**The article:**On December 22, President Joe Biden signed a $886 billion defense bill that renewed one of the US government’s most controversial spy programs. Tucked in the 3,000-page legislation is an extension of the administration’s power to warrantlessly surveil foreigners overseas, and snoop on Americans in the process.
The authority, known as Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence and Surveillance Act (FISA), has been the subject of intense scrutiny over the past few months. Set to expire on December 31, in the weeks leading up to that date, lawmakers were still in heated debates over whether and how to allow it to continue. But these conversations were halted after Congress and the Biden administration squeezed a short-term extension of the spy program through the annual defense bill, potentially keeping it in effect until 2025.
Many civil liberties advocates are criticizing the extension, saying that it skirts a rare, bipartisan push to protect Americans’ privacy. This stopgap measure, they argue, kicks a crucial debate on government spying into the new year—or beyond. In the meantime, it allows federal authorities to hold onto a power that they’ve routinely abused.
“It’s tragic,” says Elizabeth Goitein, senior director of the Brennan Center for Justice’s Liberty and National Security program. “Abuses and civil liberties violations are going to continue at a completely unacceptable rate,” she adds. “For every day, every week, every month that Section 702 continues without reform, that is what’s happening.”
Under Section 702 of FISA, federal investigators do not need a warrant to tap the phone calls, texts, and emails of foreigners outside of the country. But a loophole also lets them access messages that Americans exchange with targets abroad. These communications are funneled into a database that investigators can later search, again without a warrant. Numerous reports have documented the FBI’s “persistent and widespread” misuse of this authority to spy on Americans, running unauthorized searches on Black Lives Matter protesters, for instance, or January 6 rioters, and even a US senator.
In 2021, the FBI conducted about 3 million so-called “backdoor searches” on US residents. Last year, amid pressure from lawmakers and advocates to curb warrantless spying on Americans, that number dropped to about 119,000.
Still, the extent of this intrusion was troubling enough to spark a reform push from Republicans and Democrats. Earlier this month, Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) introduced a bipartisan bill to renew a version of Section 702 with key changes, including a warrant requirement for law enforcement to pull Americans’ communications. It sailed through the notoriously divided House Judiciary Committee with support from both sides of the aisle.
Before leaving for winter recess, the House was set to vote between advancing Rep. Biggs’ proposal or a competing bipartisan effort sponsored by Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio), which experts said would broaden Section 702 surveillance powers. But many lawmakers didn’t want to rush the vote. Instead, they opted to temporarily extend the spy program through the 2024 National Defense Authorization Act, an annual measure that sets funding and policy priorities for the Pentagon. According to House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), who had tacked the extension onto the NDAA in the first place, this move buys “necessary time to facilitate the reform process.”
The short-term extension officially stretches the spy program for four months, into April 2024. But under a little-known provision of the FISA law, a special court that oversees the program has the power to let it run for an additional year, until April 2025.
It’s a win for the Biden administration, which had been cranking up the pressure on Congress to keep the surveillance authority intact. In a House Homeland Security hearing last month, FBI director Christopher Wray acknowledged that the bureau had misused its Section 702 power in the past, but assured lawmakers that the agency was now operating with more restraint. Wray also warned that now was no time to strip the FBI of any authorities. Since Hamas’ October 7 attack on Israel, he said, a “rogue’s gallery” of groups have called for violence against the US. “702 is critical to protecting Americans from foreign terrorist threats,” he urged. “Please don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.”
“Do not let it expire,” echoed Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) on the House floor during its vote on the defense bill. “If it expires, Americans and allies will die.”
But many advocates say that by failing to add a warrant requirement and other key changes to Section 702, lawmakers had fumbled a chance to protect both Americans’ safety—and their rights. “It’s extremely disappointing,” says Sumayyah Waheed, a senior policy counsel with the civil rights group Muslim Advocates. There were bills introduced “to actually make the reforms that we desperately need in Section 702.” But “instead of allowing that debate to continue, this was kind of shoved through in a ‘must-pass’ piece of legislation.”
“There were a lot of opportunities for Congress to get this right,” says Andy Wong, advocacy director of Stop AAPI Hate, an organization for advancing the rights of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. “They sort of dodged the responsibility here.”
Wong says that leaving such a sweeping surveillance power in the government’s hands puts communities at risk. He points to the wrongful arrest of Professor Xiaoxing Xi, a Temple University physicist who was accused of espionage after the FBI misread emails he wrote to his Chinese colleagues—emails obtained in part under Section 702. Asian Americans and other communities of color often “face heightened scrutiny and suspicion,” he explains. “Really innocuous behaviors may be misinterpreted or viewed through a biased lens and lead to a lot of unwarranted suspicion and potential harm.”
Dr. Xi’s story may be among the more extreme, notes Goitein of the Brennan Center, but there may be other harms that are less obvious but also serious, largely because of the government’s extreme secrecy concerning its use of Section 702. “People can be subject to tax audits, be denied public benefits or public jobs,” she says. “There are any number of ways in which people’s lives might be affected by these searches, and they would never know it.”
When Congress returns in 2024, lawmakers will be expected to take up the reform effort once again. According to Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.), leadership is trying to figure out a “fair process” for ironing out differences in the House proposals. Senate leaders Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) also have pledged to work with the House on a bill that can be passed “early next year.”
Some experts are stressing the need to make sure the Biden administration acts swiftly since it now has room to drag its feet. “Even if Congress manages to pass a strong reform bill in the spring,” argues Goitein, “the administration has no real incentive to sign it because they know that they can continue surveillance until April 2025.”
Waheed from Muslim Advocates acknowledges their disappointment in what she described as “this setback,” but says, “We look forward to continuing the fight next year.”
If it’s showing at the bottom of the browser, then the browser thinks the link is a regular link, but clicking or copying it may invoke some JavaScript that either manipulates the link or simply redirects to the tracker site after an onClick event. I’d like to see this for my own curiosity. If my thought is correct, then there should be some way to disable that specific method call with uBlock or some other mechanism. I’m curious what happens with a text based browser or screen reader type browser. You could also trace the JavaScript and see what’s happening. If this is really happening with the big social media sites, it’s just a matter of time until a plugin is developed to correct the behavior.
I’m gonna sound like a dick who didn’t really address the intended question, but why use those sites? Not being on corporate social media solves the problem. I know that doesn’t work for a lot of people, so apologies to those folks.
The point of useing it is that privacy invasive sites like twitch or skribbl.io would still work. Twitch technicality works fine on stock Firefox unless you don’t save your history, how dare you.
They will work on ungoogled chromium too though, I guess.
In theory there is even the ability to store a chrome:flags override and use it like a user.js. So you could use upstream chromium and not rely on outdated stuff.
I will try it out after work. Do you know a way to provent automatic openings instead of librewolf? I’m currently using Hyprland and was using the appimage so it doesn’t have any conflicts.
Exactly default browser. Yes I tryed native and flatpak packages but it would constantly open all other browser instead of librewolf. Even if I defined a other one in the mineapps file
No default browser works normally but no idea how to set that in Hyprland.
I highly advise against Appimages. Flatpak is only useful if you dont trust the app which is a valid opinion, but poorly then the browser cant sandbox websites on its own. So native packages are the best option for security it you trust the browser.
Perfect would be to have the browser isolated and also using its sandbox to isolate websites from each other. I dont know if this works though, on Android it does (not with Firefox poorly as they didnt implement it)
So one vor two days later anx I can say now that I switch from thorium to ungoogled chromium Wayland. Didn’t have issues with defaults and yea its pretty much the same
No the base Browser needs to be hardened. On top of that you can install addons but privacy badger is pretty weak afaik, and canvas is just one vector. There still is UA, Apis, referrer policies, WebGL etc
Yea I can do that. I mean it will take a time but it should be possible. Tbh just don’t wanna use brave. www.deviceinfo.me is a hood site for checking how hard you browser i s hardened
And even if you ‘exit’ to the woods, you’ll be easy to note, just by your absence (When the majority of the population are present, it is easier to note who is absent).
But we have to keep pushing back about these absurdities.
Does safari have a reader mode you can use to bypass it? I use a FF extension that allows me to disable all scripts on a page when I come across junk like this.
Alternatively just chuck the link into Wayback or archive.is
privacy
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.