-Caveat Lector- <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/"> </A> -Cui Bono?- http://www.apbnews.com:80/newscenter/internetcrime/2000/04/07/netprivacy0407_01.html Too Many Cops on the Information Superhighway? Congress Weighs Privacy vs. Pursuit of Cybercrime April 7, 2000 By Amy Worden WASHINGTON (APBNews.com) -- Privacy rights advocates and legal experts Thursday told members of a congressional committee that the ever-widening scope of criminal investigations into computer crimes is jeopardizing the privacy rights of innocent people. Addressing members of a House judiciary subcommittee, the panelists warned that as law enforcement expands its efforts to capture computer hackers and others commit Internet crimes, untold amounts of data are being swept up in so-called cyber-raids. "As they vacuum in more information off the Internet, they manipulate it and store it, and, the fear is, abuse it," said Rep. Robert Barr, R-Ga. But a Justice Department official testified that investigators need the power to follow criminals through cyberspace, which has become a medium for con artists and data thieves along with legitimate businesses. Both sides agree that laws drawn up to deal with communication by letter and telephone need to be updated for the electronic age. 'Digital Storm' Barr, who plans to introduce legislation to better protect Internet privacy and regulate law enforcement's surveillance powers, said he has serious concerns about the growing ability of federal agencies to gather massive amounts of information from the Web. Among the more troubling initiatives, he said, are the Security and Exchange Commission's expanded data collection efforts and the FBI's proposed new information technology system. The FBI's $15 million system, dubbed "Digital Storm," would give analysts access to a network to conduct "data mining" on vast amounts of digital records to detect clues among millions of computer files now stored on unlinked FBI computers. The hearing was the first in what Barr said will be a series exploring ways to balance the needs of law enforcement to fight Internet crimes, while protecting Fourth Amendment rights against unlawful search and seizure. Laws becoming obsolete Barr said the existing privacy laws are fast becoming obsolete and fail to recognize the uniqueness of Internet communication, the vast expansion of the Web and the exponential growth of the number of users. Already, law enforcement has virtually unlimited power to seize computer-based records, some privacy advocates said. "Legally, it is easier for the government to snoop through a couple's private e-mails to one another than it is for the government to listen in on the very same conversations if they take place on the phone," said Gregory Nojeim, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union. "The distinction cannot be justified -- electronic conversations deserve the same level of protection as our telephone calls." Under existing privacy protection, law enforcement officials need only receive a court order for most computer searches, which are granted in nearly all cases, panelists said. In contrast, searches of an individual's home or business require a warrant. A haven for criminals? But Justice Department officials maintain that current statutes require the government be subjected to a higher burden of proof than is required under the Fourth Amendment. Still, Deputy Associate Attorney General Kevin DiGregory, who heads the Justice Department's cybercrime and intellectual property division, said broad authority to track targets online is vital to tracing the trail from perpetrator to victim in computer crimes. He said citizens' vulnerability for computer crimes is "astonishingly high," and that the government is working to protect privacy rights while trying to chase criminals through cyberspace. Computer trails "are the fingerprints of the 21st century," DiGregory said. "But they are harder to find and not as permanent." Internet snooping regulated He said investigators are instructed to handle online investigations with the same privacy standards as offline. DiGregory tried to reassure lawmakers that the FBI was not adopting any new procedures involving search and seizure cases. "The regulations that govern the physical world apply on the Internet," he said. The FBI has responded to concerns by forming a privacy council, headed by Patrick Kelly, the agency's deputy general counsel, to protect against unwarranted intrusions. The council will, among other things, create privacy rules for databases containing more than 10,000 documents. "It's not just about building audit trails," said FBI spokesman Paul Bresson. "It goes above and beyond, by forming a council to oversee all activity on the system to detect any misuse." Innocent interceptions skyrocket Some civil liberties groups say collection of data is outpacing the government's ability to ensure that only information belonging to targets of investigations is scrutinized. Citing statistics published by the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts, Nojeim said that the number of innocent exchanges recorded by government agents has skyrocketed. Between 1969 and 1973, more than half of the communications intercepted in law enforcement electronic surveillance were incriminating, compared to the four-year period ending in 1998 when only one-fifth of the communications intercepted were incriminating. "Each time a federal or state electronic surveillance intercept is installed, on average of 1,608 innocent conversations are intercepted," he added. James Dempsey, senior staff counsel for the Center for Democracy and Technology, said confusion exists because many standards apply to the same piece of information. A variety of standards "E-mail while in transit over the phone line is covered under one statute, while storage at an Internet service provider is subject to a different standard," he said. "After you open an e-mail and leave it on the server, it's protected by another standard, and when you print it out it's subject to a fourth standard." Dempsey said the existing standards are outdated and limited. "It's incumbent upon Congress to raise the legal standards for access to information," he said. Law enforcement officials say they need the ability to stay on par with criminals. "We want to put in place technology that exists today to catch up with the rest of the world," Bresson said. Sacrificing rights? But Barr told APBnews.com that just because computer criminals have access to certain technologies, it is not a reason for Americans to give up their constitutional rights. "Every time there's a gunfight, we hear calls for more arms simply because the bad guys have them and that we have to equip ourselves with something more lethal," he said. "Certainly we have to make sure government has what it needs to stop crime, but we can't blindly buy into the argument that we have to sacrifice privacy." Amy Worden is an APBnews.com staff writer in Washington ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). -- ----------------------- NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ----------------------- ________________________________________________________ 1stUp.com - Free the Web® Get your free Internet access at http://www.1stUp.com <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soap-boxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
