ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE AND PRIVACY

Electronic Surveillance and Privacy Rights

Nickolas M Martinez
Portland State University

ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE AND PRIVACY

Introduction
Electronic surveillance takes place when the government, organizations, and large
corporate companies have the ability to access data related to electronic activity with or
without ones permission. These entities believe that this form of security provides us
with privacy and protection from potentially harmful threats. Electronic privacy is
recognized as a consumers right, and not merely a commodity for sale (Lyon, D). Many
companies and organizations abuse this access. Perhaps the greatest perpetrator that
participates in this unlawful act is the National Security Agency (NSA) of the United
States Government. The NSA operates as part of the Department of Defense, fulfilling the
responsibility of monitoring, collecting, and processing information (Mission). This
organization violates the civil rights that grant us our freedom as citizens of the United
States, specifically the fourth amendment of the U.S. Constitution (Bamford, J). By
carrying out unlawful warrantless surveillance of foreign and local individuals abroad
that are neither proportionate nor necessary, they are depriving United States citizens of
their right to maintain privacy through the use of electronic technology (Jordan, D).
Research Process
To properly conduct thorough research on such a broad and highly debated topic,
I began my research by developing a general understanding as to how electronic
surveillance is facilitated. From this point I was able to draw conclusions on how
electronic surveillance could potentially be infringing on citizens right to privacy. Based
on this data, I managed to find factual journals that portrayed their concerns as to why the
actions of the National Security Agency should be evaluated to determine their integrity.
There are many political representatives and economists that have published scholarly

ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE AND PRIVACY

generals that draw serious attention to the actions being carried about by the National
Security Agency.
The idea of performing electronic surveillance and evaluating what core human
securities has proved to be a very difficult topic that required me to narrow down my
argument to a very specific issue. I chose human rights because I believe that it is
considered to be the most prevalent concern amongst national and international citizens
around the world. The primary argument is derived from the idea that there should be a
fine line between necessary and proportionate surveillance that still remains noninvasive
and surveillance that deprives individuals of their right to privacy through warrantless
data collection.
Once I had narrowed down my issue to a specific concern, my initial research
began by determining what exactly the National Security Agency was doing by
monitoring, collecting, and processing information about individuals within the United
States and practically every other country around the world (Lanier, J). In order to define
this broad statement, I needed to familiarize myself with what technology the National
Security Agency was surveillance, how they did it, who they were targeting, and most
importantly, what their intentions were.
Literature Review
One of the most powerful forms of federal law documentation that allows the
National Security Agency to carry out its surveillance without scrutiny from the public
and governmental officials is the Federal Communications Act of 1934 and the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (Diffie, W). These documents are responsible for
regulating what information the National Security Agency is allowed to collect. At the

ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE AND PRIVACY

time when this law was created, roughly thirty years ago, it allowed the government to
facilitate warrantless and seemingly necessary wiretapping to telephone lines without
consent. These laws have yet to be reformed or manipulated in a way that would make
them applicable to the different means of communication we have in our modern society.
One of the most prominent forms of data collection the National Security Agency carries
out legally through the Federal Communications Act and the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act is done by tapping into Internet service providers servers to collect
information from its consumers. Clearly, this goes beyond what the original intentions of
these two federal laws had intended upon their approval. By refusing to regulate what
data the National Security Agency is allowed to collect from these Internet service
providers, they are violating and depriving these consumers of their civil liberties and
most importantly the right to privacy granted to them through the Fourth Amendment of
the United States Constitution.
The National Security Agency has also managed to overpower the legislation that
is presented in the 1968 Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act. These federal
policies were originally created forty years ago and they were primarily directed toward
telephone taps and concealed microphones. But due to the flexibility, reliability, and far
more advanced capabilities that modern technology has, the 1968 Omnibus Crime
Control and Safe Streets Act has very little protection that it can provide to citizens
against the warrantless surveillance of the National Security Agency (Holden, C).
Without renewed surveillance policy there is very we can do to object to the varying
forms of technology that are used to archive data transmitted through the use of modern
technology.

ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE AND PRIVACY

One of the primary forms of data that the National Security Agency is responsible
for collecting is referred to as metadata. Metadata is essentially data that provides further
information about data (Lanier, J). Although this sounds like a very complex system, its
truly quite simply because with this information, the National Security Agency can
collect small amounts of information that provides a massive amount of information
when referenced in correlation to past data collected. For example, one of the most highly
debated issues about metadata is the collection of GPS locations. When this information
is collected it means practically nothing all on its own, but when the metadata is
combined it can provide substantial information about what an individual does and where
they are doing it. Due to how insignificant these tiny pieces of data are, the Department
of Defense and the National Security Agency has been able to engage in undetectabletargeted repression, which in return allows them to get away with violating this privacy
concern (Lanier, J).
To further validate the corruption of the National Security Agencys collection of
telephone and Internet metadata, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board has
issued a report calling for an end to the NSAs mass collection of data. They stated, The
bulk collection program was built on a murky legal foundation that raises many
constitutional questions and has been proven to be an ineffective tool for collecting
unique intelligence information (Leithauser, T). By questioning how
relevant this data truly is, it begs the question of whether this lenient
form of surveillance is as necessary and proportionate as Department
of Defense officials claim it is.

ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE AND PRIVACY

Edward Snowden argues that one of the most invasive forms of cutting edge
technology that the National Security Agency uses to detect potential national and
international terrorism within the United States is called Minds Eye. Minds Eye was
created by The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency to detect and predict human
behavior that can be potentially threatening or dangerous in order to prevent terrorist
attacks. Snowden claimed that there is a substantial amount of personal data that must be
gathered in order to create efficient and substantial results based on the algorithms used
to operate such a task. Until Snowden released this information, it had gone completely
hidden from the general public. I find this to be a significant violation of our privacy
rights granted to United States citizens through the Four Amendment of the Bill of
Rights, which prevents unprecedented searches to its citizens.
A major concern about the actions of the National Security Agency following the
Edward Snowdef leaos6concerned how its impact was going to affect our international
relations with ally countries. When German Chancellor Angela Merkelas found out the
United States were tapping her phone records, significant suspicion toward our
accountability and trustworthiness became a pertinent issue (NSA Defense of French,
Spanish Spying Irrelevant). Its currently unknown what measures our government goes
through in order to not only spy on our citizens, but we have also dramatically increased
the amount of spending we invest in keeping international security.
One of the National Security Agencys means of national and international
surveillance towards citizens is through the systematic placement of files on specific
individuals computers that will track their browsing history and monitor basic computer
activity. The National Security Agency continues to carry out these warrantless activities

ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE AND PRIVACY

despite strict federal rules banning the inspection of these files due to the invasion of
privacy. Their primary means of facilitating this tracking is done through a commonly
known tool referred to as cookies. Cookies are commonly used to cater to consumers by
providing advertisements based on their web search history. By abusing this tool, the
National Security Agency is clearly breaching the Fourth Amendment right to
unreasonable searches and seizures.
According to CNN Money, we spend an estimated $10 billion solely on
investments related to the National Security Agency and the expensive technology they
use (NSA Defense of French, Spanish Spying Irrelevant). It is unknown how much we
truly spend annually on the National Security Agency due to how classified it has
become, but some have claimed that spent up to $30 billion. The United States Senate
unanimously passed the FY 02 Intelligence Authorization Act, which provides a
significant increase in funding for the National Security Agency to invest in new
technology and software that will bring an even greater deficit to our tax spending
(Senate Intelligence Bill Boosts NSA Technology Spending). It is very unlikely that the
value the intelligence provides, in comparison to information that other far less intrusive
methods of intelligence can reveal is anywhere near worth the amount of funding we
allocate toward its operations. Instead of abstaining from the investments in new software
and technology, we are promoting the violation of our privacy and bulk collection of
personal data by funding this project.
Discussion and Analysis
Electronic surveillance and privacy rights plays a key role in globalization
because it poses a serious issue for the United States interests toward dominance and

ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE AND PRIVACY

retaining its position as a world leader. The United States stance on electronic
surveillance effects their technological leadership and economic strength in relation to
other nations that follow the same practices. Being at the peak of innovation has long
been the goal of the United States as a means to retain its sense of critical infrastructure
and information assurance.
A human right in correspondance to electronic surveillance and privacy rights is a
major issue in todays society because its crime that has not been justified by reasonable
necessary and proportionate reasoning. The severity of the measures that the National
Security Agency goes through in order collect metadata surpasses the severity of the
issue. Instead of performing highly intrusive surveillance on United States citizens, the
authorities should attempt to achieve a legitimate aim that only concerns those who pose
a potential threat to our society.
The National Security Agency follows a corrupt system in order to provide
national and international security over electronic surveillance. Its important that we
have electronic security to a certain extent, but its important that the American citizens
are still able to retain their human right to privacy. In order to maintain this fine line
between electronic surveillance and privacy rights, I would suggest that we simple
provide greater regulation as to what the National Security Agency is able to do in order
to maintain national security, while still existing as a world leader in technological
innovation. The primary threat that we are able to detect through electronic surveillance
is terrorism. If we are able to focus our efforts strictly toward this realm of defense, it will
be much easier to maintain our civil liberties.

ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE AND PRIVACY

The research that I have provided validates this change in policy because it
proposes serious questions concerning the accountability of the National Security
Agency. The primary reason I believe the United States should not practice such
extensive surveillance is because the intrusive nature of the National Security Agency is
not justifiably necessary or proportionate according to the United States Constitution. The
illegal act of collecting, monitoring, and processing information through warrantless
surveillance is an injustice to the freedom that is granted to all United States citizens. In
addition to these concerns, the Department of Defense spends billions of dollars every
year in order to keep their equipment functioning. It is highly unlikely that the value we
place on this intelligence, in comparison to the information that other far less intrusive
methods of intelligence can provide, are anywhere near worth the amount of funding we
choose to invest in them both in the present and in the future (Senate Intelligence Bill
Boosts NSA Technology Spending). As technology continues to advance the Department
of Defense is going to be more than likely to increase these expenditures as time goes on
in order to sustain our dominance as a national power.
Conclusion
In conclusion, technological privacy is recognized as an inherent human right that
prevents United States citizens from warrantless electronic surveillance. The National
Security Agency violates the Fourth Amendment right that prohibits unreasonable
searches and seizures by carrying out warrantless surveillance on national and
international citizens. These intrusive measures are neither necessary nor proportionate,
which calls upon going through reasonable measures to reform the outdated federal laws
and regulations that justify the National Security Agencys actions.

ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE AND PRIVACY

10

After conducting my research and analyzing the laws and regulations that govern
the National Security Agency and their oversight of digital communication, I came to the
conclusion that the risks do not outweigh the cost. I would never want government
surveillance to intrude on my personal life, as an American citizen I should be given my
right to liberty and freedom to express myself without fear that Im being watched or
monitored without my consent.

ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE AND PRIVACY

11

Bibliography
Diffie, W., & Landau, S. (2009). Communications Surveillance: Privacy and Security at
Risk. Communications Of The ACM, 52(11), 42-47.
doi:10.1145/1592761.1592776
Holden, C. (1985). Surveillance laws need overhaul. Science, 230, 645. Retrieved from
http://go.galegroup.com.proxy.lib.pdx.edu/ps/i.do?id=GALE
%7CA4015544&v=2.1&u=s1185784&it=r&p=ITOF&sw=w&asid=b23fa77c819c
918f0b2060e4120a7594
LANIER, J. (2013). THE META QUESTION. (cover story). Nation, 297(1/2), 20-23.
Leithauser, T. (2014, January 27). Lawmakers, civil liberties advocates praise group's call
to end NSA program. Cybersecurity Policy Report. Retrieved from
http://go.galegroup.com.proxy.lib.pdx.edu/ps/i.do?id=GALE
%7CA361241966&v=2.1&u=s1185784&it=r&p=ITOF&sw=w&asid=41061d588
9231a79e8b95a95ee418dea
Mack, T. C. (2014). Privacy and the Surveillance Explosion. Futurist, 48(1), 42-47.
NSA defense of French, Spanish spying irrelevant. (2013, October 30). UWIRE Text, p.
1. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com.proxy.lib.pdx.edu/ps/i.do?id=GALE
%7CA347330299&v=2.1&u=s1185784&it=r&p=ITOF&sw=w&asid=524113643
00d2f7aa5684d0d74e3eee1
NSA Leaks Were Just A Simple, Human Mistake. (2013, September 16). UWIRE Text, p.
1. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com.proxy.lib.pdx.edu/ps/i.do?id=GALE
%7CA343041041&v=2.1&u=s1185784&it=r&p=ITOF&sw=w&asid=3b81ce554
018303cb810ed455b72d8b8

ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE AND PRIVACY

12

Senate Intelligence Bill Boosts NSA Technology Spending. (2001, November 13).
Defense Daily, 212(30). Retrieved from
http://go.galegroup.com.proxy.lib.pdx.edu/ps/i.do?
Spy Agency Removes Illegal Tracking Files. (2005, December 29). New York Times, p.
A16(L). Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com.proxy.lib.pdx.edu/ps/i.do?
id=GALE
%7CA140227006&v=2.1&u=s1185784&it=r&p=ITOF&sw=w&asid=0f76aa31a5
0b93b89a621e0735f11d8d
Winter, M. (2013, September 6). NSA cracks Internet privacy. USA Today, p. 01A.
Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com.proxy.lib.pdx.edu/ps/i.do?id=GALE
%7CA342116794&v=2.1&u=s1185784&it=r&p=ITOF&sw=w&asid=f967781583
6bef7312328fd169e9ba01