No such thing as a slippery slope

Yes that title is designed to be somewhat provocative. But seriously: "future crime".


Massive New Surveillance Program Uncovered by Wall Street Journal
http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2012/12/13/national_counterterrorism_center_s_massive_new_surveillance_program_uncovered.html

After internal wrangling over privacy and civil liberties issues, the Justice Department reportedly signed off on controversial new guidelines earlier this year. The guidelines allow the NCTC, for the first time, to keep data about innocent U.S. citizens for up to five years, using “predictive pattern-matching,” to analyze it for suspicious patterns of behavior. The data the counterterrorism center has access to, according to the Journal, includes “entire government databases—flight records, casino-employee lists, the names of Americans hosting foreign-exchange students and many others.”

Notably, the Journal reports that these changes also allow databases about U.S. civilians to be handed over to foreign governments for analysis, presumably so that they too can attempt to determine future criminal actions. The Department of Homeland Security’s former chief privacy officer said that it represents a “sea change in the way that the government interacts with the general public.”

[...]

It is a question of balance: How much liberty should be sacrificed in the name of security? The revelations about the NCTC’s activities may be about to rekindle that debate.

And the original article (google "Wall Street Journal massive database" if this link doesn't work, their paywall is weird)

U.S. Terrorism Agency to Tap a Vast Database of Citizens
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324478304578171623040640006.html

The rules now allow the little-known National Counterterrorism Center to examine the government files of U.S. citizens for possible criminal behavior, even if there is no reason to suspect them. That is a departure from past practice, which barred the agency from storing information about ordinary Americans unless a person was a terror suspect or related to an investigation.

Now, NCTC can copy entire government databases—flight records, casino-employee lists, the names of Americans hosting foreign-exchange students and many others. The agency has new authority to keep data about innocent U.S. citizens for up to five years, and to analyze it for suspicious patterns of behavior. Previously, both were prohibited. Data about Americans "reasonably believed to constitute terrorism information" may be permanently retained.

[...]

Congress specifically sought to prevent government agents from rifling through government files indiscriminately when it passed the Federal Privacy Act in 1974. The act prohibits government agencies from sharing data with each other for purposes that aren't "compatible" with the reason the data were originally collected.

But the Federal Privacy Act allows agencies to exempt themselves from many requirements by placing notices in the Federal Register, the government's daily publication of proposed rules. In practice, these privacy-act notices are rarely contested by government watchdogs or members of the public. "All you have to do is publish a notice in the Federal Register and you can do whatever you want," says Robert Gellman, a privacy consultant who advises agencies on how to comply with the Privacy Act.

As a result, the National Counterterrorism Center program's opponents within the administration—led by Ms. Callahan of Homeland Security—couldn't argue that the program would violate the law. Instead, they were left to question whether the rules were good policy.

[...]

As early as February 2011, NCTC's proposal was raising concerns at the privacy offices of both Homeland Security and the Department of Justice, according to emails reviewed by the Journal.

Privacy offices are a relatively new phenomenon in the intelligence community. Most were created at the recommendation of the 9/11 Commission. Privacy officers are often in the uncomfortable position of identifying obstacles to plans proposed by their superiors.

[...]

Once the terms [of these new data-sharing agreements now that "privacy concerns" have been duly considered] are set, Homeland Security is likely to post a notice in the Federal Register. The public can submit comments to the Federal Register about proposed changes, although Homeland Security isn't required to make changes based on the comments.

(edit: man the formatting really got tore up, hope it's fixed now)

It's only fair that the government have at least as much access to information as your average cable company.

Personally I'm amazed how heavy the government is going in for data mining considering how crap the effectiveness is. Solving the false positive problem is virtually impossible given the orders of magnitudes involved.

I'm not. After 9/11 the government wanted the ability for phone companies to identify and record conversations when key words were spoken. My friend worked for a C-LEC and was part of the team trying to implement their technology (which didn't work too well). For the next year every time I called him and got his voice mail I left the same message of, "bomb, Jihad, terror, USA, Washington, allah, allahu akbar, YIYIYIYIYIYIYIYIYI". He used to cuss me because he figured the FBI was going to show up at his house one day. :-)

Update to reflect reality and history. This is what governments tend to do even if they totally intend to do good, be ethical, etc. They almost always go in way too heavy and then it's damn near impossible to dial it back.