FISA Amendments Act Minimization: Preventing Serious Harm to Corporate Persons

As I was working through some other things last night, I had an opportunity to compare the minimization standards for the FISA Amendments Act (see section h) with the standards under which the actual minimization procedures allow the retention of purely domestic communications (that is, between parties that are all within the United States). These procedures are in addition to procedures that affect foreign communications (with one of the participants a non-US person outside the US).

Last night, I suggested there were 3 “normal” standards and one that doesn’t appear in the law pertaining to cybersecurity and encrypted communications. But that’s not entirely right. The last standard in the actual law reads,

(4) notwithstanding paragraphs (1), (2), and (3), with respect to any electronic surveillance approved pursuant to section 1802 (a) of this title, procedures that require that no contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party shall be disclosed, disseminated, or used for any purpose or retained for longer than 72 hours unless a court order under section 1805 of this title is obtained or unless the Attorney General determines that the information indicates a threat of death or serious bodily harm to any person.

That is, the actual law allows retention of information for up to 72 hours (presumably to process, which is moot anyway, since they’re actually keeping this data 5 years), unless the court or the Attorney General says it must be kept longer because it pertains to threat of death of serious bodily harm.

But in the minimization standards themselves, here’s how that reads.

A communication identified as a domestic communication will be promptly destroyed upon recognition unless the Director (or Acting Director) of NSA specifically determines, in writing, that:

the communication contains information pertaining to a threat of serious harm to life or property. [my emphasis]

In plain language, the law seems to be about saving human lives. But in paragraphs marked Secret, the government has redefined threat of death or “serious bodily harm to any person” as “serious harm to life or property.”

And while it’s just a guess here, I’m guessing that they switched this language, protecting property, not people, to protect corporate people.

In any case, spying on entirely domestic communications to protect against threats entirely to property, not life, sure seems like a giant loophole in a program that is supposed to be focused exclusively on foreign intelligence.

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+2Email to someone

8 Responses to FISA Amendments Act Minimization: Preventing Serious Harm to Corporate Persons

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
Emptywheel Twitterverse
JimWhiteGNV RT @CJonesScout: Egbunu (14), Finney-Smith (13), Robinson (13).
emptywheel I wonder how many times Rahm has said "fuck" in the last 48 hours?
emptywheel @Thomas_Drake1 Phone dragnet was switching (USAF is part of) move to more automation. 12333 would be already. Do they not notice? @thegrugq
emptywheel I love how official photographers photograph Lynch w/her tall (Johnson) & taller (Comey) colleagues & manage height.
emptywheel RT @digiphile: On this #GivingTuesday, please consider registering to be an organ donor to give the gift of life:
emptywheel @lib_ertarian_ I don't think they have--they still want to save the Senate. They just can't control the monster they created.
emptywheel Shorter the entire GOP: The only thing that can save us from the monster we created is Hillary Clinton!
emptywheel The "Club for Growth" not growing.
emptywheel Great news! @onekade and I have not yet melded our brains which means we're twice as scary to the powers that be.
JimWhiteGNV The force is with the #Gators on Star Wars Night.
emptywheel RT @JasonLeopold: Good summary here: Interesting Tidbits from the House Intelligence Authorization via @emptywheel
June 2013
« May   Jul »