Top
Best
New

Posted by cf100clunk 4 hours ago

The Wyden Siren Goes Off Again: We'll Be "Stunned" by NSA Under Section 702(www.techdirt.com)
200 points | 71 commentspage 2
root_axis 1 hour ago|
It's been my experience that most people already assume full surveillance of everything happening on all devices.
ionwake 1 hour ago||
You'd be surprised, I know IT managers with 20 years experience who ( probably incorrectly) think otherwise.
kittikitti 1 hour ago||
I think it's going to be more about how many people have access to the surveillance who might use it for needless things or personal reasons, at a large scale.
bram98 2 hours ago||
Whatever we imagine, the NSA seems to top it each time.
jeffrallen 3 hours ago||
Wyden is a national treasure.

Thank you for your service, Ron.

Also: Hello from Roseburg.

davidw 3 hours ago||
I hope we get someone as good as he is when he retires. Waves from Bend.
dlev_pika 2 hours ago||
Wyden is a vote I cast without issue.

He is one of the few that is actually looking into Epstein bank accounts movements.

kittikitti 1 hour ago||
I'm going to guess warrantless search of all of our data, retention policies, and the worst part is who gets access to search through it. Basically, I speculate that anyone under a loosely defined classification would be able to access it legally. I also think there's a bunch of information and password sharing between people who don't even have a clearance for it. Perhaps sprinkle in abusing this system for personal or political reasons.

My word of caution is if you do have access to these systems or a shared password, tread very carefully.

phendrenad2 3 hours ago||
I looked up Section 702 and top result was an official government powerpoint justifying it to the public. https://www.dni.gov/files/icotr/Section702-Basics-Infographi...

Under "Oversight", they point out that the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board concluded that that the government's Section 702 program operates within legal constraints, as recently as 2014! Wow! </sarc>

electronsoup 3 hours ago||
If it was so important, wouldn't he just filibuster it till he got what he wanted?
nozzlegear 2 hours ago||
It's my understanding that a single senator can't just filibuster anything they want unless the conditions are right. It depends on a few different factors and requires the bill to be brought to the floor for debate, which itself would require cooperation from the majority leader. That's not likely to happen.
Hizonner 1 hour ago|||
Filibuster what, exactly? No proposal is before the Senate...

ON edit: Oops, sorry, 702 is up for renewal. Still not clear he could win a cloture vote, though.

recursivecaveat 2 hours ago|||
If you're solo you have to actually stand up and talk still it seems. (And even then a 60+ person majority can vote to close the debate on you) Nobody has done it solo for more than 24 hours or so. Presumably at that point you're about ready to keel over.
kelnos 2 hours ago||
He needs 40 other Senators to agree with him; 60 votes can close debate and stop a filibuster.
losvedir 3 hours ago||
Wyden has been special, as long as I can remember. I feel like a lot of us early tech people had something of a libertarian bent. I think to some extent I've grown out of it in my less idealistic older age, but the whole idea of freedom from the government, living your own life, not being spied on, still resonates with me, and Wyden has always been a champion of it to some extent. You used to have Ron Paul, and these days now Rand Paul and Thomas Massie sometimes waving that flag, too.

It was definitely swimming upstream in the post-9/11 days. I was hopeful for a while with Trump that we'd see more of a mainstream resurgence, but it's not looking like it to me anymore.

Anyway, I can only imagine what he's alluding to here...

dlev_pika 2 hours ago|
I think he is a reflection of the broader libertarian streak of Oregonians.

Source: am Oregonian.

markus_zhang 3 hours ago||
I wouldn’t be surprised by anything nowadays.
IshKebab 2 hours ago||
Uhm this article is a total lie, no?

Claim: We’ll Be “Stunned” By What the NSA Is Doing Under Section 702

Actual quote: I strongly believe that this matter can and should be declassified and that Congress needs to debate it openly before Section 702 is reauthorized. In fact, when it is eventually declassified, the American people will be stunned that it took so long and that Congress has been debating this authority with insufficient information.

He said people will be stunned that it took so long to be declassified; not that people will be stunned by what it is.

ticulatedspline 3 hours ago|
Will we? like doesn't everyone already assume the the NSA has had their hooks in basically everything possible.

Like I'm having a hard time concocting a reveal that would be "Stunning"

"NSA wiretapped all major phone carriers, recorded every voice conversation and text message of every citizen"

Meh, not that stunning. at least not in a "violation of rights" kinda way. Maybe in a "wow they had the technical acumen to even handle all that data" kind of way

"NSA has secret database with all medical records", "NSA has logs of every credit card transaction", "NSA can compel anyone anywhere to spy and reveal all data on anyone for any reason"

Would any of these reveals actually be "stunning", frankly I've assumed the worst for so long that the response will be more like "wow, that all they're doing?"

like opening a diaper on a kid with IBS, you expect it to be so bad when it's a normal turd you're suddenly really happy about shit.

Rooster61 3 hours ago||
That's not what the quote is referring to directly (the title is a bit misleading):

"In fact, when it is eventually declassified, the American people will be stunned that it took so long and that Congress has been debating this authority with insufficient information"

You are correct that the American populace has normalized this already. The fact that this is done without congressional oversight is indeed stunning. Or at least it would have been a decade or two ago.

embedding-shape 3 hours ago|||
> Would any of these reveals actually be "stunning",

Everyone knew the NSA spied on everyone, yet Snowden leaks were truly stunning, because no one had evidence of the sheer scale of what the NSA (and collaborators) were engaged in. Wyden Siren was already firing off about that many years beforehand, before we knew the actual truth, so considering his record, I'm also skeptical it'll be "truly shocking" for the average HN tech-nerd, but for the general public, to have evidence of what the government does? Probably will be "stunning", but the one who lives will see.

rockskon 1 hour ago||
So - given the law allows the NSA to do things given legal constructs, reality be damned, then what new legal construct do you think Wyden is sounding the alarm about?

When we un-tether the possibile from tech-specific delineations, you'll find things get more and more alarming.

Whatever it is Wyden is sounding the alarm about, you can be certain the sole protection we have - the sole guiding principle and bulwark against abuse - is the agency's culture given the rampant "incidental" collection and the public claims that putting the equivalent of a removable sticky-note over the names of U.S. citizens from their personal data is sufficient to satisfy the 4th Amendment as the NSA searches through our persinal data in bulk.

And what is culture if not the people we have to promote the practices?

Boy am I glad we have an administration that lets agencies largely lead themselves and doesn't engage in efforts to replace a large part of various agency's workforce - specifically those who care about the agency's culture!

lokar 3 hours ago|||
HN readers won't be surprised, but I don't think that's who he is talking about.

Most Americans have this kind of thing tuned out, that have bigger issues in their lives.

imglorp 3 hours ago|||
Don't forget backdooring or interfering with multiple cryptography standards, at least Dual_EC_DRBG and RSA.

Or backdooring most major microprocessors (tpm).

Etc?

runjake 2 hours ago||
To which TPM backdoors are you referring?

I am aware that similar accusations are leveled against Intel ME and AMD's Platform Security Processor.

imglorp 33 minutes ago|||
Yeah. Obviously we can't know officially for decades but there's still some signals. One is the HAP flag (1, solid) to turn off IME, which has had at least one pubic vuln. Are they merely reducing their attack surface? Why can only they buy CPUs without IME (2, rumor)? Etc.

https://www.csoonline.com/article/562761/researchers-say-now...

https://www.franksworld.com/2025/09/18/the-intel-backdoor-no...

bram98 1 hour ago|||
.
cucumber3732842 3 hours ago|||
I wouldn't be surprised by it, but "they're actually using all of the above, laundered through some extra steps, to provide leads to state and local LEO" would probably get people pissed off.
HoldOnAMinute 2 hours ago||
Soma ( social media ) keeps everyone comfortably sedated
bram98 2 hours ago||
anxiously sedated
TimorousBestie 3 hours ago||
> Would any of these reveals actually be "stunning", frankly I've assumed the worst for so long that the response will be more like "wow, that all they're doing?"

You’re far more cynical than the typical citizen, who Ryder is addressing.