Big Brother.

[Crooksin]

PRISM is an electronic surveillance program, classified as top secret, that has been run by the United States National Security Agency (NSA) since 2007. PRISM is a government codename for a collection effort known officially as US-984XN.

Officials confirmed the existence of PRISM and said that the program is authorized under a foreign intelligence law, Section 215 of the Patriot Act, recently renewed by Congress. Reports based on leaked documents describe the PRISM program as enabling in-depth surveillance on live communications and stored information. It provides for the targeting of any customers of participating corporations who live outside the United States, or American citizens whose communications include people outside the USA. Data that the NSA is able to obtain under PRISM allegedly includes email, video and voice chat, videos, photos, voice over IP conversations, file transfers, login notifications and social networking details.


The Washington Post noted that the leaked document indicated that the PRISM SIGAD is "the number one source of raw intelligence used for NSA analytic reports." The President's Daily Brief, an all-source intelligence product, cited PRISM data as a source in 1,477 items in 2012.
The leaked information came to light one day after the revelation that the U.S. government had secretly been requiring the telecommunications company Verizon to turn over to the NSA logs tracking all of its customers' telephone calls on an ongoing daily basis.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/inves...ebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html?hpid=z1

President Obama defended the government's surveillance programs, saying that they were legally authorized and had helped prevent terrorist attacks.

"What you’ve got is two programs that were originally authorized by Congress, have been repeatedly authorized by Congress. Bipartisan majorities have approved them. Congress is continually briefed on how these are conducted. There are a whole range of safeguards involved. And federal judges are overseeing the entire program throughout.”

He also said that having a debate about how to balance security issues with privacy concerns is healthy for democratic government, but he cautioned, "You can’t have 100 percent security and then also have 100 percent privacy and zero inconvenience. You know, we’re going to have to make some choices as a society."

Are YOU okay with it?

 

[Serperior]

Hell to the NO. Our Government is fluffed up, we don't need any bitches upstate eavesdropping on our conversation to say the least.

 

[Stigweard Ruadhan]

I've got nothing to hide - let them read through pages of my diatribe. Plus if people genuinely never thought they were doing this before, that's a little surprising.

I don't condone it and it opens the gates to all kinds of abuses, but if protocols and policies are sufficiently introduced, it really doesn't impact upon about 90% of us.

But, having said that...

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty
to purchase a little Temporary Safety,
deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

As well as...

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom—go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!"

The founding fathers of America probably would be spinning in their graves.

 

[Liliana]

I used to support gun control and I thought those right wing gun supporters were crazy when they talked about needing guns to protect against the possibility of a totalitarian government. Now I'm not so sure they're all that nuts at all.

 

[Benthos]

I hate politics and the way it is today, in all branches of government around the world in all forms have many folks who are unqualified to lead or control anything in charge of how things are run. Right wing, left wing, democrat, republican, etc. It doesn't matter the title. On topic; invasion of privacy is illegal for everyone BUT them since they're "above the law", I used to support the government, I even fought for it (conversations and served the military), but lo and behold... all in all, I say if things went south, they can't expect us to protect them.

 

[Crooksin]

Corporate executives of several companies identified in the leaked documents told The Guardian that they had no knowledge of the PRISM program in particular and also denied making information available to the government on the scale alleged by news reports. Statements of several of the companies named in the leaked documents were reported by TechCrunch as follows:

Facebook: "We do not provide any government organization with direct access to Facebook servers. When Facebook is asked for data or information about specific individuals, we carefully scrutinize any such request for compliance with all applicable laws, and provide information only to the extent required by law."

Google: "Google cares deeply about the security of our users' data. We disclose user data to government in accordance with the law, and we review all such requests carefully. From time to time, people allege that we have created a government ‘back door' into our systems, but Google does not have a backdoor for the government to access private user data."

Apple: "We have never heard of PRISM. We do not provide any government agency with direct access to our servers, and any government agency requesting customer data must get a court order."

Microsoft: "We provide customer data only when we receive a legally binding order or subpoena to do so, and never on a voluntary basis. In addition we only ever comply with orders for requests about specific accounts or identifiers. If the government has a broader voluntary national security program to gather customer data we don't participate in it."

Yahoo!: "Yahoo! takes users' privacy very seriously. We do not provide the government with direct access to our servers, systems, or network."

Dropbox: "We've seen reports that Dropbox might be asked to participate in a government program called PRISM. We are not part of any such program and remain committed to protecting our users' privacy."

Even if this is true, who knows how long they would feel this way until a briefcase of money is put infront of them.

But alas, everyone gives in apparently...

On May 28, 2013, Google was ordered by United States District Court Judge Susan Illston to comply with National Security Letter issued by the FBI to provide user data without a warrant. Kurt Opsahl, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, in an interview with VentureBeat said "I certainly appreciate that Google put out a transparency report, but it appears that the transparency didn’t include this. I wouldn’t be surprised if they were subject to a gag order."

The New York Times reported on June 7, 2013 that "Twitter declined to make it easier for the government. But other companies were more compliant, according to people briefed on the negotiations." The other companies held discussions with national security personnel on how to make available data more efficiently and securely. In some cases, these companies made modifications to their systems in support of the intelligence collection effort. The dialogues have continued in recent months, as Martin E. Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has met with executives including those at Facebook, Microsoft, Google and Intel. These details on the discussions provide insight into the disparity between initial descriptions of the government program including a training slide which states "Collection directly from the servers" and the companies" initial denials.

While providing data in response to a legitimate FISA request approved by FISC is a legal requirement, modifying systems to make it easier for the government to collect the data is not. This is why Twitter could legally decline to provide enhanced access to its systems. Other than Twitter, the companies were effectively asked to construct a locked mailbox and provide the key to the government, people briefed on the negotiations said. Facebook, for instance, built such a system for requesting and sharing the information.

 

[Zahn]

I think I am going to wait and see what happens when the other shoe drops. Too much strangeness going on.

 

[Daucus]

I believe this government program was created to figure out who/what Keith is...

 

[Renny]

Oh heyul no! I don't want anyone to listen to everything I say. Besides, I'm boring as hell. They'd regret ever listening in on me eventually.

 

[Liliana]

I believe this government program was created to figure out who/what Keith is...

The director of the NSA and chief of the CSS is Keith Alexander.

What do u think it all means?

 

[Daucus]

There can only be one Keith 0.o

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 4 Beta