More Contractor Problems — And FISC Disclosure Problems?

In the updated minimization procedures approved in 2011, the NSA added language making clear that the procedures applied to everyone doing analysis for NSA.

For the purposes of these procedures, the terms “National Security Agency” and “NSA personnel” refer to any employees of the National Security Agency/Central Security Service (“NSA/CSS” or “NSA”) and any other personnel engaged in Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) operations authorized pursuant to section 702 of the Act if such operations are executed under the direction, authority, or control of the Director, NSA/Chief, CSS (DIRNSA).

It told the FISA Court it needed this language to make it clear that militarily-deployed NSA personnel also had to abide by them.

The government has added language to Section 1 to make explicit that the procedures apply not only to NSA employees, but also to any other persons engaged in Section 702-related activities that are conducted under the direction, authority or control of the Director of the NSA. NSA Minimization Procedures at 1. According to the government, this new language is intended to clarify that Central Security Service personnel conducting signals intelligence operations authorized by Section 702 are bound by the procedures, even when they are deployed with a military unit and subject to the military chain of command.

But to me both these passages rang alarms about contractors. Did they have to include this language, I wondered, because contractors in the past had claimed not to be bound by the same rules NSA’s direct employees were?

Lo and behold the Bloomberg piece reporting that NSA’s IG undercounts deliberate violations by roughly 299 a year includes this:

The actions, said a second U.S. official briefed on them, were the work of overzealous NSA employees or contractors eager to prevent any encore to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

It sure seems that at least some of the worst violations — the ones even NSA’s IG will call intentional — were committed by contractors. Which suggests I may be right about the inclusion of that language to make it clear it applies to contractors.

If that’s the case, then why did NSA tell the FISA Court this new language was about militarily-deployed NSA employees, and not about contractors?

 

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

One Response to More Contractor Problems — And FISC Disclosure Problems?

  • 1
Emptywheel Twitterverse
emptywheel @BaFana3 You have to admit, Hadi's "election," as laughable as it was, was loads more democratic than the Sauds'.
2mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel RT @BaFana3: Specifically, Saudi Arabia says its war aims to "reinstall" Hadi as the "legitimate" government of #Yemen. What "legitimacy"? …
2mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Love that govt doesn't want you to know all the things that were on Tamerlan's smart phone, since NSA did collect on him but not read it.
20mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Very impt in anticipation of USA F-ReDux rollout: IC CAN'T do everything want to do right now. Beware expansion! https://t.co/N5zxWvmnoO
25mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Can someone at the @steve_vladeck panel ask Bob Litt if he thinks MoDo is a disgrace for being dealt and publishing info abt CIA women?
30mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Oh no! @mattapuzzo & @MarkMazzettiNYT disgraced NYT for reporting known names of drone killers, sez Bob Litt https://t.co/CFyBTRwskg
39mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @DLind: Motel 6: We'll leave the Panoptic on for you. https://t.co/DojCMNYoNM
1hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @RKTlaw: @bmaz @ScottGreenfield @TimCushing Guess they leave a light on for the cops too
1hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @josephfcox That plus who ever does anything fun in Windows? Soon they'll say Linux use is a sign of support for terrorism, like encryption
1hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz RT @Popehat: If you're traveling on a Budget, might want to skip Motel 6. Snitches should get stitches. https://t.co/02JUvlynqw
1hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @ScottGreenfield @TimCushing What the fuck??
1hreplyretweetfavorite