Declassified report reveals that the US government is buying troves of data about its citizens (web.archive.org)

submitted 1 year ago by 0x815@feddit.de to c/news@beehaw.org

27 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Perhaps most controversially, the report states that the government believes it can “persistently” track the phones of “millions of Americans” without a warrant, so long as it pays for the information, a newly declassified report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, ODNI, reveals. Were the government to simply demand access to a device's location instead, it would be considered a Fourth Amendment “search” and would require a judge's sign-off. But because companies are willing to sell the information—not only to the US government but to other companies as well—the government considers it “publicly available” and therefore asserts that it “can purchase it.”

Here' tge report (pdf): https://www.odni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/ODNI-Declassified-Report-on-CAI-January2022.pdf

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Lowbird@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago

I think they read the report; they're saying that corporations shouldn't be able to sell that information in the first place, to anyone. The government can't use the "it's publicly available information" excuse if nobody else can legally collect it to sell it to the gov and other corpertions. (Aka, they can't "make it publicly available.")

People are arguing that if it's illegal for the gov to collect the info directly, it should also be illegal for a corporation to collect and/or sell that info directly, thus closing the loophole.

[-] 0x815@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

Yes, privacy should be an 'unwaivable right'. I'm not sure whether this is the correct legal term, but it should indispensible like basic human rights.

[-] itty53@vlemmy.net 1 points 1 year ago

The thing is that corporations already can't sell that data ... unless you give them permission to ... which you do just that explicitly when you agree to the EULAs.

That's the legal basis. No one absolutely must use these platforms, legally. Practically they must in many cases but that's the catch 22. The platforms literally came up on intelligence community funding. Facebook was propped up by'em for this exact reason.

And you can't make an inalienable right to privacy such that companies can't ever sell personal data but still allow people themselves to do so, and you can't stop me from selling my data myself. That would be a much bigger breach of the contract of regulatory power that defends citizens.

Privacy isn't something anyone can reasonably force you to keep. I can't go showing my dick to everyone and then scold them for checking out my package, and still maintain my honesty. If I didn't want people looking at my wangstick, I wouldn't show it to them.

this post was submitted on 13 Jun 2023

97 points (100.0% liked)

World News

22057 readers

31 users here now

Breaking news from around the world.

News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.

Guidelines for submissions:

Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.

For US News, see the US News community.

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS