We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. If you continue to use this site, we'll assume you're happy with this. Alternatively, click here to find out how to manage these cookies

hide cookie message

US government data mining needs oversight, say senatotrs

Safeguards needed for US government data-mining programs

Article comments

Dozens of US government data-mining programs collect private data about US residents with few civil liberties safeguards and some violate US law, Democratic members of the US Senate Judiciary Committee said Wednesday.

Democratic senators pledged to provide more congressional scrutiny for data-mining programmes authorised by President George Bush’s administration. “All I want is the administration is follow the law,” Senator Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat, said during the Judiciary Committee’s first hearing since Democrats took over the majority in Congress this month. “They want us to follow the law – they should follow the law.”

Leahy pointed to the Secure Flight programme operated by the US Transportation Security Administration (TSA) as one that violated US privacy law. In December, the US Department of Homeland Security’s privacy office issued a report saying the TSA failed to notify US air travellers that their personal information was being collected.

Other government data-mining programmes, including the Department of Justice’s ONE-DOJ database, allow US agencies to share information “about thousands of individuals, including those who have never been charged with a crime,” Leahy said. The agencies can share the information with each other, with local law enforcement agencies and even with private employers, he said.

“There’s only one group they don’t share it with – the ordinary Americans they collect data on,” he added.

At least 52 US agencies use data-mining technology, and at least 199 data-mining programmes were operated or planned by US agencies in May 2004, according to a US General Accounting Office report then. Leahy on Wednesday joined two other senators, one Republican and one Democrat, in introducing the Federal Data Mining Reporting Act, which would require federal agencies to report their data-mining activities to Congress.

The DOJ and TSA have defended their use of data mining, saying the technology helps catch terrorists and criminals. “TSA is firmly committed to protecting the privacy and civil liberties of travellers,” the agency says on its website.

Joining Democratic senators in calling for more congressional oversight of data-mining programmes were Republican Bob Barr, a former US representative from Georgia, and Jim Harper, director of information policy studies for Libertarian think tank The Cato Institute.

Barr, a long-time privacy advocate, said some government data-mining programmes may violate several parts of the US Constitution, including the Fourth Amendment, prohibiting unreasonable searches and requiring that warrants be issued only after probable cause and the Fifth Amendment, guaranteeing US citizens due process in legal cases.

“The data-mining practices of [the Bush] administration have meant that innocent people’s personal information is collected, which places them under suspicion without reason,” Barr said.

No studies exist that say predictive data mining, which attempts to identify new suspects by looking at data trends, is an effective way to catch terrorists, Harper added. “The result will be that you’ll get a lot of false positives,’ he said. “You’ll waste a lot of time investigating innocent people.’

But James Jay Carafano, a foreign policy analyst at conservative think tank The Heritage Foundation, said data mining can assist law enforcement investigations. Data-mining programmes can coexist with civil liberties if agencies follow privacy guidelines and have approval from Congress, he said.

Technology is “an important part of any set of courterterrorism tools,” he said.

Republican Senator Arlen Specter also questioned how many US residents have been significantly harmed by data-mining programmes. The US government has stopped dangerous people from entering the country, he said.

“We sit here and listen to a high level of generalisation,” he said. “How do we make that determination of what is an effective tool for counterterrorism?”

Share:

Comments

Advertisement
Advertisement
Send to a friend

Email this article to a friend or colleague:


PLEASE NOTE: Your name is used only to let the recipient know who sent the story, and in case of transmission error. Both your name and the recipient's name and address will not be used for any other purpose.


ComputerworldUK Knowledge Vault

ComputerworldUK
Share
x
Open
* *