The question on whether to reform 702 must rest on more than just how many USP communications are in the haystack. Query, Use matter.
-
-
Replying to @MiekeEoyang
@MiekeEoyang do you mean how many are in, period (i.e num of incidentals), or how many are intentionally searched for (ie. FBI 702 searches)2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @pwnallthethings
@pwnallthethings But parsing matters, and we have not been good about parsing. Discussion is all over the map.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MiekeEoyang
@MiekeEoyang One thing I'm rather surprised by is no one has asked for declass of number, type of certificates.@pwnallthethings1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel@MiekeEoyang I wonder if they could declassify the number (but not category) of certs, and the number of targets within each one4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@pwnallthethings Still, if you can say "we'll use bulk collex for these 6 purposes" you should be able to say 702 = these 3 @MiekeEoyang
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.