Editing National Security Agency (section)

==Constitutionality, legality, and privacy concerning operations==
{{See also|Mass surveillance in the United States}}
In the United States, at least since 2001,<ref>[http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1113&context=dlj Echelon and the Legal Restraints on Signals Intelligence: A Need For Reevalualtion] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240606064111/https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1113&context=dlj |date=2024-06-06 }} by Lawrence D. Sloan on April 30, 2001</ref> there has been legal controversy over what signal intelligence can be used for and how much freedom the National Security Agency has to use signal intelligence.<ref>Liu, Edward C. et al. (May 21, 2015) [https://fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/R43459.pdf Overview of Constitutional Challenges to NSA Collection Activities] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210308123629/https://fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/R43459.pdf |date=2021-03-08 }}. Washington, DC: [[Congressional Research Service]].</ref> In 2015, the government made slight changes in how it uses and collects certain types of data,<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/03/world/president-tweaks-the-rules-on-data-collection.html|title=Obama's changes to NSA data collection published on February 5, 2015, by Christina Murray quoting David E. Sanger of ''The New York Times''|newspaper=The New York Times|date=3 February 2015|last1=Sanger|first1=David E.|access-date=7 June 2024|archive-date=12 May 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240512124423/https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/03/world/president-tweaks-the-rules-on-data-collection.html|url-status=live}}</ref> specifically phone records. The government was not analyzing the phone records as of early 2019.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/04/us/politics/nsa-phone-records-program-shut-down.html|title=Disputed N.S.A. Phone Program Is Shut Down, Aide Says|last=Savage|first=Charlie|date=2019-03-04|work=The New York Times|access-date=2019-03-06|language=en-US|issn=0362-4331|archive-date=2019-03-06|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190306005802/https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/04/us/politics/nsa-phone-records-program-shut-down.html|url-status=live}}</ref> The surveillance programs were deemed unlawful in September 2020 in a court of appeals case.<ref name="unlawful2020" />

===Warrantless surveillance===
{{See also|NSA warrantless surveillance (2001–2007)}}

On December 16, 2005, ''[[The New York Times]]'' reported that under [[White House]] pressure and with an [[executive order]] from President [[George W. Bush]], the National Security Agency, in an attempt to thwart terrorism, had been tapping phone calls made to persons outside the country, without obtaining [[warrant (law)|warrants]] from the [[United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court]], a secret court created for that purpose under the [[Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act]] (FISA).<ref name="NYTWarrantless"/>

===[[Edward Snowden]]===
Edward Snowden is a former American intelligence contractor who revealed in 2013 the existence of secret wide-ranging information-gathering programs conducted by the National Security Agency (NSA).<ref>{{cite web |title=Edward Snowden |url=https://www.britannica.com/biography/Edward-Snowden |access-date=February 6, 2022 |archive-date=February 2, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220202130452/https://www.britannica.com/biography/Edward-Snowden |url-status=live }}</ref> More specifically, Snowden released information that demonstrated how the United States government was gathering immense amounts of personal communications, emails, phone locations, web histories and more of American citizens without their knowledge.<ref>{{cite web
| title= Why Edward Snowden should be pardoned
| url= https://www.amnesty.org.uk/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-pardon
| access-date= February 6, 2022
| archive-date= February 7, 2022
| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20220207014116/https://www.amnesty.org.uk/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-pardon
| url-status= live
}}</ref> One of Snowden's primary motivators for releasing this information was fear of a surveillance state developing as a result of the infrastructure being created by the NSA. As Snowden recounts, "I believe that, at this point in history, the greatest danger to our freedom and way of life comes from the reasonable fear of omniscient State powers kept in check by nothing more than policy documents... It is not that I do not value intelligence, but that I oppose . . . omniscient, automatic, mass surveillance. . . . That seems to me a greater threat to the institutions of free society than missed intelligence reports, and unworthy of the costs."<ref>{{cite web
| title= Why NSA IT Guy Edward Snowden Leaked Top Secret Documents
| website= [[Forbes]]
| url= https://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2013/06/10/why-nsa-it-guy-edward-snowden-leaked-top-secret-documents/?sh=6e3f2e755673
| date= June 10, 2013
| access-date= June 7, 2024
| archive-date= May 12, 2024
| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20240512132008/https://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2013/06/10/why-nsa-it-guy-edward-snowden-leaked-top-secret-documents/?sh=6e3f2e755673
| url-status= live
}}</ref>

In March 2014, Army General [[Martin Dempsey]], [[Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff]], told the [[United States House Committee on Armed Services|House Armed Services Committee]], "The vast majority of the documents that Snowden ... exfiltrated from our highest levels of security ... had nothing to do with exposing government oversight of domestic activities. The vast majority of those were related to our military capabilities, operations, tactics, techniques, and procedures."<ref>{{Cite news |last=Capra |first=Tony |date=March 6, 2014 |title=Snowden Leaks Could Cost Military Billions: Pentagon |work=NBC News |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/news/investigations/snowden-leaks-could-cost-military-billions-pentagon-n46426 |access-date=April 11, 2015 |archive-date=April 10, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150410091944/http://www.nbcnews.com/news/investigations/snowden-leaks-could-cost-military-billions-pentagon-n46426 |url-status=live }}</ref> When asked in a May 2014 interview to quantify the number of documents Snowden stole, retired NSA director Keith Alexander said there was no accurate way of counting what he took, but Snowden may have downloaded more than a million documents.<ref name="AlexanderTrascriptDontKnowWhatHeTook">{{Cite web |title=Interview transcript: former head of the NSA and commander of the US cyber command, General Keith Alexander |url=http://www.afr.com/p/technology/interview_transcript_former_head_51yP0Cu1AQGUCs7WAC9ZVN |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141006113815/http://www.afr.com/p/technology/interview_transcript_former_head_51yP0Cu1AQGUCs7WAC9ZVN |archive-date=October 6, 2014 |access-date=May 30, 2014 |website=Australian Financial Review}}</ref>

===Other surveillance programs===
On January 17, 2006, the [[Center for Constitutional Rights]] filed a lawsuit, [[CCR v. Bush]], against the [[George W. Bush]] presidency. The lawsuit challenged the National Security Agency's (NSA's) surveillance of people within the U.S., including the interception of CCR emails without securing a warrant first.<ref name=TheJurist200705may21>{{cite news |url=http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2007/05/ex-guantanamo-lawyers-sue-for.php |date=May 19, 2007 |title=Ex-Guantanamo lawyers sue for recordings of client meetings |author=Mike Rosen-Molina |publisher=[[The Jurist]] |access-date=May 22, 2007 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080502051556/http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2007/05/ex-guantanamo-lawyers-sue-for.php |archive-date=May 2, 2008 }}</ref><ref name=CcrVBushDocket>{{cite web|url=http://ccrjustice.org/ourcases/current-cases/ccr-v.-bush|title=CCR v. Bush|publisher=[[Center for Constitutional Rights]]|access-date=June 15, 2009|archive-date=June 17, 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090617195549/http://ccrjustice.org/ourcases/current-cases/ccr-v.-bush|url-status=live}}</ref>

In the August 2006 case ''[[ACLU v. NSA]]'', [[U.S. District Court]] Judge [[Anna Diggs Taylor]] concluded that NSA's warrantless surveillance program was both illegal and unconstitutional. On July 6, 2007, the [[6th Circuit Court of Appeals]] vacated the decision because the ACLU lacked standing to bring the suit.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://fl1.findlaw.com/news.findlaw.com/nytimes/docs/nsa/aclunsa70607opn.pdf |title=6th Circuit Court of Appeals Decision |access-date=October 9, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130117053024/http://fl1.findlaw.com/news.findlaw.com/nytimes/docs/nsa/aclunsa70607opn.pdf |archive-date=January 17, 2013 |url-status=dead |df=mdy-all }}</ref>

In September 2008, the [[Electronic Frontier Foundation]] (EFF) filed a [[class action]] lawsuit against the NSA and several high-ranking officials of the [[Presidency of George W. Bush|Bush administration]],<ref name=digjourn1>{{cite news|url=http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/260075|title=Jewel Vs. NSA Aims To Stop Illegal Surveillance|author=KJ Mullins|date=September 20, 2008|work=Digital Journal|access-date=December 30, 2011|archive-date=January 25, 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140125120448/http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/260075|url-status=live}}</ref> charging an "illegal and unconstitutional program of dragnet communications surveillance,"<ref name=complaint>[https://www.eff.org/files/filenode/jewel/jewel.complaint.pdf ''Jewel v. NSA'' (complaint)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180528044116/https://www.eff.org/files/filenode/jewel/jewel.complaint.pdf |date=2018-05-28 }}. September 18, 2008. [[Electronic Frontier Foundation]]. Retrieved December 30, 2011.</ref> based on documentation provided by former [[AT&T]] technician [[Mark Klein]].<ref name=wired1>{{cite magazine|url=https://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/07/jewel/|title=Obama Claims Immunity, As New Spy Case Takes Center Stage|first=David|last=Kravets|date=July 15, 2009|magazine=[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]]|access-date=December 30, 2011|archive-date=December 31, 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111231090151/http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/07/jewel/|url-status=live}}</ref>

As a result of the [[USA Freedom Act]] passed by [[United States Congress|Congress]] in June 2015, the NSA had to shut down its bulk phone surveillance program on November 29 of the same year. The USA Freedom Act forbids the NSA to collect metadata and content of phone calls unless it has a warrant for terrorism investigation. In that case, the agency must ask the [[Telephone company|telecom companies]] for the record, which will only be kept for six months. The NSA's use of large telecom companies to assist it with its surveillance efforts has caused several privacy concerns.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Van Loo|first=Rory|date=2019-10-01|title=The Missing Regulatory State: Monitoring Businesses in an Age of Surveillance|url=https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/faculty_scholarship/678|journal=Vanderbilt Law Review|volume=72|issue=5|page=1563|access-date=2024-06-07|archive-date=2024-05-12|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240512124224/https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/faculty_scholarship/678/|url-status=live}}</ref>{{rp|1568–69}}

=== AT&T Internet monitoring ===
{{Further|Hepting v. AT&T|Jewel v. NSA|Mark Klein|NSA warrantless surveillance (2001–2007)}}
In May 2008, [[Mark Klein]], a former [[AT&T Inc.|AT&T]] employee, alleged that his company had cooperated with NSA in installing [[Narus (company)|Narus]] hardware to replace the FBI [[Carnivore (software)|Carnivore]] program, to monitor network communications including traffic between U.S. citizens.<ref name="mark">{{cite journal|date=February 16, 2007|title=For Your Eyes Only?|journal=[[NOW on PBS|NOW]]|url=https://www.pbs.org/now/shows/307/index.html|access-date=June 7, 2024|archive-date=April 9, 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140409130359/http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/307/index.html|url-status=live}} on [[Public Broadcasting Service|PBS]]</ref>

=== Data mining ===
NSA was reported in 2008 to use its computing capability to analyze "transactional" data that it regularly acquires from other government agencies, which gather it under their jurisdictional authorities.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB120511973377523845 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090124141023/http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB120511973377523845.html |archive-date=January 24, 2009 |title=NSA's Domestic Spying Grows As Agency Sweeps Up Data |first=Siobahn|last=Gorman|publisher=The Wall Street Journal Online|date=March 10, 2008 |url-status=dead |access-date=March 14, 2014}}</ref>

A 2013 advisory group for the Obama administration, seeking to reform NSA spying programs following the revelations of documents released by Edward J. Snowden,<ref>[https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2013-12-12_rg_final_report.pdf Liberty and Security in a Changing World] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170124173532/https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/docs/2013-12-12_rg_final_report.pdf |date=2017-01-24 }} – Report and Recommendations of The President's Review Group on Intelligence and Communications Technologies, December 12, 2013, 308 pages</ref> mentioned in 'Recommendation 30' on page 37, "...that the National Security Council staff should manage an interagency process to review regularly the activities of the US Government regarding attacks that exploit a previously unknown vulnerability in a computer application." Retired cybersecurity expert [[Richard A. Clarke]] was a group member and stated on April 11, 2014, that NSA had no advance knowledge of [[Heartbleed]].<ref name=reuters>{{cite news|title=White House, spy agencies deny NSA exploited 'Heartbleed' bug|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cybersecurity-internet-bug-nsa-idUSBREA3A1XD20140411|access-date=April 16, 2014|newspaper=Reuters|date=April 11, 2014|author=Mark Hosenball|author2=Will Dunham|archive-date=April 15, 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140415175914/http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/04/11/us-cybersecurity-internet-bug-nsa-idUSBREA3A1XD20140411|url-status=live}}</ref>

=== Illegally obtained evidence ===
{{Further|Parallel construction#Parallel construction in the United States Drug Enforcement Administration}}
In August 2013 it was revealed that a 2005 IRS training document showed that NSA intelligence intercepts and wiretaps, both foreign and domestic, were being supplied to the [[Drug Enforcement Administration]] (DEA) and [[Internal Revenue Service]] (IRS) and were illegally used to launch criminal investigations of US citizens. Law enforcement agents were directed to conceal how the investigations began and recreate a legal investigative trail by re-obtaining the same evidence by other means.<ref>John Shiffman and Kristina Cooke (August 5, 2013) ''[https://www.reuters.com/article/us-dea-sod-idUSBRE97409R20130805 Exclusive: U.S. directs agents to cover up program used to investigate Americans] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130814032628/http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/05/us-dea-sod-idUSBRE97409R20130805 |date=2013-08-14 }}''. Reuters. Retrieved August 12, 2013.</ref><ref>John Shiffman and David Ingram (August 7, 2013) ''[http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-dea-irs-idUKBRE9761B620130807 Exclusive: IRS manual detailed DEA's use of hidden intel evidence] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200719175938/https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-dea-irs-idUKBRE9761B620130807 |date=2020-07-19 }}''. Reuters. Retrieved August 12, 2013.</ref>

=== Obama administration ===
In the months leading to April 2009, the NSA intercepted the communications of U.S. citizens, including a congressman, although the [[United States Department of Justice|Justice Department]] believed that the interception was unintentional. The Justice Department then took action to correct the issues and bring the program into compliance with existing laws.<ref>{{cite news |author1=Lichtblau, Eric |author2=Risen, James |name-list-style=amp |date=April 15, 2009 |title=N.S.A.'s Intercepts Exceed Limits Set by Congress |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/16/us/16nsa.html |work=The New York Times |access-date=April 15, 2009 |archive-date=September 2, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120902055056/http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/16/us/16nsa.html |url-status=live }}</ref> United States Attorney General [[Eric Holder]] resumed the program according to his understanding of the [[Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act]] amendment of 2008, without explaining what had occurred.<ref>{{cite news|author=Ackerman, Spencer |title=NSA Revelations Spark Push to Restore FISA |url=http://washingtonindependent.com/39153/nsa-revelations-spark-movement-to-restore-fisa |date=April 16, 2009 |work=The Washington Independent |publisher=Center for Independent Media |access-date=April 19, 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090418170843/http://washingtonindependent.com/39153/nsa-revelations-spark-movement-to-restore-fisa |archive-date=April 18, 2009 }}</ref>

Polls conducted in June 2013 found divided results among Americans regarding NSA's secret data collection.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.statista.com/statistics/260140/opinion-of-americans-on-whether-the-nsas-secret-data-collection-is-acceptable/|title=Statistics on whether the NSA's Secret Data Collection is Acceptable|publisher=Statista|access-date=July 19, 2013|archive-date=November 4, 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131104214811/http://www.statista.com/statistics/260140/opinion-of-americans-on-whether-the-nsas-secret-data-collection-is-acceptable/|url-status=live}}</ref> [[Rasmussen Reports]] found that 59% of Americans disapprove,<ref>{{cite web|title=59% Oppose Government's Secret Collecting of Phone Records|date=June 9, 2013|url=http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/june_2013/59_oppose_government_s_secret_collecting_of_phone_records|publisher=Rasmussen Reports|access-date=July 19, 2013|archive-date=July 17, 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130717104309/http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/june_2013/59_oppose_government_s_secret_collecting_of_phone_records|url-status=live}}</ref> [[Gallup (company)|Gallup]] found that 53% disapprove,<ref>{{cite web|title=Americans Disapprove of Government Surveillance Programs|url=http://www.gallup.com/poll/163043/americans-disapprove-government-surveillance-programs.aspx|date=June 12, 2013|author=Newport, Frank|publisher=Gallup|access-date=July 19, 2013|archive-date=July 29, 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130729153218/http://www.gallup.com/poll/163043/americans-disapprove-government-surveillance-programs.aspx|url-status=live}}</ref> and [[Pew Research Center|Pew]] found that 56% are in favor of NSA data collection.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.people-press.org/2013/06/10/majority-views-nsa-phone-tracking-as-acceptable-anti-terror-tactic/|title=Majority Views NSA Phone Tracking as Acceptable Anti-terror Tactic|date=June 10, 2013|publisher=Pew Research Center|access-date=July 19, 2013|archive-date=July 14, 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130714195016/http://www.people-press.org/2013/06/10/majority-views-nsa-phone-tracking-as-acceptable-anti-terror-tactic/|url-status=live}}</ref>

=== Section 215 metadata collection ===
On April 25, 2013, the NSA obtained a court order requiring [[Verizon]]'s Business Network Services to provide [[metadata]] on all calls in its system to the NSA "on an ongoing daily basis" for three months, as reported by ''[[The Guardian]]'' on June 6, 2013. This information includes "the numbers of both parties on a call&nbsp;... location data, call duration, unique identifiers, and the time and duration of all calls" but not "[t]he contents of the conversation itself". The order relies on the so-called "business records" provision of the Patriot Act.<ref>{{cite news|author=Glenn Greenwald|title=Revealed: NSA collecting phone records of millions of Americans daily|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order|access-date=June 6, 2013|location=London|work=The Guardian|date=June 6, 2013|author-link=Glenn Greenwald|archive-date=October 12, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191012153115/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=NYTimes2013-06-05>{{cite news| url = https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/06/us/us-secretly-collecting-logs-of-business-calls.html| title = U.S. Is Secretly Collecting Records of Verizon Calls| newspaper = [[The New York Times]]| date = 2013-06-05| author = [[Charlie Savage (author)|Charlie Savage]], Edward Wyatt| access-date = 2024-06-07| archive-date = 2024-05-12| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20240512131030/https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/06/us/us-secretly-collecting-logs-of-business-calls.html| url-status = live}}</ref>

In August 2013, following the Snowden leaks, new details about the NSA's data mining activity were revealed. Reportedly, the majority of emails into or out of the United States are captured at "selected communications links" and automatically analyzed for keywords or other "selectors". Emails that do not match are deleted.<ref name="SavageBroaderSifting">{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/08/us/broader-sifting-of-data-abroad-is-seen-by-nsa.html|title=N.S.A. Said to Search Content of Messages to and From U.S|author=Savage, Charlie|date=August 8, 2013|access-date=August 13, 2013|work=[[The New York Times]]|author-link=Charlie Savage (author)|archive-date=August 13, 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130813023342/https://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/08/us/broader-sifting-of-data-abroad-is-seen-by-nsa.html|url-status=live}}</ref> The utility of such a massive metadata collection in preventing terrorist attacks is disputed. Many studies reveal the dragnet-like system to be ineffective. One such report, released by the [[New America Foundation]] concluded that after an analysis of 225 terrorism cases, the NSA "had no discernible impact on preventing acts of terrorism."<ref name="washingtonpost2014">Nakashima, Ellen. [https://web.archive.org/web/20140113192921/http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-phone-record-collection-does-little-to-prevent-terrorist-attacks-group-says/2014/01/12/8aa860aa-77dd-11e3-8963-b4b654bcc9b2_story.html "NSA phone record collection does little to prevent terrorist attacks, the group says"], ''The Washington Post'', January 12, 2014</ref>

Defenders of the program said that while metadata alone cannot provide all the information necessary to prevent an attack, it assures the ability to "connect the dots"<ref name="washingtonpost.com">Nakashima, Ellen. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-chief-defends-collecting-americans-data/2013/09/25/5db2583c-25f1-11e3-b75d-5b7f66349852_story.html / "NSA chief defends collecting Americans' data"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230326034532/https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-chief-defends-collecting-americans-data/2013/09/25/5db2583c-25f1-11e3-b75d-5b7f66349852_story.html |date=2023-03-26 }}, ''The Washington Post'', September 25, 2013</ref> between suspect foreign numbers and domestic numbers with a speed only the NSA's software is capable of. One benefit of this is quickly being able to determine the difference between suspicious activity and real threats.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://www.nap.edu/read/11896/chapter/11|year=2007|doi=10.17226/11896|isbn=978-0-309-10392-3|language=en|title=Engaging Privacy and Information Technology in a Digital Age|access-date=2024-06-07|archive-date=2022-03-27|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220327084941/https://www.nap.edu/read/11896/chapter/11|url-status=live}}</ref> As an example, NSA director General [[Keith B. Alexander]] mentioned at the annual Cybersecurity Summit in 2013, that metadata analysis of domestic phone call records after the [[Boston Marathon bombing]] helped determine that rumors of a follow-up attack in New York were baseless.<ref name="washingtonpost.com"/> In addition to doubts about its effectiveness, many people argue that the collection of metadata is an unconstitutional invasion of privacy. {{As of|2015}}, the collection process remained legal and grounded in the ruling from ''[[Smith v. Maryland]]'' (1979). A prominent opponent of the data collection and its legality is [[U.S. District Judge]] [[Richard J. Leon]], who issued a report in 2013<ref>[https://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/world/federal-judge-rules-nsa-program-is-likely-unconstitutional/668/ Federal judge rules NSA program is likely unconstitutional] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170830105413/https://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/world/federal-judge-rules-nsa-program-is-likely-unconstitutional/668/ |date=2017-08-30 }}, ''The Washington Post'', December 16, 2013</ref> in which he stated: "I cannot imagine a more 'indiscriminate' and 'arbitrary invasion' than this systematic and high tech collection and retention of personal data on virtually every single citizen for purposes of querying and analyzing it without prior judicial approval...Surely, such a program infringes on 'that degree of privacy' that the founders enshrined in the [[Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourth Amendment]]".

As of May 7, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that the interpretation of Section 215 of the Patriot Act was wrong and that the NSA program that has been collecting Americans' phone records in bulk is illegal.<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-nsa-went-too-far/2015/05/10/02635924-f5aa-11e4-b2f3-af5479e6bbdd_story.html New Rules for the National Security Agency] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230326034649/https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-nsa-went-too-far/2015/05/10/02635924-f5aa-11e4-b2f3-af5479e6bbdd_story.html |date=2023-03-26 }} by the editorial board on May 10, 2015</ref> It stated that Section 215 cannot be interpreted to allow government to collect national phone data and, as a result, expired on June 1, 2015. This ruling "is the first time a higher-level court in the regular judicial system has reviewed the NSA phone records program."<ref name=NYTimes2015-05-07>{{cite news| url = https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/08/us/nsa-phone-records-collection-ruled-illegal-by-appeals-court.html| title = N.S.A. Collection of Bulk Call Data is Ruled Illegal| newspaper = [[The New York Times]]| date = 2015-05-07| author = [[Charlie Savage (author)|Charlie Savage]], Jonathan Weisman| access-date = 2024-06-07| archive-date = 2024-05-18| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20240518131549/https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/08/us/nsa-phone-records-collection-ruled-illegal-by-appeals-court.html| url-status = live}}</ref> The replacement law known as the [[USA Freedom Act]], which will enable the NSA to continue to have bulk access to citizens' metadata but with the stipulation that the data will now be stored by the companies themselves.<ref name=NYTimes2015-05-07 /> This change will not have any effect on other Agency procedures—outside of metadata collection—which have purportedly challenged Americans' Fourth Amendment rights,<ref>{{cite web|title=Rand Paul vs. Washington DC on the USA Freedom Act|url=http://hotair.com/standing-athwarth-history-yelling-stop/2015/05/31/rand-paul-vs-washington-dc-on-the-usa-freedom-act/|website=HotAir|access-date=2015-06-02|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150602001207/http://hotair.com/standing-athwarth-history-yelling-stop/2015/05/31/rand-paul-vs-washington-dc-on-the-usa-freedom-act/|archive-date=2015-06-02|url-status=dead}}</ref> including [[Upstream collection]], a mass of techniques used by the Agency to collect and store American's data/communications directly from the [[Internet backbone]].<ref name=slides>Top Level Telecommunications, [http://electrospaces.blogspot.com/2014/01/slides-about-nsas-upstream-collection.html Slides about NSA's Upstream collection] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191108055615/https://electrospaces.blogspot.com/2014/01/slides-about-nsas-upstream-collection.html |date=2019-11-08 }}, January 17, 2014</ref>

Under the Upstream collection program, the NSA paid telecommunications companies hundreds of millions of dollars in order to collect data from them.<ref>[https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-paying-us-companies-for-access-to-communications-networks/2013/08/29/5641a4b6-10c2-11e3-bdf6-e4fc677d94a1_story.html NSA paying U.S. companies for access to communications networks] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140328125616/http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-paying-us-companies-for-access-to-communications-networks/2013/08/29/5641a4b6-10c2-11e3-bdf6-e4fc677d94a1_story.html |date=2014-03-28 }} by Craig Timberg and Barton Gellman on August 29, 2013</ref> While companies such as Google and Yahoo! claim that they do not provide "direct access" from their servers to the NSA unless under a court order,<ref>[http://www.digitalspy.com/tech/news/a487943/nsa-prism-controversy-apple-facebook-google-more-deny-knowledge.html#~pbKCS2AUgt8krC NSA PRISM Controversy: Apple, Facebook, Google, more deny knowledge] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151016020520/http://www.digitalspy.com/tech/news/a487943/nsa-prism-controversy-apple-facebook-google-more-deny-knowledge.html#~pbKCS2AUgt8krC |date=2015-10-16 }} by Digital Spy on June 6, 2013</ref> the NSA had access to emails, phone calls, and cellular data users.<ref>[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/03/microsoft-facebook-google-yahoo-fisa-surveillance-requests Microsoft, Facebook, Google and Yahoo release US surveillance requests] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170106175615/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/03/microsoft-facebook-google-yahoo-fisa-surveillance-requests |date=2017-01-06 }} by Spencer Ackerman and Dominic Rushe on February 3, 2014</ref> Under this new ruling, telecommunications companies maintain bulk user metadata on their servers for at least 18 months, to be provided upon request to the NSA.<ref name=NYTimes2015-05-07 /> This ruling made the mass storage of specific phone records at NSA datacenters illegal, but it did not rule on Section 215's constitutionality.<ref name=NYTimes2015-05-07 />

=== Fourth Amendment encroachment ===
In a declassified document it was revealed that 17,835 phone lines were on an improperly permitted "alert list" from 2006 to 2009 in breach of compliance, which tagged these phone lines for daily monitoring.<ref name=DECLASSIFIED>{{cite book|title=Memorandum of the United States in Response to the Court's Order Dated January 28, 2009|date=January 28, 2009|publisher=Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court Washington DC|location=Washington DC|page=11|url=http://www.dni.gov/files/documents/section/pub_Feb%2012%202009%20Memorandum%20of%20US.pdf|access-date=June 7, 2024|archive-date=May 12, 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240512131445/https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/section/pub_Feb%2012%202009%20Memorandum%20of%20US.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine|last=Greenberg|first=Andy|title=NSA Secretly Admitted Illegally Tracking Thousands Of 'Alert List' Phone Numbers For Years|url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/09/10/nsa-secretly-admitted-illegally-tracking-thousands-of-alert-list-phone-numbers-for-years/|magazine=Forbes|access-date=February 25, 2014|archive-date=March 1, 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140301012831/http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/09/10/nsa-secretly-admitted-illegally-tracking-thousands-of-alert-list-phone-numbers-for-years/|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=VERGE>{{cite web|last=Brandon|first=Russel|title=NSA illegally searched 15,000 suspects' phone records, according to declassified report|url=https://www.theverge.com/2013/9/10/4716642/nsa-illegally-searched-15000-suspects-phone-records-according-to|website=The Verge|date=10 September 2013|access-date=February 25, 2014|archive-date=28 February 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140228122003/http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/10/4716642/nsa-illegally-searched-15000-suspects-phone-records-according-to|url-status=live}}</ref> Eleven percent of these monitored phone lines met the agency's legal standard for "reasonably articulable suspicion" (RAS).<ref name=DECLASSIFIED /><ref>{{cite web|last=Timm|first=Trevor|title=Government Releases NSA Surveillance Docs and Previously Secret FISA Court Opinions in Response to EFF Lawsuit|date=10 September 2013|url=https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/09/government-releases-nsa-surveillance-docs-and-previously-secret-fisa-court|publisher=Electronic Frontier Foundation|access-date=February 25, 2014|archive-date=9 February 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140209033231/https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/09/government-releases-nsa-surveillance-docs-and-previously-secret-fisa-court|url-status=live}}</ref>

The NSA tracks the locations of hundreds of millions of cell phones per day, allowing it to map people's movements and relationships in detail.<ref name="GellmanSolantiTracking">Barton Gellman and Ashton Solanti, December 5, 2013, [https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-tracking-cellphone-locations-worldwide-snowden-documents-show/2013/12/04/5492873a-5cf2-11e3-bc56-c6ca94801fac_story.html?hpid=z1 "NSA tracking cellphone locations worldwide, Snowden documents show"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170719034402/https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-tracking-cellphone-locations-worldwide-snowden-documents-show/2013/12/04/5492873a-5cf2-11e3-bc56-c6ca94801fac_story.html?hpid=z1 |date=2017-07-19 }}, ''The Washington Post''. Retrieved December 7, 2013.</ref> The NSA has been reported to have access to all communications made via Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Yahoo, YouTube, [[AOL]], Skype, Apple and Paltalk,<ref name="GreenwaldPRISM">Greenwald, Glenn; MacAskill, Ewen (June 6, 2013). "[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data NSA Prism program taps in to user data of Apple, Google and others] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060818114650/http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data |date=2006-08-18 }}". ''The Guardian.'' Retrieved June 15, 2013.</ref> and collects hundreds of millions of contact lists from personal email and [[instant messaging]] accounts each year.<ref name="GellmanSoltaniAddress">Gellman and Soltani, October 15, 2013 "[https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-collects-millions-of-e-mail-address-books-globally/2013/10/14/8e58b5be-34f9-11e3-80c6-7e6dd8d22d8f_story.html NSA collects millions of e-mail address books globally] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140127122752/http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-collects-millions-of-e-mail-address-books-globally/2013/10/14/8e58b5be-34f9-11e3-80c6-7e6dd8d22d8f_story.html |date=2014-01-27 }}", ''The Washington Post''. Retrieved October 16, 2013.</ref> It has also managed to weaken much of the encryption used on the Internet (by collaborating with, coercing, or otherwise infiltrating numerous technology companies to leave "backdoors" into their systems) so that the majority of encryption is inadvertently vulnerable to different forms of attack.<ref>Perlroth, Larson and Shane, "[https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/us/nsa-foils-much-internet-encryption.html N.S.A. Able to Foil Basic Safeguards of Privacy on Web] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240522175823/https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/us/nsa-foils-much-internet-encryption.html |date=2024-05-22 }}", ''The New York Times'' September 5, 2013. Retrieved September 23, 2013.</ref><ref>Arthur, Charles "[https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/sep/16/nsa-gchq-undermine-internet-security Academics criticise NSA and GCHQ for weakening online encryption]", ''The Guardian'' September 16, 2013. Retrieved September 23, 2013.</ref>

Domestically, the NSA has been proven to collect and store metadata records of phone calls,<ref>{{cite news|title=Senators: Limit NSA snooping into US phone records|url=http://bigstory.ap.org/article/senators-limit-nsa-snooping-us-phone-records|agency=Associated Press|access-date=October 15, 2013|quote=" Is it the goal of the NSA to collect the phone records of all Americans?" Udall asked at Thursday's hearing. "Yes, I believe it is in the nation's best interest to put all the phone records into a lockbox that we could search when the nation needs to do it. Yes," Alexander replied.|archive-date=October 29, 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131029003314/http://bigstory.ap.org/article/senators-limit-nsa-snooping-us-phone-records|url-status=dead}}</ref> including over 120&nbsp;million US [[MAINWAY|Verizon subscribers]],<ref>Glenn Greenwald (June 6, 2013). "[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order NSA collecting phone records of millions of Verizon customers daily] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191012153115/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-court-order |date=2019-10-12 }}". ''The Guardian''. Retrieved September 16, 2013.</ref> as well as intercept vast amounts of communications via the internet ([[Upstream collection|Upstream]]).<ref name="GreenwaldPRISM" /> The government's legal standing had been to rely on a secret interpretation of the [[Patriot Act]] whereby the entirety of US communications may be considered "relevant" to a terrorism investigation if it is expected that even a tiny minority may relate to terrorism.<ref name="TechDirtSecretInterpretation">[http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130917/13395324556/court-reveals-secret-interpretation-patriot-act-allowing-nsa-to-collect-all-phone-call-data.shtml Court Reveals 'Secret Interpretation' Of The Patriot Act, Allowing NSA To Collect All Phone Call Data] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220224094759/https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130917/13395324556/court-reveals-secret-interpretation-patriot-act-allowing-nsa-to-collect-all-phone-call-data.shtml |date=2022-02-24 }}, September 17, 2013. Retrieved September 19, 2013.</ref> The NSA also supplies foreign intercepts to the [[Drug Enforcement Administration|DEA]], [[Internal Revenue Service|IRS]] and other law enforcement agencies, who use these to initiate criminal investigations. Federal agents are then instructed to "recreate" the investigative trail via [[parallel construction]].<ref name="reuters3">{{cite news|title=Exclusive: U.S. directs agents to cover up program used to investigate Americans|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-dea-sod-idUSBRE97409R20130805|work=Reuters|access-date=August 14, 2013|date=August 5, 2013|archive-date=August 14, 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130814032628/http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/05/us-dea-sod-idUSBRE97409R20130805|url-status=live}}</ref>

The NSA also spies on influential Muslim societies to obtain information that could be used to discredit them, such as their use of pornography. The targets, both domestic and abroad, are not suspected of any crime but hold religious or political views deemed "radical" by the NSA.<ref name="GreenwaldGallagherGrimDiscredit">Glenn Greenwald, Ryan Gallagher & Ryan Grim, November 26, 2013, "[https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/26/nsa-porn-muslims_n_4346128.html Top-Secret Document Reveals NSA Spied On Porn Habits As Part Of Plan To Discredit 'Radicalizers'] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131127144711/https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/26/nsa-porn-muslims_n_4346128.html |date=2013-11-27 }}", ''Huffington Post''. Retrieved November 28, 2013.</ref> According to a report in ''The Washington Post'' in July 2014, relying on information provided by Snowden, 90% of those placed under surveillance in the U.S. are ordinary Americans and are not the intended targets. The newspaper said it had examined documents including emails, text messages, and online accounts that support the claim.<ref name="NSAusa">{{cite news|title=Vast majority of NSA spy targets are mistakenly monitored|url=https://www.philadelphianews.net/index.php/sid/223558101/scat/c08dd24cec417021/ht/Vast-majority-of-NSA-spy-targets-are-mistakenly-monitored|access-date=July 7, 2014|publisher=Philadelphia News.Net|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140714180053/http://www.philadelphianews.net/index.php/sid/223558101/scat/c08dd24cec417021/ht/Vast-majority-of-NSA-spy-targets-are-mistakenly-monitored|archive-date=2014-07-14|url-status=dead}}</ref>

=== Congressional oversight ===
[[File:Ron Wyden and James Clapper - 6 June 2013.webm|thumb|Excerpt of James Clapper's testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence]] The Intelligence Committees of the US House and Senate exercise primary oversight over the NSA; other members of Congress have been denied access to materials and information regarding the agency and its activities.<ref>Greenwald, Glen, "[https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/04/congress-nsa-denied-access Members of Congress denied access to basic information about NSA]", ''The Guardian'', August 4, 2013. Retrieved September 23, 2013.</ref> The [[United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court]], the secret court charged with regulating the NSA's activities is, according to its chief judge, incapable of investigating or verifying how often the NSA breaks even its own secret rules.<ref>Loennig, C., "[https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/court-ability-to-police-us-spying-program-limited/2013/08/15/4a8c8c44-05cd-11e3-a07f-49ddc7417125_story.html Court: Ability to police U.S. spying program limited] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231008052647/https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/court-ability-to-police-us-spying-program-limited/2013/08/15/4a8c8c44-05cd-11e3-a07f-49ddc7417125_story.html |date=2023-10-08 }}", ''The Washington Post'', August 16, 2013. Retrieved September 23, 2013.</ref> It has since been reported that the NSA violated its own rules on data access thousands of times a year, many of these violations involving large-scale data interceptions.<ref>Gellman, B. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-broke-privacy-rules-thousands-of-times-per-year-audit-finds/2013/08/15/3310e554-05ca-11e3-a07f-49ddc7417125_story.html NSA broke privacy rules thousands of times per year, audit finds], ''The Washington Post'', August 15, 2013. Retrieved September 23, 2013.</ref> NSA officers have even used data intercepts to spy on love interests;<ref>Gorman, S. [https://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/08/23/nsa-officers-sometimes-spy-on-love-interests/ NSA Officers Spy on Love Interests] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140401212529/http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/08/23/nsa-officers-sometimes-spy-on-love-interests/ |date=2014-04-01 }}, Wall St Journal, August 23, 2013. Retrieved September 23, 2013.</ref> "most of the NSA violations were self-reported, and each instance resulted in administrative action of termination."<ref>Andrea Peterson, [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2013/08/24/loveint-when-nsa-officers-use-their-spying-power-on-love-interests/ LOVEINT: When NSA officers use their spying power on love interests] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230924092154/https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2013/08/24/loveint-when-nsa-officers-use-their-spying-power-on-love-interests/ |date=2023-09-24 }}, ''The Washington Post'' (August 24, 2013).</ref>{{Attribution needed|date=July 2020}}

The NSA has "generally disregarded the special rules for disseminating United States person information" by illegally sharing its intercepts with other law enforcement agencies.<ref name="AckermanFisa">Spencer Ackerman, November 19, 2013, "[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/19/fisa-court-documents-nsa-violations-privacy Fisa court documents reveal extent of NSA disregard for privacy restrictions]", ''The Guardian''. Retrieved November 21, 2013.</ref> A March 2009 FISA Court opinion, which the court released, states that protocols restricting data queries had been "so frequently and systemically violated that it can be fairly said that this critical element of the overall ... regime has never functioned effectively."<ref>John D Bates (October 3, 2011). "[https://www.eff.org/sites/default/files/filenode/fisc_opinion_-_unconstitutional_surveillance_0.pdf &#91;redacted&#93;] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130824171345/https://www.eff.org/sites/default/files/filenode/fisc_opinion_-_unconstitutional_surveillance_0.pdf |date=2013-08-24 }}". p. 16.</ref><ref>Ellen Nakashima, Julie Tate, and Carol Leonnig (September 10, 2013). "[https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/declassified-court-documents-highlight-nsa-violations/2013/09/10/60b5822c-1a4b-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html Declassified court documents highlight NSA violations in data collection for surveillance] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220228045431/https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/declassified-court-documents-highlight-nsa-violations/2013/09/10/60b5822c-1a4b-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html |date=2022-02-28 }}". ''The Washington Post''. Retrieved September 14, 2013.</ref> In 2011 the same court noted that the "volume and nature" of the NSA's bulk foreign Internet intercepts was "fundamentally different from what the court had been led to believe".<ref name="AckermanFisa" /> Email contact lists (including those of US citizens) are collected at numerous foreign locations to work around the illegality of doing so on US soil.<ref name="GellmanSoltaniAddress" />

Legal opinions on the NSA's bulk collection program have differed. In mid-December 2013, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon ruled that the "almost-Orwellian" program likely violates the Constitution, and wrote, "I cannot imagine a more 'indiscriminate' and 'arbitrary invasion' than this systematic and high-tech collection and retention of personal data on virtually every single citizen for purposes of querying and analyzing it without prior judicial approval. Surely, such a program infringes on 'that degree of privacy' that the Founders enshrined in the Fourth Amendment. Indeed, I have little doubt that the author of our Constitution, [[James Madison]], who cautioned us to beware 'the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power,' would be aghast."<ref name="LeonRuling">Richard Leon, December 16, 2013, ''[https://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/dec/16/nsa-collection-phone-metadata-district-court-ruling Memorandum Opinion, Klayman vs. Obama]''. U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Reproduced on The Guardian website. Retrieved February 3, 2013.</ref>

Later that month, U.S. District Judge [[William H. Pauley III|William Pauley]] ruled that the NSA's collection of telephone records is legal and valuable in the fight against terrorism. In his opinion, he wrote, "a bulk telephony metadata collection program [is] a wide net that could find and isolate gossamer contacts among suspected terrorists in an ocean of seemingly disconnected data" and noted that a similar collection of data before 9/11 might have prevented the attack.<ref>{{cite web |last=Bazzle |first=Steph |title=Judge Says NSA's Data Collection Is Legal |url=http://www.indyposted.com/227717/judge-says-nsas-data-collection-legal/ |publisher=Indyposted |access-date=December 28, 2013 |date=December 27, 2013 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131228162843/http://www.indyposted.com/227717/judge-says-nsas-data-collection-legal/ |archive-date=December 28, 2013 }}</ref>

=== Official responses ===
At a March 2013 [[Senate Intelligence Committee]] hearing, Senator [[Ron Wyden]] asked the Director of National Intelligence [[James Clapper]], "Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?" Clapper replied "No, sir. ... Not wittingly. There are cases where they could inadvertently perhaps collect, but not wittingly."<ref name="KesslerUntruth">Kessler, Glenn, [https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/james-clappers-least-untruthful-statement-to-the-senate/2013/06/11/e50677a8-d2d8-11e2-a73e-826d299ff459_blog.html James Clapper's 'least untruthful' statement to the Senate] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230622170802/https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/james-clappers-least-untruthful-statement-to-the-senate/2013/06/11/e50677a8-d2d8-11e2-a73e-826d299ff459_blog.html |date=2023-06-22 }}, June 12, 2013. Retrieved September 23, 2013.</ref> This statement came under scrutiny months later, in June 2013, when details of the [[PRISM (surveillance program)|PRISM]] surveillance program were published, showing that "the NSA apparently can gain access to the servers of nine Internet companies for a wide range of digital data."<ref name="KesslerUntruth"/> Wyden said that Clapper had failed to give a "straight answer" in his testimony. Clapper, in response to criticism, said, "I responded in what I thought was the most truthful, or least untruthful manner." Clapper added, "There are honest differences on the semantics of what—when someone says 'collection' to me, that has a specific meaning, which may have a different meaning to him."<ref name="KesslerUntruth"/>

NSA whistle-blower [[Edward Snowden]] additionally revealed the existence of [[XKeyscore]], a top-secret surveillance program that allows the N.S.A for searching vast databases of "the metadata as well as the content of emails and other internet activity, such as browser history," with the capability to search by "name, telephone number, IP address, keywords, the language in which the internet activity was conducted or the type of browser used."<ref name="GreenwaldGuardian">Glenn Greenwald, [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/nsa-top-secret-program-online-data XKeyscore: NSA tool collects 'nearly everything a user does on the internet'] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140320191519/http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/nsa-top-secret-program-online-data |date=2014-03-20 }}, ''The Guardian'' (July 31, 2013).</ref> XKeyscore "provides the technological capability, if not the legal authority, to target even US persons for extensive electronic surveillance without a warrant provided that some identifying information, such as their email or IP address, is known to the analyst."<ref name="GreenwaldGuardian"/>

Regarding the necessity of these NSA programs, Alexander stated on June 27, 2013, that the NSA's bulk phone and Internet intercepts had been instrumental in preventing 54 terrorist "events", including 13 in the US, and in all but one of these cases had provided the initial tip to "unravel the threat stream".<ref>Kube, C., June 27, 2013, [http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/27/19175466-nsa-chief-says-surveillance-programs-helped-foil-54-plots?lite "NSA chief says surveillance programs helped foil 54 plots"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200921011201/http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/27/19175466-nsa-chief-says-surveillance-programs-helped-foil-54-plots?lite |date=2020-09-21 }}, ''US News on nbcnews.com''. Retrieved September 27, 2013.</ref> On July 31 NSA Deputy Director John Inglis conceded to the Senate that these intercepts had not been vital in stopping any terrorist attacks, but were "close" to vital in identifying and convicting four San Diego men for sending US$8,930 to [[Al-Shabaab (militant group)|Al-Shabaab]], a militia that conducts terrorism in Somalia.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.democracynow.org/2013/8/1/nsa_confirms_dragnet_phone_records_collection |title=NSA Confirms Dragnet Phone Records Collection, But Admits It Was Key in Stopping Just 1 Terror Plot |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240512124446/https://www.democracynow.org/2013/8/1/nsa_confirms_dragnet_phone_records_collection |archive-date=2024-05-12 |website=Democracy Now |date=August 1, 2013 |access-date=September 27, 2013 }}</ref><ref>[http://jnslp.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/moalin.pdf "Indictment: USA vs Basaaly Saeed Moalin, Mohamed Mohamed Mohamud and Issa Doreh"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231005065118/https://jnslp.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/moalin.pdf |date=2023-10-05 }}. Southern District of California July 2010 Grand Jury. Retrieved September 30, 2013.</ref><ref>{{cite press release |publisher=The Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence |date=July 23, 2013 |url=http://democrats.intelligence.house.gov/press-release/54-attacks-20-countries-thwarted-nsa-collection |title=54 Attacks in 20 Countries Thwarted By NSA Collection |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131023153822/http://democrats.intelligence.house.gov/press-release/54-attacks-20-countries-thwarted-nsa-collection |archive-date=October 23, 2013 }}</ref> The U.S. government has aggressively sought to dismiss and challenge [[Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution|Fourth Amendment]] cases raised against it, and has granted retroactive immunity to ISPs and telecoms participating in domestic surveillance.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://arstechnica.com/security/2008/02/democrats-fail-to-block-telecom-immunity-provision/ |title=Senate caves, votes to give telecoms retroactive immunity |website=Ars Technica |date=February 13, 2008 |access-date=September 16, 2013 |archive-date=July 8, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170708072335/https://arstechnica.com/security/2008/02/democrats-fail-to-block-telecom-immunity-provision/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://progressive.org/mag/wx071008.html |title=Forget Retroactive Immunity, FISA Bill is also about Prospective Immunity |publisher=[[The Progressive]] |date=July 10, 2008 |access-date=September 16, 2013 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130918200841/http://progressive.org/mag/wx071008.html |archive-date=September 18, 2013 }}</ref>

The U.S. military has acknowledged blocking access to parts of ''The Guardian'' website for thousands of defense personnel across the country,<ref>[http://www.montereyherald.com/local/ci_23554739/restricted-web-access-guardian-is-army-wide-officials "Restricted Web access to the Guardian is Armywide, say officials"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141020150616/http://www.montereyherald.com/local/ci_23554739/restricted-web-access-guardian-is-army-wide-officials |date=2014-10-20 }}, Philipp Molnar, ''Monterey Herald'', June 27, 2013. Retrieved October 15, 2014.</ref><ref name="guardarmy">[[Spencer Ackerman|Ackerman, Spencer]]; Roberts, Dan (June 28, 2013). [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/28/us-army-blocks-guardian-website-access "US Army Blocks Access to Guardian Website to Preserve 'Network Hygiene'—Military Admits to Filtering Reports and Content Relating to Government Surveillance Programs for Thousands of Personnel"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170103143200/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/28/us-army-blocks-guardian-website-access |date=2017-01-03 }}. ''[[The Guardian]]''. Retrieved June 30, 2013.</ref> and blocking the entire ''Guardian'' website for personnel stationed throughout Afghanistan, the Middle East, and South Asia.<ref name="guardmil">{{cite news|last=Ackerman|first=Spencer|title=US military blocks entire Guardian website for troops stationed abroad|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/01/us-military-blocks-guardian-troops|newspaper=The Guardian|date=July 1, 2013|access-date=June 7, 2024|archive-date=February 2, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170202141818/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/01/us-military-blocks-guardian-troops|url-status=live}}</ref> In October 2014, the United Nations report condemned mass surveillance programs carried out by the U.S. intelligence communities and other nations as violating multiple global treaties and conventions that guaranteed core privacy rights.<ref>{{cite web|last=Greenwald|first=Glenn|title=UN Report Finds Mass Surveillance Violates International Treaties and Privacy Rights|url=https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/10/15/un-investigator-report-condemns-mass-surveillance/|date=October 16, 2014|access-date=October 23, 2014|archive-date=January 3, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150103001936/https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/10/15/un-investigator-report-condemns-mass-surveillance/|url-status=dead}}</ref>

=== Responsibility for global ransomware attack ===
An exploit dubbed [[EternalBlue]], created by the NSA, was used in the [[WannaCry ransomware attack]] in May 2017.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/nsa-officials-worried-about-the-day-its-potent-hacking-tool-would-get-loose-then-it-did/2017/05/16/50670b16-3978-11e7-a058-ddbb23c75d82_story.html|title=NSA officials worried about the day its potent hacking tool would get loose. Then it did.|last1=Nakashima|first1=Ellen|date=2017-05-16|newspaper=Washington Post|access-date=2017-12-19|last2=Timberg|first2=Craig|language=en-US|issn=0190-8286|archive-date=2022-09-01|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220901234448/https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/nsa-officials-worried-about-the-day-its-potent-hacking-tool-would-get-loose-then-it-did/2017/05/16/50670b16-3978-11e7-a058-ddbb23c75d82_story.html|url-status=live}}</ref> The exploit had been leaked online by a hacking group, The Shadow Brokers, nearly a month before the attack. Several experts have pointed the finger at the NSA's non-disclosure of the underlying vulnerability, and their loss of control over the EternalBlue attack tool that exploited it. Edward Snowden said that if the NSA had "[[Responsible disclosure|privately disclosed]] the flaw used to attack hospitals when they found it, not when they lost it, [the attack] might not have happened".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/12/global-cyber-attack-ransomware-nsa-uk-nhs|title=Massive ransomware cyber-attack hits 74 countries around the world|first1=Julia Carrie|last1=Wong|author1-link=Julia Carrie Wong|first2=Olivia|last2=Solon|date=12 May 2017|access-date=12 May 2017|work=The Guardian|archive-date=21 May 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170521030555/https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/12/global-cyber-attack-ransomware-nsa-uk-nhs|url-status=live}}</ref> Wikipedia co-founder, [[Jimmy Wales]], stated that he joined "with Microsoft and the other leaders of the industry in saying this is a huge screw-up by the government ... the moment the NSA found it, they should have notified Microsoft so they could quietly issue a [[Patch (computing)|patch]] and really chivvy people along, long before it became a huge problem."<ref>{{cite news|last1=Kharpal|first1=Arjun|title=Cyberattack that hit 200,000 users was 'huge screw-up' by government, Wikipedia's Jimmy Wales says|url=https://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/19/wannacry-cyberattack-nsa-wikipedia-jimmy-wales.html|access-date=2 June 2017|publisher=CNBC|date=19 May 2017|archive-date=24 May 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170524225959/http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/19/wannacry-cyberattack-nsa-wikipedia-jimmy-wales.html|url-status=live}}</ref>

=== Activities of previous employees ===
Former employee David Evenden, who had left the NSA to work for US defense contractor Cyperpoint at a position in the [[United Arab Emirates]], was tasked with hacking UAE neighbor [[Qatar]] in 2015 to determine if they were funding terrorist group [[Muslim Brotherhood]]. He quit the company after learning his team had hacked Qatari Sheikha [[Moza bint Nasser]]'s email exchanges with [[Michelle Obama]], just before she visited [[Doha]].<ref name=NYT-06-02-2021>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/06/technology/cyber-hackers-usa.html |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20211228/https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/06/technology/cyber-hackers-usa.html |archive-date=2021-12-28 |url-access=limited|title=How the United States Lost to Hackers|access-date=6 February 2021|website=The New York Times|date=6 February 2021|last1=Perlroth|first1=Nicole}}{{cbignore}}</ref> Upon Evenden's return to the US, he reported his experiences to the [[FBI]]. The incident highlights a growing trend of former NSA employees and contractors leaving the agency to start up their firms, and then hiring out to countries like [[Turkey]], [[Sudan]], and even [[Russia]], a country involved in [[Cyberwarfare by Russia#United States|numerous cyberattacks against the US]].<ref name=NYT-06-02-2021 />

=== 2021 Denmark-NSA collaborative surveillance ===
{{Further|Operation Dunhammer}}
In May 2021, it was reported that the [[Danish Defence Intelligence Service]] collaborated with the NSA to wiretap on fellow EU members and leaders,<ref>{{cite news |title=Danish secret service helped US spy on Germany's Angela Merkel: report |url=https://www.dw.com/en/danish-secret-service-helped-us-spy-on-germanys-angela-merkel-report/a-57721901 |work=Deutsche Welle |date=30 May 2021 |access-date=7 June 2024 |archive-date=12 May 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240512122924/https://www.dw.com/en/danish-secret-service-helped-us-spy-on-germanys-angela-merkel-report/a-57721901 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=How Denmark became the NSA's listening post in Europe |url=https://www.france24.com/en/technology/20210601-how-denmark-became-the-nsa-s-listening-post-in-europe |work=France 24 |date=1 June 2021 |access-date=7 June 2024 |archive-date=12 May 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240512132041/https://www.france24.com/en/technology/20210601-how-denmark-became-the-nsa-s-listening-post-in-europe |url-status=live }}</ref> leading to wide backlash among EU countries and demands for explanation from Danish and American governments.<ref>{{cite news |title=NSA spying row: US and Denmark pressed over allegations |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-57311441 |work=BBC News |date=31 May 2021 |access-date=7 June 2024 |archive-date=17 May 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240517041238/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-57311441 |url-status=live }}</ref>

=== Buying data without a warrant ===
NSA director [[Paul Nakasone]] disclosed in a letter to Representative [[Ron Wyden]] that the NSA buys data without a warrant.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Whittaker |first=Zack |date=2024-01-26 |title=NSA is buying Americans' internet browsing records without a warrant |url=https://techcrunch.com/2024/01/26/national-security-agency-americans-internet-browsing-records-warrantless/ |access-date= |website=[[TechCrunch]] |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=January 25, 2024 |title=Wyden Releases Documents Confirming the NSA Buys Americans’ Internet Browsing Records; Calls on Intelligence Community to Stop Buying U.S. Data Obtained Unlawfully From Data Brokers, Violating Recent FTC Order |url=https://www.wyden.senate.gov/news/press-releases/wyden-releases-documents-confirming-the-nsa-buys-americans-internet-browsing-records-calls-on-intelligence-community-to-stop-buying-us-data-obtained-unlawfully-from-data-brokers-violating-recent-ftc-order |archive-url=https://archive.today/20240127094647/https://www.wyden.senate.gov/news/press-releases/wyden-releases-documents-confirming-the-nsa-buys-americans-internet-browsing-records-calls-on-intelligence-community-to-stop-buying-us-data-obtained-unlawfully-from-data-brokers-violating-recent-ftc-order |archive-date=27 January 2024 |access-date= |website=wyden.senate.gov |language=en}}</ref>