No-Privacy Zone

No-Privacy Zone

If you want to read everything The Nation has ever published on civil liberties and privacy, click here for information on how to acquire individual access to The Nation Digital Archive, a collection of every issue of The Nation ever published since 1865.

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

Almost nine months ago, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) disclosed plans to upgrade the nation’s airport security system with data-mining technology designed to catch potential terrorists before they board commercial flights. The second-generation Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening System (CAPPS II) would scan government and private-sector databases for criminal, financial and other information and ferret out high-risk passengers using a color-coded “risk score.” As details emerged, however, the program became embroiled in controversy. Senator Ron Wyden, instrumental in exposing the privacy threat posed by John Poindexter’s Total Information Awareness (TIA) project, led a backlash in Congress that challenged the TSA’s authority to create such a system. The Senate Appropriations Committee denied funding for the CAPPS II program pending a privacy-impact study from the General Accounting Office.

Meanwhile, thanks to a series of suits by the ACLU and the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), documents emerged showing that dozens of innocent passengers–including American Muslims, South Asians and senior citizens–were being harassed, detained and even strip-searched by National Guard, airport security and local law-enforcement officials because of a secret no-fly list, the existence of which the TSA had previously denied. TSA administrator James Loy repeatedly promised that CAPPS II would not move forward until all privacy concerns were addressed, and the Department of Homeland Security hired a chief privacy officer to make sure all programs measured up to existing privacy laws. At the end of July, the TSA made several concessions to critics, calling for a Passenger Advocate Office to assist passengers mistakenly flagged as high risk under the program.

But in mid-September, the furor reignited when a lone privacy advocate uncovered a disturbing document regarding New York-based JetBlue Airways, which has been in talks with the TSA to participate in testing the CAPPS II program. According to the document, JetBlue secretly provided 5 million passenger-name records, involving some 1.5 million passengers, to a Huntsville, Alabama-based defense contractor called Torch Concepts, which government officials say was participating in a military base security program for the Defense Department. One of Torch Concepts’ vendors, Little Rock-based Acxiom Corporation, then used the JetBlue data to extrapolate Social Security numbers and other private information on almost half these customers, according to the document, which was a Torch Concepts presentation on passenger risk assessment. The TSA admitted that it helped facilitate the JetBlue relationship with Torch Concepts but claimed that the firm was not a TSA contractor and had nothing to do with the development of CAPPS II. However, TSA officials told The Nation that Acxiom is a subcontractor to Lockheed Martin, the main contractor on the CAPPS II project.

What is interesting about this is that the TSA has repeatedly claimed that its screening system would require access only to the travel itineraries, names, addresses, dates of birth and phone numbers of passengers. The JetBlue scandal shows that passengers could lose control of a great deal more personal information.

“For me it was totally consistent with what I’ve seen in my research of the privacy practices of the travel industry in the USA,” said privacy advocate Edward Hasbrouck, who uncovered the original document and leaked it to Wired News.

A December 2002 Defense Department report on security and privacy, which can be found on the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency website (www.darpa.mil.iao/secpriv.pdf), cites the “stunning” amount of data that Acxiom is capable of gathering and suggests that the government may be able to cull data from Acxiom without the firm even knowing about it.

Acxiom, one of the nation’s largest data-mining companies, has actively sought federal contracts related to homeland security in the past two years. In December 2001 Acxiom hired Gen. Wesley Clark, now a Democratic presidential candidate, as a lobbyist and board member to help procure government contracts.

Washington-based EPIC earlier this year filed suit in an effort to connect the dots between the CAPPS II program and the TIA program. Now EPIC has filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission alleging that JetBlue and Acxiom violated consumer-protection laws when they disclosed the information to Torch Concepts. EPIC has also filed Freedom of Information Act requests with the Defense Department, the Federal Aviation Administration and the TSA to get to the bottom of the JetBlue imbroglio. Until the TSA, JetBlue, Torch Concepts and Acxiom come clean, there can be no confidence that CAPPS II will make Americans either safe or free.

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x