: USA Today revealed telephone call-detail records program • 2007: Gov’t claims program under FISA court; – Protect America Act passes • 2008: FISA Amendments Act • 2013: Edward Snowden LinuxCabal September 2014 Know Your Codenames • STELLAR WIND – the original PSP program – has four basic parts: Content Metadata Telephony NUCLEON MAINWAY PINWALE/ Internet MARINA • EVILOLIVE - IP geolocation (1EF)PRISM • FASCIA – Location database LinuxCabal September 2014 Boundless indeed LinuxCabal September 2014 Know your spying laws • Wiretap Act
    [Show full text]
  • Section 702 and the Collection of International Telephone and Internet Content
    SECTION 702 AND THE COLLECTION OF INTERNATIONAL TELEPHONE AND INTERNET CONTENT LAURA K. DONOHUE* INTRODUCTION ............................................................ 119 I. THE EVOLUTION OF SECTION 702 .......................... 124 A. The President’s Surveillance Program .......... 125 B. Redefinition of “Facility” under FISA ........... 128 C. The Protect America Act ................................ 135 D. The FISA Amendments Act ........................... 137 1. Section 702 ................................................ 139 2. Sections 703 and 704 ................................. 142 E. Executive Order 12,333 ................................... 144 1. Shifting Communications and FISA Modernization .......................................... 147 2. Executive Order 13,470 ............................ 149 II. PROGRAMMATIC COLLECTION ............................... 153 A. Targeting ......................................................... 158 1. Information To, From, and About Targets ....................................................... 159 2. Foreignness Determinations.................... 165 3. Foreign Intelligence Purpose Determination .......................................... 170 4. Result of Statutory Interpretations.......... 172 5. Congressional Intent ................................ 174 a. Minimization and Explicit Limits .. 174 * Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center. Thanks to Judge Morris Arnold, William Banks, Orin Kerr, and David Kris for comments on an earlier draft of this paper. This Article is
    [Show full text]
  • Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court
    30C3 – 30 December 2013 Through a PRISM, Darkly Kurt Opsahl Senior Staff Attorney, EFF Montag, 27. November 2017 30C3 – 30 December 2013 What we’ll talk about today • The Background – History, codenames, spying laws • The Programs – Facts we know about spying under: • FISAAA and the Patriot Act (PRISM, MARINA) • Executive Orders (MUSCULAR, BULLRUN) • Fight Back – What we can do to stop the spying Montag, 27. November 2017 30C3 – 30 December 2013 The Background • After 9/11, President Bush unleashed the full power of the NSA • A subset of the President’s Surveillance Program was later labeled the TSP • PSP was without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic Montag, 27. November 2017 The Eye of Sauron unleashed. TSP was a tautology – defined as the part of the PSP that surveilled terrorists. 30C3 – 30 December 2013 US Companies Sit on Wire Montag, 27. November 2017 The PSP took advantage of being on the wire for most communications – even Asia to Africa would likely go through the United States. 30C3 – 30 December 2013 Showdown at the Hospital • March 2004 – Acting Attorney General Comey refused to sign off on the PSP • Gonzales and Comey race to hospital Montag, 27. November 2017 Acquisition word game. Comey says no lawyer would buy this theory. Addington says I’m a lawyer. “No good lawyer.” Comey is now the FBI Director. 30C3 – 30 December 2013 Public Disclosure • 2005: NY Times revealed the existence of PSP, focus on content collection • 2006: USA Today revealed call-detail records program • 2007: Gov’t claims program under FISA court; – Protect America Act passes • 2008: FISA Amendments Act Montag, 27.
    [Show full text]
  • St-09-0002 Working Draft Office of the Inspector General National Security Agency Central Security Service
    TOP SECRETIISTLW//COMINT/ORCONINOFORN ST-09-0002 WORKING DRAFT OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY CENTRAL SECURITY SERVICE 24 March 2009 (U) TABLE OF CONTENTS I. (U) INTRODUCTION: .............................................................................................1 II. REVIEW CATEGORIES ........................................................................................3 (U) APPENDIX A: About the Review (U) APPENDIX 8: Presidential Authorizations (U) APPENDIX C: Timeline of Key Events (U) APPENDIX D: NSA Legal Review of the Presidential Authorization (U) APPENDIX E: Flowchart of Metadata Analysis (U) APPENDIX F: Flowchart of Content Analysis (U) APPENDIX G: Security Clearances for President's Surveillance Program (U) APPENDIX H: NSA Office of the Inspector General Reports on President's Surveillance Program WORKING DRAFT TOP SECRETIISTLW//COMINTIORCONINOFORN TOP SECRETIISTLW//COMINTIORCONINOFORN WORKING DRAFT TOP SECRET/ISTLWI/COMINTIORCONINOFORN ii TOP SECRET/ISTLW//COMINT/ORCONINOFORN ST-09-0002 WORKING DRAFT I. (U) INTRODUCTION Background (U//FOUO) On 4 October 2001, President George W. Bush issued a memorandum entitled "AUTHORIZATION FOR SPECIFIED ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES DURING A LIMITED PERIOD TO DETECT AND PREVENT ACTS OF TERRORISM WITHIN THE UNITED STATES." The memorandum was based on the President's determination that after the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States, an extraordinary emergency existed for national defense purposes. (TS//SV/ORINF) The 4 October 2001 Presidential authorization delegated authority to the Secretary of Defense, who further delegated it to the Director of National Securitv Agency/Chief. Central Securitv Service (DfRNSA/CHCSS} to conduct specified electronic surveillance on targets related to Afghanistan and international terrorism for 30 days. Because the surveillance included wire and cable communications carried into or out of the United States, it would otherwise have required FISC authority.
    [Show full text]
  • Takeo PRISM Publication.Pdf
    PUBLIC SOURCE www.documentcloud.org/documents/813847-prism.html On 6th June 2013, journalists1 from The Guardian and Washington Post reported that the US National Security Agency2 (NSA) was undertaking a portfolio of clandestine mass surveillance programs on a scale reminiscent of George Orwell’s dystopian society of 1984. The NSA’s initiatives supposedly ranged from the bulk collection of email and telephone records to infiltrating the data infrastructures of every leading Internet company and service provider. In response to these allegations, the US government claimed that the NSA and other sections of its intelligence community were legally operating under the authority of laws such as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) and the USA Patriot Act of 2001 that had been amended3 in the post-9/11 political landscape to support the nation’s continuous “War on Terror”. However, the surveillance activities in question were not targeted at specific individuals or groups of interest, but rather focused on amassing personal data from millions of unsuspecting citizens indiscriminately and without clear jurisdiction or transparent oversight4. The first NSA program to be disclosed in these reports was PRISM – a “special source operation”5 responsible for collecting stored data and live Internet transmissions obtained from a consortium of technology giants including Apple, AOL, Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Yahoo. Collaborating with the Five Eyes6 network and major European allies, the NSA used PRISM and other related programs7 to data mine the world’s electronic communications systems in order to create vast information repositories that would give analysts the ability to “select” and “target” any individual in the world.
    [Show full text]