The director of the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts released the following report on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court’s activities during 2017. The report states that the FISC received 1,614 applications—granting 1,147, modfying 391 in part, denying 50 in part, and denying 26 in full.
Latest in FISC
The mystery as to why there was no Section 702 application or certification reported for 2016 has now been solved (I'm assuming readers know today's big 702 news, flagged by Quinta here, and as explored in detail by Charlie Savage in this article): NSA has been struggling to resolve a problem with "about" collection under the Upstream heading, including in particular a problem with analysts quering the fruits of that c
In Rare En Banc Session, Surveillance Court to Reconsider Whether ACLU Can Seek Release of Documents
All 11 judges on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court will rehear an ACLU claim that it has standing to assert a First Amendment right to see FISC decisions upholding the government’s bulk data collection program.
The hearing appears to be just the second time in the FISC’s history that it has publicly stated that it will meet en banc (it is unclear whether it has held secret en banc sessions).
Does the FISA court perform a recognizably judicial function when it reviews 702 minimization procedures for compliance with the Fourth amendment? Our guest for episode 115 is Orin Kerr, GWU professor and all-round computer crime guru.
No holds are barred as a freewheeling panel of cryptographers and security pros duke it out with me and the Justice Department over going dark, exceptional access, and the Apple-FBI conflict.
Recently, the government unsealed a November ruling by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC).
On Friday, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court authorized the extension of the NSA's collection of bulk telephony metadata under Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act until November 29th, 2015—the latter date marking the end of a transition to new, narrower surveillance rules imposed by the USA Freedom Act.
Our guest commentator for episode 74 is Catherine Lotrionte, a recognized expert on international cyberlaw and the associate director of the Institute for Law, Science and Global Security at Georgetown University. We dive deep on the United Nations Group of Government Experts, and the recent agreement of that group on a few basic norms for cyberspace. Predictably, I break out in hives at the third mention of “norms” and default to jokes about “Cheers.”