Factbox: Two key U.S. laws underpin NSA surveillance programs

By Lawrence Hurley (Reuters) - Two key provisions of U.S. law have helped intelligence agencies gather reams of information in recent years from telephone companies and electronic service providers. The laws have drawn criticism from civil libertarians and prompted court challenges, the most high-profile of which the government won earlier this year before the U.S. Supreme Court. Both provisions of the law have attracted increased scrutiny amid controversial leaks of documents by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden that have revealed widespread U.S. government surveillance activity. On Thursday, the Guardian, the New York Times and ProPublica reported that the agency has secretly developed the ability to crack or circumvent commonplace internet encryption used to protect everything from email to financial transactions. Here are the basics of the laws and challenges to them. FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE ACT Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), as amended in 2008, lets the government collect electronic communications for acquiring intelligence on non-U.S. targets that pose a threat to national security. The government cited this provision to support its Prism program, in which the NSA searches email and other internet traffic for foreign intelligence purposes, using data supplied by internet providers in response to specific or broad NSA requests. The existence of the program was revealed by Snowden. For electronic service providers, the law says the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) in Washington can authorize a company to provide "all information, facilities, or assistance necessary." Civil liberties groups say this has been interpreted too broadly by both the government and the court. Some have speculated that the term "assistance" could be interpreted to require companies to help the government circumvent encryption. "There's no consensus on what that language means," said Alexander Abdo, an American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) lawyer. "It's an open question." PATRIOT ACT Section 215 of the 2001 USA Patriot Act requires companies to turn over business records if a government request for them is approved by the FISC. The government cited this provision in seeking metadata on telephone calls from Verizon Communications Inc, as revealed by Snowden. The section allows the government to ask the court for "any tangible things" as part of any authorized investigation related to terrorism or intelligence activities. As the Justice Department wrote in an October 2011 letter to members of Congress, the government must show, among other things, that the information sought is "relevant to an authorized national security investigation." Civil liberties advocates say the government has interpreted Section 215 too broadly in seeking access to various data. COURT CHALLENGES Companies faced with requests for information from the government can, in theory, push back by appealing to the surveillance court. Mark Jaycox, an analyst at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a civil liberties group, said a company could ask the court to clarify the meaning of "assistance" under FISA, for example. But, because the court acts in secret, there is no way of knowing if anyone has done this. "It's something the public is in the dark about," he said. Separately, civil liberties groups have at various times tried to challenge both provisions in federal court. The U.S. Supreme Court dealt them a severe blow in February when it ruled that a group of plaintiffs, including journalists and human rights groups, could not challenge Section 702 on the ground that they could not show they had suffered any injury. Other lawsuits are still pending around the country on various related issues, including one by the ACLU challenging the collection of telephone data under the Patriot Act that was filed after Snowden began leaking documents. (Editing by Kevin Drawbaugh and Chistopher Wilson)