Global Information Society Project: Law Enforcement and National Security in the Information Age: Technology, Security, and Privacy in the War on Terror.
A panel discussion with
Barry Steinhardt, ACLU,
Eben Moglen, Columbia University,
Paul Rosenzweig, Heritage Foundation, and
Heather Mac Donald, Manhattan Institute,moderated by
Kim Taipale, Center for Advanced Studies in Science &. Technology Policy.October 14, 2004, in New York.
KIM TAIPALE, MODERATOR
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS - AS PREPAREDIntroduction - 8 minutes.
Law Enforcement and National Security in the Information Age: Technology, Security, and Privacy in the War on Terror
Good evening. Welcome to tonight's panel discussion on Technology, Security and Privacy in the War on Terror. Tonight's event is being webcast live and I want to welcome our online viewers as well.
My name is Kim Taipale and I am the executive director of the Center for Advanced Studies in Science and Technology Policy as well as the director of the Global Information Society Project at the World Policy Institute here at The New School.
Tonight's panel is the first in a series of events to be hosted by the Global Information Society Project as part of its Program on Law Enforcement and National Security in the Information Age.
Before I introduce the distinguished panel and we begin tonight's session I'd like to say a few words about the GIS Project and this Program.
The Global Information Society Project is a long-term collaborative research project of the World Policy Institute and the Center for Advanced Studies focused on information, communication, and technology policy and related issues, especially as such policy impacts on the development of global civil society, international relations, world trade, global economic development and capital investment, and national and global security and law enforcement.
The Project has a broad agenda covering a host of issues well beyond those we are discussing tonight and I would urge you to go to our web site at global-information-society.org to find out more about the Project. You can also go to the World Policy Institute or Center for Advanced Studies web sites and look under "research projects".
The GIS Project provides a non-partisan, objective forum for engaging in the public debate about these important issues. We are developing a number of specific Programs focused on particular areas of interest - including Law Enforcement and National Security, Telecommunications and Spectrum Policy, Intellectual Property and Trade Issues, as well as Information Technology as Agent of Change in Environmental and Energy Policy - within which we will hold public discussions such as tonight's, host or participate in larger conferences, as well as engage in various other research and publication activities. We are actively looking for additional academic and public policy participants and partners for all of our Programs as well as the Project itself. If you are part of an institution or project that would like to get involved please email me at the address on the web site.
The Program on Law Enforcement and National Security in the Information Age, of which tonight's panel is the inaugural event, is focused specifically on issues relating to technology and its impact on law enforcement and national security - we are concerned both with technology's potential to improve collective security as well as its potential to negatively impact individual liberty and freedom.
The particular focus of tonight's panel is how that balance is being impacted in the 'war on terror'. As noted in the brief description of tonight's event, I do not think that security and liberty are somehow rivals to be traded one for the other to achieve this balance - rather, I believe that we must start from the premise that both security and liberty are required obligations of a civil society and each much be maximized to the extent possible consistent with maintaining the other. Indeed, as Thomas Powers writes with regard to James Madison, "From [the founders] point of view, it is clear that there is not so much a 'tension' between liberty and security as there is a duality of our concern with security, on the one hand, and with liberty, on the other."
In examining this dual obligation of security and liberty, we confront two particular intersecting, and confounding, trends at this point in our history - both to some extent a result of technological developments. First, the nature of the threats to collective security have changed thus blurring the lines between law enforcement and national security and requiring new techniques and procedures to allocate security resources preemptively, and, second, the nature of the threat to individual freedom has changed because information technologies that can help allocate security resources more effectively, such as improved information sharing and data analysis, are challenging to political and legal systems, and social expectations, that are at least partially based on protecting certain civil liberties and individual freedoms by maintaining privacy through the "practical obscurity" of inefficient information access technologies and procedures.
What do I mean by this?
First, (and regardless of one's particular political or ideological view of the current 'war on terror') there is a fundamental undeniable fact - that is, the seed value of potentially catastrophic outcomes has changed from the nation state to organized but stateless groups (and is trending towards the individual). In simple terms, the threat to national security is no longer confined only to other nation states. Organized groups of stateless actors, and soon perhaps even individuals, have the capacity to inflict the kind of catastrophic outcomes that can literally destroy - or at least significantly impact - our way of life by undermining the confidence in the economic or political systems that maintain it.
Thus, the line between law enforcement and national security is blurring, and law enforcement, at least with regard to these types of threats, is increasingly being asked to take a preemptive rather than reactive approach.
Preemption, of course, raises the issue of what predicate is necessary for action - that is, how does "presumed innocent" work in a world in which the consequences of a false negative may be catastrophic? Assuming a political consensus for preemptive action - and even Barry/ACLU has said we need to find and stop terrorists before they act - the question becomes what standard and on what basis is "reasonable suspicion" to be judged sufficient for further action by government agents or to trigger consequences to an individual - and what tools or technologies can appropriately be used in that process. And, how do we mitigate the problem of false positives?
These questions intersects with the second point - that is, emerging information technologies, including new surveillance, collection, information sharing, and data analysis technologies, that may be useful in allocating law enforcement resources towards particular threats to our collective security, raise significant civil liberties issues. In particular, they challenge certain perceived expectations of privacy that have traditionally been relied on to protect certain individual freedoms, such as free speech, political autonomy, public anonymity and personal secrecy.
Regardless of the outcome of any particular debate on these issues, and regardless of whether any particular government program is funded or defunded, there is one thing I am absolutely certain of - we face a future in which technology will enable more information sharing and greater access to distributed data, as well as provide increasingly powerful tools for data observation and analysis. Thus, in my view, we face the issue not whether these technologies will be employed, but rather under what constraints and according to what values they will be developed and applied. Additionally, we need to consider what technologies or strategies exist - for example, encryption, anonymization, and pseudonymiztion - for actually increasing protection of individual privacy even within systems in which there is increased sharing and analysis.
My own views on these issues are set out in the various academic articles that I have authored on these subjects and for those interested they can be accessed online from our web site - but tonight we are here to hear from the panelists.
The format for tonight's event is that each speaker will present for about 12 minutes or so and we will then have about half an hour for a discussion among the panel and Q&A from the audience. I will introduce each speaker briefly before they speak but there are links to more detailed bios as well as other material, including links to publications, from our website - look for the announcement page for tonight's event.
With that, let me turn to the panel. First, I want to thank the panelists for joining me tonight. I consider everyone on this panel a personal friend and we have argued about many of these issues before. Although I disagree at times with some of their views - and suspect they with mine, I appreciate that they have taken the time to participate in tonight's event and share those views. Every speaker on this panel has a national reputation on these issues, is committed to solving the problems that we face, and is actively involved in efforts that will determine the outcome of this debate.
Our first speaker is Barry Steinhardt. Barry is the Director of the Technology and Liberty Program at the ACLU. He was a co-founder of the Global Internet Liberty Campaign, the world's first international coalition of NGOs concerned with the rights of Internet users to privacy and free expression. He is a member of the Advisory Committee to the US Census and was a member of the US delegation to the recent G-8 Government and Private Sector Tokyo conference on Cyber Crime. Barry has spoken and written widely on privacy and information technology issues.
Again, you can find more information about Barry and all the speakers as well as links to their writings from our web page announcement of this event.
[Barry Steinhardt presentation -12 minutes]
Our second speaker is Eben Moglen. Eben is Professor of Law and Legal History at the Columbia University School of Law. He also serves pro bono as the General Counsel to the Free Software Foundation and was instrumental in developing the GPL [General Public License] under which much open source software is currently developed. Earlier, Eben represented Philip Zimmerman, the author of PGP encryption software, against potential criminal prosecution by the government for exporting cryptography software. Eben is a recipient of the EFF Pioneer Award for his work to protect freedom on the Internet.
[Eben Moglen presentation -12 minutes]
Our third speaker is Paul Rosenzweig. Paul is Senior Legal Fellow at the Heritage Foundation and an Adjunct Professor of Law at George Mason University School of Law, where he teaches Criminal Procedure and an advanced seminar on White Collar Crime. Prior to joining Heritage, Paul served as a prosecutor with the Department of Justice, as Investigative Counsel to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and, most recently, as Senior Litigation Counsel in the Office of the Independent Counsel. Paul has spoken and written widely on issues of technology, security and privacy and has testified before Congress on many occasions on these issues.
[Paul Rosenzweig presentation - 12 minutes]
Our final speaker this evening is Heather Mac Donald. Heather is an Olin Fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a Contributing Editor to CityJournal. Her writings have also appeared in The Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, New York Times, The New Republic, Partisan Review, The New Criterion, Public Interest, and Academic Questions. In addition to numerous articles on policing and homeland security as well as other topics, she is the author of two books, "The Burden of Bad Ideas" and "Are Cops Racists?"
[Heather Mac Donald presentation - 12 minutes]
The panel will now take questions from the audience. There are microphones in the aisles. Please introduce yourself by stating your name and affiliation. Because we have so little time I'd ask that you keep your questions as short as possible. If you don't get a chance to ask a question here in person please remember that there will be a moderated online discussion following this meeting for about two weeks on the New School online web site, www.dialnsa.edu.
[Panel discussion and Q&A - 30 minutes]
I just want to thank the panel again for their participation. I also want to thank the World Policy Institute and the New School for hosting this event. And, I want to thank the audience for coming and for their participation. I want to remind everyone that there will be an online discussion that I will be moderating at www.dialnsa.edu in which you can ask follow up questions. An archived version of the webcast will also be available there.
Please check our web site for future events or sign up online if you want to be on our email list for future announcements. Thank you and goodnight.
GISP: PLENSIA 10-14-04
Opening RemarksEvent Announcement 10/01: [EMEDIAWIRE]
Post-event Press Release 10/15: [USNEWSWIRE]
Event Webcast 10/14: [Archived Webcast (.ram)]