By
Declan McCullagh
January 6, 2003, 10:58 AM PT
WASHINGTON--The biggest problem with criticism of
Adm. John Poindexter's massive spy proposal is not in the argument over
the system being so darn creepy.
Of course it's creepy.
This new federal agency deliberately chose the motto "knowledge is
power," crafted a logo certain to inspire conspiracy theories, and is
itching to assemble a detailed computerized dossier on every American.
And that a figure such as Poindexter--disgraced in the Iran-Contra
scandal and with a database addiction dating back to at least 1987--is
running the show is a detail worthy of a Jonathan Swift satire.
No, the biggest problem
with the criticism of the Total Information Awareness system is that
it's too shortsighted. It's focused on what the Poindexters of the world
can do with current database and information-mining technology. That
includes weaving together strands of data from various sources--such as
travel, credit card, bank, electronic toll and driver's license
databases--with the stated purpose of identifying terrorists before they
strike. But what could Poindexter and the Bush administration devise in
five or 10 years, if they had the money, the power and the will?
That's the real question,
and therein lies the true threat. Even if all of our current elected
representatives, appointed officials and unappointed bureaucrats are
entirely trustworthy--and that's a pretty big assumption--what could a
corrupt FBI, Secret Service or Homeland Security police force do with
advanced technology by the end of the decade? What if there was another
terrorist attack that prompted Congress to delete whatever remaining
privacy laws shield Americans from surveillance?
For a hint at what the
future might bring, it's worth reviewing some of the projects already
under way at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA),
which is the parent agency for Poindexter's Information Awareness
Office. Combine that information with the technology trends toward
smaller sensors, cheaper hardware and ubiquitous wireless networks, and
the possibilities are immensely disquieting. We could face the emergence
of unblinking electronic eyes that record where we are and what we do,
whenever we interact.
|
Poindexter's office has an entire project area called Human ID at a
Distance that's spending millions on researching biometric
technologies, including face recognition and "gait performance"
detection. |
Imagine a world where
every street corner is dotted with disposable microcameras, equipped
with face-recognition software that identifies pedestrians and
constantly updates their individual files with up-to-the-minute location
information. (Wearing masks won't help: Many states already have
antimask laws, and the rest would follow suit if masks became
sufficiently popular.) The microcameras are linked through a network
modeled on existing 802.11 wireless technology. The wireless mesh also
includes cameras devoted to spotting and recording license plates and a
third type that identifies people by the way they walk.
It's not that far from
reality. Poindexter's office has an entire project area called
Human ID at a Distance that's spending millions on researching
biometric technologies, including face recognition and "gait
performance" detection. Facecams already are in use in airports, city
centers and casinos. And license plate recognition, by comparison, is a
snap.
Or how about locations out
of the range of this fixed surveillance mesh? In 1998, DARPA began
funding a project to create spybots that can fly day and night and that
use infrared and video sensors. These spybots, being designed by
Lockheed Martin and code-named
MicroStar, will have a six-inch wingspan, weigh only 86 grams and
cost about $10,000--an affordable price point for surveilling Americans
from above.
And what of the spybots'
larger cousins, capable of hovering higher and seeing more for a longer
duration? Last week The Washington Post
reported that the federal government may permit unmanned aircraft to
fly above the United States. "I believe that the potential applications
for this technology in the area of homeland defense are quite
compelling," said Sen. John Warner, R-Va., chairman of the Senate Armed
Services committee, who added that the drones could be used by domestic
police agencies.
Location tracking
GPS devices that record a vehicle's position and transmit it to police
are an exciting growth area for the eavesdrop establishment. Jim Bell,
an Internet essayist convicted of stalking federal agents, said before
his arrest that he was sure the federal agencies were tailing him
electronically. During Bell's trial, it emerged that he was right: The
police arm of the IRS was
tracking him on their laptops with a legally implanted GPS bug
inside Bell's Nissan Maxima.
Last week, The Associated
Press reported that an Oregon state task force wants a law requiring all
cars to sport GPS receivers and recorders. The stated purpose: To
measure how far you drive and calculate how much you owe in road taxes.
The Nov. 15, 2002
report from the task force envisions some privacy protections--but
those could be eliminated if homeland security worries become more
acute, possibly leaving all Oregonians tracked whenever they're on the
road.
Criminals already may be
finding less desirable uses for GPS trackers. Last week, the Smoking Gun
Web archive of documents owned by Court TV
posted a criminal complaint against a 42-year-old Wisconsin man
accused of stalking an ex-girlfriend using a GPS bug hidden in her car.
"We continue to see
problems with stalkers (using databases)," says
Peter Wayner, author of Translucent Databases. "I think there are
many more sleazeballs who will use this stuff than there are cops who
will use it to catch people. It's a lot easier to abuse this technology
than to use it successfully."
|
Some of
your congressional representatives may soon be asked why there has
never been even one hearing investigating DARPA, Poindexter and his
Total Information Awareness plans. |
Then there's Applied
Digital Systems (ADS)
of Palm Beach, Fla., which
received FDA approval last fall for a microchip to be implanted in
humans for tracking and identification purposes. (Company spokesman
Matthew Cossolotto told me in June 2001 that ADS had no such plans. "We
are not now developing, nor do we have any plans to develop, anything
other than an external, wearable device," he said in an e-mail message.)
It's difficult to imagine
a more ruthlessly effective way to track every American. I doubt it's
likely, but it's possible to imagine a future where "getting chipped"
starts as a way to speed your way through lines at ATMs and
airports--and ends up being mandatory.
There's some precedent. In
October, police in one Colorado county
started pressuring businesses to require fingerprints when customers
make purchases with checks or credit cards. Police in Arlington, Texas,
are
asking businesses to participate in a similar program.
Things get stranger still.
The Electronic Privacy Information Center used the Freedom of
Information Act in August 2002 to obtain
government documents that talked about reading air travelers' minds
and identifying suspicious thoughts. The NASA briefing materials
referred to "non-invasive neuro-electric sensors" to be used in aviation
security.
In a bizarre press
release, NASA claimed it has not approved any research in the area of
"mind reading" and that "because of the sensitivity of such research,"
the agency will seek independent review of future projects. Yikes.
There are some bright
areas in this generally dismal outlook.
Avi Rubin, an associate professor of computer science at Johns
Hopkins University, predicts growing interest in antisurveillance
measures. "I expect there will be a whole industry popping up in
counter-surveillance--at least, I hope," Rubin said. "Nowadays, it's not
like someone drops a camera and comes back and retrieves the data. You
attack the transmission."
Short of fleeing to the
wilderness or living our lives entirely online, our only option is to
fight the Poindexterization of modern life before it becomes too late.
Congress returns this week. Some of your congressional representatives
may soon be
asked why there has never been even one hearing investigating DARPA,
Poindexter and his Total Information Awareness plans.