DHS: "Info could be used in a manner inconsistent with privacy policy stated at time of collection"

[Anthony Soprano]

Privacy Impact Assessment for the Automated Targeting System
November 22, 2006

1.6 Privacy Impact Analysis: Given the amount and type of data being collected, discuss what privacy risks were identified and how they were mitigated.

The privacy risks associated with the maintenance of the information in ATS include: the information may not be accurate or timely because it was not collected directly from the individual, the information could be used in a manner inconsistent with the privacy policy stated at the time of collection, and/or the individual may not be aware that the information is being used by ATS for the stated purposes and/or a negative CBP action could be taken in reliance upon computer generated information in ATS that has been skewed by inaccurate data.

To mitigate these privacy risks, CBP has done the following:

Accurate and Timely Information. The system generates a risk assessment; however, no action will be taken unless the information has been reviewed by a CBP officer trained in the interpretation of the information and familiar with the environment in which the information is collected and used. The ATS system supports CBP officers in identifying individuals or cargo that may pose a risk of violating U.S. laws or otherwise constitute a threat to national security, but it does not replace their discretion to determine whether the individual or cargo should be allowed into the country. If personally identifiable information is believed by the data subject to be inaccurate, a redress process has been developed and the individual is provided information about this process during the secondary review. See Section 7 of this PIA.

Consistency with the stated privacy policy. Prior to inclusion of information from system of records notices other than ATS, CBP reviews the routine uses and purposes statements to ensure that the purposes for which the information was collected and used are consistent with the law enforcement purposes of ATS. CBP officers are trained on the limited uses for which the information may be used in connection with their official duties.

Lack of awareness of the use of information. In order to increase transparency, CBP has published a SORN (see 71 FR 64543) and this PIA as means of informing individuals about the specific elements of ATS (ATS was previously considered a part of TECS). Additionally, before information may be used in ATS the Privacy Act system of records notice must be reviewed by CBP to ensure the use is consistent with the stated purposes.

Automatic negative determination. As part of CBP’s inspection policies and procedures no adverse action is taken by CBP with respect to an individual, cargo or conveyance until the relevant information is reviewed by a well-trained CBP officer.

http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/privacy/privacy_pia_cbp_ats.pdf

[Kagemusha]

1. So they lied to protect national security (in their version). What's new.

What are we going to DO about it? That's the better question. At least the Republicans weren't sent back on top of the world at midterms. (Edit: That fact raises the chances of getting something done about it from none to slim.)

[Anthony Soprano]

2. It depends on how "public" these policies become, and...

...how the average American reacts to "disclaimers" such as these. A privacy policy is supposed to be just that...a policy that outlines the collection, retention and usage of data. To cap it off with "anything might happen" is unacceptable...unless, of course, people simply choose to accept it.

:patriot:

[sarcasmo]

3. America no longer exists thanks to the Bush clan.

Kick and Nom

[Trillo]

4. "Weapons of mass effect"

ATS-Inbound assists in identifying
imported cargo shipments, which pose a high risk of containing weapons of mass effect,
narcotics, or other contraband.

"other contraband" is vague.

The phrase "weapons of mass effect", the word "effect" is unusual. Why didn't it say "weapons of mass destruction" instead of "effect"? What else are they trying to capture with their word choice "effect" that almost slips by unnoticed? The word "effect" could mean a "positive" instead of a "negative", whereas "destruction" tends to the negative.

RH Websters unabridged definition of "weapon"
2. anything used against an opponent, adversary, or victim: the deadly weapon of satire.

"Weapons of mass effect" could be paperback novels printed in another country.

The linked document could in part be describing a massive anti-competition system.