Committee concludes government ineffective at detecting terrorists

Let’s add another thing to President-elect Barack Obama’s to-do list: protect citizen privacy while effectively fighting terrorism.

Fred Cate, an IU law professor and director of the IU Center for Applied Cybersecurity Research, saw almost four years of work come to an end with the release of the much anticipated National Academy of Sciences and Department of Homeland Security report on the use of information-based programs by the government to fight terrorism.

The report, which Cate helped draft, was an evaluation of the government programs that collect personal data such as credit card transactions, travel records and Internet history and use the information as a means to detect or prevent terrorism.

Cate was responsible for drafting the framework for evaluating the effectiveness of the existing data-based counterterrorism programs.

“The goal was to really look at the science and technology of data mining and to figure out how well does it work for predicting terrorism or identifying terrorists,” Cate said, adding that issues raised in terms of privacy were also addressed.

Cate said that sometimes data, credit card transactions and travel records might be examined to determine whether someone is a terrorist or a terrorist attack is being planned. Cate said these methods are not supported by any science.

“Commercial data mining, for example, for fraud prevention and marketing, depends on observing millions or tens of millions of transactions to be able to recognize statistically relevant linkages or patterns,” Cate said. “Fortunately, we have very few patterns of terrorist behavior to work with, and terrorists, unlike most consumers, are working hard to mask their transactions, so the ‘promise’ of data mining as a counterterrorism tool seems unlikely to be realized.”

The report also evaluated, and deemed ineffective, another type of counterterrorism practice known as “behavioral surveillance.” This type of surveillance uses methods such as gait analysis, facial expression readings and remote surveillance of body temperature to detect for possible terrorists in airports and other public places.

Cate said he hopes the government will take the committee’s report and suggestions seriously.

There are more issues facing these programs other than the fact that science does not support the methods, such as concerns about the Fourth Amendment and privacy laws, Cate said.

“The Fourth Amendment has gotten really outdated,” Cate said. “Back in the 1970s the Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment didn’t apply to data unless you possessed it yourself, so the court said that if somebody else had it then it must not be private or else you wouldn’t have let someone else have it.”

In today’s terms, Cate said this means that all credit card, travel and phone information, along with everything put on the Internet, is not protected by the Fourth Amendment.

Peter Swire, the former privacy counselor to the Clinton administration, said he believes the committee’s report “is the best single document (he has) seen for how privacy issues should be addressed in the federal government going forward.”

The impact of this report has yet to be seen, but Cate said he thinks the Democratic Party, now united under Obama, will look at the committee’s recommendations and enact a new, more effective, counterterrorism program.