RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN GOVERNMENT SURVEILLANCE OF ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS
February 24, 2003
BACKGROUND
As information technology has become more extensive and sophisticated, the
relationship between electronic communication and individual privacy has
been the focus of innumerable commentaries, reports, and in recent months,
sweeping government initiatives. Predictably, there has been little consensus
between government entities seeking to take advantage of technological possibilities
for law enforcement enhancements and staunch civil libertarians who advocate
strict safeguards on the ability of such agencies to encroach on individual
rights.
In the wake of September 11, 2001, government interest in maximizing its
ability to circumvent future terrorist activity has prompted the introduction
of heightened surveillance programs which have generated significant legal
debate. For a thorough background of the trend toward increased monitoring
of various realms of activity, see http://www.aclu.org/Privacy/Privacylist.cfm?c=39
.
TOTAL INFORMATION AWARENESS
Perhaps one of the most expansive of these new surveillance initiatives
is the Pentagon's plan to launch its Total Information Awareness (TIA) program.
Under this scenario, the government would employ data mining technologies
to detect potential terrorist activity through monitoring of e-mail, commercial
databases, and other data repositories (see http://www.darpa.mil/iao/TIASystems.htm
). As could be predicted, reaction to this initiative has ranged from accusations
that such a
program signals the start of a "Big Brother" era in federal law enforcement
(see http://www.aclu.org/Privacy/Privacylist.cfm?c=130
), to voluminous explanations as to why the unique threat of terrorist activity
requires this novel, technology-based approach. According to the Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the new realities of the international
landscape require the government to "find the terrorists on a world of noise,
understand what they are planning, and develop options for preventing their
attacks," and the best way to accomplish this to take full advantage of the
resources only new technology can provide (see
Remarks of Dr.
John Poindexter, Director Information Awareness Office of DARPA). For
additional DARPA arguments on the necessity of this initiative, read TIA
FAQs and http://www.darpa.mil/iao/Excerpt.pdf
.
Total Information Awareness has not only attracted the criticism of civil
liberties groups, but has also garnered negative attention from other interest
groups. Please see http://www.acm.org/usacm/Letters/tia_final.html
and http://www.business2.com/articles/web/0,1653,46876,00.html
for criticisms of the program's potential for effectiveness from the computer
science arena. Consider also the comments of former Nixon speech writer William
Safire in November, 2002:
If the Homeland Security Act is
not amended before passage, here is what will happen to you:
Every purchase you make with a credit card, every magazine subscription
you buy and medical prescription you fill, every Web site you visit and
e-mail you send or receive, every academic grade you receive, every bank
deposit you make, every trip you book and every event you attend ---- all
these transactions and communications will go into what the Defense Department
describes as "a virtual, centralized grand database."
To this computerized dossier on your private life from commercial sources,
add every piece of information that government has about you
---- passport application, driver's license and bridge toll records, judicial
and divorce records, complaints from nosy neighbors to the
F.B.I., your lifetime paper trail plus the latest hidden camera surveillance
---- and you have the supersnoop's dream: a " Total Information Awareness"
about every U.S. citizen.
This is not some far-out Orwellian scenario. It is what will happen to your
personal freedom in the next few weeks if John Poindexter gets the
unprecedented power he seeks.
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS
With the adoption of Amendment 59 to
the Omnibus Appropriations Bill, the Senate has just limited further
development of TIA pending significant further inquiry
into the privacy and civil liberties consequences of developing such a system.
Clearly, there is much more consideration of the potentially far-reaching
effects of government surveillance of online communication, such as that
outlined in TIA.
QUESTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION:
Is there validity in the premise that the unprecedented scope/nature of
national security threats posed by terrorists and other hostile entities
necessitates the use of innovative technological solutions?
To what extent are you willing to permit government use of personal data
gathered by way of your online activities, if national security is demonstrably
strengthened?
Are you convinced that it is possible to tailor data mining initiatives
such as those advocated by DARPA sufficiently that any encroachment on individual
civil liberties would be minor, or at least at a tolerable level?
Does a "virtual dragnet" program (as TIA has been pejoratively dubbed) simply
cast too wide a net collecting far more information could possibly be helpful
in tracking potential terrorist activity?
How could the various abuses of these surveillance systems, of which many
interest groups have warned, be effectively checked? How should the standards
governing the use of data gathered in this fashion be developed, and by whom?