- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Mapping Terror Networks: Why Metadata Matters
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:09 am
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:09 am
quote:
We met every afternoon in the CIA director's conference room at 5. At the FBI director's conference room, we met every morning shortly after 7.
At both agencies, the questions were similar: How best can we clarify the blurry picture of an emerging terror conspiracy overseas or in the United States? How can we identify the key players and the broader network of fundraisers, radicalizers, travel facilitators and others quickly enough so they can't succeed? And how do we ensure that we've mapped the network enough to dismantle—and not merely disrupt—it?
The only way to understand why the NSA collects and needs access to vast amounts of telephone metadata is to keep these questions in mind, especially the last. In ruling on Friday that the data collection is lawful, U.S. District Court Judge William H. Pauley III expressed it well: "The government needs a wide net that could find and isolate gossamer contacts among suspected terrorists in an ocean of seemingly disconnected data."
Mapping a network of people is simple in concept but complex in practice: find the key operators, and then find the support group. The challenge isn't limited to counterterrorism. Any group—from organized-crime enterprises to gangs, drug cartels, or human traffickers—consists of a team of people who interact and are organized for a particular purpose. If an analyst maps that network well enough, then a series of arrests or lethal operations can destroy it.
Map a network poorly, however, and you may miss peripheral players who will recreate a conspiracy after the core conspirators are arrested. The goal is to eliminate the entire spiderweb of a conspiracy; cutting off a piece, like the arm of a starfish, is a poor second choice. The starfish's arm regenerates.
Think of the range of linkages you might find among individuals in these networks. Money, phone calls, email exchanges, travel, social media, chat rooms—the modes constantly expand. How many linkages could a security service monitor electronically even two decades ago? Very few: Many of today's means of communication and interaction didn't exist.
A security service can also use human surveillance teams on the ground to map a network. This is more familiar and comforting, and it might sound less intrusive than the digital mapping programs run by NSA computers. But human surveillance operations are slow, inefficient and costly. And they have a higher risk of missing members of the network. The fastest, most efficient solution to mapping a network of conspirators lies in following digital connections among people. And as digital trails expand, digital network mapping will increase in value.
There is a healthy debate about how far U.S. security services should delve into our digital trails, but emotions too often overcome common sense. Every week I hear someone comment on whether the government is listening to their conversations—as if there's some huge complex of government employees in a mythical Area 51, listening to other Americans. The debates about government intelligence collection should be clearer about distinguishing between what the government collects and what it does with it. They may be collecting my phone number; what I'd worry more about is what they do with what they collect.
For an ongoing investigation, the data might seem relatively straightforward: link cellphones, email contacts, financial transactions, travel and visa information, add in whatever else you can find, and sort through the data using modern network analysis tools. Bingo! Within a day, you can have the beginnings of an understanding of a complex network that might take old-school investigators weeks or more to piece together.
Even so, an analyst has to ask other questions. Where did the conspirators travel a year ago? Five years ago? Who did they live with? Who did they sit next to on an airplane? Who gave them money? And a thousand other questions.
Investigators need an historical pool of data, in other words, that they can access only when they have information that starts with a known or suspected conspirator in the middle of a spiderweb they don't fully understand. Meanwhile, time pressures lurk: If you're late by a day, you lose.
LINK
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:10 am to Decatur
Fear mongering...when will it end?
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:13 am to cwill
quote:
Fear mongering...when will it end?
Who is actually fear mongering here? You're the one trying to scare everyone away from the big bad NSA.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:15 am to Decatur
The real players in terrorist networks are off the grid dude. They've figured that much out. If metadata worked as well as we wish it did then we would've been able to stop an attack that was inspired by a YouTube video found on the internet that was accessed by computers with traceable IP addresses right?
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:16 am to cwill
Never comrade, Terrorists are on the lose. When Terrorists are roaming free, the only thing that can stop them is Government. If you aren't willing to part with a paltry amount of your freedom to allow Government to protect you and your loved ones from Terrorists, then maybe you aren't a true American and possibly a Terrorist yourself.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:16 am to Decatur
That has already been shown to abuse the power?
The shite isn't hypothecial tin foil hat.
They've already done it and it's publically known.
The shite isn't hypothecial tin foil hat.
They've already done it and it's publically known.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:17 am to Decatur
So says the organization looking up ex wives data. Clearly we need to believe them blindly.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:18 am to Decatur
Hitler found an excuse to wield more power over people as well.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:18 am to cwill
quote:Never. Sheople are easily herded.
Fear mongering...when will it end?
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:19 am to Decatur
quote:
You're the one trying to scare everyone away from the big bad NSA.
The NSA did that themselves. Or do you think that, like the IRS, they'll never abuse their power?
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:20 am to Decatur
quote:
Who is actually fear mongering here? You're the one trying to scare everyone away from the big bad NSA.
The NSA and it's lackeys are trying to justify their illegal (sorry, secretly legal) intrusion into our lives by continually screaming "TERRORISTS!". It's been one long parade of scare tactics.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:22 am to Decatur
quote:
There is a healthy debate about how far U.S. security services should delve into our digital trails, but emotions too often overcome common sense.
I agree with this, people get very emotional and irrational when it comes to this topic. For example, the intrusion on everyday americans lives from the government when previous methodologies were working okay. They definately fricked up on 9/11 but it's nothing that could not have been solved without proper due process.
Emotions that overwhelm common sense such as the idea that we should trust a government that has continually betrayed that trust.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:22 am to Decatur
quote:
Who is actually fear mongering here? You're the one trying to scare everyone away from the big bad NSA.
And these Republican folks had no problem with it when Bush was doing it.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:23 am to Rex
Oh STFU. That's such a bitchmade argument.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:26 am to Jbird
quote:
Link?
No need to derail this with whether or not people on this board/Republicans were for it before they were against it...it's a fact, but who cares...there are hypocritical duplicitous people on both sides and Decatur and Rex are very likely those type of folks.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:27 am to Decatur
quote:
big bad NSA.
Which you've suddenly fallen in love.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:33 am to Decatur
The theory of what they can do is great. But they just can't do it like the talk about it. We see this time and time again. And the chance for abuses are much greater than the chance of actually stopping an attack in this way. The only people you will catch are dumb ones that you are likely setting up through sting operations.
Terrorism is just a scare tactic to expand govt powers. The TSA is a great example. 9/11 would be prevented by simply locking the cockpit doors. Done. Stop wasting our time and creating an atmosphere of fear.
Terrorism is just a scare tactic to expand govt powers. The TSA is a great example. 9/11 would be prevented by simply locking the cockpit doors. Done. Stop wasting our time and creating an atmosphere of fear.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:42 am to Rex
quote:
And these Republican folks had no problem with it when Bush was doing it as well as these Democrat folks having no problem with it when Obama is doing it.
Posted on 1/3/14 at 11:43 am to Decatur
quote:
How best can we clarify the blurry picture of an emerging terror
The faceless bogeyman is always a good excuse to usurp freedoms.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News