The project calls for the development of a prototype based on test data that would be deployed at the Army Intelligence and Security Command at Fort Belvoir, Va. Officials would not say when the system would be put into operation.The system is one of a number of projects now under way inside the government to lash together both commercial and government data to hunt for patterns of terrorist activities.
Note that even if this project should somehow be defeated, there are duplicates out there in the woodpile. One of them will get through. It's time to shift the focus to surviving in an absolute police state. The genie is out of the bottle; the government is now--or will be shortly--totally out of control, IMO.
There are several threads on this, and I don't have time at the moment to read through all the replies, so I apologize in advance if I've flagged people who have already seen this.
These new developments are concerning. I don't think many are aware of the increased authority given to the federal government to monitor and disrupt Online activities. For example, after passage of the Patriot Act, if the FBI identified a website that was critical of FBI activities and presented information exposing FBI wrong doing, it would be completely legal for the FBI to spend time, resources, and taxpayer dollars to shut down the critcism. What's more is the individuals assigned to monitor dissidents no longer have to be federal agents.
These activities were illegal prior to the Patriot Act;however,the power is now available to the FBI just as I described it. I hope they use their new power to monitor and disrupt online activity more wisely than they have wielded their power in the past.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Executive Summary
Chief Concerns
The EFF's chief concerns with the USAPA include:
Expanded Surveillance With Reduced Checks and Balances.
USAPA expands all four traditional tools of surveillance -- wiretaps, search warrants, pen/trap orders and subpoenas. Their counterparts under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that allow spying in the U.S. by foreign intelligence agencies have similarly been expanded. This means:
Be careful what you put in that Google search. The government may now spy on web surfing of innocent Americans, including terms entered into search engines, by merely telling a judge anywhere in the U.S. that the spying could lead to information that is "relevant" to an ongoing criminal investigation. The person spied on does not have to be the target of the investigation. This application must be granted and the government is not obligated to report to the court or tell the person spied up what it has done.
ISPs hand over more user information. The law makes two changes to increase how much information the government may obtain about users from their ISPs or others who handle or store their online communications. First it allows ISPs to voluntarily hand over all "non-content" information to law enforcement with no need for any court order or subpoena. sec. 212. Second, it expands the records that the government may seek with a simple subpoena (no court review required) to include records of session times and durations, temporarily assigned network (I.P.) addresses; means and source of payments, including credit card or bank account numbers. secs. 210, 211.
New definitions of terrorism expand scope of surveillance.
One new definition of terrorism and three expansions of previous terms also expand the scope of surveillance. They are 1) § 802 definition of "domestic terrorism" (amending 18 USC §2331), which raises concerns about legitimate protest activity resulting in conviction on terrorism charges, especially if violence erupts; adds to 3 existing definition of terrorism (int'l terrorism per 18 USC §2331, terrorism transcending national borders per 18 USC §2332b, and federal terrorism per amended 18 USC §2332b(g)(5)(B)). These new definitions also expose more people to surveillance (and potential "harboring" and "material support" liability, §§ 803, 805).
Overbreadth with a lack of focus on terrorism. Several provisions of the USAPA have no apparent connection to preventing terrorism. These include: Government spying on suspected computer trespassers with no need for court order. Sec. 217.