How the TSA encourages airport theft

[dave () farber net]

...... Forwarded Message .......
From: John Adams <jadams01 () sprynet com>
To: dave () farber net
Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 19:08:25 -0400
Subj: For IP? How the TSA encourages airport theft

Not their headline, I should note, but my own somewhat cynical take on  
the subject. Here's the money quote, from a few paragraphs down in the  
story:

        ''It sounds like TSA has confused ends and means. They are  
compromising security for the sake of secrecy,'' Aftergood said.

http://www.ajc.com/monday/content/epaper/editions/monday/ 
news_041b592785bc71c000c8.html

Airport security tricky in court
Criminal case dropped to guard secrecy
Rebecca Carr - Cox Washington Bureau
Monday, May 24, 2004

Washington --- Last fall, Miami prosecutors thought they had a solid  
case against a federal baggage screener who was caught on videotape  
stealing CDs from passengers' luggage.

Just one small problem: The defense would be allowed to question a key  
prosecution witness from the Transportation Security Administration  
about Miami International Airport's security and training of baggage  
screeners.

Fearing the testimony could put what the government calls Sensitive  
Security Information in the hands of terrorists, prosecutors dropped  
the charges.

U.S. District Court Judge Adalberto Jordan set the defendant free. He  
is now in Miami studying radiology.

The case reveals a growing tension between the public's right to know  
about a crime at one of the nation's busiest airports and the federal  
government's desire to protect sensitive security information from  
disclosure.

The federal government argues that even seemingly innocuous information  
about the nation's transportation systems could aid terrorists and  
other criminals in their plots. Critics disagree, saying that to cloak  
such information in secrecy undermines the public's ability to protect  
itself.

The Miami case is ''a rather shocking story,'' said Steven Aftergood,  
director of the Federation of American Scientists' Project on  
Government Secrecy.

''It sounds like TSA has confused ends and means. They are compromising  
security for the sake of secrecy,'' Aftergood said.

The critics have it all wrong, said Lauren Stover, the eastern field  
director for TSA public affairs based in Miami.

''Our agency does not like to hide under the SSI umbrella,'' Stover  
said.

The Miami case and other examples of the TSA refusing to release  
sensitive security information have raised concerns among open  
government advocates who say there is no oversight on what TSA can  
stamp ''SSI.''

''It is an invitation to unlimited secrecy,'' Aftergood said. ''These  
decisions need to be reviewed by some sort of oversight mechanism.''

Open government advocates say there are understandable reasons to keep  
certain sensitive documents and pieces of information from the public.  
But the public should at least know how much information has been  
removed from the public domain under the SSI label.

Jane Kirtley, director of the Silha Center for media ethics and law at  
the University of Minnesota, said the whole notion of removing reams of  
information from the public for an unlimited time frame is ''very  
troubling.''

''The idea that we can basically close off this amorphous category of  
information without any checks and balances is very troubling,''  
Kirtley said.

Lawmakers complain

Some Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill are concerned about the lack  
of oversight to ensure that TSA is not abusing its authority.

''While it is important that truly sensitive security information not  
be disclosed to the public, the Bush administration all too often  
inappropriately uses secrecy as a weapon to prevent the American public  
from learning of its activities,'' said Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.), a  
member of the House Select Committee on Homeland Security, which  
oversees the policies of TSA.

The agency wanted to prosecute the Miami baggage screener to the  
highest degree possible, Stover said.

''We are a transparent agency operating that way every day under the  
belief that the public has a right to know," Stover said. "We have to  
learn to balance that against information that might be used against  
us.''

The agency was concerned that an open court proceeding would reveal  
critical information because of videotape footage showing the defendant  
stealing and expert TSA testimony about screening procedures.  
Terrorists could watch the videotape and hear from TSA officials how  
they screen bags. The agency does not want to do ''the homework'' for  
the terrorists, she said.

''Our mission is to safeguard the security of our nation and traveling  
public, and we could not jeopardize innocent lives for the actions of a  
few individuals,'' Stover said.

Amy Von Walter, a spokeswoman for the TSA based in Washington,  
estimated that about a quarter of the agency's actions are marked  
''SSI,'' but she could not quantify that figure because the agency  
deals with ''billions of documents.''

Von Walter said the agency does not hesitate to take appropriate action  
when baggage screeners violate the law. For example, four baggage  
screeners in Detroit were indicted last month on theft charges.

The TSA was given the power to keep secret sensitive information about  
the nation's transportation networks soon after Congress created the  
agency on Nov. 16, 2001.

But the concept of keeping secret sensitive security information has  
been around since 1974. That's when Congress passed legislation giving  
the Federal Aviation Administration permission to protect a narrow band  
of information about its research and development from public  
disclosure.

Expanded security

Under TSA's management, the definition of SSI has greatly expanded to  
include nearly a dozen different regulations, including information  
about security programs, vulnerability assessments and technical  
specifications of certain screening equipment, according to a recent  
report by the Congressional Research Service, the research arm of  
Congress.

Basically, anything that poses a ''detrimental '' threat to air travel  
qualifies as sensitive security information, according to the  
regulations defining SSI.

Unlike national security documents that are reviewed before receiving  
classification status of ''top secret,'' information placed in the  
category of SSI is ''born'' secret, meaning there is no criterion to  
meet or review to ensure that it should be removed from the public's  
view.

The federal government created the Information Security Oversight  
Office to monitor the number of classified documents it creates each  
year. No such monitoring agency exists for SSI materials. The materials  
are simply removed from the public domain without any type of oversight  
as there is with the classification system.

Another important distinction is there is a time limit given to  
classified materials. While some of these time limits are extended for  
decades, there is no time limit with SSI materials.

On Tuesday, the TSA expanded the authority to the U.S. Coast Guard. The  
Coast Guard will be allowed to use the SSI label to keep secret port  
and facility security assessment plans required by legislation passed  
by Congress last year.

> ON THE WEB: The CRS report can be found on the Federation of American  
Scientists Project On Government Secrecy site: www.fas.org



-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/