|
Editorial Release
E-Surveillance
- A
Dangerous Delusion
In the long-lasting
wake of the September 11 tragedy, as governments worldwide relentlessly
intensify the surveillance of electronic communications and dragnet the
flow of personal e-mail, freedom-minded citizens both in and out of political
power must voice louder the question: Who is watching us and to
what end?
It is a sad reality
that terrorist planners capable of executing large-scale attacks are deluded,
fanatical and murderous,
but we can't bank
on them being also stupid.
Their future online correspondence will no doubt omit those keywords likely
to trigger an apparatus like the
FBI’s Carnivore
e-mail snooper (since renamed as the less aggressive, "DCS1000").
The content of terrorist communications will likely seem benign – needless
of encryption. The probable scenario will be such that tactical
codes may, for instance, be passed back-and-forth as discussions on the
mechanical merits of the latest model Mercedes coupe.
In a worrisome contrast,
an unsuspecting university student plying the Web while researching the
roots of Islamic radicalism, or a foreign-born resident including the
word ‘chemical’ in a benign e-mail to a colleague back home, may instantly
become the target of covert government monitoring.
While the long-term
e-mail accounts and ongoing communications of law-abiding citizens are
tracked and retained, it can be assumed that the “evil doers” will prove
at least as crafty as the average spammer. Plotters of high crimes
will expend two minutes to establish an anonymous free account with Hotmail,
Yahoo, or one of countless other smaller providers. Then, after
the coded message is sent from the public library, the corner internet
café, or the local Kinko’s, like a spammer they will abandon that e-mail
box and be gone.
This anonymity and
ease with which a Web-based e-mail account is created and discarded is
perhaps the deepest pothole awaiting those hard-driving government data
miners. It would seem that our Homeland e-spies and those cyber
troopers of other nations expect criminal targets to somewhat cooperate
– perhaps diligently maintain a snoop-friendly AOL account. But
a furtive terrorist is not likely to establish a cell phone or ISP account
and offer up a credit card – especially a suspect credit card – then include
other required corresponding, traceable information. Why bother?
While terrorists and
other criminals abandon no-cost and anonymous e-mail identities with each
message sent, or use calling cards to place international coded calls
via pay phones, or place strategically-worded ads online and in printed
periodicals, or simply send a letter to a temporary postal box established
under an alias, ostensibly democratic governments are implementing draconian
and enormously expensive tax-paid systems to monitor the private communications
of their law-abiding citizens. A few examples follow.
-
Pursuant a
plan drawn up by Europol, the police and intelligence arm of the European
Union, the European parliament recently passed the so called “Data
Protection Directive.” This measure requires that ISP’s and
telecom firms within the EU retain not only their customers e-mail message
headers, but also their Web surfing habits, chat logs, pager records,
newsgroup activity and all personal info associated with the user’s
account; including user names and passwords.
-
In accordance
with a new surveillance law now effect in Switzerland, a record of every
e-mail transmitted in and out of that country will be logged and stored
for at least six months.
-
In the UK,
the “Regulation
of Investigatory Powers Act” allows government security agencies
to access electronic communications which ISP’s and telecoms are required
by law to intercept and store; including e-mail messages, Web surfing
tracks and fax transmissions.
-
The Spanish
Senate intends to force ISP’s to maintain a record of their customers'
Internet activity for a year and, upon demand, make that information
available to law enforcement agencies.
-
In New Zealand
the Government introduced “Supplementary
Order Paper 85,” thus allowing the interception of electronic communications
by police, the Security Intelligence Service and the Government Communications
Security Bureau.
-
In early 2002,
U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft directed the FBI to expand "data
mining" and Web browsing surveillance. Authorization for this
covert scrutiny of personal communications and habits can be secured
without the subject being suspected of criminal activity. (When
questioned by some privacy-minded members of Congress about such freewheeling
domestic spying, Ashcroft replied that criticism of the Justice Department
action would "only aid terrorists.")
-
As previously
mentioned, in an apparent effort to lower the profile of its Carnivore
e-mail monitoring program, the FBI renamed the surveillance system “DCS1000,”
and it continues to collect messages sent by and to U.S. citizens who
may not even be the subject of an FBI probe.
-
The FBI's mostly
secret
Magic Lantern spyware will (or already has) come online. A
newer component of Carnivore, this remote apparatus will monitor not
only communications, but also the actual keystrokes of individuals who
may, or may not, be under legitimate investigation.
And perhaps most ominous
of all, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), was (or
is still) developing what was disturbingly titled as “Total Information
Awareness”
(open
DARPA PDF TIA file in new window). Due to negative publicity
and bipartisan congressional complaints, the TIA program was since renamed
as the more post-9-11 politically-advantageous brand, "Terrorism Information
Awareness" (Due to congressional scrutiny, DARPA URL's and the program
itself as previously configured may no longer be active by the
time you read this). See
DARPA material.
See update
on disclosed program status, and other replacement and now in effect
IT surveillance
measures.
Conceived by the federally-indicted Regan-era
(Iran-Contra) spookmaster, Dr. (Admiral) John Poindexter -- since resigned
after it became known that he established a speculative futures market
based on predicting the next terrorist hit on a US city -- TIA project
directives are (or were) described as the "total reinvention of technologies
for storing and accessing information... data that will need to be stored
and accessed will be unprecedented, measured in petabytes."
In DARPA’s own brand
of Orwellian techno-speak: "Technically, the TIA program is focusing
on the development of: 1) architectures for a large-scale counter-terrorism
database, for system elements associated with database population, and
for integrating algorithms and mixed-initiative analytical tools; 2) novel
methods for populating the database from existing sources, create innovative
new sources, and invent new algorithms for mining, combining, and refining
information for subsequent inclusion into the database; and, 3) revolutionary
new models, algorithms, methods, tools, and techniques for analyzing and
correlating information in the database to derive actionable intelligence.”
Boiling this paragraph
down to plain English, one could assume that TIA (or what DARPA may refer
to the now likely covert program after this writing) is to be a blanket
data collection tool designed to track every individual who communicates
electronically.
The problem with such
a super surveillance apparatus is that while likely accomplishing little
in the fight against international terrorism, put at risk will be the
rights, freedoms and economic well being of those citizens ostensibly
being protected.
We live in an age
in which 30-year FBI veterans sell out their country and an A-Z lineup
of hackers readily target
top secret government databases. Whether an individual accessing
a system like TIA is a government employee out to quash dissent or sell
secrets, or a hacker targeting a bank account, you can be sure that the
system and its data will eventually be misused.
This is the era of
information, when references to “1984” have become cliché. But in
the case of TIA, the comparison is more relevant than ever. Peaceable,
tax-paying citizens deserve to be left alone, not scrutinized and potentially
compromised by their own government.
Those governments
now expending untold sums of their citizens’ tax dollars in creating Orwellian
systems of surveillance should perhaps instead rely on more proven tools
of target-specific intelligence: human intelligence, human operatives
and human expertise.
Like
Pearl Harbor 60 years before, the U.S.
had the information that would likely have prevented September 11.
The tragedy resulted from a massive failure of bureaucracies; not from
a lack of electronic surveillance. Carnivore, Magic Lantern or even
TIA would have made little difference. Within cumbersome and wasteful
agencies officials failed to communicate and failed to act on the data
already on their desks.
Now, the same officials
that ignored obvious signals, the same officials that ignored the warnings
of their own agents, the same officials that curtailed effective human
intelligence operations; these are the same officials that want to read
your e-mail.
Lowell Bennett is a San Francisco-based
freelance writer.
Copyright © 2002 – Lowell Emerson Bennett
|