WhatsApp Ordered to Help US Agents Spy on Chinese Phones–No Explanation Required
forbes.com> The U.S. doesn't need to know who they're targeting or show probable cause when ordering Facebook, WhatsApp or any tech company to help agencies spy on users in secret, newly-unsealed court documents show.
> U.S. federal agencies have been using a 35-year-old American surveillance law to secretly track WhatsApp users with no explanation as to why and without knowing who they are targeting.
Doesn't include actual message content. Still very bad.
The Chinese government, and now others will also look more seriously into these matters, seems justified in building their Great Firewall after these constant stories of the surveillance state at work domestically and internationally.
We can't even keep the NSA from illegally prying into alleged "domestic terrorists" like Martin Luther King and Muhammad Ali:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/26/nsa-surveillan...
Who are today's similarly classified domestic terrorists?
Tomorrow's?
As for issuing no warrant or probable course- what of it? American law enforcement only needs to respect their own citizens,not citizens living and belonging to another country.
This is a very unpleasant tactic, but i have to say i would feel far more uncomfortable if it was China who had this capability and not the US.
> American law enforcement only needs to respect their own citizens,not citizens living and belonging to another country.
I suppose when you say "needs", you are making some argument that the constitution requires some minimal level of respect towards US citizens; however, a more expansive definition which includes moral imperatives would require that American law enforcement follows the "general principles of law as recognised by civilized nations"[0] as well as "international custom"[1] at least as regards international actions.
Even from the perspective of its own constitution, though, America is bound by its commitments to various international civil rights treaties that it has ratified, such as the ICCPR, which requires it to "protect and preserve basic human rights such as the right to ... privacy"[2].
Of course, countries do generally spy on each other's citizens, so it's difficult to say what it would take to breach international law (even assuming there were a court that could exercise jurisdiction over the issue), much less what it would take to trigger a constitutional challenge in US domestic courts over such a breach, but if, for example, the CIA started deliberately publishing every foreign citizen's private emails, just for the lolz, I would hope that even allies would declare this a breach of international law.
[0] https://unimelb.libguides.com/internationallaw/sources#s-lg-...
[1] https://unimelb.libguides.com/internationallaw/sources#s-lg-...
[2] https://civilrights.org/edfund/resource/where-the-united-sta...
But WhatsApp is a US company - by compelling them, aren't Facebook's rights being violated? Do US citizens have no legal recourse if the government forces them to betray foreigners?
I don't know. Does Facebook as a company have any rights?
>Do US citizens* have no legal recourse if the government forces them to betray foreigners?
They do. They can close shop.
Individuals do not relinquish their rights if they organize into a company. Or let me put it this way: if Facebook can be compelled, do you think this precedent won't be applied to Bob's Linux Repair Shop?