Slashdot Mirror
DHS Passenger Scoring Almost Certainly Illegal
Vicissidude writes "At the National Targeting Center, the Automated Targeting System program harvests up to 50 fields of passenger data from international flights, including names, e-mail addresses and phone numbers, and uses watchlists, criminal databases and other government systems to assign risk scores to every passenger. When passengers deplane, Customs and Border Protection personnel then target the high scorers for extra screening. Data and the scores can be kept for 40 years, shared widely, and be used in hiring decisions. Travelers may neither see nor contest their scores. The ATS program appears to fly in the face of legal requirements Congress has placed in the Homeland Security appropriations bills for the last three years." From the article: "Marc Rotenberg, the director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said he was unaware of the language but that it clearly applies to the Automated Targeting System, not just Secure Flight, the delayed successor to CAPPS II. 'Bingo, that's it -- the program is unlawful,' Rotenberg said. 'I think 514(e) stands apart logically (from the other provisions) and 514 says the restrictions apply to any 'other follow-on or successor passenger prescreening program'. It would be very hard to argue that ATS as applied to travelers is not of the kind contemplated (by the lawmakers).'"
Until they start sending people with a score that is too high to secret prisons without the right to know why they are being charged or the evidence that is being used to convict them. All of this crap is getting way out of control.
GENERATION 27: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
if you use a fake boarding pass :-)
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
Where is it that you guys are getting the idea that the rule of law applies to this administration? That wouldn't be in their interests at all. And since they're in charge of enforcing the laws they break...
And if you think that Congress, aside from a couple of freaks like Feingold and Leahy, are going to do anything about this at all... well, I hope you're right, but I'd bet against it.
PS: I like those freaks. I wish they weren't the exception.
Meet the new congress ... same as the old congress.
The last part of your complaint really puts things in perspective, doesn't it? I could have voted for a republican candidate if he had been willing to shrink the powers of our government. I could have voted for a democrat who was willing to do that. Sadly, I've never seen a serious candidate for national office (except Ron Paul) who could plausibly claim that he was willing to reduce federal power in any practical way.
I hope that over the next two years, we will all learn that, just as voting republican in 2000 didn't solve our problems with government, voting democrat in 2006 and 2008 won't either. I wish that we had a viable alternative, but I'm afraid that we won't see one until after we all see that we need one.
See what I've been reading.
From the article:
Paul Rosenzweig, a high-level Homeland Security official, told Congress in September that the system had "encountered 4801 positive matches for known or suspected terrorists." However, it is unclear how many of those were correct matches.
No, it's very clear. Zero. Zilch, none, nada. If there were any correct matches, they would trot them out and use them to demonstrate the "success" of the program.
I think some sort of new check and balance needs to be put in place against the executive branch. We're supposed to have the Congress and the Supreme Court to protect us from potential abuses, but they haven't obviously served us very well in the past 6 years...
What we need, I'm not sure. But we need something.
-B
Ash and Hickory, straight-grained and true, make excellent bludgeons, dandy for the cudgeling of vegetarians.
I haven't set foot in an airport since this insanity began, and I refuse to do so until this insanity ends.
Traveling by bus, train, or car is not as fast or comfortable, but at least you can do it with some of your privacy intact.
Just say no.
>
>For Hiring?
> Is it publicly available or is it only available to the government?
It's a government database, much like the databases that hold criminal records, etc. Access to it is sold to data brokers such as Choicepoint.
When Company X wants to hire you, they ask Choicepoint if you're "a good risk".
Choicepoint crunches the numbers by means of a proprietary formula, one of the ingredients of which your credit rating (for sale by other data brokers), another of which is your criminal record and/or arrest history (for sale by other arms of the government), and another of which is now your Terrorist Score.
Neither you (nor Company X!) ever finds out what your Terrorist Score is. Company X takes a look at Choicepoint's evaluation and combines it, with your resume, and how well you did on the job interview, and whatever else it wants... and decides whether or not to hire you.
So if your Terrorist Score is too high, you might not get the job, because Choicepoint or the other background-checking firms have decided that it's important enough to make you a risk... or maybe not. You'll never know. That's both a feature (everyone has plausible deniability, so nobody can get sued), and a bug (you may be denied a job because of a bogus data point in your Terrorist Score, just as you can be denied a job due to bogus data on your credit history -- but you can at least fix the errors in your credit history.)
Now that that's out of the way, can we stop calling it a Terrorist Score? If I keep using that term, your score goes up. Probably the only way to fix a bad Terrorist Score is to start calling it a Freedom Score. At the rate I'm going, I'm gonna have to donate at least $1000 to both the RNC and the DNC before I can get hired again, let alone fly anywhere.
The one bright spot to all of this is that starting next year, you'll be able to log into www.FreeTerrorReport.com and get a free copy of your score from all three of the main terror bureaus.
We're going down, in a spiral to the ground
Although similar this is not a dupe. The previous article announced the program. This article espouses the opinions of the EFF, specifically Mark Rotenberg.
It's things like this that I like about slashdot. Posting multiple articles from different sources about the same subject allows for both a healthy debate by us and tends to provide more then one side to a story. Instead of just getting the bias of one publication we get to see the subtle shades of bias and decide for ourselves who makes sense, who we want to agree with or believe.
Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
Next thing you know, he'll have NASA purposely direct meteors at America so he can show how prepared for any disaster he is. Enormous clouds of dust will rise up out of the craters of midwest cities and George Bush will be flying over head in a helicopter touting his emergency preparedness plan and at the same time having congress sign over more power to him. He'll have congress give him an emergency 3rd term so that he can save America.
I'm seriously done with the hype and the fear that controls this country. Ever since 9/11 our country has not rested in the fight against terrorism. That means, that we are fighting the fear of terror. So, we are afraid. We're afraid of the terrorists. The terrorists don't have to do one damned thing ever again and we'll remain afraid as long as we're fighting this war. What do the terrorists want? They want us to be afraid. Fear will keep us from doing anything. Fear is an inhibitor. As long as this country remains afraid then it will not accomplish anything great.
Why were the Feds so slow to respond to the pain and suffering in New Orleans? Because we were paralyzed with fear. Why have gas prices gone through the roof? Because we're fear has robbed us of our ability to react. I am not afraid of the next disaster that will strike this country because there is a new one each day. Friends are dying in Iraq, friends died in New Orleans, and friends will be dying close to home as long as we live in fear.
George Bush... give me my country back you bastard! I'm not afraid of you, of Osama bin Laden, IEDs, cancer, hurricanes, snow flakes, bunny rabbits, muslims, christians, Hummers, or anything elses for that matter. You have taught me what fear is and fear is evil! I will not be afraid. I will act. I will do what I have to do as a human, as an American and as a fighter. I AM NOT AFRAID AND I WILL NOT BE CONTROLLED BY FEAR!!!!!
"No one will really be free until nerd persecution ends."
Yes, but how many of the Oklahoma City terrorists were Muslims? How many of the abortion clinic bombing terrorists were Muslims? How many of the Columbine terrorists were Muslims?
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
The link in the Wired New story is broken -- Regulations.gov doesn't use static URL's for individual documents.
l er-is-a-target/
The Identity Project comments, including as an appendix the text of the relevant law, are at:
http://hasbrouck.org/IDP/IDP-ATS-comments.pdf
Those comments also expain how the "Automated Targeting System" would include information on domestic flights and travelers, in addition to international travel records.
There's more background on my blog, and the Identity Project blog:
http://hasbrouck.org/blog/archives/001184.html
http://papersplease.org/wp/2006/12/05/every-trave
Dripping sarcasm notwithstanding, there's a fundamental point here. Can the intrusions in liberty be justified by reduced risk of hijackings or whatever? Or, perhaps, do they increase the risk? Some evidence would be apropos.
Suppose that the numbers above were true. The toll in deaths and ruined lives would still be lower than, say, the carnage on the highways. An orthogonal issue? I don't think so. Just think of what you could do with the billions of dollars wasted on building the police state. Highway safety is not even the most effective use to which these dollars could be put, but its orders of magnitude better than whatever DHS does with it.
But don't let my digression distract you from the fundamental point: there is not one iota of evidence that wiretaps, no-fly lists, torture, profiling, etc. make us safer. There is plenty of evidence that they directly diminish our quality of life, and indirectly divert our resources from more worthy pursuits.
We don't need a word for entering and leaving different kinds of vehicles. "Disembark" should cover all forms of mass transit - ships, planes, trains, buses. We don't have words like "deship", "detrain" or "debus", so why must we have such nonsense as "deplane"?
Deplane sounds like what I do to a piece of paper when I make it into a ball and throw it in the rubbish, or deform any other planar surface so it is no longer a plane.
Or, as the parent poster suggested, it sounds like we are being cleansed of an infestation of tiny parasitic planes. Deice - remove ice, degauss - remove gauss, delouse - remove lice, deplane - remove planes. Makes more sense to me.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke
Somehow I find that rather scary.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke
But wouldn't it make more sense to give those high scorers extra screening before they got on the plane?
I know you're trolling, but taxes do no concern me nearly as much as government spending. Taxes are a matter of when you pay, spending is how much you pay. Compare republican vs democrat spending.
HIV Crosses Species Barrier... into Muppets