advertisement
advertisement
advertisement

NSA Phone Data Grab Raises Frightening Retail Questions. Can Complying With A Lawful Warrant Still Violate A Chain’s Privacy Policy?

Written by Mark Rasch
June 26th, 2013

Attorney Mark D. Rasch is the former head of the U.S. Justice Department’s computer crime unit and today is a lawyer in Bethesda, Md., specializing in privacy and security law.

The recent revelations that Verizon and most likely others shared the entire contents of their customer databases with the U.S. National Security Agency raises a question for retailers and payment processors. How much data should I share with the government, particularly when it has a subpoena, and how much effort should I expend fighting government demands for information?

Any time you create “big data,” you run the risk of big headaches. Remember, the government has something called “sovereign immunity,” meaning that, for the most part, it cannot be sued. That leaves the data collector, retailer or payment processor with the responsibilities. If a retailer provides information to a government agency – even in the face of a demand or subpoena – the retailer, and not the government, can face liability if it is later determined that the demand or subpoena was not “lawful.”

Here’s the problem. Most retailers have privacy policies that say they will turn over data (or even databases) in response to “lawful” government demands or requests. But if it turns out that the demand or request is overbroad, unreasonable, not supported by probable cause, done for an improper purpose, or simply that the government did not follow the proper procedure in obtaining the subpoena or warrant, or in otherwise requesting the information, the demand may not be lawful.

And voila! The retailer will have violated its own privacy policies. What’s worse, it will have opened itself up for liability not only to its customers, but also to the government that demanded the information in the first place. Finally, even statutes that appear to provide the entity with immunity for complying may not protect the chain.

The NSA “PRISM” program was actually only part of the NSA’s data-gathering efforts. PRISM was the NSA’s effort to collect “content” information over the Internet – that is to read people’s e-mails, snoop on their Skype calls, capture video conferencing information, and read private SMS messages, tweets and Facebook postings. In addition, the NSA had a program, codenamed NUCLEON, to capture so-called “metadata” from the Internet; the header information from emails (whom customers are writing to, when they are writing, from where they are writing), which websites people are visiting and from where, and other theoretically “non-content” information. For telephone companies, the NSA has similar programs; codename MARINA for content information (listening in on phone calls) and codename MAINWAY for telephone metadata.Daphne-Party Diashow

We know little about these programs except that they were theoretically approved by a super-secret court called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) and that they were targeting the communications of “non-U.S. persons.” Other revelations in the past about programs like ESCHELON indicate that the U.S. government had an understanding with other friendly governments. Since we couldn’t spy on U.S. citizens in the U.S. (without a warrant), they would spy on our citizens for us, and we would spy on theirs for them. All perfectly legal. Well, not perfectly.


advertisement

Comments are closed.

Newsletters

StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!
advertisement

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

StorefrontBacktalk
Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.