Print 69 comment(s) - last by SlyNine.. on Jun 29 at 12:48 AM

  (Source: AP)
WSJ report cites sources close to agency saying holes in interception are filled by data grabs at a lower level

According to a report by The Wall Street Journal, sources close to the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) warn about a potential "blind spot" in their phone record (aka "telephony metadata") scheme that allows them to track the call records and locations of Americans on a daily basis.

I. T-Mobile and Verizon Wireless Make Spying on Americans Trickier...

The source states that T-Mobile's foreign ownership (T-Mobile is owned primarily by Germany's Deutsche Telekom AG (ETR:DTE)) and Verizon Wireless's foreign co-ownership (UK-based Vodafone Group Plc. (LON:VOD) has a 45 percent stake in Verizon Wireless) made seizing phone records under the Oct. 2001 USA PATRIOT (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism) Act slightly harder.  

Both companies reportedly at times refused to participate in the program, although U.S. Verizon Wireless parent company Verizon Communications Inc. (VZ) did turn in information on its land lines, which it solely serves.  And reportedly the U.S. government did not challenge theirt waivering cooperation.

Obama spying
Foreign co-owned carriers have reportedly been less than enthusiastic about Bush and Obama administration spying. [Image Source: AP]

But don't worry -- says the source -- Verizon Wireless and T-Mobile customers are still able to be monitored anyways.  Most of that traffic on Verizon or T-Mobile is at some point routed through connections owned by solely-U.S.-owned telecoms like AT&T, Inc. (T) or Sprint Nextel Corp. (S).  Thanks to this wonderful routing, the source assures, approximately 99 percent of phone traffic in the U.S. is monitored by the NSA.

II. ...But When There's a Will, Big Brother Has a Way 

A pending acquisition of Sprint might seemingly shift that balance if Japan's Softbank Corp. (TYO:9984) wins in its bid for most of the U.S. carrier.  But it will likely have little effect.

T-Mobile or smaller U.S. carriers often fill in holes in their coverage by allowing customers to roam onto solely-U.S. owned networks like AT&T.  This is one spot where the NSA can intercept the phone data.

And ultimately the NSA can always monitor at an even lower level, if necessary -- the high speed telecommunications backbone that underlies both landlines and wireless networks.  And that infrastructure is solely owned by U.S. firms -- AT&T and Verizon Business Network Services Inc. (a subsidiary of Verizon Communications).  Thus regardless of who owns the cellular carriers, the NSA can (and in many cases reportedly already does) seize communications at the lowest level, eliminating pesky civil liberties complaints by foreign nations.

fiber optics
Communications can be seized at the U.S.-owned backbone that underlies wireless networks.
[Image Source: AP]

In a letter to Rep. Edward Markey (D., Mass.) Verizon Wireless admits [PDF] it did turn over records some of the time.  It says it responded to 260,000 customer data requests in 2011 (although it did not say how many customers were involved per request).  Of those half of the orders were without warrant (due proccess) while approximately half were via a court order or warrant.

According to sources, U.S. officials recognized the foreign leadership of T-Mobile and Verizon Wireless might lead them to buck the data gathering if they pushed the issue too hard.  So the feds kept their requests relatively small, knowing they could seize the information they missed further down the pipe.

Recent surveys showed approximately half of Americans are comfortable with the goverment tracking their locations (phone records).

Sources: WSJ, Verizon Wireless [PDF]

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

1% on VPN?
By techxx on 6/14/2013 4:15:29 PM , Rating: 2
1% on VPN?

RE: 1% on VPN?
By xti on 6/14/2013 4:25:42 PM , Rating: 3
that 1% is missing out on my special ingredient for a good casserole.

RE: 1% on VPN?
By Motoman on 6/14/2013 4:55:15 PM , Rating: 3
Knock it off with the Cream of Sum Yung Gai already. Too much umami.

RE: 1% on VPN?
By xti on 6/14/2013 11:00:44 PM , Rating: 2
Umami love my eggroll and dumplings.

RE: 1% on VPN?
By Cypherdude1 on 6/16/13, Rating: 0
RE: 1% on VPN?
By Cheesew1z69 on 6/16/2013 5:37:28 PM , Rating: 2
While I applaud this petition, I seriously doubt this is going to have any impact on pardoning him.

RE: 1% on VPN?
By Reclaimer77 on 6/16/2013 6:02:03 PM , Rating: 2
Now that he's apparently selling us out to China? Nah, fat chance of that.

I think Snowden had good intentions maybe, but the way he's gone about this whole thing is an illustration on how NOT to be a whistleblower.

I don't know if he wanted to be a martyr or if he's really just that stupid. Either way, I don't see a happy ending to this little fairytale.

Don't get me wrong, glad he got the word out. But he could have done the same thing by bringing this up with a US Representative or a Congressional hearing, upholding his oath. At least then, there would be a chance of him having a future.

RE: 1% on VPN?
By Oceanryder on 6/17/2013 1:16:37 PM , Rating: 2
I'd like to think Snowden had good intentions (albeit from his own perspective), but his actions: from fleeing the country to now supposedly bartering with the Chinese Government, point more so to a traitor.

RE: 1% on VPN?
By Cheesew1z69 on 6/17/2013 1:17:45 PM , Rating: 2
And why he would never be pardoned...

RE: 1% on VPN?
By tamalero on 6/18/2013 11:59:13 AM , Rating: 2
When the news reports that the US is going after him (including arrests.. hitmen or even drones).. no surprise he decided to go for the best for his safety.

RE: 1% on VPN?
By BRB29 on 6/17/2013 8:27:11 AM , Rating: 2
While I applaud this petition, I seriously doubt this is going to have any impact on pardoning him.

because it never happened before right?

RE: 1% on VPN?
By theapparition on 6/17/2013 10:03:40 AM , Rating: 1
I guarantee 99%+ on that list had political ties to the outgoing president.

Snowden doesn't have that. It won't happen.

RE: 1% on VPN?
By BRB29 on 6/17/2013 10:30:05 AM , Rating: 2
Vietnam draft dodgers – Ford offered conditional amnesty to over 50,000 draft dodgers.

Vietnam draft dodgers – Unconditional amnesty issued in the form of a pardon by Jimmy Carter

First-time offenders convicted of crimes under the Narcotics Control Act of 1956 – pardoned all, in effect overturning much of the law passed by Congress. Pardoned by Kennedy

George Burdick – a New York newspaper editor, who had refused to testify in federal court regarding the sources used in his article concerning the collection of customs duties. He pled the 5th amendment; President Wilson then granted him a full pardon for all of his federal offenses, which he refused. He continued to plead the 5th, at which he was sentenced by a federal judge for contempt. It was then that the Supreme Court reinforced the necessity of accepting a pardon to be valid; the federal judge had imprisoned Burdick on the grounds that he was claiming falsely his need for protection against self-incrimination. Pardoned by Woodrow Wilson

Frederick Krafft – convicted for alleged violation of the Espionage Act. Only person convicted under this law to receive a full executive pardon by Woodrow Wilson

Even Harry Truman saved the guy that tried to assassinate him

Your 99%+ is looking pretty lame.

RE: 1% on VPN?
By Cheesew1z69 on 6/17/2013 7:56:49 AM , Rating: 3
The fact that anyone voted this up is pathetic... horribly pathetic and sad..

RE: 1% on VPN?
By xti on 6/28/2013 8:54:24 AM , Rating: 2
can you please stop stalking me? your man crush on me is creepy.

RE: 1% on VPN?
By Jeffk464 on 6/15/2013 11:46:23 AM , Rating: 2
FYI there is a newer skype type program called viber. Its based out of Cyprus and might not be hacked by the FED's, who knows?

RE: 1% on VPN?
By BRB29 on 6/15/13, Rating: 0
RE: 1% on VPN?
By Cheesew1z69 on 6/15/2013 4:58:10 PM , Rating: 2
Normal people, unlike you, when they says the feds, they mean the FBI. Again, showing your complete ignorance.

RE: 1% on VPN?
By BRB29 on 6/17/2013 8:22:42 AM , Rating: 1
What is your definition of normal? uneducated?

If you're going to accuse someone of anything, at least be accurate on who you're talking about. But why does that even matter, the people here can't even differentiate who they are blaming. No wonder why you're always losing in life and blaming the government in general lol. If you hate the government so much then do something about it or vacate yourself somewhere else.

RE: 1% on VPN?
By Cheesew1z69 on 6/17/2013 11:27:43 AM , Rating: 2
Troll, done feeding you. You contribute nothing to these conversations. You are a know-it-all loser who argues even when pointed out to be wrong. You call people liars and uneducated when you have nothing to counter with.

It's pretty obvious to anyone at this point you are just trolling. Go get a job and a life would you.

RE: 1% on VPN?
By JPForums on 6/18/2013 8:29:44 AM , Rating: 2
What is your definition of normal? uneducated?

Nah, the use of "Feds" to cover any generic federal entity (though mostly used for those with policing authority) was made popular by Hollywood. Which federal entity they are referring to in any given situation is to be inferred by the context of the situation. Makes it much less work to get things right when you can just refer to all of them at once and let the target audience figure out which one is applicable (if they care). Like it or hate it, they set the trends in the U.S.

RE: 1% on VPN?
By foolsgambit11 on 6/17/2013 1:29:40 AM , Rating: 2
the fed is the Federal Reserve. The feds (with the 's') is more generic, although it's probably most frequently used to refer to agencies that have policing power, like the FBI/DEA/ATF/Homeland Security/whatever.

RE: 1% on VPN?
By SlyNine on 6/29/2013 12:48:06 AM , Rating: 2
First off, given the context it's pretty obvious what "feds" he's talking about. Feds being short for federal authority. The fed, as you are implying, is a completely different thing.

Second off, get a life.

RE: 1% on VPN?
By cditty on 6/15/2013 10:03:14 PM , Rating: 2
Viber has been out a very long time.

RE: 1% on VPN?
By T2k on 6/18/2013 3:15:37 PM , Rating: 2
You mean the same Viber that's being distributed for free, offering free calls, developed by company that has no revenue, makes no money, relies on private investors and owned by a former Israeli agent, working out of Cyprus, the go-to meeting place of all Middle Eastern intelligence services and agents?
Sure, I'm sure it's clean, of course...

RE: 1% on VPN?
By In2Boost on 6/16/2013 12:48:52 PM , Rating: 2
1% in high-level government positions, perhaps?
Perhaps the same 1% who won't be using Obamacare?

"My sex life is pretty good" -- Steve Jobs' random musings during the 2010 D8 conference

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki