sign in sign up
<<
Home , Edward Snowden, Global surveillance, Surveillance abuse, Upstream collection, XKeyscore

DOMESTIC : EDUCATION AND PUBLIC OPINION

Item Type text; Electronic Thesis

Authors Urity, Mounica

Publisher The University of Arizona.

Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.

Download date 01/10/2021 18:02:02

Item License http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/

Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/613754 DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE:

EDUCATION AND PUBLIC OPINION

By: Mounica Urity

______

A Thesis Submitted to The Honors College In Partial Fulfillment of the Bachelor’s degree With Honors in

Management Information Systems The University of Arizona MAY 2016

Approved by:

______

Suzanne Weisband

Department of Management Information Systems

Table of Contents Abstract ...... 4

Introduction ...... 4

Background Information ...... 5

Surveillance Programs ...... 6

Stellar Wind ...... 6

PRISM ...... 7

Blarney ...... 8

XKEYSCORE ...... 9

Surveillance Concerns ...... 10

Invasion of ...... 10

Metadata ...... 11

Surveillance ...... 12

Ineffective ...... 13

Public Reaction ...... 13

Methodology ...... 15

Research Questions ...... 15

Sample ...... 16

Results ...... 16

Preliminary Analysis ...... 16

Further Analysis ...... 18

Discussion ...... 21

References ...... 23

Figure 1. FISA Orders and FISC Court Orders ...... 26

Figure 2. Details about PRISM ...... 27

2

Figure 3. PRISM Programs Timeline ...... 28

Figure 4. Degrees of Separation...... 29

Figure 5. ...... 30

Figure 6. Changes in Search-Term Volume after PRISM Leak ...... 31

Figure 7. Changes in Web Search Volume after PRISM Leak ...... 32

Figure 8. Survey Responses about Current Events ...... 33

Figure 9. Survey Responses about Password Behavior ...... 34

Abstract

In 2013, revealed thousands of classified documents that revealed a program run by the ’ . The most shocking detail in the leak is that the United States government spies on its own citizens and collects terabytes of data every day. In the three years since the Snowden revelations, the media has covered these programs constantly. In addition, many civil rights groups have protested the surveillance programs saying they are unconstitutional and are flagrant privacy violations.

However, much of the general public does not understand the programs or how they are affected by surveillance. This paper will investigate how much people know about surveillance programs, if they are concerned about their online privacy, and see if there is a relationship between the two.

Introduction

The history of intelligence1 and surveillance in the United States began well before it became a nation (Andrew). George Washington even wrote that “gaining intelligence…was one of his most immediate and pressing duties” (Andrew). However, the early Republic had a large distrust of standing armies that dates back to its colonial days. Due to this, intelligence was seen as “a necessary evil” that was only utilized in wartime (Tidd). This was the prevalent view until the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941; it changed America’s perception of intelligence being a

“necessary evil.” The next major milestone in US intelligence is the Cold War that led to the creation of the National Security Agency (Tidd). The NSA continued to grow at a steady rate until 9/11. After which, the NSA’s workforce grew by a third and its budget doubled (Priest).

1 Intelligence: information gathered and prepared with the express intent of helping officials make and carry out decisions (Warner)

This growth continued unchecked until Edward Snowden, a NSA , revealed classified documents about their programs (Harding). While he was not the first whistleblower, he made the biggest impact. Even though mass surveillance programs affect everyone, many people still do not know the full extent of these programs or understand why being educated about them are important. This paper will investigate three main questions: how much people know about surveillance programs, if they are concerned about their online privacy, and see if there is a relationship between the two.

Background Information

In June 2013, Edward Snowden, a NSA contractor, started revealing more than a million classified documents about the domestic and global surveillance programs conducted by the

National Security Agency (Strohm and Wilber). It all started in 2012 when Snowden anonymously contacted journalist and filmmaker about many secret government programs that were a part of the US global surveillance system. When he contacted these two journalists, he knew that he might never again be able to set foot in the

United States and that he could be tried as a traitor. But he felt that the public needed to know that the government was abusing and violating the law. Moreover, he felt it was up to the public to decide if the government should continue to participate in those programs (Goetz and

Heilbuth).

I want to note that this paper is not going to investigate the legality or morality of Edward

Snowden’s actions, nor is it a political statement about the government’s actions. The focus of this paper is to investigate people’s knowledge about these programs and their opinions about domestic surveillance.

Surveillance Programs

The following sections are not an exhaustive list of the surveillance programs conducted by the NSA. I will discuss programs that were released in the Snowden Leak that have the largest impact. In addition, as this paper is about domestic surveillance, the discussion will be centered on how these programs affect people on American soil and American citizens.

Stellar Wind

As mentioned before, after 9/11 the National Security Agency gained a lot of power and money. This is in part due to Stellar Wind, a secret system that allowed intelligence agencies to collect the information of anyone, including monitoring the phone calls and of millions of

Americans, without a warrant under the pretext of fighting (). Prior to the

Presidential authorization of Stellar Wind, anytime an wanted to tap into the communication of an American, the agency would have to submit a request that detailed reasonable cause to the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, also known as the

FISA Court (Kirk). In 1978, the year after the FISA Courts were first created, only 207 requests resulted in a warrant… and in 2012, it was over 1,5002. The increase in FISA court warrants as well as the intelligence community’s ability to bypass the safeguards put in place to protect

Americans from unlawful search and seizure show a huge change in the culture of domestic surveillance.

In 2005, published an article that leaked the Stellar Winds program

(Lichtblau and Risen). After huge public outcry about privacy concerns, the publicly stated that the program was cancelled. However, among the documents released by

Edward Snowden was an from the Office of the Inspector General that detailed the

2 See Figure 1 for a table listing details about FISA Court Requests

continued use the Stellar Wind (The Guardian). Furthermore, after the program was exposed,

Congress passed the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 (Reyes). Congress said that this act would protect the privacy of Americans, but in reality, it was used as the legal basis, ex post facto, for the programs that would be revealed in the Snowden leak (Bamford).

PRISM

SIGNAD US-984XN, or its colloquial name PRISM, is one of top secret government surveillance programs that was leaked by Edward Snowden in 2013. This program is gives the

NSA the most amount of raw data3 out of all of their surveillance programs. PRISM taps into the servers of major companies. At first, the National Security Agency was collecting data from these companies without their knowledge using a surveillance program called

MUSCULAR (Gellman and Soltani), but over time the companies began to comply with government’s demands [PRISM] for a secret into their servers (Harding). The PRISM program started in 2007, with as its major source of data. Over the next few years,

PRISM expanded to also have access to data from Yahoo, , , and , among others4.

The stated intent of PRISM is to prevent acts of terrorism by monitoring the internet activity of potential terrorists. However, all internet activity is sent around the world in the form of

“packets.” This means that any packet, sent by anyone, including someone in the United States with no terrorist ties, will be collected by the NSA. This extraneous information is called

“accidental collection.” Accidental collection also occurs because intelligence analysts use contact chaining. This is the idea that you do not just want to find information about terrorists, but also their friends (Gellman and Poitras). While contact chaining seems like it would be very

3 See Figure 2 for full list of what PRISM collects 4 See Figure 3 for a full timeline/list of providers

useful, the internet has made the world a much smaller place. In fact, every single person in the world can be connected by just six degrees of separation (Smith). This means that you are

“chained” to people that you have never met, and most likely will never meet. The NSA is allowed to travel three degrees of separation. Now if you look at the typical Facebook user who has 190 friends, you can connect the user to over 5 million people in just those three degrees5.

The amount of accidental collection increases when you consider that the algorithms the NSA uses to determine if someone is a terrorist or not only have an accuracy of 51%, just slightly better than flipping a coin (Gellman and Poitras). For these reasons, a lot of groups are saying that this type of surveillance is beyond the scope of the Constitution.

Blarney

Blarney is one of the oldest surveillance programs that were revealed in the Snowden Leaks; it was started in 1978 and wasn’t revealed until 2013. This program works a lot like the PRISM program, only instead of collecting internet data, Blarney collects telecommunication data

(Macaskill and Dance). Blarney collects all phone data from US telecommunications companies such as AT&T and Sprint, among others. This data ranges from phone numbers, phone call content, text message content, multimedia content, app data, location, camera data, and more

(Macaskill and Dance).

Blarney is a program that uses “upstream collection6.” Upstream collection is when the NSA

“taps into a high volume circuit and packet-switched networks… and capture data as they move across fiber-optic cables and the gateways that direct global communications traffic” (Timberg and Gellman). This type of collection makes it impossible to only collect data from people who

5 See Figure 4 6 See Figure 5 for a diagram further explaining “upstream collection”

are suspected of being terrorists. That means that most of the information that is being collected, stored, and analyzed is from innocent Americans.

XKEYSCORE

XKEYSCORE is known as the National Security Agency’s Google for people’s private communications. This program was responsible for collecting and analyzing internet data from all over the world. According to an NSA report, this program is the widest reaching collection of online data (Greenwald, XKeyscore). One key difference between this program and PRISM is that XKEYSCORE gets its internet traffic from the fiber optic cables [upstream collection] that make up the internet rather than from internet service providers (Marquis-Boire, Greenwald and

Lee). This means that the NSA doesn’t just get information from specific companies, but rather everything a user does on the internet (Greenwald, XKeyscore).

XKEYSCORE compiles information from many different sources that range from satellite data, telecommunications, internet data, and third party intelligence partners among others

(Marquis-Boire, Greenwald and Lee). It then allows NSA analysts to easily search through this information with a front-end search engine. According to Glenn Greenwald, “[XKEYSCORE] searches that database and lets [NSA employees] listen to the calls or read the emails of [people], look through everything that the NSA has stored, or look at the browsing histories or Google search terms that you've entered, and it also alerts them to any further activity that people connected to that email address or that IP address do in the future” (Rea). Unfortunately, there is relatively little oversite to this program. While NSA analysts usually need to request a FISA

Court’s warrant by detailing exactly what they hope to achieve and what data they plan on collecting, this program had a warrant that authorized “full take collections” even for Americans

(Marquis-Boire, Greenwald and Lee). Edward Snowden stated that while using this program, he

could “wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant, to a federal judge or even the president, if I had a personal email”—all without asking for a warrant or the permission of his superiors

(Snowden, PRISM Whistleblower).

Surveillance Concerns

Invasion of Privacy

Many civil liberties groups are concerned that the NSA is violating the privacy rights of millions of Americans by conducting mass surveillance. The American Civil Liberties Union says that allowing the NSA to monitor the communications of millions of people without a warrant is unconstitutional (ACLU). In Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, it states that people are protected from unlawful search and seizure. This means that the government and its agents are not allowed to go through an individual’s without getting the express permission of a court. Intelligence agencies state that the data they are collecting does not violate the Fourth Amendment because they are not actually searching through a person’s belongings.

Furthermore, they say that as long as someone does not have something to hide, they should not worry (Poitras, Citizen 4) However, in the court case United States v Jacobsen (1984), it was held that the Fourth Amendment’s protection against search and seizure also guards “the reasonable ” (United States v Jacobsen). The ALCU and other civil liberties groups say that people have the reasonable expectation of privacy that their communications are not being listened to and the NSA is overstepping the bounds of the law

(ACLU).

In addition, all of these programs (and who knows how many others) were created without the knowledge of the American people and sometimes against of the wishes of high level

officials who felt the programs were overstepping the bounds of the law (Poitras, Citizen 4).

According to Senators Ron Wyden and , “[mass surveillance] is unacceptable. It raises serious constitutional questions, and poses a real threat to the privacy rights of law-abiding

Americans. If a government agency thinks that a particular American is engaged in terrorism or , the Fourth Amendment requires that the government secure a warrant or emergency authorization before monitoring his or her communications. This fact should be beyond dispute”

(Ackerman and Ball).

Every click, every search, and every conversation is monitored, and stored. Civil liberties groups believe that the amount of information a person puts out digitally is enough to form a

“life pattern” and find out many intimate details about the person (Macaskill and Dance). A person’s online signature can show their every thought and action, even the ones that they have not told anyone (J. Angwin). According to the The CATO Institute, the amount of information the NSA has “is a way of getting inside your head that's in many ways on par with reading your diary” (Greenwald and Ackerman).

Metadata

The NSA and the Obama Administration argue that since most of the data it collects is metadata7, the surveillance programs are and do not violate Americans’ privacy

(Greenwald and Ackerman). Some examples of metadata are the length of a phone call or an IP address (Blaze). However, metadata is a very powerful and revealing tool. Since the Snowden revelations, there has been a lot of research to prove just powerful. MIT researchers say they are able to identify 90% of people using just four different purchases (Gibbs). Metadata can reveal your identity, people you are seeing, where you live, where you like to shop, any

7 Metadata: data about data; data that gives information about other data

illnesses you might have, and many other private details about your life (Greenwald and

Ackerman).

Surveillance Abuse

The NSA has an enormous amount of data about everyone in America and abroad. However, it does not have safeguards in place to ensure that this information will not be abused. As mentioned before, any NSA analyst can access anyone’s private information through

XKEYSCORE (Snowden, PRISM Whistleblower). Snowden even stated that NSA employees routinely pass around intimate pictures, “[NSA employees often do] something that is completely unrelated to their work in any sort of necessary sense, for example, an intimate nude photo of someone in a sexually compromising situation… They turn around in their chair and show a coworker who says, ‘Hey that’s great. Send that to Bill down the way.’ Then Bill sends it to George, who sends it to Tom” (Snowden, I, Spy: Edward Snowden in exile). Employees would also listen in to phone calls or read people’s messages even when it had nothing to do with national security. Snowden then says that there is no audit system to make sure that this type of behavior does not happen; it is seen as a “perk” of working for the NSA (Snowden, I, Spy:

Edward Snowden in exile).

Abuse of power does not only happen at the employee level. The NSA has been used to spy on various non-profits, the largest one being Greenpeace (Lee). The NSA even uses the phrase

“Greenpeace” as a keyword/flag in their analysis (ACLU). Greenpeace stated, “we fear that the

NSA’s illegal surveillance program will enable the U.S. government to preemptively block lawful protests and silence the voices of millions of Americans dedicated to environmental protection, and social development” (ACLU).

Ineffective National Security

Another major concern about mass surveillance has nothing to do with violating people’s privacy rights, but rather that mass surveillance is actually making the NSA less effective at protecting the United States from attacks. According to NSA whistleblower William Binney, the man responsible for creating the code behind the NSA’s programs, “the agency is drowning in useless data, which harms its ability to conduct legitimate surveillance…Analysts are swamped with so much information that they can't do their jobs effectively, and the enormous stockpile is an irresistible temptation for misuse” (J. Angwin). One internal NSA report stated “we are drowning in information. And yet we know nothing” (Maass). These reports are in stark contrast to the official NSA statement that mass surveillance helps protect the United States. Many people say that if the NSA has too much information, they should collect less information about

Americans and focus on signals from abroad.

Public Reaction

Edward Snowden said that his greatest fear about whistleblowing is that nothing would change, that people would learn about mass surveillance and be apathetic (Snowden, PRISM

Whistleblower). And it seems that at the very least, Snowden has made an impact; there are still people who talk about government surveillance three years after the leaks. But how did the average person react to the Snowden revelations, both in the immediate aftermath of the leak and afterwards?

Prior to the leaks, more than 60% of Americans felt that the government was not going far enough in its surveillance methods. However, in the month after the leak, that number dropped close to 40% (LoGiurato). In the immediate aftermath of the Snowden leaks, people signed

petitions against the NSA, moderated their consumption of the Internet, self-censored online, and used more privacy tools (Preibusch). Americans started to change their search topics on Google because they feared being flagged by the government (Marthews and Tucker). However, continued media coverage of the Snowden leaks had no impact on Americans’ interest. There was a trend of people quickly losing interest and only regaining that interest when a large company such as Facebook or Google made a public announcement about privacy8.

An analysis of Americans’ search terms showed that “Edward Snowden” was searched on

Google about 10% more often than the average search term9. At first, this suggests that people were interested in surveillance. But, when you look at the search frequency of “royal baby” during the same time period, people were more interested in that topic 140% more than

Snowden. This suggests that people were interested in Edward Snowden as a celebrity [much the same way they were interested in the royal baby] rather than the significance of his leak. This idea is furthered supported by the search term frequency of “privacy.” There was no noticeable change in the frequency of Americans’ searches for the term “privacy” from before the leak to after it. That being said, the number of Wikipedia page views for “privacy” and “surveillance”, grew by 23% and 75%, respectively (Preibusch). But the page views for “surveillance” shrank back to the usual levels after 5 weeks, and “privacy” in 2 weeks (Preibusch).

Another way to analyze public reaction is to look at the use of privacy technologies before, and after the Snowden Revelations. For the five weeks after the leak, the Tor10 user base grew

10%; but after the fifth week, users dropped back to normal size. In contrast, when the Silk Road cybercriminals were arrested in September 2013, just a few months after the leak, ’s user

8 See Figure 6 for graph on Search Term Volume 9 See Figure 7 for graph on Web Search Volume 10 Tor - a privacy technology that allows it’s users to communicate anonymously on the Internet (Tor Project)

base quadrupled (Preibusch). For the average American, concerns about their privacy and the aftermath of the Snowden leak is short lived.

Furthermore, in 2015, Last Week Tonight, a satirical news show on HBO interviewed random people on the street (Oliver). In these interviews, people were asked who Edward

Snowden was, if they knew what the NSA does, and if they were worried about privacy violations. Everyone shown in the clip had similar answers. They did not know who Edward

Snowden is [many said the creator of WikiLeaks] or what the NSA does. People also were not worried about privacy violations. However, when told that the NSA has the power to view pictures they send privately, everyone interviewed believed that amount of power should be illegal as it is an invasion of privacy (Oliver).

Methodology

Research Questions

I always just assumed that people knew about government surveillance because it was always on the news and it has even become a part of the culture (House of Cards, Person of Interest).

But after watching ’s segment on Edward Snowden, I became a little uncertain in my convictions (Oliver). A lot of people did not know who Edward Snowden was, what the NSA does, or the information they can collect. But everyone did seem to disapprove of the government being able to listen to their phone calls or view their pictures. Did Last Week

Tonight cherry-pick funny answers or do people actually know so little about one of the biggest political debates. I decided to find out myself. I wanted to answer the following questions in a survey of my peers:

1. How much do people know about government surveillance?

a. Have they heard of Edward Snowden and know what he did?

b. Are they familiar with the NSA and know what type of information it

collects?

2. How much do people care about potential privacy concerns?

a. Do they monitor their online behavior because of privacy concerns?

b. Do they change their behavior because of privacy concerns?

3. Are people who are knowledge about government surveillance worried about

potential privacy violations?

Sample

A survey was conducted on Google Forms and 121 people responded. Of those, 57% were female, and most of the participants (also 57%) were between the ages of 18-21 years of age, and

33% were between 22-26 years of age. Not surprisingly, 94% were students (n=114), of which

90% were University of Arizona students (n=103). Of those, 82% of the students were

University of Arizona Eller College of Management students, and almost half of the students

(46%) were college seniors. I expected Eller students to know more the importance of privacy because they have to take MIS 111, and this class covers the importance of online security and privacy. However, the results show that Eller students did not differ from other participants.

Results

Preliminary Analysis

Before we conduct analyses of our research questions, there were some basic analyses that covered general percentages about respondents’ basic understanding of current events, trust in government, and privacy concerns.

Interest in Current Events

We asked a number of questions related to how participants get their news and how well they stay informed about current events. For example, we asked about the types of media they use

(including social media) to get their news. Perhaps not surprisingly, 79% mention that they get their news from Facebook11. However, 58% indicated that they frequently read about current events.

Trust in Government

There were two questions about trust in government. When asked if they thought the Federal

Government had the people’s best interests at heart, 41% did not think so (n=50), and when asked if politicians cared more about their career than they about their constituents, 62% thought politicians cared more about their career (n=75).

Privacy Habits

Although 77% of respondents say they use Facebook, 60% of respondents stated they care who can see their posts on Facebook. In addition to social media use, I also looked at the password habits of respondents. It was disconcerting to learn that 60% only change their passwords when they are required to do so, and 82% use the same password for multiple websites, even though they admitted knowing they should change it more regularly.12 This may explain why 57% stated they wanted to learn how to be safer online and 55% were interested in taking a cybersecurity class.

11 See Figure 8 for the other types of news mentioned 12 See Figure 9

Knowledge about Snowden and Surveillance

Although 69% responded positively about knowing about Edward Snowden (n=121), only 84 of them answered correctly (67%). As presented in a John Oliver segment asking the same question, four people answered that Snowden is the creator of WikiLeaks (12%). Regarding questions about the NSA and government surveillance, 74% responded that they did not know the types of information the NSA collects about them (n=90). Of the 31 people who said they knew what the NSA collects about them, 61% stated they were worried about potential privacy concerns (n=19) and almost all of them stated they would be concerned if a stranger had access to the same information as the NSA (n=30). There were 90 respondents who did not know what type of information the NSA collects about them. After they were given a brief list of types of data that were collected, 43% stated they were worried about potential privacy violations by the

NSA (n=39), and 84% said they would be worried if a stranger had access to the same amount of information as the NSA (n=76).

Further Analysis

Based on our previous analysis, we developed scales to examine the relationship among current events, beliefs about the Federal government, social media use, and privacy concerns.

There were seven questions about knowledge about current questions. After reverse coding, and verifying that respondents answered correctly, we summed the seven variables. See Table 1 on next page.

Table 1. Correlation of seven knowledge items about news questions

We thought that the more knowledgeable respondents were about current events, the more they would know about Edward Snowden and government surveillance. The results did not show any significant effects. However, the more knowledgeable the participants were about the news, the more worried they were about privacy on social media (r=.18, p<.05).

The privacy concern was quite interesting and permeated other results about privacy. First, the more worried respondents were about privacy in social media, the more concerned they were about privacy in general (r=.23, p<.05). Also, if they are worried about privacy overall, they are more likely to want to learn about security (r=.38, p<.01) and take cybersecurity courses (r=.31, p<.01). Moreover, if respondents frequently post details about their life on social media, they are less worried about online privacy on social media (r= -.39, p<.01). Alternatively, the 57%

who do not post details about their life on social media (n=69), are less worried about online privacy on social media (n=29), X2=38.5, p<.01.

Finally, we found that beliefs about the Federal government and politicians were tied to respondents' beliefs about how they felt about people in general. Table 2, below, shows the results. We see that believing that the Federal Government has its citizens’ best interests in mind, is significantly related to believing that most people are good (r=.24, p<.01), and, as expected, is negatively related to politicians caring more about their careers (r= -.28, p<.01). In contrast, respondents who think politicians care more about their careers, also think most people will tell a when they can benefit from it (r=.28, p<.01).

Table 2. Correlations of beliefs about the government and beliefs about most people.

Discussion

The purpose of this thesis was to survey mostly student views about mass surveillance programs and the how Edward Snowden is linked to these programs. I wanted to know if their views and behavior about privacy changed as a result of their knowledge of these events. How much did survey respondents read the news and how did they get their news? Does knowledge of the news affect their views of government surveillance and privacy? The results suggest that knowledge was not linked to knowing about government surveillance or Edward Snowden, but it was significantly related to their concerns about privacy. It also made respondents realize they wanted to learn more about online safety and take cybersecurity courses, mostly because their concern about privacy was related to their online password behavior. It further suggests that students should be more educated about these topics so they can see the importance of online behavior.

In looking at respondents’ statements about what they thought about the general purpose of the NSA, there were some who viewed the NSA positively, and were more trusting of the agency. However, others were skeptical and had negative views. It may very well be that student views of the NSA may be a link to their views of privacy, and trust of the government and politicians. Future research may want to explore this idea in more detail.

It may also be useful to explore the topics they read in the news, rather than if and how they read the news in general. For example, knowing that they read news sites that delve into topics of government surveillance and privacy (e.g., Electronic Frontier Foundation, Wired, The

Guardian, to name a few). In the end, privacy is a major concern for students, which suggests they care, but are not really sure what to do to protect it. Figuring out the best way to educate students, especially business students who will likely work in companies that care about this, is

the next step. This thesis offered a way to understand how students think about government surveillance, Edward Snowden, securing their use of the Internet, and privacy.

References

Ackerman, Spencer and . "NSA performed warrantless searches on Americans' calls and emails – Clapper." The Guardian 1 April 2014. Web.

ACLU. American Civil Liberties Union. 2016. Web. 2015.

—. "Statement;Greenpeace Sues NSA." 2016. American Civil Liberties Union. 2015.

Andrew, Christopher. For the President's Eyes Only. New York: Harper Perennial, 1996. Print.

Angwin, Julia. "NSA Struggles to Make Sense of Flood of Surveillance Data." 25 December 2013. Web.

Angwin, Julie. "The Web's New Gold Mine: Your Secrets." The Wall Street Journal 30 July 2010.

Bamford, James. "The NSA Is Building the Country’s Biggest Spy Center (Watch What You Say)." Wired (2012). Web.

Blaze, Matt. "Phew, NSA is Just Collecting Metadata." Wired 19 June 2013. Web.

Citizen 4. Dir. Laura Poitras. Perf. Edward Snowden. 2014. Web.

Cohn, Cindy and Andrew Crocker. Electronic Frontier Foundation. 19 March 2015. Web. 2015.

Electronic Privacy Information Center. FISA Graphs. 2014. Web.

Forbes. Forbes.com. June 2013. Web. 2015.

Gellman, Barton and Ashkan Soltani. "NSA infiltrates links to Yahoo, Google data centers worldwide, Snowden documents say." 30 October 2013. Web.

Gellman, Barton and Laura Poitras. "U.S., British intelligence mining data from nine U.S. Internet companies in broad secret program." The Washington Post 7 June 2013. Web.

Gibbs, Mark. "MIT Researchers Show You Can be Identified by a Just Few Data Points." Network World 30 January 2015. Web.

Greenwald, Glenn and . "NSA collected US email records in bulk for more than two years under Obama." The Guardian 27 June 2013. Web.

Greenwald, Glenn. "XKeyscore: NSA tool collects 'nearly everything a user does on the internet'." The Guardian 31 July 2013. Web.

Harding, Luke. . New York: Vintage Books, 2014. Print.

House of Cards Season 4, Episode 7. Dir. Alex Graves. Perf. Kevin Spacey and Robin Wright. 2016. Web.

Last Week Tonight: Government Surveillance. Dir. John Oliver. Perf. John Oliver. 2015. TV.

Lee, Timothy. "Here’s everything we know about PRISM to date." The Washington Post 12 June 2013.

Lichtblau, Eric and James Risen. "Spy Agency Mined Vast Data Trove, Officials Report." 24 December 2005. The New York Times. Web. 2016.

LoGiurato, Brett. "Edward Snowden's Leaks Have Caused A 'Massive Shift' In The Public's Views Of Government Surveillance." Business Insider 10 July 2013. Web.

Maass, Peter. "Inside NSA, Officials Privately Criticize "Collect It All" Surveillance." 28 May 2015. Web.

Macaskill, Ewen and Gabriel Dance. "NSA Files: Decoded." 1 November 2013. Web.

Marquis-Boire, Morgan, Glenn Greenwald and Micah Lee. "XKEYSCORE." The Intercept 1 July 2015. Web.

Marthews, Alex and Catherine Tucker. "Government Surveillance and Internet Search Behavior." SSRN Working Paper (2014). Web.

Person of Interest. Perf. Jim Caviezel. 2011. TV.

Prebusch, Soren. "Privacy Behaviors after Snowden." Communications of the ACM Vol 58 No 5 (2015): 48-55. Web.

Preibusch, Soren. "Privacy Behaviors After Snowden." Communication of the ACM Vol. 58 No. 5 May 2015: 48-55. Web.

Priest, Dana. "NSA Growth Fueled by Need to Target Terrorists." The Washington Post 21 July 2013. Web.

Rea, Kari. "Glenn Greenwald: Low-Level NSA Analysts Have 'Powerful and Invasive' Search Tool." ABC News 28 July 2013. Web.

Reyes, Silvestre. H.R.6304 - FISA Amendments Act of 2008. 2007. Web. 2015.

Smith, David. "Proof! Just six degrees of seperation between us." The Guardian 2 August 2008. Web.

Snowden, Edward. I, Spy: Edward Snowden in exile . 18 July 2014.

Snowden, Edward. PRISM Whistleblower Glenn Greenwald. 9 June 2013. Web.

Strohm, Chris and Del Quentin Wilber. Bloomberg Technology. 9 January 2014. Web. 1 December 2016.

Terminal F. Dirs. John Goetz and Poul-Erik Heilbuth. 2015. Web.

The Guardian. "Email and Internet." NSA inspector general report on email and internet data collection under Stellar Wind – full document 27 June 2013: 51. Web.

Tidd, John. "From Revolution to Reform: A Brief History of US Intelligence." SAIS Review of International Affiars (2008). E-Journal.

Timberg, Craig and . "NSA paying U.S. companies for access to communications networks." The Washington Post 23 August 2013. Web.

Tor Project. Tor Project. 2016. Web. 2016.

United States of Secrets. Dir. Michael Kirk. PBS Frontline. 2014. Wed.

United States v Jacobsen. No. 82-1167. United States Supreme Court. 2 April 1984. Web.

Warner, Micheal. "Wanted: A Definition of "Intelligence"." Studies in Intelligence (2002). Print.

Figure 1. FISA Orders and FISC Court Orders

Source: (Electronic Privacy Information Center)

Figure 2. Details about PRISM

Source: (Forbes)

Figure 3. PRISM Programs Timeline

Source: (Forbes)

Figure 4. Degrees of Separation

Source: (Macaskill and Dance)

Figure 5. Upstream Collection

Source: (Cohn and Crocker)

Figure 6. Changes in Search-Term Volume after PRISM Leak

Changes in search-term volume after PRISM day, June 6, 2013, in percentage points

relative to reference period.

Source: (Preibusch).

Figure 7. Changes in Web Search Volume after PRISM Leak

Changes in Web search volume for PRISM-related topics compared to other events in

international politics, sports, and gossip.

Source: (Preibusch)

Figure 8. Survey Responses about Current Events

Figure 9. Survey Responses about Password Behavior