Slashdot Mirror


Cost of Secrecy Continues to Increase

xerid writes "The Associated Press is running an article about the increasing costs of government secrecy. The information stems from a report (PDF Warning) posted at OpenTheGovernment.org. From the article: 'The government is withholding more information than ever from the public and expanding ways of shrouding data. Last year, federal agencies spent a record $148 creating and storing new secrets for each $1 spent declassifying old secrets, a coalition of watchdog groups reported Saturday. That's a $28 jump from 2003 when $120 was spent to keep secrets for every $1 spent revealing them.'"

14 of 213 comments (clear)

  1. Increased cost by BWJones · · Score: 5, Interesting

    OK, here is the deal. Keeping secrets is simple for one reason: You have to fact check each new bit of classified information with a whole database of older information in order to decide whether or not something has bearing. It is often easier to simply start classifying everything that *might* have some bearing on national security than it is to actually go looking all of the time. So, what we are left with is an increasingly chaotic and poorly indexed "database" of national security "secrets" that are costing the taxpayer more and more to maintain and data mine. The problem of over exuberance with classification of documents is simply that costs of declassification to preserve history start spiraling out of control.

    The thing that absolutely amazed me has been investigating my Grandfathers history. Many of his records going back to WWII are still classified and it was only a few years ago that he had certain medals delivered to his family after the declassification of other records. Of course it is likely that they do not have any real bearing on todays issues, and nobody likely checks them anymore against new issues, but the amount of history that is being kept away from American citizens is stunning. I am not saying that declassification is easy. Quite the contrary, it takes skilled analysis to sit down and go through documents line by line and word for word while retaining a comprehensive knowledge of current and past events that may or may not have bearing on the request.

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    1. Re:Increased cost by sd_diamond · · Score: 2, Interesting

      OK, here is the deal. Keeping secrets is simple for one reason: You have to fact check each new bit of classified information with a whole database of older information in order to decide whether or not something has bearing. It is often easier to simply start classifying everything that *might* have some bearing on national security than it is to actually go looking all of the time.

      Actually, it's more accurate to say that it seems easier. You're right that this perception is what often drives over-enthusiastic security classification of data, but the truth is that those doing it don't consider all of the peripheral costs associated with their decision. Dealing with classified data and classified projects is not only a pain in the ass, but is much more expensive than working in an unclassified domain. Only people with an appropriate clearance level can even look at the data, and that means costly and time-consuming investigations and Clearance paperwork if you want to bring on new hires. All hardcopies must be stored in a safe or vault approved for Classified data, and maintained by people trained and qualified to manage it. Classified electronic data can only be stored on computers specially modified and approved for Classified -- and those computers can only be kept in Classified vaults. Not to mention the fact that all communications and correspondence containing Classified information must travel through appropriately secured channels. The list goes on...

    2. Re:Increased cost by computechnica · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The AWACS(AOCP)code I work on is stored on a classified mainframe. Not all of it has anything classified in it but because it is on the mainframe with classified code it will never be released in any way. We still have a couple of old green screen terminals but mostly use PCs with terminal emulators.

  2. Re:selling secrets by SilverspurG · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In the pdf is a graph of year vs. number of declassified and classified pages. The Clinton years are the only years since 1980 where more pages were declassified than new pages classified.

    The correlation is so strong that it makes me think there's a lot more that we should be able to learn from that graph. Perhaps there are correlations between businesses owned primarily by Repubs vs. businesses owned primarily by Dems. Perhaps there are correlations with watchdog groups which try to keep the government in line. Perhaps there are correlations with specific lobbying groups and law enforcement agencies.

    There's also a graph on secrecy orders issued vs. secrecy orders rescinded with respect to patents. Apparently this was a much more popular maneuver in the late 80s than it is today. It makes me wonder if that system may have become stagnant and no longer serves the purpose which it was created for.

    I like graphs.

    --
    fast as fast can be. you'll never catch me.
  3. I need to know, I have a right to know! by Robbyboy · · Score: 4, Interesting
    As I read this article and associated links it really peeves me that someone would spend this much time to actually research this data. The three levels of classification are put into place for a reason, TO PROTECT NATIONAL INTERESTS. Naysayers and conspiracy theorists will disagree which is their right as will the reporters that say its their right to know.

    Lets take the example that was listed in one of the links and see what the big deal is. The USMC came across some bad body armor. Some state its the result of using the bottom bidder. Others state that people need to know this. Both sides have valid points, but now consider this: Our enemies get a hold of just exactly how that body armor is flawed and use that against our men and women deployed. You can use your imagination from there. If it is classified, it is usually done for a reason that people who apply that classification know about. If they justified every application of a classification, why have secrets at all.

    Maybe I will have others disagree with me. Fine, my response is not all inclusive just something to chew on.

    1. Re:I need to know, I have a right to know! by McGiraf · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Our enemies get a hold of just exactly how that body armor is flawed and use that against our men and women deployed. You can use your imagination from there.

      Ok, I imagine that security through obscurity doesn't work.

      They should have fixed it, not try to hide it has a flaw. Someone will find out anyway how they are flawed and use this info against soldiers who have been kept in the dark on how to mitigate the risks.

      Bad exemple ...

  4. How the Govt can reduce the cost by Alain+Williams · · Score: 1, Interesting
    Take note of the recent decision in Massachusetts that MS Word format documents may not be readable in the future. Realise that if everyone stays running on MS Windows 95 and ancient versions of MS Word, that there are no upgrade fees due.

    Put the two together: You don't pay for the old/bought software and no one can read the file formats that it produced ... perfect, cheap secrecy.

  5. The real question by Eminence · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The real question is whether they have more to hide or whether it's just the good old Parkinson's Law at work. I think it's the later, seriously.

    Possibly the whole state bureaucracy, whole state machine is just like a Windows installation. It degrades over time and at some point you have to re-install from scratch.

  6. Re:Maybe we shouldn't have impeached clinton? by tsotha · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I hope people will wake up and realize not every 60-year-problem is Bush's fault.

    If you ever work with classified data you'll realize it's almost impossible to get something declassified, since nobody wants to be the one who releases data that turns out to help an enemy launch the next Pearl Harbor or 9/11 attack. When you're a civil servant, the key to advancing is to not do anything that hurts your career, as opposed to businessmen (and to some extent, military) who advance their careers by doing something.

    Also, not classifying sensitive data is a career-ending mistake, while over-classifying unimportant data is, well, nothing that will ever get you into trouble. Who's gonna know? So when in doubt you always err on the side of extra security.

    Sometime in the '80s they made a change to the rules where if you classified something you had to put a date upon which the item becomes declassified automatically. Unfortunately, there's warehouses full of classified data dating back to the second world war (think Raiders of the Lost Ark here) that nobody has the time to look at, so it will never be declassified.

    I suspect most of the old stuff will eventually be destroyed for lack of money, which is a shame from the historical perspective.

  7. End of cold war by geekee · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "In the pdf is a graph of year vs. number of declassified and classified pages. The Clinton years are the only years since 1980 where more pages were declassified than new pages classified."

    I think there's a strong correlation to the end of the cold war and the lack of understanding of the magnitude of terrorist threats with the trend you've noticed.

    --
    Vote for Pedro
  8. Is Sweden still an "Open Gov't" Kingdom? by ivi · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Is Sweden still as open as it was in the 80's?

      Some years ago, I read (in official info, received from the Swedish Institute) that
      almost EVERYTHING produced by a Swedish gov't dep't, authority, etc. is freely
      available for public access.

      http://www.si.se/templates/StartPage.aspx?id=3

      If that link has died/changed, pick your language at the top of the site at:

            http://www.si.se/

      There used to be an SI Fact Sheet (or 3) on all of this, but I couldn't find it
      after 8 minutes at SI's web site...

      (Perhaps Sep 11th has changed Sweden's openness? 'hope not...)

      Surprisingly enough, openness applied even to such sacred cows (in other lands)
      as [most of] the Prime Minister's mail & [most] individual's tax records (useful,
      after all, to family-tree researchers).

      While living/working in the Kingdom of Sweden over 5 chilly "winters," I tested the latter
      claim... walking into the local tax office (Lokallaskattemindigheten, from memory...)
      and - in English - asked to use the Office's "public computer terminal" - still speaking
      English.

      In about 5 minutes, whoever was using a computer terminal finished and I was escorted
      inside, to a place with 2 or 3 computer terminals. A "Public (ie, limited / read-only)
      Access" card was sweeped-in, for my terminal, and I was given practically unlimited access
      (in time spent at the computer terminal).

      Of course, I had to know enough Swedish to be able to understand the prompts & commands
      needed to get to some sample data records, by my own & some few friends' and colleagues'
      data.

      I understand that only the names of children born out of wedlock would have been hidden
      from me; also, data may be hidden at certain points in the processing cycle (eg, before
      it is verified as accurate?)

      The only cost became payable only if I had wanted to print out some of the date I found
      (rather than copy into my notes, by hand).

      (I wonder if - today - one could use digital cameras to photograph data while displayed
      on screens, or - better - whether USB-disks can be used to gether much more information
      in a more convenient & useful manner...? Does anyone know?)

      The openness was said to go far beyond the example mentioned above...

      Any publicly-funded report was to be freely available - on request - at various depart-
      mental libraries.

      Even corporate libraries could be pursuaded to loan some of their materials (via Inter-
      Library Loan arrangements) to individual borrowers, in the community.

      The idea was, I understand, that an informed public was a basic tenet of [Social] Democracy.

      I didn't happen to stumble on any reports on the costs of supplying such information, or
      of not providing it.

      Has anyone got up-to-date info on how it is in Sweden today?

      ( cf: http://www.sweden.se/ for gen'l info )

    1. Re:Is Sweden still an "Open Gov't" Kingdom? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yep, in Sweden (and in Finland, probably also other socialist Scandinavian countries) accountability to anyone is considered much more important aspect of democracy and freedom than here in US.

      In Scandinavia people except wide rights to review government and other public institutions in action and this is provided by legislation, so yes, you are free to access practically everything but truly sensitive documents such details of military bases (the list of things government is allowed to classify is limited).

      Not surprisingly, these countries top as the least corrupted societies in the world, while US ranks behind many developed nations.
      http://www.transparency.org/cpi/2004/cpi2004.en.ht ml#cpi2004

      Also Central European countries such France implement strong constitutional Freedom of Information rights (comparing to US), but Scandinavian countries have always shown the way to world.

      Erhm, btw, what the heck is this... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13233

    2. Re:Is Sweden still an "Open Gov't" Kingdom? by swiftstream · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I lived in Sweden last year, and while I didn't personally try to test how transparent the scoiety is, it is much more open than the US. There was a case not long ago where an archbishop or something was forced to release personal communications with the subordinate bishops in the area (I'm not too clear on the details, but Sweden has a state church, so archbishop is a government position). There was also a case where a high-level minister (government, not church) was forced to resign after the press learned that she had bought herself a candy bar on her government credit card. So yes, Sweden takes transparency and very seriously and they aren't afraid to boot somebody who doesn't live up the standards out of office.

      It causes constant problems in relations between the US and Sweden, because Sweden wants the US to tell them things which may be sensitive or classified, but the US is afraid that if they do tell them then by Swedish law they would become publically available.

      --
      Be a PATRIOT--because the only thing we have to fear is the lack thereof.
  9. Re:why we classify by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 2, Interesting
    What seems to be misunderstood is the reason why information is classified. Information is protected because of the sensitivity of the source that provides that information, whether is be HUMINT, satelite, etc. In many cases, our source of information with regard to our enemies is dependent on no more than one solid source. If that source is lost, or the knowledge of the capability is revealed to others, our intelligence would be compromised.

    So if we don't protect the black-ops, we might find out exactly how and where they're screwing everybody and be able to do something stop it.

    Gee. That'd be just horrible.

    The stage-production of 'neighboring warring nations' which need to spy on one another is just that; a stage production created so that people can offer up over-simple rationalizations for continued secrecy and fear-based social controls.


    -FL