In response to a Freedom of Information Act request from New York Times reporter Charlie Savage, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB) has declassified its implementation report on Presidential Policy Directive 28: Signals Intelligence Activities (PPD-28). PPD-28 was signed by President Obama in January of 2014 and provides principles guiding “why, whether, when, and how the United States conducts signals intelligence activities.” The report was sent to Congress in early 2017.
Latest in Surveillance
On Sept. 13, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that the United Kingdom’s bulk data-collection programs violate human-rights law by failing to incorporate adequate privacy safeguards and oversight—but that mass surveillance and intelligence sharing did not violate international law.
The ‘Big Brother Watch’ Ruling on U.K. Surveillance Practices: Key Points from an American Perspective
Last month the European Court of Human Rights found that various U.K. surveillance practices violate the Right to Privacy in the European Convention. The case is a great opportunity to better understand what is—and is not—similar about U.S. and EU legal frameworks in this area.
Lawyers and privacy advocates alike should pay careful attention to the “priority actions” in the National Cyber Strategy related to surveillance and criminal law reform.
Bloomberg reports that the Chinese People’s Liberation Army has quietly been corrupting a key computer chip. The technical implications are frightening.
There is value in putting down a marker that using the technology this way is not acceptable.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit heard oral argument on Monday in United States v. Hasbajrami, which challenges the constitutionality of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The panel was composed of Judges Gerard Lynch, Christopher Droney, and Susan Carney. Listen below.
A new CSIS report points out where it is possible to make progress on technology, privacy and security issues.
How to understand the NSA’s June 28 announcement about its call-detail record databases.
The Supreme Court seems to have understood itself as applying the Fourth Amendment to the 21st century, and in particular to digital network technology of the 21st century—but it left several key questions unanswered.