New York Times
http://www10.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/05/cyber/articles/27network.html
May 27, 1999
Lawmakers Raise Questions About International Spy Network
By NIALL McKAY
n international surveillance network established by the National Security
Agency and British intelligence services has come under scrutiny in recent
weeks, as lawmakers in the United States question whether the network, known
as Echelon, could be used to monitor American citizens.
Last week, the House Committee on Intelligence requested that the National
Security Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency provide a detailed
report to Congress explaining what legal standards they use to monitor the
conversations, transmissions and activities of American citizens.
The request is part of an amendment to the annual intelligence budget bill,
the Intelligence Reauthorization Act. It was proposed by Bob Barr, a Georgia
Republican and was supported by the chairman of the House Intelligence
Committee, Porter Goss, a Florida Republican. The amendment was passed by
the House on May 13 and will now go before the Senate.
Barr, a former CIA analyst, is part of a growing contingent in the United
States, Europe and Australia alarmed by the existence of Echelon, a computer
system that monitors millions of e-mail, fax, telex and phone messages sent
over satellite-based communications systems as well as terrestrial-based
data communications. The system was established under what is known as the
"UKUSA Agreement" after World War II and includes the security agencies of
the United States, Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
Although Echelon was originally set up as an international spy network,
lawmakers are concerned that it could be used to eavesdrop on American
citizens.
"I am concerned there are not sufficient legal mechanisms in place to
protect our private information from unauthorized government eavesdropping
through such mechanisms as Project Echelon," Barr said in an interview on
Tuesday.
The finished report will outline the legal bases and other criteria used by
United States intelligence agencies when assessing potential wiretap
targets. It will be submitted to the House and made available to the public.
"If the agencies feel unable to provide a full account to the public, then a
second classified report will be provided to the House Committee on
Intelligence," Barr said. "This is to stop the agencies hiding behind a
cloak of secrecy."
Judith Emmel, chief of public affairs for the NSA, declined to comment about
the UKUSA Agreement but said the agency was committed to responding to all
information requests covered by Barr's amendment. "The NSA's Office of
General Counsel works hard to ensure that all Agency activities are
conducted in accordance with the highest constitutional, legal and ethical
standards," she said.
Until last Sunday, no government or intelligence agency from the member
states had openly admitted to the existence of the UKUSA Agreement or
Echelon. However, on a television program broadcast on Sunday in Australia,
the director of Australia's Defence Signals Directorate acknowledged the
existence of the agreement. The official, Martin Brady, declined to be
interviewed for the "Sunday Program," but provided a statement for its
special on Echelon. "DSD does cooperate with counterpart signals
intelligence organizations overseas under the UKUSA relationship," the
statement said.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Related Articles
European Parliament Debates Wiretap Proposal
(May 7, 1999)
Dutch Law Goes Beyond Enabling Wiretapping to Make It a Requirement
(April 14, 1998)
European Study Paints a Chilling Portrait of Technology's Uses
(February 24, 1998)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Meanwhile, European Parliament officials have also expressed concern about
the use of Echelon to gather economic intelligence for participating
nations. Last October, the spying system came to the attention of the
Parliament during a debate on Europe's intelligence relationship with the
United States. At that time, the Parliament decided it needed more
information about Echelon and asked its Science and Technology Options
Assessment Panel to commission a report.
The report, entitled "Development of Surveillance Technology and Risk of
Abuse of Economic Information", was published on May 10 and provides a
detailed account of Echelon and other intelligence monitoring systems.
According to the report, Echelon is just one of the many code names for the
monitoring system, which consists of satellite interception stations in
participating countries. The stations collectively monitor millions of voice
and data messages each day. These messages are then scanned and checked
against certain key criteria held in a computer system called the
"Dictionary." In the case of voice communications, the criteria could
include a suspected criminal's telephone number; with respect to data
communications, the messages might be scanned for certain keywords, like
"bomb" or "drugs." The report also alleges that Echelon is capable of
monitoring terrestrial Internet traffic through interception nodes placed on
deep-sea communications cables.
While few dispute the necessity of a system like Echelon to apprehend
foreign spies, drug traffickers and terrorists, many are concerned that the
system could be abused to collect economic and political information.
"The recent revelations about China's spying activities in the U.S.
demonstrates that there is a clear need for electronic monitoring
capabilities," said Patrick Poole, a lecturer in government and economics at
Bannock Burn College in Franklin, Tenn., who compiled a report on Echelon
for the Free Congress Foundation. "But those capabilities can be abused for
political or economic purposes so we need to ensure that there is some sort
of legislative control over these systems."
On the "Sunday Program" special on Echelon, Mike Frost, a former employee of
Canada's Communications Security Establishment, said that Britain's
intelligence agency requested that the CSE monitor the communications of
British government officials in the late 1980s. Under British law, the
intelligence agency is prohibited from monitoring its own government. Frost
also said that since the cold war is over, the "the focus now is towards
economic intelligence."
Still, Echelon has been shrouded in such secrecy that its very existence has
been difficult to prove. Barr's amendment aims to change that.
"If this report reveals that information about American citizens is being
collected without legal authorization, the intelligence community will have
some serious explaining to do," Barr said.
----- Original Message -----
From: Perry E. Metzger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, June 05, 1999 6:30 AM
Subject: NSA and Congress at odds over Echelon
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Received: from mail28.domainhost.com ([209.224.235.150])
> by hpamgaaa.compuserve.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/HP-1.4) with ESMTP id QAA24153
> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 4 Jun 1999 16:30:44 -0400 (EDT)
> Received: from blacklodge.c2.net (blacklodge.c2.net [140.174.185.245]) by
mail28.domainhost.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA12956 for
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 4 Jun 1999 13:51:01 -0700 (PDT)
> Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by blacklodge.c2.net
(8.8.8/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA02005; Fri, 4 Jun 1999 13:29:36 -0700 (PDT)
> Received: by blacklodge.c2.net (bulk_mailer v1.11); Fri, 4 Jun 1999
13:29:16 -0700
> Received: (from majordom@localhost) by blacklodge.c2.net (8.8.8/8.7.3) id
NAA01980 for cryptography-outgoing; Fri, 4 Jun 1999 13:29:15 -0700 (PDT)
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: NSA and Congress at odds over Echelon
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-Reposting-Policy: redistribute only with permission
> Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108)
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
> From: "Perry E. Metzger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 04 Jun 1999 16:29:09 -0400
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Lines: 5
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> Federal Computer Week has an interesting article about the NSA
> resisting Congressional oversight about Echelon:
>
> http://www.fcw.com/pubs/fcw/1999/0531/web-nsa-6-3-99.html
>
