Slashdot Mirror


Senate Wants Database Dragnet

Doc Ruby writes "Wired reports that the "Senate could pass a bill as early as Wednesday evening that would let government counter-terrorist investigators instantly query a massive system of interconnected commercial and government databases that hold billions of records on Americans".

9 of 249 comments (clear)

  1. Total information awareness? by lothar97 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    So, I guess Poindexter's Total, excuse me, Terrorism Information Awareness is now a reality. I thought, and the page I cited agrees with me, that this project was stopped by Congress. I guess another name, and another "overview and rationale" makes it more palatable. Nothing like keeping the people in fear all the time.

    I've resisted wearing my tinfoil hat, now I'm wearing one, and putting one around all my personal information as well.

    --

  2. Riiight by Donoho · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Many have trouble accurately querying databases within the same company. If these government agencies have the brain power (internal or contracted) to pull this off then they can have my information.

    1. Re:Riiight by MonkeyGone2Heaven · · Score: 5, Insightful


      Actually, having the government inacurately querying these databases is what scares me. The last thing I want is to be scooped up in some anti-terrorist sweep because some doufus doesn't know his joins.

      Of course, they'll be just as certain I'm a terrorist as they were that Saddam Hussien had vast stocks of WMD when we invaded Iraq.

  3. What about foreigners ? by Jesrad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm pretty certain there are millions of records of personnal information on us foreigners in those many many databases, too. Nice to see how highly we're regarded by the current US Administration :( Especially when we have no say in how these informations can be (mis)handled.

    --
    Maybe we deserve this world ?
  4. the article mentions "protections" and other crap by macshune · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "To prevent abuses of the system, the Markle task force recommended anonymized technology, graduated levels of permission-based access and automated auditing software constantly hunting for abuses."

    Who is going to audit the auditing software? Who gets to assign permissions? How can this be anonymized? Why are these just recommendations?

    "The proposed network would not look for patterns in data warehouses to attempt to detect terrorist activities, Dempsey said. Instead, an investigator would start with a name and the system would try to see what information is known about that person."

    Ok, so it's not a "dragnet," but a "dossier net" that just keeps a file on everybody synthesized from government and commercial data. I fail to see how this could possibly detect someone using a false name, who does not want to be found and probably doesn't use credit cards.

    "The next Mohammed Atta is not going to be found in commercial databases," Griffin said, referring to the tactical leader of the 9/11 attacks. "We are going to stop him running a red light somewhere, and we are going to run relationships associations with this guy and we are going to say, gee, you have things in common with guys on watch lists. That's how you are going to find the guy -- not because he has bad credit.""

    Riiiight. How many people would match up to these arbitrary watch lists? How many more middle eastern folks are gonna be pulled over again and again and questioned again and again just because their activities look something similar to someone's idea of a potential terrorist?

    Is it worth it?

  5. Riiiiiight... by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The IRS lacks staff and adequate software and hardware. The BIA has totally hosed the accounting of the trust fund money. The Justice Department says that complying with a large FOIA data request would crash their servers. The current, tiny No Fly list contained the name of a prominent Senator. I should worry about this, why?

    --
    Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
  6. domestic terrorists? by dresseduptoday · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ah, so it has struck US politicians that threats to the nation may (at least in theory) come from people who are not forreign nationals. Not that I envy those of you who live there, regardless of nationality. Freedom used to be cherished, and covernment control and distrust of own citisens in the former eastern block used to be scorned. Bring that point of view back! Your fears are scores for your enemies. _ /Bjorn.

  7. Just who is the enemy? by Whammy666 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Why are the majority of these new anti-terrorism laws targeting American citizens? Al-Qaeda is largely based in foreign countries and consists of foreign nationals. Yet the focus of Asscrofts et. al. anti-terror efforts has been to find new and creative ways to spy on US citizens.

    What's wrong with this picture?

    --
    When all else fails, run.
    1. Re:Just who is the enemy? by RealAlaskan · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Why are the majority of these new anti-terrorism laws targeting American citizens?

      It's all about control, in two senses: they're desparate to control everyone, and they can only tighten the screws on those of us they already have some control over. So, today they turn the U.S. into a police state, tomorrow the world.