The Evil in E-Mail

Frenchy in Ontario writes "An Ontario university researcher is devising ways to help law enforcement agencies better pinpoint likely criminal behavior in e-mails. His theory is that people who are "up to something" are more likely to write differently than people who aren't - either by avoiding using certain words at all that could be flagged for possible criminal context (like "bombed) or to examine patterns that might indicate criminal activity - like several people e-mailing one person but not each other, which is how some criminal networks operate. There's also an interesting paragraph on why Enron's emails aren't as valuable as you might think for this sort of work."

Comments

Dumbest thing I've read all week...

[TripMaster Monkey]

From TFA:

Skillicorn doesn't know all the ways suspicious e-mails might read differently from innocent ones. The beauty of his approach is that he doesn't need to know. His software is designed simply to look for messages that are different, based on word frequencies, from the mass of e-mails. It needn't understand the reasons for the differences.

Super. I'm predicting a whole lot of false positives...especially during the initial phase of this operation...

Also from TFA:

One difference might be the complete absence of words someone might possibly think would draw a law enforcement agency's attention to their e-mails, but that most people would occasionally use innocently (as in "my presentation yesterday really bombed.")

Great...so words like 'bombed' get the email flagged...as well as an absense of the word 'bombed'? So far, Skillicorn's test appears 100% sensitive...too bad it's 0% specific.

Some more from TFA:

A related trick, he says, is to examine patterns in who e-mails whom. As an example, in criminal networks it is common to find several people communicating regularly with the same person, but never with each other.

OMG! This is the pattern of emails in my company! My whole company is a giant terrorist organization! I had no idea!

/sarcasm

But here's the kicker...again with the quoting:

To help with his work, Skillicorn has been working with archives of e-mail from Enron Corp., the company at the heart of one of the most prominent scandals in recent U.S. business history. In some respects, he notes, the Enron e-mails are not a good sample for analysis, because Enron employees seemed to have no compunction about what they were doing. "People should feel some guilt or at least some self-consciousness when they're being deceptive," he says.

So let me get this straight...if criminals are okay with their criminal activity (like...say...terrorists), they'll 'slip under the radar'??? Great test, Skillicorn...sounds a lot like a standard polygraph test, which experienced criminals can fool at will, while innocent people fail them 50% of the time. That's what the War on Terror really needs...another inaccurate 'test' that does nothing but throw false positives.

I'm just glad that this method is so obviously stupid that it will never be implemented by our government...
Oh, wait...one more from TFA:

Such technology has obvious applications in surveillance by law enforcement and security bodies, but Skillicorn suspects agencies like the U.S. National Security Agency have little need of his help. "I infer from things they say around me that some of this stuff they already do," he says.

Crap.

Re:Dumbest thing I've read all week...

[The FooMiester]

I especially liked the part about:

Another, Skillicorn says, is that research shows
people speak and write differently when they feel guilt about a
subject, for instance using fewer first-person pronouns, like I and we.


Because people always use first person pronouns in messages. That's just what's done. And alot of them should be used.

Sounds like a way to track messages with "substance" rather than the "hai h u r? heer are the pictures of my vacation." messages.

Think about that. This man has just come up with a way to measure the relative interest of what the sender has to say to people in the government.

Yet another way to cut down on the messages that the government has to read and be bored with. Yet another way to enable the government to read out communications more effectively

Yet another reason to look into using real encryption.

Re:Dumbest thing I've read all week...

[Otter]

If I understand correctly, what he's done is this:

1) Devised a theory

2) Tested it on a sample set of emails from Enron

3) Gotten poor results

4) Blamed the failure on Enron, for being just *too* evil for his theory to work!

Yawn. Maybe he should save the press release until he's gotten something to work.

Agreed

[MarkusQ]

This line in the lead jumped out at me:

like several people e-mailing one person but not each other, which is how some criminal networks operate.

We have an addresses "techsupport@internaldomain" which matches this pattern to a T.

--MarkusQ

P.S. Back when we were on MS-Windows, it would have been OK, because the people asking for TechSupport were often sending each other worms at the same time.

Re:Agreed

[ebuck]

Worse yet, people will be watched and harrased by this technology, but never brought to court over it.

In a court, you can question the evidence used against you. Considering that the creator of this evidence indicated that he didn't need to know how it works, it's highly likely that you could get this evidence thrown out because it fails the test of provablility.

So this technology will "flag" people, and they will be watched "just in case". However, there's not going to be a court case, just continued monitoring until the budget to watch this person dries up. And it's very easy to get a bigger budget because you can argue, "We are watching 400,000 people who have been flagged as possible terrorists, we can't keep up. We need more money." Even when your flagging system has worse odds of finding a terrorist than the Lottery.

Word bombs....

[Invalid Character]

Bomd, jihad, kidnap, extort, terrorize, kill, godless, constitution.

That should keep me safe for a few days.

Oh dear

[Anonymous Coward]

Dr Skillicorn has obviously never done any work with or for a law enforcement or intelligence agency. After spending three years in this area working on data mining of electronic communication, I can say this fella has not done his research properly. He has failed to note that the frequency of grammatical and spelling mistakes, let alone "missing" words, have become so frequent now in the SMS TXT generation that this will cause a major problem when scanning messages on this scale. I really can't be bothered to pick any more holes in this because it is time for a bacon and ketchup sandwich.

Re:Big Brother right here

[Adult film producer]

I dont think so. Strongly enforced u.s. export controls have kept the Al Queada from gaining access to militant grade encryption tools.

Government sucks.

[Fantastic Lad]

"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws."

-Tacitus

Government is already too invasive. I'm already forced to seek a building permit before I can erect a structure on my own property. The fines for ignoring this, (and say, having the gall to build a solar powered house which is not connected to the AC power grid, or (horrors!) a straw-bale house), are huge and the government's reasons for these laws are utterly ridiculous.

Any professor who suggests that we should be looking to monitor email content is not thinking clearly. The Government already has their nose in everything, and telling us that, "It's For Our Own Good," is NOT a valid excuse.

It's MUCH more important that people be able to make mistakes -and even die through their own faults- than live ensnared in the safe-keeping of a bunch of ignorant civil servants who are trying to build a Starfleet future where everybody dresses the same, and nobody is allowed to think or act outside a bunch of pre-set 'safe' boundaries designed for middle-class suburbanites who exist in eternal ignorance of the real world, who actually believe in the Discovery Channel, who drink milk, and live in absolute terror of anything you can't experience beyond the confines of a nice, respectable department store.

-FL

letter from college home

[e**(i pi)-1]

Letter from College:

Hi Mom,

I blew it and bombed the final exam. The physics
prof put the gun on my head and told me to work harder.
I could kill him. I feel like having a knife
at my throat. The anger feels like poison in my
blood but I know it is my fault and the all is
blamed to that virus, I had been laboring with
for quite a while. I'm working on it mom! I promise
to make you proud. I can not wait to be on the subway
home to work on my final project on weapons of
mass destruction in my political science class. Its
mental terror.

Love
Your son

P.S. The powder you sent me works well for my
skin infection. Strong agent.