Anti-Terrorist Info gathering, or Right to Privacy?
I dug this up - rather interesting if you think about it.
AP: Privacy Protecting Programs Killed
Mon Mar 15, 2:52 AM
By MICHAEL J. SNIFFEN, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Two cutting-edge computer projects designed to preserve the
privacy of Americans were quietly killed while Congress was restricting
Pentagon data-gathering research in a widely publicized effort to
protect innocent citizens from futuristic anti-terrorism tools.
As a result, the government is quietly pressing ahead with research into
high-powered computer data-mining technology without the two most
advanced privacy protections developed to police those terror-fighting
tools.
"It's very inconsistent what they've done," said Teresa Lunt of the Palo
Alto Research Center, head of one of the two government-funded privacy
projects eliminated last fall.
Even members of Congress like Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., who led the fight
to restrict the Pentagon terrorism research, remain uncertain about the
nature of the research or the safeguards. He won a temporary ban on
using the tools against Americans on U.S. soil but wants to require the
administration to give Congress a full description of all its
data-mining research.
"We feel Congress is not getting enough information about who is
undertaking this research and where it's headed and how they intend to
protect the civil liberties of Americans," said Chris Fitzgerald,
Wyden's spokesman.
The privacy projects were small parts of the Pentagon's Terrorism
Information Awareness research.
The project was the brainchild of retired Adm. John Poindexter, who was
driven from the Reagan administration in 1986 over the Iran-Contra
scandal. Some 15 years later, he was summoned back by the Bush
administration to develop data-mining tools for the fight against
terrorism.
Poindexter's new software tools, far more powerful than existing
commercial products, would have allowed government agents to quickly
scan the private commercial transactions and personal health records of
millions of Americans and foreigners for telltale signs of terrorist
activity.
Partly to appease critics, Poindexter also was developing two privacy
tools that would have concealed names on records during the scans. Only
if agents discovered concrete evidence of terrorist activities would
they have been permitted to learn the identities of the people whose
records aroused suspicion.
One privacy project worked with Poindexter's Genisys program, which
scanned government and commercial records for terrorist planning. The
other was part of his Bio-ALIRT program, which scanned private health
records for evidence of biological attacks.
Late last year, Congress closed Poindexter's office in the Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, in response to the uproar
over its impact on privacy.
But Congress allowed some Poindexter projects, including some
data-mining research, to be transferred to intelligence agencies.
Congress also left intact similar data-mining research begun in the fall
of 2002 by the Advanced Research and Development Activity, or ARDA, a
little-known office that works on behalf of U.S. intelligence.
The research sponsored by ARDA, called Novel Intelligence from Massive
Data, is so similar to some work done for Poindexter that Lunt offered
to adapt her privacy protection software. ARDA and other agencies
weren't interested because Congress had killed the original projects.
"When I went to talk to them, ARDA made clear they don't want to get
into any area Congress doesn't want to fund," Lunt said.
It's not clear what, if any, privacy research is being done by ARDA or
by the surviving remnants of Poindexter's program.
Last fall's Intelligence Authorization Act approved continued research
on the type of powerful data-mining Poindexter envisioned but said "the
policies and procedures necessary to safeguard individual liberties and
privacy should occur concurrently with the development of these analytic
tools, not as an afterthought."
ARDA said it obeys all privacy laws and hasn't given its researchers any
government or private data, but it declined to say whether it is
sponsoring any research on privacy protection.
Lunt, a former DARPA program manager, was developing privacy protection
software for Poindexter's Genisys program. Her software shielded
identities in the records the government reviewed, restricted each
intelligence analyst to only the data he or she was authorized to see
and created a permanent record to track cheaters.
Professor LaTanya Sweeney of Carnegie Mellon University was the
principal researcher developing privacy protections for the Bio-ALIRT
project. An early version of Bio-ALIRT was used to help protect
President Bush's 2001 inauguration and the 2002 Olympics before Sweeney
developed her privacy software.
She also presented her work last fall to officials of various agencies
and said she was told they "might want to continue the work. But they
came through with zero dollars."
The bio-surveillance system monitors symptoms of patients at emergency
rooms and doctors' offices and such less-obvious sources as increases in
grocery store orange juice sales and in school absenteeism in hopes of
detecting a biological attack. Names are concealed until evidence
suggests victims need to be treated.
Sweeney said DARPA paid to develop the privacy software but didn't pay
for a public field test. "The tool just sits there unused," she said.
"People think they have to sacrifice privacy to get safety. And it
doesn't have to be that way."
What do you think all this means? Where is the line in protecting this country from terrorists by any means possible and invading one's privacy.
Bottom line, if you know what's going on out there, is it's a front to gain more and more control of the people.
__________________
We were made by God and for God, and until you figure that out, life isn't going to make sense.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a civilization, it expects what never was and what never will be.
RE: Anti-Terrorist Info gathering, or Right to Privacy?
if your not a terrorist , what do you have to worry about ? besides invasion of privacy that is. This should be transparent to the general public , again not a terrorist , nothing to worry about ...except big brother in your business
__________________
Take the "Training Wheels" off your bow. Go traditional !
RE: Anti-Terrorist Info gathering, or Right to Privacy?
Quote:
What do you think all this means? Where is the line in protecting this country from terrorists by any means possible and invading one's privacy.
Bottom line, if you know what's going on out there, is it's a front to gain more and more control of the people.
I think it is unconstitutional (and quite insulting) to waive an American's rights in the hope of maybe locating a potential terrorist (most of whom, if not all, are probably outside the country now, or dead). It's bad enough that we were attacked in the first place, but to be caught up in a intelligence war on our own soil? What the Feds need to do is track these animals down before they get here. That should be priority number 1.
RE: Anti-Terrorist Info gathering, or Right to Privacy?
AughtSix,
You are very naive if you think there are not terrorist cells within our boundaries even as I type. Any person that is participating in the planning of terrorist activity is IMHO NOT an American and underserving of civil rights. That is true whether they are a citizen turned bad or an immigrant, illegal or otherwise. The day is coming when another attack will occur on our soil and it will come from within, i.e., from terrorist cells already on our soil. At that point in time it will be too late to say "Maybe I should have waived some of my personal rights for the good of the whole nation, and especially those who may be killed in a terrorist attack!!
RE: Anti-Terrorist Info gathering, or Right to Privacy?
Quote:
You are very naive if you think there are not terrorist cells within our boundaries even as I type. Any person that is participating in the planning of terrorist activity is IMHO NOT an American and underserving of civil rights. That is true whether they are a citizen turned bad or an immigrant, illegal or otherwise. The day is coming when another attack will occur on our soil and it will come from within, i.e., from terrorist cells already on our soil.
There could very well be. One pops up under arrest every now and again. But I'm actually confident that the Feds are doing their homework. Sure, people slip in. But it's kind of hard to cause terror alone. Once groups form and begin operating, it tends to be somewhat difficult to keep it all under wrap.
If the Feds want to spy on non-citizens, then fine. But spying on Americans is wrong, ethically and legally. As citizens, we deserve the benefit of the doubt. If someone has committed a crime, then he/she should be treated accordingly. But being monitored because you buy a lot of orange juice? Give me a frickin' break.
Quote:
At that point in time it will be too late to say "Maybe I should have waived some of my personal rights for the good of the whole nation, and especially those who may be killed in a terrorist attack!!
RE: Anti-Terrorist Info gathering, or Right to Privacy?
Quote:
But being monitored because you buy a lot of orange juice?
AughtSix,
Me thinks you have been reading too many science fiction novels. Where did you come up with "monitored because you buy a lot of orange juice?" The Patriot Act is aimed at terrorists not everyday Joe American. That is not to say that if everyday Joe American becomes a frequent visitor to sites that are known to the FBI and other agencies to be Al Quieda friendly that Joe American won't be put under the microscope. I should hope he would be!!
RE: Anti-Terrorist Info gathering, or Right to Privacy?
Quote:
The bio-surveillance system monitors symptoms of patients at emergency rooms and doctors' offices and such less-obvious sources as increases in grocery store orange juice sales and in school absenteeism in hopes of detecting a biological attack. Names are concealed until vidence suggests victims need to be treated.
Didn't you read the entire article before responding?
Anti-Terrorist Info gathering, or Right to Privacy?
