Latest Leak Shows NSA Spied On A US Law Firm Representing A Foreign Government In A Trade Dispute
from the the-business-of-the-spy-business-is-apparently-business dept
Remember the limitations imposed on the NSA by the administration's minor reform efforts? Recently, ODNI director James Clapper "released" a copy-paste job on a month-old presidential directive that included this paragraph:
“in no event may signals intelligence collected in bulk be used for the purpose of suppressing or burdening criticism or dissent; disadvantaging persons based on their ethnicity, race, gender, sexual orientation, or religion; affording a competitive advantage to U.S. companies and U.S. business sectors commercially;” or achieving any purpose other than those identified above.As I noted then, the NSA must be following these guidelines going forward because the most recent leak published at the New York Times shows the agency using its powers to "afford a competitive advantage to US companies/business sectors."
A top-secret document, obtained by the former N.S.A. contractor Edward J. Snowden, shows that an American law firm was monitored while representing a foreign government in trade disputes with the United States…This gives the agency a bit of deniability, depending on how it phrases its response (or if a specific response ever arrives -- it only offered boilerplate earlier). It didn't spy on the US law firm, another agency did. It's just when the Australian agency offered to share the info, the NSA didn't say no. Instead, it offered "guidance" and recommended Australian intelligence keep intercepting attorney-client communication.
The government of Indonesia had retained the law firm for help in trade talks, according to the February 2013 document. It reports that the N.S.A.’s Australian counterpart, the Australian Signals Directorate, notified the agency that it was conducting surveillance of the talks, including communications between Indonesian officials and the American law firm, and offered to share the information.
The Australians told officials at an N.S.A. liaison office in Canberra, Australia, that “information covered by attorney-client privilege may be included” in the intelligence gathering, according to the document, a monthly bulletin from the Canberra office. The law firm was not identified, but Mayer Brown, a Chicago-based firm with a global practice, was then advising the Indonesian government on trade issues.The paths towards plausible legality are twofold. Attorney-client communications are not specifically protected from NSA surveillance by US law and the agency is more than welcome to intercept communications involving a foreign intelligence target, like Indonesian officials. At this point, minimization is supposed to kick in and remove information related to non-targeted US persons. The NSA's canned answer deliberately avoids the specifics of the leak.
On behalf of the Australians, the liaison officials asked the N.S.A. general counsel’s office for guidance about the spying. The bulletin notes only that the counsel’s office “provided clear guidance” and that the Australian agency “has been able to continue to cover the talks, providing highly useful intelligence for interested US customers.”
In a statement, Ms. Vines, the agency spokeswoman, said: “N.S.A. works with a number of partners in meeting its foreign-intelligence mission goals, and those operations comply with U.S. law and with the applicable laws under which those partners operate. A key part of the protections that apply to both U.S. persons and citizens of other countries is the mandate that information be in support of a valid foreign-intelligence requirement, and comply with U.S. attorney general-approved procedures to protect privacy rights.”This would seem to be an admission by omission. If there's no immediate answer or plausible deniability, simply pass along the agency's mission statement as a "response."
This isn't the first time the agency has performed surveillance on behalf of US trade entities. As we've covered earlier, evidence of economic espionage in Brazil had previously been exposed and the New York Times is apparently in possession of other documents showing more trade-related spying.
A 2004 N.S.A. document, for example, describes how the agency’s intelligence gathering was critical to the Agriculture Department in international trade negotiations.So, the new guidance (as of January 17th) supposedly prevents the NSA from deploying surveillance for economically-motivated reasons. That's of small comfort considering the agency has denied performing this sort of surveillance in the past, continually asserting that its interest is solely in national security, even as more evidence mounts that its intelligence "customers" include US businesses and trade groups.
“The U.S.D.A. is involved in trade operations to protect and secure a large segment of the U.S. economy,” that document states. Top agency officials “often rely on SIGINT” — short for the signals intelligence that the N.S.A. eavesdropping collects — “to support their negotiations.”
Even if the NSA did nothing more than "offer guidance," there's still an object lesson in this story: no matter who you are, no matter where your country of origin, you'll always be someone else's "foreigner," and afforded none of the minimal protections that your own country grants you.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: edward snowden, indonesia, james clapper, leak, nsa, odni
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Following every American's phone call, internet communications, or other methods of communications without justifiable reasons valid enough to obtain a search warrant with a judge is a huge reason why the public feels so against all this. It violates our principals right to the core of who we are supposed to be. Instead our government officials have turned this government into a laughing stock on the world stage with everyone murmuring hypocrite behind the back of their hand.
How have we sunk so low?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
NSA and Law Firms
At least half my client base are foreign entities involved in U.S. activities, often in some sense "opposed" to particular U.S. interests (depending on administration, tax policy, etc.). Regardless of stance, my clients have the right to consult with me openly and confidentially without fear of reprisal, surveillance and, frankly, cheating by the opposition.
If there is one thing America is supposed to be about, it's fair play. When the government itself is the one undermining fair play, it's not longer the America that stands as a beacon for liberty and freedom, and that is sad. I can't imagine how President Obama sleeps at night, knowing he not only wasted the votes of supporters like me, but that he actually increased the immoral actions of our government, from assassinations to over-reaching surveillance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: NSA and Law Firms
I imagine he sleeps quite well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: NSA and Law Firms
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: NSA and Law Firms
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: NSA and Law Firms
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: NSA and Law Firms
Isn't that ultimately what most really rich and successful lawyers do?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: NSA and Law Firms
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Even if it shouldn't, what do you wanna bet that it will?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Changes are coming down the pipes. Slowly but surely they will arrive. Changes beyond the cosmetic that Obama offered will have to be done. Either that or the NSA and other various spy agencies stand to loose a good portion of their abilities.
Brazil is teed and planning laying their own subsea line. Probably won't help a lot as the US will just go tap in undersea beyond their depth to do something about it. Germany and France are planning on having talks about making their own internet connections that don't require emails and net communications being routed through the US. The EU is looking at killing the financial spying arrangement set up over drugs with the US on privacy grounds and in addition considering laws to require Google and other major communications giants to keep their data in country. These are the first major rumbles to global reaction. Be sure that more comes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The NSA is a bunch of compulsive liars. The facts show this to be true, over and over again. Trust the facts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Heh, yeah, I used to work with them as a contractor. Every single person I ever dealt with in a management position there was indeed a liar. It seemed to be a requirement to move into management. This was in contrast to most of the non-management worker bees.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Collect-it-all means collect-it-all. Including gay pillow talk of justice Scalia and congressman King. Got it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Innocent!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not suprised!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]