[lit-ideas] Big Brother does "dataveillance"
- From: JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 23:20:05 EST
_http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/adatamine;_yl
t=Ah0Mx.akeyZhTbaloGjTE54DW7oF;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl_
(http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/adatamine;_yl
t=Ah0Mx.akeyZhTbaloGjTE54DW7oF;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl)
US plans massive data sweep
By Mark Clayton, Staff writer of The Christian Science MonitorThu Feb 9,
3:00 AM ET
The US government is developing a massive computer system that can collect
huge amounts of data and, by linking far-flung information from blogs and
e-mail to government records and intelligence reports, search for patterns of
terrorist activity.
The system - parts of which are operational, parts of which are still under
development - is already credited with helping to foil some plots. It is the
federal government's latest attempt to use broad data-collection and powerful
analysis in the fight against terrorism. But by delving deeply into the
digital minutiae of American life, the program is also raising concerns that
the
government is intruding too deeply into citizens' privacy.
"We don't realize that, as we live our lives and make little choices, like
buying groceries, buying on Amazon, Googling, we're leaving traces everywhere,"
says Lee Tien, a staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "We
have an attitude that no one will connect all those dots. But these programs
are about connecting those dots - analyzing and aggregating them - in a way
that we haven't thought about. It's one of the underlying fundamental issues
we have yet to come to grips with."
The core of this effort is a little-known system called Analysis,
Dissemination, Visualization, Insight, and Semantic Enhancement (ADVISE). Only
a few
public documents mention it. ADVISE is a research and development program
within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), part of its three-year-old
"Threat and Vulnerability, Testing and Assessment" portfolio. The TVTA received
nearly $50 million in federal funding this year.
DHS officials are circumspect when talking about ADVISE. "I've heard of it,"
says Peter Sand, director of privacy technology. "I don't know the actual
status right now. But if it's a system that's been discussed, then it's
something we're involved in at some level."
A major part of ADVISE involves data-mining - or "dataveillance," as some
call it. It means sifting through data to look for patterns. If a supermarket
finds that customers who buy cider also tend to buy fresh-baked bread, it might
group the two together. To prevent fraud, credit-card issuers use
data-mining to look for patterns of suspicious activity.
What sets ADVISE apart is its scope. It would collect a vast array of
corporate and public online information - from financial records to CNN news
stories - and cross-reference it against US intelligence and law-enforcement
records. The system would then store it as "entities" - linked data about
people,
places, things, organizations, and events, according to a report summarizing a
2004 DHS conference in Alexandria, Va. The storage requirements alone are
huge - enough to retain information about 1 quadrillion entities, the report
estimated. If each entity were a penny, they would collectively form a cube a
half-mile high - roughly double the height of the Empire State Building.
But ADVISE and related DHS technologies aim to do much more, according to
Joseph Kielman, manager of the TVTA portfolio. The key is not merely to
identify
terrorists, or sift for key words, but to identify critical patterns in data
that illumine their motives and intentions, he wrote in a presentation at a
November conference in Richland, Wash.
For example: Is a burst of Internet traffic between a few people the plotting
of terrorists, or just bloggers arguing? ADVISE algorithms would try to
determine that before flagging the data pattern for a human analyst's review.
At least a few pieces of ADVISE are already operational. Consider Starlight,
which along with other "visualization" software tools can give human analysts
a graphical view of data. Viewing data in this way could reveal patterns not
obvious in text or number form. Understanding the relationships among
people, organizations, places, and things - using social-behavior analysis and
other techniques - is essential to going beyond mere data-mining to
comprehensive
"knowledge discovery in databases," Dr. Kielman wrote in his November
report. He declined to be interviewed for this article.
One data program has foiled terroristsStarlight has already helped foil some
terror plots, says Jim Thomas, one of its developers and director of the
government's new National Visualization Analytics Center in Richland, Wash. He
can't elaborate because the cases are classified, he adds. But "there's no
question that the technology we've invented here at the lab has been used to
protect our freedoms - and that's pretty cool."
As envisioned, ADVISE and its analytical tools would be used by other
agencies to look for terrorists. "All federal, state, local and private-sector
security entities will be able to share and collaborate in real time with
distributed data warehouses that will provide full support for analysis and
action"
for the ADVISE system, says the 2004 workshop report.
A program in the shadowsYet the scope of ADVISE - its stage of development,
cost, and most other details - is so obscure that critics say it poses a major
privacy challenge.
"We just don't know enough about this technology, how it works, or what it is
used for," says Marcia Hofmann of the Electronic Privacy Information Center
in Washington. "It matters to a lot of people that these programs and
software exist. We don't really know to what extent the government is mining
personal data."
Even congressmen with direct oversight of DHS, who favor data mining, say
they don't know enough about the program.
"I am not fully briefed on ADVISE," wrote Rep. Curt Weldon (news, bio, voting
record) (R) of Pennsylvania, vice chairman of the House Homeland Security
Committee, in an e-mail. "I'll get briefed this week."
Privacy concerns have torpedoed federal data-mining efforts in the past. In
2002, news reports revealed that the Defense Department was working on Total
Information Awareness, a project aimed at collecting and sifting vast amounts
of personal and government data for clues to terrorism. An uproar caused
Congress to cancel the TIA program a year later.
Echoes of a past controversial planADVISE "looks very much like TIA," Mr.
Tien of the Electronic Frontier Foundation writes in an e-mail. "There's the
same emphasis on broad collection and pattern analysis."
But Mr. Sand, the DHS official, emphasizes that privacy protection would be
built-in. "Before a system leaves the department there's been a privacy
review.... That's our focus."
Some computer scientists support the concepts behind ADVISE.
"This sort of technology does protect against a real threat," says Jeffrey
Ullman, professor emeritus of computer science at Stanford University. "If a
computer suspects me of being a terrorist, but just says maybe an analyst
should look at it ... well, that's no big deal. This is the type of thing we
need
to be willing to do, to give up a certain amount of privacy."
Others are less sure.
"It isn't a bad idea, but you have to do it in a way that demonstrates its
utility - and with provable privacy protection," says Latanya Sweeney, founder
of the Data Privacy Laboratory at Carnegie Mellon University. But since
speaking on privacy at the 2004 DHS workshop, she now doubts the department is
building privacy into ADVISE. "At this point, ADVISE has no funding for
privacy
technology."
She cites a recent request for proposal by the Office of Naval Research on
behalf of DHS. Although it doesn't mention ADVISE by name, the proposal
outlines data-technology research that meshes closely with technology cited in
ADVISE documents.
Neither the proposal - nor any other she has seen - provides any funding for
provable privacy technology, she adds.
Some in Congress push for more oversight of federal data-miningAmid the furor
over electronic eavesdropping by the National Security Agency, Congress may
be poised to expand its scrutiny of government efforts to "mine" public data
for hints of terrorist activity.
"One element of the NSA's domestic spying program that has gotten too little
attention is the government's reportedly widespread use of data-mining
technology to analyze the communications of ordinary Americans," said Sen.
Russell
Feingold (D) of Wisconsin in a Jan. 23 statement.
Senator Feingold is among a handful of congressmen who have in the past
sponsored legislation - unsuccessfully - to require federal agencies to report
on
data-mining programs and how they maintain privacy.
Without oversight and accountability, critics say, even well-intentioned
counterterrorism programs could experience mission creep, having their purview
expanded to include non- terrorists - or even political opponents or groups.
"The development of this type of data-mining technology has serious
implications for the future of personal privacy," says Steven Aftergood of the
Federation of American Scientists.
Even congressional supporters of the effort want more information about
data-mining efforts.
"There has to be more and better congressional oversight," says Rep. Curt
Weldon (R) of Pennsylvania and vice chairman of the House committee overseeing
the Department of Homeland Security. "But there can't be oversight till
Congress understands what data-mining is. There needs to be a broad look at
this
because they [intelligence agencies] are obviously seeing the value of this."
Data-mining - the systematic, often automated gleaning of insights from
databases - is seen "increasingly as a useful tool" to help detect terrorist
threats, the General Accountability Office reported in 2004. Of the nearly 200
federal data-mining efforts the GAO counted, at least 14 were acknowledged to
focus on counterterrorism.
While privacy laws do place some restriction on government use of private
data - such as medical records - they don't prevent intelligence agencies from
buying information from commercial data collectors. Congress has done little
so far to regulate the practice or even require basic notification from
agencies, privacy experts say.
Indeed, even data that look anonymous aren't necessarily so. For example:
With name and Social Security number stripped from their files, 87 percent of
Americans can be identified simply by knowing their date of birth, gender, and
five-digit Zip code, according to research by Latanya Sweeney, a data-privacy
researcher at Carnegie Mellon University.
In a separate 2004 report to Congress, the GAO cited eight issues that need
to be addressed to provide adequate privacy barriers amid federal data-mining.
Top among them was establishing oversight boards for such programs.
Some antiterror efforts die - others just change namesDefense Department
November 2002 - The New York Times identifies a counterterrorism program
called Total Information Awareness.
September 2003 - After terminating TIA on privacy grounds, Congress shuts
down its successor, Terrorism Information Awareness, for the same reasons.
Department of Homeland Security
February 2003 - The department's Transportation Security Administration (TSA)
announces it's replacing its 1990s-era Computer-Assisted Passenger
Prescreening System (CAPPS I).
July 2004 - TSA cancels CAPPS II because of privacy concerns.
August 2004 - TSA says it will begin testing a similar system - Secure Flight
- with built-in privacy features.
July 2005 - Government auditors charge that Secure Flight is violating
privacy laws by holding information on 43,000 people not suspected of
terrorism.
Copyright © 2006 _The Christian Science Monitor_
(http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/csm/brand/SIG=114211ceu/**http://www.csmonitor.com/)
(javascript:ADFlaunch())
Other related posts:
