Advanced search Help
Searching for terms: ALL (Electronic AND Surveillance) in: title or summary
Clear all search criteria
Only 1/2! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, which is half the size of the Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).
-
H. Rept. 109-680, Part 1: Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act, Report together with Additional and Minority Views to Accompany H.R. 5825, September 25, 2006
"The Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 5825) to update the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do pass. […] The purpose of H.R. 5825 is to modernize the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, to strengthen oversight of the executive branch concerning electronic surveillance and intelligence, and to provide clear electronic surveillance authority to the nation's intelligence agencies in the event of a terrorist attack, armed attack, or imminent threat against the United States. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act ('FISA') provides the legal framework for collecting specified types of foreign intelligence information within the United States. The current legal and technical framework relative to FISA was constructed in 1978. The complexity, variety and means of communications technology has since mushroomed exponentially and globally-but the structure of our surveillance laws has remained hidebound around the technology of generations-old wired telephones."
United States. Government Printing Office
2006-09-25
-
H. Rept. 109-680, Part 2: Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act, Report together with Dissenting and Additional Views to Accompany H.R. 5825, September 25, 2006
"The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 5825) to update the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do pass. […] Representative Heather Wilson, Judiciary Committee Chairman Sensenbrenner, and Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Hoekstra introduced H.R. 5825, the 'Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act,' on July 18, 2006. This bill would strengthen oversight of the executive branch and enhance accountability, clarify the scope and applicability of FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) warrants; and update the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to reflect modern changes in technology and communication. H.R. 5825 pertains to the manner in which the Federal government collects oral, wire and electronic communications for foreign intelligence purposes. Congress enacted the first Federal wiretap statute during World War I. The authority and limits of government surveillance have been the focus of extensive judicial consideration. By the time the United States Supreme Court ruled on the issue in Olmstead v. United States, over 40 States had banned wiretapping. In the Olmstead case, the Court found that a wiretap of a Seattle bootlegger did not violate the Fourth Amendment because there was not 'an official search and seizure of his person, or such a seizure of his papers or his tangible material effects, or an actual physical invasion of his house or curtilage for the purposes of making a seizure.' Subsequent decisions eroded the Olmstead holding, however."
United States. Government Printing Office
2006-09-25
-
Presidential Directive 19: Electronic Surveillance and Physical Searches Conducted by the Department of Defense Outside the United States for Foreign Intelligence Purposes
In this Directive, President Carter amends "Presidential Directive/NSC-19 to include a delegation of power to military judges to authorize electronic surveillance and physical searches directed United States persons who are outside the United States. The military judges included in this delegation are those who are authorized by 10 U.S.C. section 826 to preside at general court-martial and who are designated by the Secretary of Defense to exercise this delegation of power. The Secretary of Defense may designate only military judges who are located outside the United States. Military judges may exercise this power only through issuance of warrants and only with respect to persons who are subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. 10 U.S.C. section 802, articles 2(1)-(10). Warrants my be issued only on a finding of probable cause that the United States person is an agent of a foreign power and only when necessary to obtain significant foreign intelligence or counterintelligence. Physical searches may entail unconsented entry into real or personal property but shall use the minimum intrusion necessary to obtain information. This amendment also empowers military judges to approve surreptitious and continuous monitoring as defined in Executive Order 12036 under the same terms applicable to electronic surveillance."
United States. White House Office
1979-08-24
-
Executive Order 12139: Foreign Intelligence Electronic Surveillance
This executive order authorizes the Attorney General to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order.
United States. Office of the Federal Register
1979-05-23
-
Electronic Surveillance: Report of the National Commission for the Review of Federal and State Laws Relating to Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance
"The report which follows is the result of two years of work by the National Commission for the Review of Federal and State Laws Relating to Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance. In the course of its two years of work, the Commission held 17 days of hearings, receiving testimony from more than 100 witnesses. In August 1974, 14 experienced prosecutors and investigators conferred for three days in an attempt to determine, how, when, and why electronic surveillance can best be used in, law enforcement. Commission staff members visited 46 State and 12 Federal law-enforcement jurisdictions to study and report on the manner in which court authorized and consensual electronic surveillance is being used. Background studies of various aspects of electronic surveillance were\prepared by 0 the Commission staff and consultants. (A majority of the Commission determined not to study the use of electronic surveillance in national security cases.) This volume contains the Findings and Recommendations of the Commission, a Summary of the Evidence considered by it, and Minority and Concurring Reports. The testimony taken at our hearings and the reports, of the staff and consultants have been published in five separate volumes of supporting materials."
United States. National Commission for the Review of Federal and State Laws Relating to Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance
1976
-
Enhancing Influenza Surveillance Using Electronic Surveillance System for the Early Notification of Community-Based Epidemics (ESSENCE)
"Influenza is a cause of preventable morbidity and mortality; timely analysis of surveillance data may allow earlier recognition of outbreaks, potentially including those caused by new influenza strains. Influenza-like Illness (ILI) is of particular interest in surveillance because many bio-warfare and bio-terrorism agents cause flu-like syndromes. The Department of Defense Global Emerging Infections Surveillance and Response System (DoD-GEIS) sponsors two programs, ESSENCE (The Electronic Surveillance System for the Early Notification of Community-based Epidemics) and the DoD Influenza Surveillance Program, that could assist in influenza outbreak detection and response. ESSENCE utilizes military beneficiary population outpatient visits data to detect aberrations in daily counts of ICD-9 based syndrome groups. Begun in 1999 in the Washington, DC area and expanded in 2001 following the events of September 11, this system analyzes outpatient visit data across DoD military treatment facilities (MTFs), in the US and abroad. A prior study assessed the value of ESSENCE data in detecting yearly influenza activity by comparing it to a traditional influenza surveillance system used by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Results of that study showed similarity between the rates of ILI visits to sentinel physicians in the South-Atlantic region and military facilities in the National Capital Area. Soon after September 11, 2002, ESSENCE began receiving outpatient data from all US MTFs in the world and making syndromic surveillance data easily available throughout DoD installations."
Walter Reed Army Institute of Research. Division of Preventive Medicine
MacIntosh, Victor H.
2004-06
-
Non-Traditional Intelligence, Reconnaissance, and Surveillance Electronic Intelligence for the Operational Electronic Warfare Officer
From thesis abstract: "The military's decreasing budget and continued requirement to simultaneously wage war with two nation states, and maintain Defense Support to Civil Authorities in the homeland, necessitate a need to think creatively on how to provide a robust intelligence collection effort in a financially constrained era. The over tasking of ISR [Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance] assets and the limited support they can provide in a contested environment make use of Non-Traditional Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (NTISR) capable platforms an attractive and affordable option to fill ISR gaps. To that end, the United States military must develop a means of tasking NTISR assets in the collection of theater electronic intelligence (ELINT) to provide Operational Commanders with a layered method to acquire actionable information to prepare, plan, and execute campaigns and major operations. ELINT providers in the NTISR community need to produce doctrine and a tasking concept to produce a viable method of getting ELINT to an Operational staff." This paper was submitted to the Naval War College faculty in partial satisfaction of the requirements of the Joint Military Operations Department. The contents of this paper reflect the author's personal views and are not necessarily endorsed by the Naval War College or the Department of the Navy.
Naval War College (U.S.)
Vande Griend, Nicholas A.
2012-05-04
-
Electronic Surveillance Manual: Procedures and Case Law Forms
"This manual sets forth the procedures established by the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice to obtain authorization to conduct electronic surveillance pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Sections 2510-2522 (2001) (Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, as amended by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA), the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (CALEA), the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (Antiterrorism Act)), the USA-Patriot Act of 2001, and the Homeland Security Act of 2002 and discusses the statutory requirements of each of the pleadings. Throughout this manual, the above federal wiretap statutes will occasionally be referred to collectively as 'Title III.' This manual is divided into two sections. The first section provides an overview of the procedures to follow when applying for authorization to conduct electronic surveillance, and discusses format, statutory and policy requirements, and pertinent case law concerning specific electronic surveillance issues. The second section provides sample forms pertaining to electronic surveillance involving wire, oral and electronic communication interceptions, pen register/trap and trace procedures, access to transactional data and stored wire and electronic communications, and the use of tracking devices. These forms are intended only to provide general guidance in drafting the most frequently used pleadings and do not prohibit alternative approaches."
United States. Department of Justice
2005-06
-
Federal Government Information Technology: Electronic Surveillance and Civil Liberties
"Public policy on the use of information technology to electronically monitor individual movements, actions, and communications has been based on a careful balancing of the civil liberty versus law enforcement or investigative interests. New technologies--such as data transmission, electronic mail, cellular and cordless telephones, and miniature cameras--have outstripped the existing statutory framework for balancing these interests. The primary technical focus of this report is on technological developments in the basic communication and information infrastructure of the United States that present new or changed opportunities for and vulnerabilities to electronic surveillance, not on the details of specific surveillance devices. The primary policy focus is on domestic law enforcement and investigative applications, not on foreign intelligence and counterintelligence applications. Thus, this report addresses four major areas: 1) technological developments relevant to electronic surveillance; 2) current and prospective Federal agency use of surveillance technologies; 3) the interaction of technology and public law in the area of electronic surveillance, with special attention to the balancing of civil liberty and investigative interests; and 4) policy options that warrant congressional consideration, including the amendment of existing public law to eliminate gaps and ambiguities in current legal protections."
United States. Congress. Office of Technology Assessment
1985-10
-
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act: An Overview of the Statutory Framework for Electronic Surveillance [Updated September 18, 2001]
The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, 50 U.S.C. § 1801 et seq., provides a statutory framework for electronic surveillance in the context of foreign intelligence gathering. In so doing, the Congress sought to strike a delicate balance between national security interests and personal privacy rights. This report will examine the detailed statutory structure provided by this act and related provisions of E.O. 12333. This report is current through the changes to FISA in P.L. 106-567, Title VI (Dec. 27, 2000).
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Bazan, Elizabeth B.
2001-09-18
-
Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act, as Passed by the House of Representatives [Updated January 18, 2007
"The Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act, H.R. 5825, 109th Congress, was one of a number of bills introduced in the Senate and the House of Representatives addressing various aspects of the TSP and a variety of approaches to electronic surveillance of terrorists and those affiliated with them. This bill was designed to enhance flexibility in electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information, while requiring increased reporting and congressional oversight of these activities. The measure was introduced on July 18, 2006, and passed the House on September 28, 2006. This report summarizes the bill as passed by the House and analyzes the potential impact of its provisions were they to become law. The 110th Congress may wish to contemplate similar or different approaches to these issues, or may choose to forego legislation in light of the new FISC [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court] orders and the anticipated termination of the TSP [Terrorist Surveillance Program], while continuing congressional oversight. This report will not be updated."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Bazan, Elizabeth B.
2007-01-18
-
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate: H.R. 5825: Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act
"H.R. 5825 would modify the rules and procedures the government must follow to use electronic surveillance programs in the investigation of international terrorism. The bill would amend the definition of electronic surveillance under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to remove the current distinction between treatment of wire and radio communications, and to focus FISA protections on domestic communications. The bill also would expand the ability of the government to conduct electronic surveillance without a warrant in certain cases where the target of the surveillance is an agent of a foreign power."
United States. Congressional Budget Office
2006-09-25
-
H.R. 5825 (109th Congress): 'Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act' [September 8, 2006]
"In discussing the need for the National Security Agency's 'Terrorist Surveillance Program,' a program in which international communications of persons within the United States have been the subject of electronic surveillance without a warrant or a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court order, where one party to the communication is believed to be a member of al Qaeda, affiliated with al Qaeda, a member of an organization affiliated with al Qaeda, or working in support of al Qaeda, the Bush Administration has stated that electronic surveillance under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), while still a valuable tool in combating terrorism, lacks the speed and agility to deal with such terrorists or terrorist groups. Critics have challenged the NSA program on legal and constitutional grounds. On August 17, 2006, in 'American Civil Liberties Union v. National Security Agency', Case No. 06-CV-10204 (E.D. Mich. August 17, 2006), U.S. District Court Judge Anna Diggs Taylor held the program unconstitutional on the ground that it violated the Administrative Procedures Act, the Separation of Powers doctrine, the First and Fourth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), and Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act (Title III). The decision has been appealed. […] On September 1, 2006, it was referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security of the House Judiciary Committee. H.R. 5825 was one of several bills that were the focus of a hearing held before the House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security on Wednesday, September 6, 2006. This report will summarize the provisions of the bill and discuss the impact of its provisions, if passed, on current law."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Bazan, Elizabeth B.
2006-09-08
-
Newly Declassified Documents Regarding the Now-Discontinued NSA Bulk Electronic Communications Metadata Pursuant to Section 402 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
"Following a declassification review by the Executive Branch, the Department of Justice released on August 6, 2014, in redacted form, 38 documents relating to the now-discontinued NSA [National Security Agency] program to collect bulk electronic communications metadata pursuant to Section 402 of the FISA [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act]. […] Under the program NSA was permitted to collect certain electronic communications metadata such as the 'to,' 'from,' and 'cc' lines of an email and the email's time and date. This collection was done only after the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court [FISC] approved the government's applications, and pursuant to court order generally lasting 90 days. NSA was not permitted to collect the content of any electronic communications. Like NSA's bulk telephony metadata program under FISA section 501, this program was subject to several restrictions approved by the FISC, such as: [1] The information could be used only for counterterrorism purposes. [2] The information had to be stored in secure databases. [3] The databases could be queried using an identifier such as an email address only when an analyst had a reasonable and articulable suspicion that the email address was associated with certain specified foreign terrorist organizations that were the subject of FBI counterterrorism investigations. […] [4] NSA was required to destroy the bulk metadata after a set period of time."
United States. Office of the Director of National Intelligence
2014
-
Electronic Surveillance: A Matter of Necessity
One extremely successful technique in intelligence collection has been electronic surveillance, both silent video surveillance and interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications. The challenge for criminal investigators is to keep pace by using increasingly sophisticated investigative techniques. This article focuses on investigators' obligation to demonstrate the necessity for electronic surveillance before the court will authorize its use.
United States. Federal Bureau of Investigation
Colbridge, Thomas D.
2000-02
-
Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act, as Passed by the House of Representatives [Updated December 29, 2006]
"The Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act, H.R. 5825, 109th Congress, was one of a number of bills introduced in the Senate and the House of Representatives addressing various aspects of the TSP and a variety of approaches to electronic surveillance of terrorists and those affiliated with them. This bill was designed to enhance flexibility in electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information, while requiring increased reporting and congressional oversight of these activities. The measure was introduced on July 18, 2006, and passed the House on September 28, 2006. This report summarizes the version of the bill passed by the House and analyzes the potential impact of its provisions were they to become law. H.R. 5825 represents one approach to these issues considered in the 109th Congress. The 110th Congress may well contemplate similar or different approaches. This report may be updated or replaced, depending upon subsequent developments in the 110th Congress."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Bazan, Elizabeth B.
2006-12-19
-
Warrantless FBI Electronic Surveillance
"This report focuses exclusively on the FBI's use of electronic surveillance; NSA's monitoring system is described at length in the Committee's Report on NSA. Because the legal issues and the FBI's policy and practice regarding consensual monitoring devices such as 'body recorders' are distinct from those of nonconsensual wiretaps and microphone installations, the report is also confined to the latter forms of electronic surveillance."
United States. Congress. Senate
1976-04
-
Presidential Authority to Conduct Warrantless Electronic Surveillance to Gather Foreign Intelligence Information [January 5, 2006]
"This memorandum lays out a general framework for analyzing the constitutional and statutory issues raised by the NSA electronic surveillance activity. It then outlines the legal framework regulating electronic surveillance by the government, explores ambiguities in those statutes that could provide exceptions for the NSA intelligence-gathering operation at issue, and addresses the arguments that the President possesses inherent authority to order the operations or that Congress has provided such authority."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Bazan, Elizabeth B.; Elsea, Jennifer
2006-01-05
-
Memorandum of Law in Support of Application for Authority to Conduct Electronic Surveillance [...]
This document was declassified on December 13, 2014. "To follow [terrorist's] trails effectively, and to respond to new leads, it is vital for the U.S. Intelligence Community to be able quickly and efficiently to acquire communications to or from individuals reasonably believed to be members or agents of these [...] foreign powers. The attached Application is intended to address these problems by establishing an early warning system under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 ('FISA') [...] to alert the U.S. Government to the presence of members and agents of these foreign powers and to aid in tracking such individuals within the United States. Specifically, the Government seeks authorization from this Court to conduct electronic surveillance to collect the substantive contents of certain telephonic and electronic communications [...]."
United States. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court
2006-12-13
-
Serial No. 112-59: Going Dark: Lawful Electronic Surveillance in the Face of New Technologies, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, First Session, February 17, 2011
From the opening statement of Tim Griffin: "Today's hearing examines the issue of the growing gap between the legal authority and the technological capability to intercept electronic communications. This is known in law enforcement circles as ''going dark.'' Going dark is not about requiring new or expanded legal authorities. It is about law enforcement's inability to actually collect the information that a judge has authorized. Simply stated, the technical capabilities of law enforcement agencies have not kept pace with the dazzling array of new communication devices and other technologies that are now widely available in the marketplace. Court-ordered electronic surveillance has long been a valuable tool for effective law enforcement. It is a technique that is used as a last resort, when other investigative techniques have failed or would be likely to fail or would even be too dangerous to try. The judicial process that must be followed to seek a court order to authorize this type of surveillance is neither easily nor quickly obtained. There are many layers of review, many facts that must be established, and ultimately, a judge decides if such a technique is warranted." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Tim Griffin, Robert C. Scott, John Conyers, Valerie Caproni, Mark Marshall, Susan Landau, Henry C. Johnson, and Joel M. Margolis.
United States. Government Printing Office
2011
-
Serial No. 107-166: Privacy vs. Security: Electronic Surveillance in the Nation's Capital, Hearing before the Subcommittee on the District of Columbia of the Committee on Government Reform, House of Representatives, One Hundred Seventh Congress, Second Session, March 22, 2002
From the opening statement of Constance A. Morella: "We live in the video age. Police forces, including the Metropolitan Police Department, are increasingly employing video surveillance, both to deter crime and to catch criminals. The Metropolitan Police Department is in the process of establishing the most extensive surveillance network in the United States; a system that could ultimately include more than 1,000 cameras, all linked to a central command station accessible to not only the District police but the FBI, the Capitol Police, the Secret Service, and other law enforcement agencies. The existence of such a network raises many questions. Among them, does the prevalence of cameras inhibit our privacy rights? Are those cameras effective in deterring or solving crimes? And, perhaps most urgently, who gave permission for the implementation of this system, and where are the policies governing its use? I believe there has been an unfortunate lack of public debate on these issues. Even supporters of electronic surveillance concede that police departments should only use these cameras if there is a widespread public desire for such technology. There is clearly no consensus the District of Columbia for or against these cameras, because the public only learned about their existence after they had been put in place." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Johnny Barnes, Kathleen Patterson, Ronald Goldstock, Margret Kellems, Constance A. Morella, Eleanor Holmes Norton, John Parsons, Charles Ramsey, John Woodward, Jr.
United States. Government Printing Office
2003
-
H.R. 5825 (109th Congress): 'Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act'
"Several bills have been introduced in the House of Representatives and in the Senate to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and to address questions raised with respect to the 'Terrorist Surveillance Program.' H.R. 5825, the 'Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act,' was introduced on July 18, 2006. The bill was referred on that date to both the House Committee on the Judiciary and to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. On September 1, 2006, it was referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security of the House Judiciary Committee. H.R. 5825 was one of several bills that were the focus of a hearing held before the House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security on Wednesday, September 6, 2006. This report will summarize the provisions of the bill and discuss the impact of its provisions, if passed, on current law."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Bazan, Elizabeth B.
2006-09-08
-
Electronic Surveillance Issues
This document provides information on electronic surveillance as it relates to legislation, justice department policy, warrantless access to communications, applicability of Title III, transactional records access, and more. From the document: "As new technologies continue to appear in the marketplace and outpace existing surveillance law, the primary job of evaluating their impact on privacy rights and of updating the law must remain with the branch of government designed to make such policy choices, the legislature."
United States. Department of Justice
Harwood, Stephen L.
2005-11
-
Legal Standards for the Intelligence Community in Conducting Electronic Surveillance
From the text: "(U) Electronic surveillance is conducted by elements of the Intelligence Community for foreign intelligence and foreign counterintelligence purposes. Because of its potential intrusiveness and the implications for the privacy of United States persons, such surveillance is subject to strict regulation by statute and Executive Order and close scrutiny. The applicable legal standards for the collection, retention, or dissemination of information concerning U.S. persons reflect a careful balancing between the needs of the government for such intelligence and the protection of the rights of U.S. persons, consistent with the reasonableness standard of the Fourth Amendment, as determined by factual circumstance."
United States. National Security Agency
2000-02
-
Privacy Impact Assessment for the Electronic Surveillance System (ELSUR)
"The Electronic Surveillance System (ELSUR) is owned by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), a component agency within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). ELSUR allows ICE to track and search for ICE applications for court orders that authorize ICE to intercept oral, wire, or electronic communications during the course of a criminal investigation. ICE conducted this Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) because ELSUR contains personally identifiable information (PII) and to publicly document the privacy protections that are in place."
United States. Department of Homeland Security. Privacy Office
2010-11-02
-
Electronic Surveillance in a Digital Age
"Lawlessness and terrorism present new challenges to our society as the 21st Century approaches. Electronic surveillance is an invaluable tool in America's arsenal to fight crime in this era of high-speed, global communications. Digital communications technology has recently outpaced the ability of the law enforcement agencies to implement court authorized wiretaps easily and effectively. To address this problem, the 103d Congress enacted the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (P.L. [Public Law] 103-414). This Act invokes the assistance of the telecommunications industry to provide technological solutions for accessing call information and call content for law enforcement agencies when legally authorized to do so. The law enforcement community and the telecommunications industry are currently working collaboratively on solutions to implement the requirement of the Act. On September 27, 1994, Congressman Michael G. Oxley, a member or OTA's [Office of Technology Assessment] Technology Assessment Board, requested that OTA consider the technical aspects of implementing the law that will affect the ultimate cost to the government, the industry, and the rate payers. This background paper reviews the progress of the industry and the law enforcement agencies in implementing the Act since its approval in October 1994. OTA extends its thanks to the Alliance for Telecommunications Industry Solutions (ATIS) that sponsors the Electronic Communications Service Providers (ECSP) committee, which is the forum for the collaborative efforts of the industry and law enforcement in seeking solutions for complying with the requirements of the Act. Without the willful cooperation of the ECSP, OTA would likely not have been able to accurately compile the information contained in this background paper."
United States. Congress. Office of Technology Assessment
1995-07
-
Serial No. 113-34: Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) (Part II): Geolocation Privacy and Surveillance, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, First Session, April 25, 2013
This is the April 25, 2013 hearing on "Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), Part 2: Geolocation Privacy and Surveillance" held before the U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security and Investigations. From the opening statement of F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.: "This hearing is the second in a series on the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, otherwise known as ECPA. Today, we will examine the issue of geolocation and its use by law enforcement in criminal investigations. While this hearing was planned before the attack in Boston, those tragic events highlight the importance of the topic. The stakes are high. As in any ECPA reform, Congress needs to strike the right balance to protect privacy rights without undermining law enforcement." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., Robert C. "Bobby" Scott, John Conyers Jr., Mark Eckenwiler, Peter A. Modaferri, Catherine Crump, and Matt Blaze.
United States. Government Printing Office
2013
-
Telecommunications Carriers Electronic Surveillance Contacts
The Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), Section 105, and various rulings of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) require telecommunications carriers to submit company compliance manuals regarding their respective "systems security and integrity" policies and procedures. One important aspect of those policies and procedures is the identification of telecommunications carrier-designated points of contact (POCs) responsible for liaison with the law enforcement community to facilitate lawfully authorized electronic surveillance on their networks.
United States. Federal Bureau of Investigation
2003-08
-
Remarks on United States Signals Intelligence and Electronic Surveillance Programs, January 17, 2014
This is from the remarks of President Barack Obama titled, "Remarks on United States Signals Intelligence and Electronic Surveillance Programs." From the remarks of President Barack Obama on January 17, 2014: "Throughout American history, intelligence has helped secure our country and our freedoms. […] And so, in the early days of the Cold War, President Truman created the National Security Agency, or NSA, to give us insights into the Soviet bloc and provide our leaders with information they needed to confront aggression and avert catastrophe. […] The horror of September 11 brought all these issues to the fore. Across the political spectrum, Americans recognized that we had to adapt to a world in which a bomb could be built in a basement and our electric grid could be shut down by operators an ocean away. We were shaken by the signs we had missed leading up to the attacks: how the hijackers had made phone calls to known extremists and traveled to suspicious places. So we demanded that our intelligence community improve its capabilities and that law enforcement change practices to focus more on preventing attacks before they happen than prosecuting terrorists after an attack. It is hard to overstate the transformation America's intelligence community had to go through after 9/11. Our agencies suddenly needed to do far more than the traditional mission of monitoring hostile powers and gathering information for policymakers. Instead, they were now asked to identify and target plotters in some of the most remote parts of the world and to anticipate the actions of networks that, by their very nature, cannot be easily penetrated with spies or informants. […] And yet, in our rush to respond to a very real and novel set of threats, the risk of Government overreach--the possibility that we lose some of our core liberties in pursuit of security--also became more pronounced. We saw, in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, our Government engaged in enhanced interrogation techniques that contradicted our values."
United States. Office of the Federal Register
Obama, Barack
2014-01-17
-
Serial No. 109-131: Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act: Hearing before the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Ninth Congress, Second Session on H.R. 5825, September 12, 2006
From the opening statement of Daniel E. Lungren: "Yesterday marked the fifth anniversary of the terrorist attacks that killed nearly 3,000 Americans. As we remember the loss of our fellow citizens, a recurring question is raised regarding whether America is safer today than it was on September 11, 2001. […] Safer does not mean that there is any room for complacency as the events in Bali, Madrid, Oman others, including London on 7/ 7, indicate we are still at war with an enemy that is fully devoted to one thing; that is the murder of innocent people. In this regard, it is a primary responsibility of Government to protect its citizens from violence. Understanding this, Congress must ensure that the law enforcement and the intelligence communities are equipped with the proper tools to fight a 21st century war against an enemy which operates by stealth and surreptitious means. This Congress has already acted to provide law enforcement and intelligence officers with enhanced capability through the enactment of important legislation like the USA PATRIOT Act, Homeland Security Act and Intelligence Reform Act. Now we need to streamline the FISA process and make it technology neutral. These are the express goals of H.R. 5852, the Electronic Surveillance Modernization Act. Today we will hear testimony on the bill and suggestions for possible improvements to the legislation in order to achieve these goals." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Daniel E. Lungren, Robert C. Scott, John Eisenberg, Vito Potenza, Kate Martin, Bruce Fein, and John Conyers,
United States. Government Printing Office
2006
