Slashdot Mirror
MATRIX Database Schema Altered Due to Privacy Concerns
nusratt writes "Associated Press: 'The Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange combines state vehicle and crime records with commercial databases owned by a private company, Seisint, covering half the U.S. population,' but there were 'questions about the legality of sending state-owned records to Seisint'. The solution? "Each state will maintain its own records . . . Software will search each state's records as necessary.' 'The new setup is designed to get around obstacles in some states' data laws.'"
Each state will maintain its own records . . . Software will search each state's records as necessary. The new setup is designed to get around obstacles in some states' data laws.
I am a programmer and let me just say that this is a really bad idea. Why? Because it's always a bad idea to design a large system that acts like a server but essentially is only a client.
Each state running their own version of the system, operating independently of the other states, will only ensure that the system could become easily corruptible (both criminally and data corrupted), without anyone higher examining the system for audits, outside of audits applied to the individual systems.
It's actually better to have one system and have multiple clients to the system with downgraded permissions, so that a team can go through and audit the whole system easier.
Now I'm not saying I'm all for Seisint holding the keys. Really the government should run this system themselves and hire the right people for the job, with the adequate level of security clearance to do the work. But diffracting a system into multiple independent systems operating on roughly the same premise, is not going to make it any better. It's going to cause lots of problems and I can foresee the following results without much effort, even:
1. Some states will apply problematic functions to the system.
2. Zero data cohesion for audits over the multiple systems.
3. Easier to corrupt state driven systems than federal ones.
4. Criminal activity changes jurisdiction (ie: no longer federal crime, perhaps?)
5. Bugs cropping up in one state won't be present in another.
6. Fifty times the cost of maintaining the systems; the guys doing this, just multiplied their haul by the number of states involved, instead of getting paid one lump sum to do the fsking job.
7. Social Engineers can break into state-run systems much easier, because they don't have to travel half way across the country to get in.
8. Criminals are now able to falsify criminal information like on that horrible movie The Net!
9. Awareness of a fragmented system is not enough to safeguard privacy.
The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
Another way for my illegitimate government to sidestep legitimate state data laws to invade my privacy.
When will this madness stop? Europe is way ahead of the US when it comes to personl privacy.
Flame on if you wish. I for one am ...
Mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore!!
Cue television throwing scene
Karma, We don't need no stinkin' karma!
Read this statement from the article carefully:
The new setup is designed to allow for more frequent updates of the information and get around obstacles in some states' data laws, Zadra said
Yes, that's right, those pesky laws designed to protect your privacy are "obstacles" that are getting in the way.
*sigh*
"Europe is way ahead of the US when it comes to personal privacy."
I also used to think so -- until the EU caved to the U.S. and agreed to start regularly sending all of the EU's travel records to the U.S.
Start following the news on things being done by the EU bureaucracy -- sometimes covertly and against the explicit wishes of the citizenry. Read the handwriting on the wall: more and more, the dominance of the U.S. -- militarily, culturally, politically and economically -- is poisoning the rest of what used to be called the "Free World".
The evolution from the former European "Common Market" for easing trade frictions, to an EU with wider powers -- political powers -- is destined to be recognized someday as a grave error and a disaster for human rights.
Getting around a States data Laws is Computer Crime.
Plain and Simple. Engineering the System to circumnavigate the laws, wouldn't that be an Inducement to infringe Data, and somehow violate the New proposed Induce Laws? Or how about The DMCA, or better Yet HiPPA (sp?)
My cat's picked up a Hammer. HEY! Put down that Hammer. Put Down that Hamm...THUNK!
"but each state will have software that will only allow them to access information about people in their state?"
NO, THAT'S THE SNEAKY PART. Everyone involved will still be able to get to the same data. It's just a shell game, to circumvent privacy regulations.
The most harm that could come of this sort of system is the tendency for authorities to embarass you with such broad access to your history. Like the time the cop ran down my driving record after I denied speeding when he pulled me over for the offense. I already looked foolish enough to the passengers in my vehical, but it made me look even worse now that they knew every ticket I had for the past three years. Boy, did he ever put me in my place!
So now they will have access to the websites you surf, the television you watch, the videos you rent, the foods you buy, the property you own, the banks you use, the crimes you've committed, the people you've met, the jobs you've held, the classes you've attended, the doctors you've seen, the diseases you've had, the opionions you've expressed, the sports you play, the religion you follow, the taxes you've paid, and so on, and so on...
I guess the scariest part is when somebody else who meshes up with all the things you do and enjoy, happens to commit some kind of horrible atrocity. Now they run profiles through their database to determine other likely culprits for similar crimes, and lo- your name appears. You couldn't win the lottery, but you've won a free "closer inspection". But if you didn't do anything wrong, don't worry about it. You probably won't even know they were investigating you.
It's easy to see where potential employers may also eventually have access to this information, and that's good too, because you wouldn't want to work with somebody who has a shady history now would you? Obviously, current employers need access to this information as well. Employees can be such a handful! Personal information can help you better manage them to make them more productive.
Needless to say, one could only hope that banks will also be in line to have a shot at your personal info, because they need to know the spending habits of their clients in order to detect fraud. It's for your protection.
Eventually many responsible corperations will have some degree of access to this information to better improve the comfort and security of their clients and associates. It will bring greater stability and certainty to the markets.
And of course these records will always be available to local, state, and federal law enforcement for obvious beneficial reasons. It's much more effecient to investigators if they don't actually have to run around to investigate who, what, when, where, why, and how on a person's history. You can immediately establish links and let the obvious story fall into place. It's not as if you'll be denied a jury trial if it's a major offense.
No... Only good can come of this so called "invasion of privacy" and the sooner it starts, the better.
Note: Even when I play devil's advocate, this kind of thinking still scares the shit out of me, though I have no criminal history. Now can someone explain why that is?
If the government can routinely blow 10's of billions of dollars on a war that wasn't justified, it can fork over a little extra to make sure the citizens are protected from unnessary, centralized, control over massive amounts of data on U.S. Citizens. We already KNOW ahat happens when so much data is centralized under the control of one entity- just ask almost anyone who has had their identity stolen.
Even having said all this, I think that this MATRIX idea is a waste of money. Nobody knows what a "terrorist" looks like in terms of their spending habits. It's entirely possible that there is no discernible difference. There is plenty of room, however, to flag false positives, as has already been shown with the fed's "no fly" list. Because some of the stuff I've heard is really rather rediculous, I have no inclination to trust the fed with any more data on U.S. citizens than it had before 9/11.
A few weeks ago I attended the Fifth HOPE conferenece in New York City. While I was there, I saw Steven Rambam, a private investigator and former federal agent, give a presentation entitled "Privacy: It Ain't What It Used to Be." A better title would have been "Privacy is Already Dead."
He started out by asking if anybody in the room (about 200+ tin-foil-hat wearing hackers) had ever heard of Seisent. Not a single hand went up, and he seemed to be genuinely suprised and disturbed by this.
He made a very good point repeatedly throughout his presentation: we shouldn't be worried because Government has this data on us; no, we should be terrified because private corporations that don't even answer to the government have this data. And it's not just limited to name, address and telephone number: criminal records, addresses of residence, education, employers, telephone calls, magazine subscriptions, travel records, television viewing habits (if you have cable), internet downloads, gun ownership and voting records. Yes voting records - they know if you voted and what party you registered under.
Suffice to say, these guys should be the household name, not the RIAA. Why does the media focus on the MPAA et al and their paltry lawsuits and not these guys?!?
So I changed my sig to read "What is Seisint?" and I tell everyone I know about them.
Some have responded to me with ambivalence. "What's the big deal?" "Meh, they have the data, there's nothing we can do about it." I'm not sure how to respond to people like that except with "the dumber you are the happier you are" or something.
What could they do with that data? Use your imagination, stupid.
Rambam finished by giving a live demonstration of a smaller database of individual information that he owns (derived mostly public records). He demonstrated how quickly you could compile information on any random person with just their SSN - as it turned out, the "victim" he took from the audience was already a real victim of identity theft. The query took less that 10 seconds. It was pretty amazing / disturbing.
During the Q&A portion of the presentation, several audience members asked what they could do to "get out" of the database. Rambam replied that there was nothing we could do: the data was now the property of this one private company - even the data that was collected from State governments (Aside from being one of the egregiou privacy invasions in human history, it was also one of the most gernerous corporate subsidizations ever).
Rambam did say one thing we could do: "Vote, vote, vote." Private corporations have too many protections and powers compared to individuals, and Government is the only way to change that.
The final questioner for the session had a very +5 Insightful comment on what everyone in the audience should do just in case the voting didn't work out:
"Buy, and learn how to use, a rifle."
The audience response to this comment was, of course, thunderous applause.
Order the deportation of all Saudi Citizens? Have you considered that Saudi Arabia is one of our closest allies in the middle east? Not to mention a very important source of oil? Put aside PC thought for a second, and consider the diplomatic and geopolitical ramifications of villainizing that people? That people, the vast majority of whom have not attacked America? Why not just send them an open letter and ask them to join Al Qaeda and to stop selling us oil?
As for your analogy with the other world powers in history, let me ask you something about them. Where are they? Where is their power now? If we walk in their path, we will reach the same destination they did. We are not Romans, we are not Germans, we are Americans. We ought to blaze our own trails, ahdering to the principals upon which this nation was founded.
Yes it is racist to look at someone from a particular race/nationality and judge them by their group identity. The cornerstone of a free society is the recognition of individual identity and individual rights. Every day in America, 3,000 people die from a combination of tobacco, alcohol, and medical malpractice. That's 9/11 everyday. Every single day, 3,000 avoidable deaths occur. We do not take away individual liberty because of them. We do not give up the principle of freedom because of it. Why then, should we compromise our principals for a singular incident where 3,000 people died?
Give me Liberty or give me death.
Live free or die. Better to be dead right, than alive wrong, in chains, bowing the knee. And that is the fate that awaits everyone who gives up their liberty and rights for security. They will bow the knee, they will see lady liberty bow the knee, and the blood of all those who have fought for the principals of our nation, will have been shed in vain.
Think for yourself, destroy your television.