Passenger Screening, Take 10
By Ryan Singel

Story location: http://www.wired.com/news/privacy/0,1848,66433,00.html

02:00 AM Jan. 31, 2005 PT

A controversial and much-delayed upgrade of the current airline
passenger-screening system has gained new momentum, as officials have
started testing the newly centralized computer system using real passenger
data and are looking to see if commercial databases can help verify
passengers' identification.

Currently, airline passengers are screened by individual airlines, which
select passengers for extra screening or rejection based on whether a
person's name matches or approximates those on government watch lists.
Passengers who fly one-way or pay with cash are also more likely to be
patted down and searched.

The Transportation Security Administration wants to centralize the process,
using a system now called Secure Flight. Under the proposal, airlines will
have to provide data dumps to the agency, which will use an expanded,
unified watch list run by the Terrorist Screening Center to flag potential
threats.

Homeland Security officials hope law enforcement and intelligence groups
will add more data to the watch list if they are assured the information
will not be provided to private companies.

That matching process is currently being tested with millions of passenger
records, which the Transportation Security Administration ordered airlines
to turn over in November.

The TSA further wants to test whether the information passengers provide to
airlines can be verified using massive commercial databases run by companies
such as LexisNexis and Acxiom.

The TSA will award contracts to private companies for testing Feb. 22.

An earlier proposed upgrade, known as CAPPS II, drew intense criticism from
privacy groups and Congress, in part for its reliance on commercial
databases and algorithms to compute a passenger's threat level.

Privacy activists, such as security consultant Richard M. Smith, argue those
databases, which are used for direct marketing and fraud investigations, are
inaccurate and that relying on them could lead to trouble for those whose
data is outdated or for students or poor people who don't have much of a
"data footprint."

Smith, who just moved, has started getting junk mail intended for a man
named Quincy Smith and vice versa, which he attributes to an error in the
Postal Service's change-of-address database, which data aggregators use to
harvest addresses.

In a letter to Quincy Smith, Richard worries about how this could affect
him:

"We don't know each other, but we are now linked permanently in
direct-marketing databases. I hope you are not a terrorist or associate with
known terrorists. Otherwise, airplane travel is going to become a major
hassle for my family and I."

Even though the TSA is relying on private databases for identity
verification, not to decide if someone might be a terrorist, Chris Hoofnagle
of the Electronic Privacy Information Center argues officials should not
authorize these databases to be used for airline security, regardless of the
outcomes of the test.

"These databases are only accurate enough for targeting of junk mail,"
Hoofnagle said. "That's what they are for."

In the 1990s, the Direct Marketing Association promised it would not market
its services to law enforcement since that would harm the direct-marketing
industry, according to Hoofnagle.

"Where are those promises today?" Hoofnagle asked.

EPIC also just posted documents (.pdf) obtained through the Freedom of
Information Act showing that Acxiom lobbied the Justice Department after the
Sept. 11 attacks to radically reduce federal privacy protections so it could
build an identity-verification tool.

Congress has also expressed its concern over the use of such databases and
has barred the TSA from even testing the use of commercial databases until
the Government Accountability Office certifies the agency has strong privacy
policies in place.

That report is due in March, but the TSA's bidding process indicates that
the agency thinks it will get a green light from the GAO sooner than that.

Secure Flight also gained some momentum from a recent announcement that
President Bush is nominating a former Department of Transportation official
named Michael Jackson to be the second-in-command at Homeland Security.

Jackson is a widely respected manager who initiated the CAPPS II project but
left the government just as Homeland Security officials announced they would
use it to search for those with warrants out for their arrest.

Privacy advocates decried the "mission creep." According to an account in
Washington Post reporter Robert O'Harrow's book No Place to Hide, Jackson
unsuccessfully attempted in a last-minute trip to the White House to
convince officials not to use the system for purposes other than aviation
safety.

The TSA hopes to roll out the system in increments this year, but first has
to mollify congressional critics who mandated an audit into the program's
effectiveness and intrusiveness before it can be deployed.

In a similar audit last year, the GAO failed the program on seven of its
eight criteria.

The TSA did not return a request for comment by press time.

End of story



You are a subscribed member of the infowarrior list. Visit 
www.infowarrior.org for list information or to unsubscribe. This message 
may be redistributed freely in its entirety. Any and all copyrights 
appearing in list messages are maintained by their respective owners.

Reply via email to