Slashdot Mirror
Florida's Version Of TIA May Spread To Other States
Annoying Cowwart writes "Looks like TIA is coming back, this time through the by-the States-but-all-together backdoor. Now called M.A.T.R.I.X. ('Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange'). See the
Washington Post article for details. I wonder: do they have to try hard to find such apt names for their projects or does it come naturally? (For German speakers, there is another article about this in Der Spiegel.)"
Next time someone says "The Matrix has you", they probably won't be lying. Of course, you'll know all too well, when the CIA goons come crashing through the front door.
Multistate
:)
Anti
TeRrorism
Information
eXchange
You can make an acronym of out anything, if you try hard enough.
Frankly, I'd be surprised if this tool is actually used in terrorist-related investigations more than a small percentage of the time.
That said, as long as the statement holds true that "it includes information that has always been available to investigators but brings it together and enables police to access it with extraordinary speed", I really don't have too much of a problem with it. It doesn't represent an encroachment on privacy rights so much as an improvement in investigatory tools. What needs to develop alongside these tools, of course, are strict guidelines on the manner in which they should be used.
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
Things like this seem to me to only hurt the innocent. I mean, given that everyone can now read about this existing, any half-witted criminal would get a haircut, steal a new car and do something far away from home, right? I mean, if someone didn't take precautions such as these given this system, then they would probably be the type of criminal who would leave other evidence everywhere. This seems to have a ton of privacy implications and would target a lot of innocent people who, just say, happened to own red trucks or whatever the case may be, without targetting the actual criminals. What a waste. And they used my tax dollars to pay for a stupid, incorrect acronym, too. Grrr...
I think it's a bit much to push this all on one family, especially since it's only one guy running the state. Besides, the wheels for all of this were set in motion by the last guy, and if you look a bit closer at the people involved you realize many of them are Democrats.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
Putting it that extreme way is short sighted, to be polite.
Having not total control over every citizen almost certainly leads to more crime by the people, but that is the cost of more freedom. More control to the government and you have almost certainly more crimes by the government/and or companies.
And they will probably hurt us citizens more in the long term. Want examples? Google for yourself, or ask. But I'm too lazy to write them all down here.
IMHO law enforcement should be more effective and should not work by gathering information about everyone and then doing some data mining.
Although I hate to say it, I have to say that they have a good point here. The need for a tool to help law enforcement is unquestioned. The only problem that most of us seem to have is the use of this tool.
The states already have access to all this data. The only difference now is that they will be able to access it more quickly. I cannot see how that will be any worse than what we already have.
Unfortunately, what we already have is proof that this tool will not be used in the utopian manner than the designers intend. Instead, it will be used by police forces to highlight people that they feel are suspects (because they meet some predetermined criteria). They will then seek to examine these folks to determine if they are associated with the crime they are investigating. Of course, if they happen to stumble across some other "crime" while they investigate they can get two for the price of one.
Is it needed in the short term? Yes, I hate to say it, but I think that it is.
Is it the correct solution in the long run? Perhaps, but not right now. Not with the "Big Brother" mentality that seems to be gripping the law enforcement community.
We are Pentium of Borg. Division is futile. You will be approximated.
I won't join any organizations like the ACLU to protect my freedoms! NO! I'm going to be an armchair critic and let the government erode my freedoms!
Karma whorin' since 1999
Last week the news said airlines were looking at the credit agency and medical insurance reports of every passenger. People with low credit scroes were flagged for additional scrutiny. I guess because these are easy databases to access, not because they are informative.
The US (and other western nations) are slowly, but surely, relieving the average citizen of their privacy rights in the interests of 'the war on terror' (such as it is). And of course, it's is our very freedoms (in many things) that the terrorists want to take away - to make us afraid...
I don't know what the future holds, but worlds such as those portrayed in films like 'Minority Report' don't seem so far fetched anymore..
Sure, there's some data in federal databases that isn't in private ones, but there's a lot of companies that already have databases like this put together, listing every possible bit of credit and consumer information about you they know or can buy.
Those databases are unregulated, and they don't have to tell anyone they have assembled that information. Zero accountability. Raise your hand if you think the government doesn't have access to that information on a rental basis.
Once the government gets this system assembled, there will finally be a concrete reason to work out some legislation governing what can be done with large scale assemblies of data about the public in general, and lawmakers will finally have a reason to draw a line somewhere to mark the point where assembly and correlation of data becomes an invasion of privacy.
Yeah, it's gonna be painful. But I'd rather have this battle be fought on a battlefield I understand and can control than with guns, knives, and bombs. Just think of how many accounts with access to this database there will be... and how many chances to shoulder surf, social engineer, stack smash, and otherwise access and corrupt the data?
ObPaRaNoIa: I'm nearly certain that the fed somewhere is harvesting slashdot pages with a web spider and doing a full text index and cross-correlation with other known "hacker" web blogs... it's a great way to keep track of those "criminals". How many hackers can give up reading slashdot, even when they're running from the law?
Erik
As a taxpayer, can I see my information that floats around in these 'public' databases? The information in the M.A.T.R.I.X? Like reviewing my own credit report?
I suspect not, which then brings up the flip side, how do I protect my privacy and get my information removed from these 'public' databases?
I am not a criminal, but I feel I have no control over my privacy anymore.
-- sed s/liberty/profit/g US.Constitution
At least they picked a name that should strike the proper level of fear into joe citizen. When it was TIA no one had a clue, it was almost as good as the PATRIOT Act (who could vote against being a patriot right?). But with a name like MATRIX thanks to the media machine people will naturally associate it with total helpless control and loss of basic rights.
This program will be quickly dropped, the politicians will say it was all that guys idea *point long finger* and it'll come up again under the name "USA FLUFFY BUNNIES AND PEACE ON EARTH FOR EVERYONE Act"
Vote no on USA FLUFFY BUNNIES AND PEACE ON EARTH FOR EVERYONE!
States Archive of Terrorist Actions Network
OR
S.A.T.A.N
Yeah... that's it
On the one hand, anything that helps law enforcement officers track down and lock up criminal types is a Good Thing, and anything that helps them identify something dangerous in progress is also Good.
BUT,
On the other hand, there are a wide range of different kinds of cops, and at least half of them aren't the sort of people who should BE cops. They're like the dickhead who used to cruise around my neighborhood on the fourth of july, "confiscating" everyone's fireworks and bringing them home to his own kids, or the cop who keeps a "drop gun" handy in case he fucks up and shoots the wrong person, or the cops who you hear about from time to time, who shake down hookers and drug dealers for their own piece of the pie (pardon the pun).
The problem is, cops are people. And, like all people, some are good and some are bad. Some are REALLY bad. Put a tool like this in their hands, without sufficient top-down control (and you know, they're just going to give that lip service) and at least some of the cops entrusted with this will misuse it. Regularly. Perhaps often.
Another problem is, there's a real "us vs. them" mentality among cops, so even if one cop finds out another cop is, say, digging around in his ex-girlfriend's current boyfriend's records, it's unlikely anything will be done about it. Cops don't "rat" each other out, ok? They just don't. Do you really think a bunch of good old boys are going to keep an eye on each other? What'll really happen is, "Joe won't snitch on Bob for fucking with the guy who 'stole' Bob's girl, if Bob doesn't snitch on Joe for checking up on the hot babe who lives in his building". And, Joe and Bob will keep on misusing their power, as has happened throughout history.
For that reason, I'm against this utterly.
Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
On the one hand, the use of computers to consolidate information already available to law enforcement is inevitable. It's great that it's happening (relatively) in the open, where some (relatively) accountable people will be setting the regulations. BUT just the fact that this sort of database EXISTS scares the hell outta me. realize that this will be the NUMBER ONE hack target in the world. Detailed information about every citizen and visitor of the United States, from their home address to their shopping habits. terrorists aren't the only ones who will be willing to pay out the *ss for this! And all it takes is ONE bribe-able officer. And we aren't just talking small, hundred thousand dollar bribes, either... many many people would pay in the hundreds of millions of dollars for access to this. And to top it all off, the guy developing it has a suspicious history, and a tendency to volunteer himself for projects involving sensitive government information. But he's trustworthy, right? I hope they have a team of monkeys working around the clock to check for backdoors, 'cause I'D put one in if i was writing this system...
**** You never REALLY learn to swear until you own a computer. ****
Paul S. Cameron: The
Matrix has YOU!
Asher has also donated services to the FBI, the Secret Service and other agencies. And authorities credit Seisint with helping to turn up links among the hijackers who slammed planes into the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, and to some of their associates.
1) If this statement is indeed true, then my first question is "Were the links apparent before, or after the terrorist attacks".
a) If the answer is "before", then why didn't these paragons of virtue say something and save ~3000 lives?
b) If the answer is "after", then the system is worthless as an intelligence tool. The bits and pieces of any conspiracy are always out in the public before an incident occurs. The value of intelligence analysis is the ability to merge these apparently unrelated pieces of information to reach a conclusion. If their system is only capable of making a link after an event, then Florida residents better keep an eye on their wallets.
Here, I'll do the same thing without their database: 'The Japanese were responsible for
bombing Pearl Harbor.'
Pretty neat, huh?
2) Who goes to jail if the system is used for political surveillance?
a) Considering the system can be abused (a point that even supporters admit is possible), who will be responsible for rouge elements within a state government that use the system to collect information on political activists who disagree with a sitting administration?
b) Does anyone really believe that Nixon DIDN'T use the IRS and FBI to spy on anti-war activists during Viet Nam?
This system, however worthy it is in stopping potential violent acts, is too dangerous a tool to be placed in the hands of politicians.
"Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
Cops are always honest and unbribe-able (sp?). Besides the US government has never abused any of its powers.
And the government needs to know your credit rating. Because if you are poor you are a criminal in America today. If you are poor you might have motivation to commit a crime, rich people don't commit crimes because they're already rich.
Vote Quimby!
Does anyone know if the government agencies have access to the source code, and are using internally compiled and configured versions of the software and hardware? This software has been donated for free to the state of Florida, and it seems as though this guy has also donated software to other government agencies. This would be a great way for someone to get backdoors into some of the most sensitive information systems in the U.S.
The problem is the commercial databases that are for sale. I'm more concerned about getting my info off these databases. I want my privacy, actually I demand my privacy.
Have you ever been to a turkish prison?
As far as I'm concerned, the republicrat/demopublican parties are both as bad as eachtother. There has been a quiet fascist coup spanning BOTH parties.
Liberty is dead. Americans want ZERO risk. Such a people are destined for slavery under an Iron Fist.
Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
My state's IT people are too incompetent and/or mismanaged to get a single decent IT project completed. I'd say 90% of IT and software design is a total waste in state gov't.
Even if they could get their act together, the house and senate can't sustain funding for them even when there's plenty of money, much less when they are Billions in the red.
Using outside firms, known for cashing in on lucrative cushy government contracts while producing virtually nothing, only compounds the problem.
What makes you think they can make this work?
What will result is a system that will track law abiding people while clever "grifters" and "criminals" short circuit the system, or worse, use the system as a means to further their agenda.
When an incompetent but well-intentioned government spies on their own, they end up exposing to danger the very people they are sworn to protect.
In the U.S., not much talent gravitates to the government sector when fortunes can be made elsewhere.
It's just technology. The technology is inevitable.
That's not "just technology". That's a specific application of technology and there's nothing inevitable about it.
It's quite easy, technologically, to fit everyone in the country with an electronic bracelet (or anklet) which transmits to law enforcement data center that person's location in real time. It might not be so easy to do this politically.
Or take an even simpler example. Until recently there were no public roads in the USA where it was legal to go faster than, say, 70 mph. Why weren't all cars fitted with governors that would limit the speed to 70 mph? From the technology point of view it's trivial to do...
Kaa
Kaa's Law: In any sufficiently large group of people most are idiots.
Benjamin Franklin, who wrote that "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
I don't know about you, but I don't feel any safer than I did on September 10, 2001, or September 12, or whatever day you choose to pick. And yet Ashcroft seems intent on tearing down the Constitution piece by piece.
This is my sig. There are many others like it, but this one is mine.
As we all know, eyewitnesses are *terrible* at reporting facts. (Google it if you don't believe me).
So, if you're looking for an Arab male, 20-30, in the LA area, driving a red pick-up truck, this database will turn up 20 matches. Found your guy, right?
Wrong. While you're rounding up innocents for heat-lamp questioning, the 25-year-old Phillipino has ditched the stolen truck and is hightailing it to another state.
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
-- Pablo Picasso
Having had their hands slapped on that one, they instead resort to the lovely "Matrix" acronym -- perhaps (you think?) thinking that it'd be catchy with all those kids who saw the movie... Note to spooks: to the kids who saw the movie, this acronym will not seem cool, it'll just seem unbelievably scary. Criminy.
Best stick to "Patriot" something-or-other. That's always good. Red white and blue for the logo this time... With the people in the image depicted in nifty flight suits. Ah, soothes the worry.
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
Why is it that "they" are always trying to collect more information when it is evident that the problem isn't insufficient information, but INABILITY to process collected information?
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
>>Seems to me that such a system really works best on people with nothing to hide - which contradicts the very purpose for which it is intended.
Agreed. However, the system fulfills it's purpose well -- it does precisely what it was designed to do. Those objectives are simply different from the stated goals. "Law enforcement" learned (from TIA) not to tell the public the real purpose of privacy-invading projects such as this unless they wished to suffer the wrath of elected officials threatened with voter backlash.
I'm as anti TIA call up pictures of my mom on a whim as anyone. But I'm pro-technology. In other discussions (p2p, for example) I often argue that the luddites should get out of the way. Technology is progress! If you're not with us, then you are a candlemaker in the age of electricity. Too bad for you.
/. about how people how post statements to /. are idiots. Those people truly are. But come on. I don't think the issue or answers here are at all obvious. They are worthy of deep thoughtful discussion. So screw on your thinking caps, and the next time this topic comes up (probably within the next 24 hours) try to add some depth to the conversation. This is a great forum in which to do so. Slashdot is read by millions. Take advantage. Get some good ideas out there. God knows we need them.
I think the same argument applies here. Like it or not, using databases to correlate huge repositories of information is just not that difficult. It's going to happen. How can it be stopped?
Are there any constitutional provisions protecting us from such technology? Not that I know of. Quite frankly, the constitution is rather ambiguous on the subject of your privacy. Witness the recent bruhaha vis-a-vis sodomy in Texas for example. In that case the Supreme court came down on the side of privacy. How the supremes feel about your medical records, your social security number, your photograph, your fingerprints, your school record, your criminal record, your address, etc. has yet to be determined. It's not so clear that anything in the US constitution protects you from the potential abuses inherent to correlating all that information. The constitution proper primarily concerns itself with what the goverment can do. The Bill of Rights primarily concerns itself with what the government cannot do. As far as I know, there's nothing in there that says the government can't make a database. Funny, it probably never occured to them.
On the other hand, the constitution doesn't protect you from the abuses inherent to giving everyone ready access to gasoline, either. Are you afraid of gasoline?
So here's an idea. If the government is going to create vast databases of information about its citizens - fine. But make those databases public. The problem is one of power. If only a few people have access, they have too much power. Give *everyone* access. It's not o.k for John Poindexter to look up pictures of my mom on a whim. But it's o.k. if anyone in the world can do so.
The truth is the truth. Who's afraid of the truth? The biggest lotto winner who gave millions to churches just had hundreds of thousands of dollars recovered behind the dumpster of the brothel he was visiting. That's the truth. You can read it in the papers. Throw open the bathroom doors! What you do with yourself is the Truth! Let it show, baby!
Yeah, whatever. I want to poop in private. I believe its my right to do so. I want to fuck in private too. And talk to my doctor about my vascectomy in private. I want my school records to remain private. I want my criminal record, meager as it may be, to remain private also. But I want to know if my neighbor is a child molester.
My main point is - this is goddamn complicated issue. And I'm getting pretty sick of the typical slashdot rhetoric. I'm not one to post statements to
--Lawrence Lessig for Congress!
I actually think this system can work, but it needs three major adjustments:
1) Anyone who wants to access information from this system, for whatever reason, must get a search warrant from a judge before doing so.
2) People must be allowed to retrieve their own records at will and be permitted to submit corrections to incorrect data.
3) Public oversight in the form of a third-party's review of the system should be enforced in the form of an annual report to congress or some such body detailing the usage of the system (times it was accessed, by who, for what info, whether a conviction or arrest was ever obtained on the suspect.)
All in all, I think that enormous databases of information for law enforcement purposes are inevitable, but they need to have appropriate checks and balances in place before they become safe to implement IMHO. None of the current systems or proposals would meet my standards for this, and anyone who thinks that these safeguards would cripple the system with buerocratic inefficiency should go watch the excellent movie Enemy of the State for a quick hollywood-style remider of the consequences of failing to implement appropriate safeguards.