I don't like how this article buries the important parts of this story. There is good reason to think that this surveillance by public info is legal currently, there was a court ruling stating that's the case.
A law is necessary to codify that this practice is a violation Fourth Amendment, and Wyden is currently one of a handful of senators trying to get it passed.
The story eventually mentions this, but the beginning focus on confidentiality makes it seem like they're hiding evidence of their crime.
Sorry, I'm basing this off other articles on this subject I've read recently but my 30 second search didn't locate them. The DoD has some reason to believe their interpretation is correct though, a law clarifying it's not would still be a good idea.
The pessimist in me wonders if Senator Wyden is being funded by a company who stands to gain when their competitor can no longer supply the Pentagon with surveillance data according to the letter of the law.
Three things on that. First, the law would just require a warrant before they get that data, there isn't really some other source that would benefit from it. Second, Wyden has been supportive of similar issues for years, not beyond suspicion but there should be some substance to any suspicion cast on him. And finally, I wouldn't care if Wyden was being paid to ensure that law enforcement needs a warrant.
My cynical take is that Wyden is only allowed to make these press releases because both parties know that they are unlikely to become law. People get less upset knowing someone is pushing for the issues they care about even though the effort is futile.
A law is necessary to codify that this practice is a violation Fourth Amendment, and Wyden is currently one of a handful of senators trying to get it passed.
The story eventually mentions this, but the beginning focus on confidentiality makes it seem like they're hiding evidence of their crime.