E-Mail Surveillance Renews Concerns in Congress (2009)

nytimes.com

57 points·uvdiv··10 comments

I think several "political analysts" on tv owe Snowden an apology for saying his claim of being able to read the President's email was grandiose, given this prior proof.

And just imagine what unsupervised contractors do.

At today's hearing, Rep. Himes was focused on the risks of collecting the data even assuming good processes and oversight for legitimate access. In response the NSA said that there hadn't been any examples of people ignoring processes and getting improper access. But here's at least one ...

To preempt confusion: the old title was

'NSA analyst "improperly accessed" Bill Clinton's email [2009]'

That's what the early comments are replying to.

I thought he only sent 2 emails, or did he have a separate personal email account?:

http://www.salon.com/2011/02/17/bill_clinton_2_emails_presid...

This incident didn't occur during Clinton's presidency.

Because each court order could single out hundreds or even thousands of phone numbers or e-mail addresses, the number of individual communications that were improperly collected could number in the millions, officials said.

Hey Google, Facebook at al, what say you?

Hey Bill,

Here are the nuclear launch codes:

nhERB3kDBdg7vVSZ Q4MKgBcPkgS4MqtU fdsAbGzOnOf8d2Ep

Hope all goes well. Good luck with the free world. Say high to Hillary.

George

Wouldn't Bill be sending them to George?

We've had two George Bush's; but, I think the context suggested you're right.

George H.W. Bush would be sending them to Bill who would send them to George W. Bush.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com