FBI

One item that is making the rounds (judging by the number of places it appeared in my reading list) is this report at news.com on a new tactic being used by the feds to combat kiddie pr0n:

The FBI has recently adopted a novel investigative technique: posting hyperlinks that purport to be illegal videos of minors having sex, and then raiding the homes of anyone willing to click on them.

Undercover FBI agents used this hyperlink-enticement technique, which directed Internet users to a clandestine government server, to stage armed raids of homes in Pennsylvania, New York, and Nevada last year. The supposed video files actually were gibberish and contained no illegal images.

The story continues with a discussion of the details and legalities in one particular case, concluding:

Civil libertarians warn that anyone who clicks on a hyperlink advertising something illegal—perhaps found while Web browsing or received through e-mail—could face the same fate.

When asked what would stop the FBI from expanding its hyperlink sting operation, Harvey Silverglate, a longtime criminal defense lawyer in Cambridge, Mass. and author of a forthcoming book on the Justice Department, replied: “Because the courts have been so narrow in their definition of ‘entrapment,’ and so expansive in their definition of ‘probable cause,’ there is nothing to stop the Feds from acting as you posit.”

Although I tend to side with civil liberties folks when it comes to net-related issues, I have to admit that I personally don’t mind this tactic, especially when it comes to attempting to combat consumers of material such as this. If you’re caught actively seeking such illicit material….

However, where I do get to be somewhat uncomfortable is the ways in which such a tactic could be abused. For example, while it seems perfectly kosher to pursue folks who are actively seeking kiddie pr0n, I’d hope that there would be some care taken to not even raise suspicion about folks who accidentally click a link, either due to it’s placement near other, legitimate links (or the close button, when it comes to spam messages), or because the link was disguised as something innocuous.

Seen in the Washington Post:

Digital images of faces, fingerprints and palm patterns are already flowing into FBI systems in a climate-controlled, secure basement here. Next month, the FBI intends to award a 10-year contract that would significantly expand the amount and kinds of biometric information it receives. And in the coming years, law enforcement authorities around the world will be able to rely on iris patterns, face-shape data, scars and perhaps even the unique ways people walk and talk, to solve crimes and identify criminals and terrorists. The FBI will also retain, upon request by employers, the fingerprints of employees who have undergone criminal background checks so the employers can be notified if employees have brushes with the law.[...]

The increasing use of biometrics for identification is raising questions about the ability of Americans to avoid unwanted scrutiny. It is drawing criticism from those who worry that people’s bodies will become de facto national identification cards. Critics say that such government initiatives should not proceed without proof that the technology really can pick a criminal out of a crowd.[...]

Privacy advocates worry about the ability of people to correct false information. “Unlike say, a credit card number, biometric data is forever,” said Paul Saffo, a Silicon Valley technology forecaster. He said he feared that the FBI, whose computer technology record has been marred by expensive failures, could not guarantee the data’s security. “If someone steals and spoofs your iris image, you can’t just get a new eyeball,” Saffo said.

Of course, the “privacy advocates” paragraph wasn’t found until the end of the 3-page article, and there’s essentially no discussion about the lack of law, regulation, and training to minimize the inappropriate use of such data, correcting erroneous data, etc.

I don’t mind data collection and data mining as long as controls are in place to keep such activities kosher and reasonable. However, we seem to be a society of people who either are paranoid about such things, or of sheeple who don’t really care as long as their bread and circuses are delivered on time.