« January 2006 | Main | March 2006 »
February 28, 2006
Citizen activists served with papers for Guantanamo protest
A group of Christian protestors from the anti-torture organization Witness Against Torture marched on the prison at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base to demand the U.S. close the prison and release the detainees.
The Treasury Department has served papers on several members of the group, including a few who did not actually go to Cuba because travel to Cuba is banned.
This is a little off our beaten path, but it's interesting to see how domestic activists are dealt with. I would love to know how the process has changed materially since the COINTELPRO days and how all the new technology has changed the process.
http://www.upi.com/SecurityTerrorism/view.php?StoryID=20060207-032439-9384r
Posted by Nicole Duarte at 01:44 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Byrd regrets Patriot Act vote
The oldest Democrat in the U.S. Senate, West Virginia Sen. Robert Byrd, now says he regrets
his vote for the USA Patriot Act in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.
Byrd's switch indicates an interesting strategic dilemma for many Democrats facing re-election in the 2006 midterm elections. Russell Feingold, the only senator who voted against the Patriot Act the first time around, won re-election in 2004 by a landslide in Wisconsin. But Democrats in traditionally conservative states such as Nebraska, Florida and North Dakota (and moderate Republicans in Maine and Rhode Island) must decide whether they agree with Byrd's assertion that, "In essence, this legislation says that the Bill of Rights is right no more."
Byrd probably faces little to no electoral peril, but some of his colleagues in more politically precarious positions have decisions to make. These decisions may go a long way toward determining which party will control the Senate after 2006. For my money, some of the more interesting statements on Patriot Act renewal and NSA wiretapping are coming from moderate Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska. In this December 2005 press release, Nelson announced support for a three-month extension of the Patriot Act while supporting an investigation of wiretapping.
Posted by Christopher Kriva at 12:09 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 27, 2006
Cyberthieves get smarter
The New York Times reports online identity thieves have increasingly sophisticated tools at their disposal. Rather than simply "phishing" for personal information and passwords by tricking Internet users into entering this data on phony Web sites, criminals now use monitoring programs that record keystrokes. Once installed, these programs often wait until users visit banking or credit cards sites before recording data.
"This type of software is a much more efficient way to get what they're after," says David Thomas, chief of the computer intrusion division at the FBI.
The Times also published a sidebar with advice on how to avoid inadvertently installing this kind of software. The best advice: use (and keep up to date) antivirus and antispyware programs.
Posted by Jessica Bernstein-Wax at 10:48 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 22, 2006
Judge to Justice: Did you wiretap Ahmed Abu Ali?
NPR reports on a judge who ordered the government to reveal whether or not it had collected secret wiretap evidence against Ahmed Abu Ali, a U.S. citizen convicted of plotting to kill President Bush.
This is the second recent instance of a judge ordering the government to reveal specific information about data gathered under the domestic wiretap program. A story about the first instance recently appeared on this blog.
Posted by Nicole Duarte at 09:06 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 21, 2006
First insurgent arrests on US soil
The Washington Post reported Wednesday that the Justice Department has accused three Ohio men of plotting to kill US and coalition troops by setting up a terrorism training camp in the Middle East.
This is the first time suspects on US soil have been charged with aiding the insurgency. Attorney General Gonzalez would not comment on whether the NSA warrantless surveillance program was used in the investigation. However, the use of corporate records was examined in the article:
Corporate records in Illinois from 1997 show that Hindi has a connection to another man convicted of conspiring to violate U.S. sanctions against Iraq -- Rafil Dhafir, an Iraqi-born physician in Syracuse, N.Y., who was sentenced to 22 years in prison. Hindi is listed as the registered agent and manager of Royal International LLC of Oak Lawn, Ill., and Dhafir and his wife were listed as members of the travel agency's board.A law enforcement official said there is no known connection between Dhafir and the Toledo case. Dhafir's attorney was not available to comment. A person who answered Hindi's home telephone in Toledo would not comment.
Posted by Laura Spadanuta at 10:45 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Declassified documents ... reclassifed.
The Bush administration has called for the reclassification of thousands of pages of declassified documents, Melissa Block of NPR reports. Some are calling it a senseless reclassification of documents.
Essentially, information once considered sensitive, such as an intelligence operation to leaflet Eastern Europe from a hot-air balloon, were declassified because the information no longer justified the cost of maintaining secrecy, according to Thomas Blanton, Director of the National Security Archives at George Washington University.
Now those documents are being removed from the public shelves of the National Archives.
Posted by Nicole Duarte at 04:21 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Newspaper urges caution before letting UAE company control tides of U.S. ports
A Miami Herald editorial that appeared today urged caution before a deal is made final that would grant the UAE's Dubai Ports World control of operations at six major U.S. ports.
The editorial said calls to block the sale of port control from British firm P & O Ports to Dubai Ports Worldwide is premature, but that questions such as what role the company will play in port security, and how Dubai Ports Worldwide plans to guard against infiltration by Al Qaeda need to be answered.
The article cited former DHS Secretary Tom Ridge as expressing concerns about who would be in charge of hiring and firing measures and whether the company would play a role in port security. The editorial also mentioned the worries of Rep. Peter King, a usual Bush ally, as demonstrating how widespread anxiety is over the transfer of port operations to a UAE company.
The UAE, while a U.S. ally, "has also served as a base for some of the highjackers involved in the 9/11 attacks and has financial connections to terrorists. That alone makes it imperative that the public knows more about the takeover of port operations by Dubai Ports World."
Posted by Kathleen Miller at 03:40 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Data mining to receive more congressional oversight, researchers say
An article in Congressional Quarterly by Zack Phillips (2/16/2006) delves into a Congressional Research Service report entitled "Data Mining and Homeland Security: An Overview" (1/27/2006)
According to the report, data mining projects will be subject to increasing scrutiny and congressional oversight in the coming years. Phillips says although the data mining process has great potential for tracking terrorists through immigration, travel records, communications or financial transactions, the recent discontent with secret surveillance programs by the National Security Agency have raised congressional concern.
Posted by Meredith Mazzotta at 01:04 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 20, 2006
Federal judge calls for updated surveillance law
In the wake of disclosure of the National Security Agency's wiretapping program, federal judge Richard Posner's Feb. 15 opinion piece, "A New Surveillance Act," published in the Wall Street Journal, furthers the conversation. (Paid subscription needed.)
In his commentary, Posner, a U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals judge, writes that the way around all of the uproar about a previously secret policy that is unlikely to even catch terrorists (in his mind) is to enact a new statute to update the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
"National security intelligence is a search for the needle in a haystack," he writes. "It is a mistake to think that the only way to prevent abuses of a surveillance program is by requiring warrants. Congress could enact a statute that would subject warrantless electronic surveillance to tight oversight and specific legal controls...."
Posner elaborates by suggesting allowing "national security electronic surveillance" outside of FISA's current provision by asking Congress to declare a national emergency and granting the President certain powers. He says that "national security" should be defined "narrowly" and that information gathered through these techniques should be barred from being used for purposes other than national security.
A new statute isn't a revolutionary idea, nor are the ideas Posner outlines. But it does suggest an approach that would make monitoring legal, with some protections for privacy and civil liberties.
Posted by Dalia Naamani-Goldman at 05:25 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Privacy on paper
The Los Angeles Times reports (registered login) today that a year after being formally established, a federal committee meant to ensure privacy and civil liberties has never met. The Senate Judiciary Committee took steps last week to get the ball rolling by approving two Bush-nominated lawyers to the panel. It could be months before anything else happens. Critics say the lack of activity demonstrates the Bush administration's lack of commitment to civil liberties.
"They have stalled in giving the board adequate funding. They have stalled in making appointments," said Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.). "It is apparent they are not taking this seriously."
Posted by Laura McGann at 07:37 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 17, 2006
House committee to hold hearings on NSA spying
While a House committee has decided to hold hearings on the National Security Administration's program of spying on citizens in the United States, members are divided on whether to limit the hearings to an investigation of whether the surveillance laws need to be changed or to expand into an investigation of the NSA's actions.
Posted by Ellen Shearer at 09:10 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
NYT: Roberts part of White House coverup
Here is the New York Times editorial page's take (no-fee subscription required) on the job Pat Roberts, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, is doing regarding the NSA eavesdropping.
Now Mr. Roberts is trying to stop an investigation into Mr. Bush's decision to allow the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans without getting the warrants required by a 27-year-old federal law enacted to stop that sort of abuse.Mr. Roberts had promised to hold a committee vote yesterday on whether to investigate. But he canceled the vote, and then made two astonishing announcements. He said he was working with the White House on amending the 1978 law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, to permit warrantless spying. And then he suggested that such a change would eliminate the need for an inquiry.
The Times also points out that Roberts (whose actions it describes as "outrageous") is attempting to amend FISA law to basically make what the NSA has been doing legal.
Posted by Laura Spadanuta at 07:26 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 16, 2006
Blair scores two points in push for tougher anti-terror laws
Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain won two parliamentary victories this week: the passage of two separate pieces of legislation. One law criminalizes "glorification" of terrorism. Another makes national ID cards mandatory.
Blair says these measures will make Britain safer and help fight terrorism. As the New York Times reports, the new measures have made civil rights activists and some legislators very nervous. They are concerned Britain is becoming a police state. Here is an excerpt on criminalizing "glorification" of terrorism.
Legislators voted 315 to 277 in a ballot that pitted Mr. Blair's Labor Party against the Conservative and Liberal Democratic opposition. Seventeen Labor dissidents voted against the measure.Mr. Blair's critics said the vote, one of three crucial parliamentary tests in as many days, was as much a display of political maneuvering as a strengthening of British laws, which already include prohibitions like those used last week to prosecute Abu Hamza al-Masri, a firebrand Muslim cleric. He was sentenced to seven years in prison for soliciting to murder and promoting racial hatred.
Speaking after the vote, Mr. Blair said the new law "will allow us to deal with those people and say: Look, we have free speech in this country, but don't abuse it."
And an excerpt from the national ID cards story:
In the vote on Monday, the Commons rejected an amendment from the House of Lords that would have made optional, instead of mandatory, a plan to require Britons to be given national identity cards when they apply for passports. But in a compromise worked out among the legislators, Parliament will have to pass another law to make the new rules binding.The government argues that the biometric information in both the new passports and the ID's, like fingerprints and iris scans, will help the police fight terrorism, organized crime and identity fraud.
Posted by Faith Okpotor at 04:57 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Judge to Justice: Turn over documents on warrantless eavesdropping
U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy has ordered the Justice Department to comply with a Freedom of Information Act request by the Electronic Privacy Information Center for documents regarding that department's warrantless domestic spying program.
The Justice Department has been ordered to release the documents within 20 days or compile a list of what it is withholding. The department had said it would start to compile the documents on March 3, but did not know when the process would be complete.
The information was requested under an "expedited request." This is my favorite part:
"Routine FOIA requests are to be handled within 20 days while expedited requests have no set time limit under the law, prompting the Justice Department to take the position that the amount of time for expedited requests could be longer than that for the routine 20-day handling."
Posted by Nicole Duarte at 04:06 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Federal officials mistakenly release secret documents to Islamic group's lawyers
Federal officials mistakenly provided an Islamic charity's defense attorneys with top-secret counter-terrorism documents, The Los Angeles Times reported today.
"The blunder exposed secret wiretap requests that commonly include classified information from U.S. agencies, foreign intelligence reports and confidential sources," the Times reported.
The release of the classified documents, which include wiretap records, could threaten one of the Bush Administration's biggest terrorism prosecution cases. The federal government alleges the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development funded the militant Palestinian group Hamas. In December 2001 the Treasury Department shut the organization down and froze its assets.
This blunder appears to be the first of its kind in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court's 27-year history.
Posted by Jessica Bernstein-Wax at 03:13 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
UK intelligence reorganization sends MI5 deeper into Northern Ireland
The BBC has been covering a major shift in the British intelligence community. MI5, which is analogous to the FBI in the United States, will gain jurisdiction over security in Northern Ireland. The police were formerly responsible for security functions.
The idea is to streamline the intelligence community and unify the national security effort. Sinn Fein thinks it's just the intelligence community readjusting its grip in Northern Ireland.
Its interesting that the British would choose to give an intelligence agency leadership in a situation which had previously been handled by the local police. The security threats are different in Northern Ireland, but this is what the Church Committee said not to do.
Posted by Nicole Duarte at 10:27 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 15, 2006
Is your copier spying on you?
I actually first saw this on January 30th on Fox 5 News Investigates here in Washington, DC. But it's been covered earlier in PC World, on Boing Boing, the E-Media Tidbits blog and -- comprehensively -- on the Web site of the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Basically, copy machines and printers are now putting invisible (to the naked eye) codes on pages printed or copied indicating what machine made the copy (when codes are entered on the machine), the date and time. Or, for printed documents, which computer the print command came from, date and time.
It's quite a tracing tool...
Posted by Meredith Mazzotta at 05:02 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
UK officials looking for Windows "back door"
UK officials are talking to Microsoft over fears the new version of Windows, could make it harder for police to read suspects' computer files, the BBC reported Wednesday, Feb. 15.
Windows Vista, due to be rolled out later this year, has encryption to prevent users from downloading unlicensed films and music, but it could prevent police and officials from finding civil criminals and terrorists. Cambridge academic Ross Anderson urged the U.K. government to look at establishing "back door" ways of getting around encryptions.
Posted by Beth Davidz at 01:29 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Making a list
The National Counterterrorism Center now has 325,000 names on its list of people suspected to be terrorists or individuals aiding terrorists, the Washington Post reports. The current list started in 2003 with 75,000 names.
Officials would not speak on the record about whether any of the people listed are U.S. citizens; one official, speaking anonymously, said "only a very, very small fraction" are U.S. citizens.
No details have been given about how a wrongly listed person could work to be removed from the list. Critics, including representatives from the ACLU and the Electronic Privacy Information Center, weigh in on this issue.
The article gives details about some of the interagency use of the list's information. The NCTC, for example, supplies a subset of its list to the FBI along with "one of 25 codes such as 'Member of Foreign Organization,' 'Hijacker,' or 'Has Engaged in Terrorism.'"
The article refers to a June 2005 Justice Department report that was critical of some elements of the NCTC list-building protocol.
Posted by Carlos Roig at 06:57 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 14, 2006
DHS slammed in post-Katrina report
An AP article says that the post-Katrina analysis report to be released Wednesday morning will conclude Bush was not fully advised of the scope of the damage caused by Katrina.
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff was “totally detached” from Katrina relief efforts, according to Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn. Last week, former FEMA Director Michael Brown said he dealt with the White House directly rather than deal with what he described as a bumbling Homeland Security bureaucracy.
Shays also said on Good Morning America that the Department of Homeland Security “stood and watched [FEMA] fail” during Katrina relief efforts.
The Feb. 10 report says that after a Homeland Security Department project in which states evaluated their emergency response and evacuation plans, 20 states are confident about their emergency management plans, 14 are somewhat confident, 13 are not confident and three did not respond to the survey.
Posted by Kathleen Miller at 01:42 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 10, 2006
Former FEMA head rips Homeland Security Department
Remember the oft-lampooned former FEMA director, Michael Brown?
Well, Brown found himself on Capitol Hill today, testifying in a Senate hearing investigating the government response to Hurricane Katrina. He minced no words, tearing into the Department of Homeland Security.
"The policies and decisions implemented by the DHS put FEMA on a path to failure," Brown told senators.
Interestingly, Brown blames a DHS focus on counterterrorism for the poor response. Though terrorism does represent an important focus of DHS's work, could Brown be right? Is the internal security of Americans compromised because of an obsession with external threats?
Posted by Christopher Kriva at 02:43 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Compromise Patriot Act likely to become law
Key senators apparently have agreed to a compromise to extend the USA Patriot Act, The New York Times reported.
The deal focused on three particular areas. The new measure would give recipients of subpoenas the right to challenge an accompanying judicial order not to discuss the case publicly, though they would have to wait one year. In the meantime, they would have to comply with the subpoena. That would prevent the FBI from demanding the names of lawyers consulted by people who receive secret government requests for information and prevent most libraries from being subject to those requests.
Posted by Ellen Shearer at 08:56 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 09, 2006
Secure Flights program must undergo an audit
Transportation Security Administration chief Kip Hawley announced Thursday the Secure Flights program has been suspended due to security concerns.
The announcement was made before the Senate Commerce Committee. Hawley informed the committee that a full audit of the IT components of the program needed to take place.
The Secure Flights program would take over the job of checking passenger names against watch lists, airlines currently perform this function.
The AP article can be viewed in full here
Posted by Blathnaid Healy at 01:48 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Judges, Justice insiders had reservations about warrantless monitoring
The chief judges of the FISA intelligence court and some Justice Department insiders, especially James Baker, head of the department's liaison office to the court, had reservations about how the NSA was using evidence gathered through warrantlessc monitoring, the Washington Post reports.
The two judges' discomfort with the NSA spying program was previously known. But this new account reveals the depth of their doubts about its legality and their behind-the-scenes efforts to protect the court from what they considered potentially tainted evidence. The new accounts also show the degree to which Baker, a top intelligence expert at Justice, shared their reservations and aided the judges.Both judges expressed concern to senior officials that the president's program, if ever made public and challenged in court, ran a significant risk of being declared unconstitutional, according to sources familiar with their actions. Yet the judges believed they did not have the authority to rule on the president's power to order the eavesdropping, government sources said, and focused instead on protecting the integrity of the FISA process.
The article also says that actions by the FISA court to expedite approvals of warrants after 9/11 proved effective. When the third-ranked Al-Qaeda official, Abu Zubaida, was captured in March 2002 and his laptop was examined, the "vast majority" of the people he was in contact with were being monitored under FISA warrants, the Post reported.
Posted by Faith Okpotor at 12:47 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Internet, telecom firms strained by surveillence requests
Telecom and Internet firms find they need help responding to the increasing number of requests for information from the government, The Wall Street Journal reports.
Between 2000 and 2004, the number of telephone wiretaps authorized by state and federal judges increased by 44 percent, the Journal said. The article's focus is on companies that have built a new line of business helping telecommunications and Internet firms gather the information being requested by government investigators.
Posted by Beth Davidz at 12:33 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Air travel prescreening program getting more review
After four years and $150 million to build a system to prescreen air travelers, the U.S. Transportation Security Administration is going back to the drawing board.
Kip Hawley, the department's assistant secretary, said in prepared testimony to a U.S. Senate committee:
We will move forward with the Secure Flight program as expeditiously as possible, but in view of our need to establish trust with all of our stakeholders on the security and privacy of our systems and data, my priority is to ensure that we do it right . . . not just that we do it quickly.... I believe programs like Secure Flight should be built from a strong privacy foundation as a starting point as opposed to building it and then adding privacy. The approach I just outlined will accomplish that.
Posted by Meredith Mazzotta at 10:38 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 08, 2006
America expects surveillance?
"America Expects Surveillance," U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales wrote in an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal on Monday, the same day that he appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee to testify about President Bush's wiretapping program.
In it, Gonzales cites wartime precedents in using intelligence derived from monitoring communications. "The use of signals intelligence -- intercepting enemy communications -- is a fundamental incident of waging war," Gonzales writes.
"These sweeping measures were seen as necessary and lawful during critical moments of past armed conflicts. So, too, are the more focused intercepts of al Qaeda during our armed conflict, especially given the nature of the enemy we face."
He also repeats the administration's argument that monitoring programs are legal under Congress's Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the Fourth Amendment.
Gonzales concludes: "The AUMF is not a blank check for the president to cash at the expense of the rights of citizens. The NSA's terrorist surveillance program is narrowly focused on the international communications of persons believed to be members or agents of al Qaeda or affiliated terrorist organizations."
A key question to consider is whether the public has the information it needs to evaluate Gonzales' arguments. Of course, the administration contends disclosing more information about information-gathering practices would also tip off terrorists and change their behavior. Still, does America expect surveillance? Or does America first need to understand more about how it works?
Posted by Dalia Naamani-Goldman at 06:27 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 07, 2006
'Capturing information' or just snooping?
Today's Wall Street Journal had an article (subscription required) about hotels that are collecting bits of information about their guests and sharing the information with their other properties. The goal of the program is to win guests. The program includes everything from just "overhearing" guests to monitoring their comings and goings.
Hilton Hotels Corp. is researching a radio-frequency identification system that it will test next year; the idea is, guests will carry a micro-chipped card in their pocket that will inform the front desk when they walk into the hotel, allowing for quicker identification and check-in.What is generating the most concern is the reliance on sharp-eyed-and-eared employees to pick up on and record clues. The hotel industry calls its data-collection procedures "capturing" information, but some travelers worry they amount to snooping.
Posted by Laura Spadanuta at 05:37 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
All aboard! Screening comes to train system
A $10 million, three-week test program by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has begun to screen people for explosives as they board New Jersey's PATH train to Manhattan. The program is in place at the Exchange Place station and is a response to the train bombings in Madrid and London.
Officials seek to determine how well the "airport style" screening technology well serve mass transit users. They said the screening process takes about one minute.
If the test is considered successful, similar equipment could be used on the rest of the Port Authority Trans-Hudson train system and on other mass transit systems around the country, authorities said.
Posted by Kathleen Miller at 03:41 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Homeland security budget released for 2007
The fiscal 2007 budget for homeland security will provide $58.3 billion, a 6 percent increase of $3.4 billion over 2006, according to this announcement by the U.S. Department of State.
The budget summary shows how funds will be allocated toward various security-related items. Interesting to note are a $176 million (41 percent) increase for intelligence and warning, and $440 million for a new baggage screening device that would increase throughput at airports by 250 percent.
Posted by Phil Stuart at 02:58 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Day 1: The warrantless spying hearings
NPR has created a news hub around the warrantless spying hearings.
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, the first witness, testified that the president had implicit authority to instigate the spying program, which was given by Congress when they authorized him to fight terrorism after Sept. 11, 2001.
Several senators beg to differ, saying President Bush circumvented existing FISA law governing wiretapping of U.S. citizens.
Posted by Nicole Duarte at 12:14 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
The meaning of "Surveillance net yields few suspects"
The Washington Post's Sunday (Feb. 5, 2006) story That the National Security Administration's warrantless operation has eavesdropped on thousands, but yielded fewer than 10 people suspicious enough to justify checking their domestic calls has raised conflicting arguments -- some senators say it shows that the agency is just fishing while what a blogger calls "dotists" say lack of arrests is a silly argument for stopping the surveillance and that it make it harder for terrorists to communicate easily.
Posted by Ellen Shearer at 10:20 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Connecting with the Blogosphere
The New York Times is often considered our nation's "paper of record," so it is probably bloggers' most linked-to U.S. news site. Which is why The Annotated Times is such a useful resource.
Today, for instance, the site is a great way to track reaction to Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez's congressional testimony defending warrantless electronic surveillance. The site also enables you to subscribe to RSS feeds based on topics covered by the Times.
The Annotated Times was purchased last year by The Times, according to Martin Nisenholtz, who oversees the newspaper's digital operations.
Posted by Rich Gordon at 09:29 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 06, 2006
Documents from 1974 wiretapping scandal posted online
The National Security Archive, a research center at George Washington University, posted documents from the Ford Administration's 1974 wiretapping scandal on its Web site this weekend.
The documents include a memo to the president from White House counsel Philip Buchen, attorney general Edward Levi's outline of the advantages of wiretapping and "top secret" Justice Department reports from 1976 and 1977.
Many reporters, such as Scott Shane of the New York Times and Patrick Radden Keefe of Slate, have compared the current judiciary committee hearings to the 1975 Church Committee wiretapping investigation.
Donald Rumsfeld, George H.W. Bush and Dick Cheney all served as top officials under President Gerald Ford at the time of the scandal.
Posted by Jessica Bernstein-Wax at 02:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 04, 2006
No place to hide ... from Jon Stewart
Now available online: Robert O'Harrow Jr., the author of "No Place to Hide," a book that argues privacy is at risk because of homeland security initiatives, was interviewed on the "Daily Show" on Thursday.
While Jon Stewart mugs, O'Harrow discusses the cooperation between private data and technology companies and government anti-terror investigators. He points out that during the 1990s, companies said they were "trying to get into the heads of their customers" to better market to them. Considering the flow of information between the government and private companies, it puts a new twist on the concept.
Of course, Stewart adds a light touch. Discussing his college years and the possibility that, say, a college marijuana possession conviction could be excavated via government data mining, Stewart quipped, "That's the *best* thing I did."
Posted by Beth Davidz at 08:18 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 02, 2006
Senate approves Patriot Act extension
The U.S. Senate voted late Thursday to temporarily renew provisions of the USA Patriot Act rubber-stamped by the House earlier this week.
The key paragraph in this story?
Earlier in the week, Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, one of the negotiators who helped block the act's renewal last year, told reporters almost all of his concerns had been worked out with the White House.
CNN tabs Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wisconsin, as the lone dissenter. The temporary renewal -- specifically, Craig's comments -- could bode well for the White House as it seeks to extend many of the Patriot Act provisions well beyond this five-week renewal period.
Posted by Christopher Kriva at 09:37 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Senators joust with White House over wiretapping
In a Feb. 2 Slate column, Patrick Radden Keefe reacts to the news that the Bush administration refused to hand over classified legal opinions on Bush's domestic wiretapping program to members of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Keefe predicts Judiciary Committee hearings, scheduled to begin Monday, will accomplish little unless the committee subpoenas the CEOs of major American telecommunications companies. While the Bush officials can claim "executive privilege," these private companies cannot.
The columnist contrasts the current wiretapping investigation to the 1974 Church Committee hearings, which he dubs "a triumph of investigation":
If the committee was serious about investigating warrantless eavesdropping, it would borrow a tactic from the Church Committee era and subpoena the CEOs of major telecommunications companies . . . just as the NSA operated Shamrock with the cooperation of private companies in the 1960s, it is conducting its warrantless eavesdropping program with the assistance of telecom companies today.
Posted by Jessica Bernstein-Wax at 08:16 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
February 01, 2006
Chicago judge will close court during agents' testimony
A Chicago judge decided Tuesday to close her courtroom when two Israeli agents come to take the stand and testify against Mohammad Salah. Salah is accused of laundering money for the Palestinian group Hamas.
Judge Amy St. Eve has also ruled that the two agents may testify using aliases.
The Chicago Tribune failed in its attempts to keep the courts open to the media and the public. Also arguing to keep the hearing open was a coalition of civil rights, Arab-American and other groups.
St. Eve ruled that a closed hearing was necessary to protect the safety of the agents and to preserve classified information.
Tribune Public Editor Don Wycliff called attention to the case in his regular column Thursday. He quoted the Tribune's legal brief supporting keeping the courtroom open to the public:
"Secrecy can destroy the legitimacy of government institutions, including our criminal courts in particular. ... Secrecy can cripple accountability of public servants and public trust in the judicial process. Secrecy can hide abuses of fundamental rights of citizens."
Posted by Blathnaid Healy at 10:29 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
California RFID bill under review
California bill SB 768, "The Identity Information Protection Act of 2005," prohibits the use of Radio Frequency Identification chips in state-issued ID cards (such as drivers licenses) for three years, until safeguards are in place to protect an individual's privacy. During this period, ethical issues associated with RFIDs will be examined, including whether or not the government can force citizens to carry documents that broadcast their personal information.
But according to a report in SecureID News, an industry publication for identification technologies, the bill is under review. Proponents for RFID chips, such as manufacturers and the American Electronics Association, say the bill will slow down the growth of the RFID. They worry this will hurt companies that produce the technology and hope to contract with the government.
Read more about the debate here.
Posted by Phil Stuart at 03:59 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Fact-checking the president
The Washington Post ran a bit of a fact-checking analysis today on comments President Bush made during his State of the Union speech last night, including some of his wiretapping comments:
For instance, Bush strongly suggested that the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks could have been prevented if the phone calls of two hijackers had been monitored under the program. This echoes an assertion made earlier this year by Vice President Cheney.But the Sept. 11 commission and congressional investigators said the government had compiled significant information on the two suspects before the attacks and that bureaucratic problems -- not a lack of information -- were the main reasons for the security breakdown. The FBI did not even know where the two suspects lived and missed numerous opportunities to track them down in the 20 months before the attacks.
Posted by Laura Spadanuta at 02:33 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Catching illegal immigrants -- at $15 million per
Blogger Bruce Schneier posted today about the US VISIT program which has taken mug shots and fingerprinted some 44 million foreigners at U.S. points of entry since January 2004. Of the 44 million processed, US VISIT has apprehended about 1,000 people (none terrorists) on immigration and criminal violations at a cost of $15 billion. That works out to be $15 million per apprehension.
“Surely there's a more cost-effective way to catch bad guys?”
Schneier writes.
Posted by Laura McGann at 02:32 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
The USA Patriot Act dance continues
According to this story in today's New York Times (registration required), the U.S. House is preparing to renew the USA Patriot Act for an additional five weeks.
As the article points out, provisions involving library records and the government's ability to seek records without judicial approval are politically loaded obstacles to resolution, particularly in the Senate.
It will be interesting to see how the Senate responds to the House's temporary extension proposal. Will the same coalition that prevented renewal of the bill based upon privacy concerns go for broke and attack even temporary renewal? And if the bill is temporarily renewed, how will Senate Democrats position for a presumably bigger fight when the five-week period expires?
Posted by Christopher Kriva at 02:16 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Expensive NSA contract yielded no results
The Chicago Tribune reported Sunday about how a a NSA contract awarded to San Diego-based Science Applications International Corp. resulted in an expenditure of $1.2 billion without making Americans any safer.
The project, code-named "Trailblazer," was supposed to be "NSA's state-of-the-art tool for sifting through modern-day digital communications and uncovering nuggets to protect America against an ever-changing collection of enemies." The company failed to deliver.
After an estimated $1.2 billion in development costs, only a few isolated analytical and technical tools have been produced, said an intelligence expert with extensive knowledge of the program.Trailblazer is "the biggest boondoggle going on now in the intelligence community," said Matthew Aid, who has advised three federal commissions and panels that investigated the Sept. 11 intelligence failures.
The article was the result of an investigation by the Baltimore Sun (a Tribune Co. paper). The Tribune published it inside the A section. I thought it was underplayed.
Posted by Faith Okpotor at 11:51 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
AT&T sued for warrantless wiretapping
While I was skimming the "Your Rights Online" section of Slashdot, news for nerds, I came upon a post that
AT&T is being sued by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) for helping the NSA with warrantless wiretaps. The EFF is an organization whose mission is to protect the digital rights of consumers and the general public. (I see them as an electronic ACLU.) On top of EFF's Web site, AT&T's logo is slightly modified to look like the Death Star.
Under the Patriot Act companies aren't liable if they receive warrants to wiretap, but there isn't any protection if no warrants are issued.
The lawsuit alleges that AT&T opened its key telecommunications facilities and databases to direct access by the NSA and/or other government agencies, has given the government unfettered access to its over 300 terabyte "Daytona" database of caller information -- one of the largest databases in the world -- and continues to assist the government.
In the lawsuit, EFF says it is suing, on behalf of a nationwide class of AT&T customers, to stop this "illegal conduct" and hold AT&T responsible for its collaboration in the domestic spying program, which has "violated the law and damaged the fundamental freedoms of the American public."
News of the suit was covered first in the tech media. Only the news seemed to know. But now publications such as The New York Times are reporting on the story.
Posted by Beth Davidz at 09:17 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Hey, Chicago, I can see you (and you and you...)
Chicago Mayor Richard Daley has endorsed a proposed plan to require all Chicago businesses open more than 12 hours a day to install both indoor and outdoor cameras, the Chicago Sun-Times reports. Only bathrooms and changing areas would be exempt.
Daley says he's "looking for more and more cameras all over."
The camera system would combine with another Chicago plan to create a network of sensors that would sniff out weapons and keep tabs on the water supply.
City Hall is now finalizing a contract for "Operation Virtual Shield," Daley's Big Brother plan to link 1,000 miles of "sometimes stand-alone fiber" into a unified "homeland security grid" -- complete with sensors to monitor the city's water supply and detect chemical and biological weapons.
The Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce estimates that approximately 12,000 businesses would need to comply with the proposed camera ordinance.
Some may object to constant camera surveillance because of its impact on privacy, but, without substantial government subsidies for the expensive camera systems, could this requirement also drive small businesses to alter their hours or even shut down their operations?
Posted by Carlos Roig at 06:12 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack