FBI to access browsing history w/out warrant in terrorism cases

[Lion Heart 15,041]

The Obama administration is seeking to amend surveillance law to give the FBI explicit authority to access a person’s Internet browser history and other electronic data without a warrant in terrorism and spy cases.

The administration made a similar effort six years ago but dropped it after concerns were raised by privacy advocates and the tech industry.

FBI Director James B. Comey has characterized the legislation as a fix to “a typo” in the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, which he says has led some tech firms to refuse to provide data that Congress intended them to provide.

But tech firms and privacy advocates say the bureau is seeking an expansion of surveillance powers that infringes on Americans’ privacy.

Now, at the FBI’s request, some lawmakers are advancing legislation that would allow the bureau to obtain “electronic communication transactional records” using an administrative subpoena known as a national security letter. An NSL can be issued by the special agent in charge of a bureau field office without a judge’s approval.

Such records may include a person’s Internet protocol address and how much time a person spends on a given site. But they don’t include content, such as the text of an e-mail or Google search queries. There’s also a limit to how much visibility the bureau would have into which part of a website a person had visited. For instance, according to the bureau, if the person went to any part of The Washington Post’s website, law enforcement would see only washingtonpost.com — nothing more specific.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-wants-access-to-internet-browser-history-without-a-warrant-in-terrorism-and-spy-cases/2016/06/06/2d257328-2c0d-11e6-9de3-6e6e7a14000c_story.html?postshare=6161465253213235&tid=ss_tw

[Redstreak 6,653]

Noooooooooooooooooooooot a fan of that

[Erotica 34,929]

Goodbye privacy

[RAMROD 117,073]

Well, this doesn't seem likely to affect many people, except the ones confirmed participate in terrorism act, right?

 

[Sizzily 14,571]

I hope they enjoy looking at all the p*rn in my browsing history.

[ryanripley 86,575]

4 minutes ago, Sizzily said:

I hope they enjoy looking at all the p*rn in my browsing history.

you beat me to it  

[PartySick 172,545]

So...the Patriot Act 2.0? But instead of tapping our phones, they'll be looking at our browser history?

In the choice between privacy and security, I choose privacy

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

17 minutes ago, ryanripley said:

you beat me to it  

Pun intended?

[lego 44,165]

30 minutes ago, RAMROD said:

Well, this doesn't seem likely to affect many people, except the ones confirmed participate in terrorism act, right?

 

 

Not exactly. This will be very convenient to find people's secrets and blackmail them to become informants. 

[ryanripley 86,575]

Just now, LebaneseDude said:

Pun intended?

[RAMROD 117,073]

Just now, YourSweet666 said:

 

Not exactly. This will be very convenient to find people's secrets and blackmail them if they don't become informants. 

Eek! In that case, this is terrible. 

I hope every big IT companies refused to aid them the way Apple did.

[SychosSoChic 9,995]

No.

[Whispering 18,865]

I'm fine with it. They can look at my computer and phone history all they want. I have nothing to hide! 

It's like having to go through security and have all your luggage and yourself scanned at the airport. If you don't have anything to hide, then it isn't a problem. Security first, especially when dealing with suspected terrorists of in situations like airports, etc. 

[Illuminati 15,965]

3 minutes ago, Whispering said:

I'm fine with it. They can look at my computer and phone history all they want. I have nothing to hide! 

It's like having to go through security and have all your luggage and yourself scanned at the airport. If you don't have anything to hide, then it isn't a problem. Security first, especially when dealing with suspected terrorists of in situations like airports, etc. 

might as well allow them to monitor you 24/7 just in case something potentially happens. it's not as much of a security measure as it is a gateway to monitoring people in general, especially those that are maybe fighting against the current system or who are not very supportive of their current government or pose some sort of competition not necessarily dangerous people but those that are just in a way of anything even slightly corrupt in the system.

[Whispering 18,865]

20 hours ago, BlTCH said:

might as well allow them to monitor you 24/7 just in case something potentially happens. it's not as much of a security measure as it is a gateway to monitoring people in general, especially those that are maybe fighting against the current system or who are not very supportive of their current government or pose some sort of competition not necessarily dangerous people but those that are just in a way of anything even slightly corrupt in the system.

I mean, if they want to. I'm pretty boring. Today I worked outside in my yard and ate a sandwich for lunch.  Tonight, I'm going to a friend's house for dinner. 

Seems like a giant waste of time and energy, but if that's what they want to do!