Bertster7 wrote:
FEOS wrote:
Bertster7 wrote:
Most phone calls are scanned for keywords by the the UK-USA group. Read the
report to the European Parliament on Echelon.This is not concrete - but it's quite a way from being conspiracy theory "nutter" stuff. There is a lot of evidence floating around to suggest this network is used to indiscriminately scan all (most - the network is not estimated to have complete coverage of all telecoms globally, but it is estimated to be capable of intercepting a very high proportion of them) communications for keywords. There are even allegations (quite well substantiated ones) it has been used by the CIA for industrial espionage.
It almost certainly happens and there are lots of convenient little legal loopholes to allow it to do so.
It is most certainly conspiracy nutter stuff. The ability to "vacuum cleaner" bits and bytes is hardly cosmic. The ability to analyze it in any meaningful way certainly is. That's why yours and mine isn't (not to mention laws that prevent that without probable cause and warrants absent specific circumstances). That's why I said he needed to read US Code before spouting off about it. Apparently, you and those who wrote that report need to, as well. I fully realize domestic eavesdropping laws in the UK (and presumably AUS and NZ) are different than in the US. But I've got a damn solid handle on the limits of what they are in the US, as I have to read them and be tested on the annually.
Analysing it in any meaningful way is not what he said - he said looking for keywords, which is quite possible.
Looking for keywords IS analysis, Bert. It takes CPU time and analyst time that could be spent elsewhere.
I never said it isn't possible. I said it isn't feasible.
Bertster7 wrote:
As for the legal aspect, you need to look at how the loopholes work. It's not illegal for UK based signals analysts to do this to US residents and vice-versa. With intelligence sharing agreements this gives nice workarounds for governments to gain access to all sorts of stuff in a manner that, whilst not admissable in court, is technically not illegal for them to obtain.
It's not technically illegal for the UK to obtain, but it is for the US to obtain. There's not a "nice workaround". If it's on a "US person" as defined in USC 50, then it's verboten without a warrant or specific circumstances (essentially a warrant at that point)...regardless, the intel community then has to turn it over to law enforcement once they realize they have something on a US person. That's the way it works.
Bertster7 wrote:
I've done some work in signals analysis (few months in the summer back when I was at uni studying that sort of stuff). I have a fairly good idea of what is practical to obtain and not. Scanning telecoms traffic for keywords is quite straightforward. With an intercept network that is estimated to cover most of the worlds comms it can be done .
So have I. Never said it was difficult.
Bertster7 wrote:
As for laws governing international communications monitoring, they're not at all the same as domestic ones.
Of course not. Our laws are concerned about protecting the civil liberties of our citizens, not those of other countries...otherwise, our intelligence services wouldn't be able to do their jobs, now would they? I would suppose the same applies in other countries as well.
