Communications

The Total Information Awareness Project Lives On

(Page 2 of 3)

  • Wednesday, April 26, 2006
  • By Mark Williams

But when senators asked why, given the fact that FISA had provisions by which government agents could wiretap first and seek warrants later, the Bush administration had sidestepped its requirements at all, Gonzalez claimed he couldn't elaborate for reasons of national security.

Former NASA director General Michael Hayden, in charge when the NSA's surveillance program was initiated in 2002, was slightly more forthcoming. FISA wasn't applicable in certain cases, he told the senators, because the NSA's surveillance relied on what he called a "subtly softer trigger" before full-scale eavesdropping began. Hayden, who is nowadays the nation's second-highest ranking intelligence official, as deputy director of national intelligence, said he could answer further questions only in closed session.

Gonzalez's testimony that the government is making increased use of FISA, together with his refusal to explain why it's inapplicable in some cases -- even though retroactive warrants can be issued -- implies that the issue isn't simply that government agents may sometimes want to act quickly. FISA rules demand that old-fashioned "probable cause" be shown before the FISA court issues warrants for electronic surveillance of a specific individual. Probable cause would be inapplicable if NSA were engaged in the automated analysis and data mining of telephone and e-mail communications in order to target possible terrorism suspects.

As the Electronic Frontier Foundation's lawsuit against AT&T reveals, NSA has access to the switches and records of most or all of the nation's leading telecommunications companies. These companies' resources are extensive: AT&T's data center in Kansas, for instance, contains electronic records of 1.92 trillion telephone calls over several decades. Moreover, the majority of international telecommunications nowadays no longer travel by satellite, but by undersea fiber-optic cables, so many carriers route international calls through their domestic U.S. switches.

With the telecom companies' compliance, the NSA can today tap into those international communications far more easily than in the past, and in real time (or close to it). With access to much of the world's telecom traffic, the NSA's supercomputers can digitally vacuum up every call placed on a network and apply an arsenal of data-mining tools. Traffic analysis, together with social network theory, can reveal patterns indiscernible to human analysts, possibly suggesting terrorist activity. Content filtering, applying highly sophisticated search algorithms and powerful statistical methods like Bayesian analysis in tandem with machine learning, can search for particular words or language combinations that may indicate terrorist communications.

Whether the specific technologies developed under TIA and acquired by ARDA have actually been used in the NSA's domestic surveillance programs -- rather than only for intelligence gathering overseas -- has not been proved. Still, descriptions of the two former TIA programs that became Topsail and Basketball mirror descriptions of ARDA and NSA technologies for analyzing vast streams of telephone and e-mail communications. Furthermore, one project manager active in the TIA program before it was terminated has gone on record to the effect that, while TIA was still funded, its researchers communicated regularly and maintained "good coordination" with their ARDA counterparts.

It's this latter fact that is most to the point. Whether or not those specific TIA technologies were deployed for domestic U.S. surveillance, technologies very much like them were. In 2002, for instance, ARDA awarded $64 million in research contracts for a new program called Novel Intelligence from Massive Data. Furthermore, overall, a 2004 survey by the U.S. General Accounting Office, an investigative arm of Congress, found federal agencies operating or developing 199 data mining projects, with more than 120 programs designed to collect and analyze large amounts of personal data on individuals to predict their behavior. Since the accounting office excluded most of the classified projects, the actual numbers would likely have been far higher.

Print

Related Articles

Behind the Big Apple's Data Dump

NYC releases a wealth of data--but with a positive spin.

Close Comments

To comment, please sign in or register

Forgot my password

Guest (bill)

  • 2121 Days Ago
  • 04/26/2006

TIA

Time to fire up the old PGP.

Reply

Guest (Sam)

  • 2121 Days Ago
  • 04/26/2006

PGP

What is PGP?

Reply

Guest (sid)

  • 2121 Days Ago
  • 04/26/2006

tia

encryption; google "pgp"

Reply

Guest (Tom)

  • 2121 Days Ago
  • 04/26/2006

PGP

It may hide the content but the NSA will still know who's talking to who.

Reply

Guest (quercetin)

  • 2118 Days Ago
  • 04/29/2006

PGP / TOR

TOR.  From the same Navy that John Poindexter was an admiral in.  TOR is to traffic analysis as PGP is to message content.  Google 6,266,704 and feel lucky.

Reply

Guest (P1)

  • 2121 Days Ago
  • 04/26/2006

PGP

The more who encrypt, the more unweildy TIA will become

Reply

Guest (Vic Anderson)

  • 2117 Days Ago
  • 04/30/2006

Orwellian TIA

Stop Big Brother NOW!

Reply

Advertisement

Guest (Vladimir)

  • 2116 Days Ago
  • 05/01/2006

TIA

Is not more new and mere weared informatic idea?

Reply

Guest (pud)

  • 2114 Days Ago
  • 05/03/2006

TIA

Yes and no. Increasing the ability to exchange greater amounts of information over a wider area should definately be considered improvement; but if an individual is stripped of the ability to choose who he wants to share that information with, a freer exchange of information can be invasive, and threatening.

Reply

Guest (owennmtz)

  • 2042 Days Ago
  • 07/14/2006

Confidential but threatening information

How can we identify and extract only threatening information, and leave the rest secret?  How can we professionalize the persons handling that information?  Threatening information about any person or entity should be available only to profesionalized persons following lawful regulations, employed by lawful entities responsible for protecting the community.

Reply

Guest (Dale)

  • 2042 Days Ago
  • 07/14/2006

Threatening Informatoin?

Seems like we are protecting the repulic ( entrenched power holders) NOT the public. Of what value are individual rights when the power base is threatened? Where is the ACLU?

Reply

Guest (clan_enoch)

  • 2042 Days Ago
  • 07/14/2006

Where's the ACLU?

Thank goodness they weren't officed in the WTC or they wouldn't have known it was coming either!!!  They'd be dead.  Yea, who needs intelligence?  Clinton was right...burp!

Reply

forexmant

1 Comment

  • 758 Days Ago
  • 01/18/2010

Re: Where's the ACLU?

Thank Goodness they didn't have offices in WTC? One of the WTC buildings had an outpost for the CIA New York City office where the US corporate execs after foreign travel would be debriefed, etc. Administrative functions primarily. Do you think anyone would have just intentionally disregarded the information in order to observe what to the buildings can happen to see had the specific threat of that attack been caught in advance? If so then you are a scoundrel who projects his own ignorance upon others.

Reply

Advertisement

MAGAZINE

Can We Build Tomorrow's Breakthroughs?

Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.

Advertisement

Technology Review Lists

TR50

Our list of the 50 most innovative companies, including the following:

Lattice Power

First Solar

1366 Technologies

BIND Biosciences

More

Advertisement

Facebook

Advertisement