F.B.I. Data Mining Went Beyond Targets

[spanone]

~snip~ WASHINGTON, Sept. 8 — The F.B.I. cast a much wider net in its terrorism investigations than it has previously acknowledged by relying on telecommunications companies to analyze phone-call and e-mail patterns of the associates of Americans who had come under suspicion, according to newly obtained bureau records.

The documents indicate that the F.B.I. used secret demands for records to obtain data not only on the person it was targeting but also details on his or her “community of interest” — the network of people that the target in turn was in contact with.~snip~\

IN OTHER WORDS, THEY BROKE THE LAW

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/09/washington/09fbi.html?_r=1&hp=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1189271068-x70IVa3AhqCOkzd4JmmV1Q&pagewanted=print

[Trillo]

1. Better give those telecommunication corporations

retroactive legal immunity.
/sarcasm

[leveymg]

2. We're all no more than six degrees of separation from Osama bin Laden

That makes all of America a "community of interest" under this criteria.

[TahitiNut]

4. GMTA

I was composing my post below at the same time you posted. Since I've actually been peripherally involved in the research, I'm aware of (at least some of) the data mining strategies being employed.

In order to identify those (comparatively few) individuals with one or two "degrees of separation" from a "known" (or suspected) 'terrorist' they must travel the (lower) 'landscape' upon which such 'pinnacles' of association exist.

[TahitiNut]

3. Some methods of data-mining rely on "degrees of separation"

For over 15 years, the problem of detecting 'deposits' of relevant information in some enormous collection of data has been the subject of many funded comp-sci/IT research efforts, particularly in the DOE National Laboratories and NSA/DIA. The paradigm of "mining" is an important one - where's the gold? To locate the 'gold' the associations between entities/terms are mapped topologically, offering a visual, color-coded 'terran' with a graphical interface that permits "drill-down' to the particular 'deposits' of data. Clearly, the problem of locating specific data of interest for further perusal involves the elimination of data of little relevance to the exploration. It's like panning for gold - wash away the dirt.

When we're talking about collaboration and coordination between people, the analysis requires some definable method whereby contact is accomplished coupled with some measure of proximity. Clearly, this is akin to the "Six Degrees of Separation" hypothesis that has been the subject of studies by Milgram and others.

This is what's so pernicious about this program. It puts the cart before the horse. It's based on the premise that the seeker (government) must have a priori access to all the "dirt" (ordinary citizens engaged in communication or collaboration) in order to 'mine' the purported 'gold' - illegal conspiracies. It's a surveillance approach that is driven by a technology ... irrespective of the application and the inherent rights of human beings.

Like many things, it's the existence of a 'solution' that drives the myopic to claim that the "ends justify the (use of the) means" in an application of a tool developed for unrelated purposes.

Succinctly, it's the abuse of a tool - a repeated corruption throughout the history of humanity since the discovery of fire.

[spanone]

5. here is the part i don't believe

The F.B.I. recently stopped the practice in part because of broader questions raised about its aggressive use of the records demands, which are known as national security letters, officials said Friday after being asked about it.

?who raised the broader question? When?

so essentially the FBI could look into ANYONE associated with one of their targets...anyone...relatives, friends, business associates, on and on, if i'm reading this correctly.

[TahitiNut]

7. Yep. In essense, however, they've already collected SOME data.

When composing some topology of contacts, it's impossible to filter the relevant from the irrelevant unless the contextual data is present. In fact, it's essential when contact/collaboration is presumed to be a combination of two or three transactions. Consider, for a simple example, an internet "message drop" where people make entries on some neutral sites. In order to associate person 'A' with person 'B' through the 'coincidental' access to internet site '32' all such accesses need to be obtained and the topology wherein some measure of 'proximity' (time and frequency) is aggregated and portrayed as having a high degree of connectedness must be portrayed against some low degree of connectedness. (You can't see a mountain without seeing the surrounding valleys and plains.)

It's literally collecting ALL the data in order to ELIMINATE that which would otherwise be regarded as a violation of privacy. Cart before horse. The association can only be seen if one sees it against a background of ordinary private activity. This is why they think they're faced with a conundrum ... it's the nature of the tool/technique they want to use.

[DemReadingDU]

9. I doubt that this was stopped permanently

Probably stopped while the questions were being asked, then resumed shortly thereafter ;-)

[Bitwit1234]

6. The main reason they wiretapped in this country

was to spy on the democrats, running for office, in congress and they groups that opposed bush. That is the only reason we all know it and you'll never convince me otherwise.

[MissWaverly]

10. yes and all the anti war folks and anyone who criticized him

and anybody like Andy Stephenson who said the elections were stolen.

[tom_paine]

8. Oh THAT'S SURPRISING

At least as surprising as learning Hitler was industrially extermination the Jews.

That surprising, no less and no more.

[libodem]

11. Oh, say it isn't so

[The Backlash Cometh]

12. I want to know if anyone actively went into our records.

If so, we deserve restitution for the invasion of privacy. Especially if they took the information and used it to invade our privacy even further by using the inside information to affect our personal lives.