Carnivore Rejection
BOULDER, COLORADO
Web posted on 9/07/00
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has set such confining terms for the review of its Carnivore surveillance tool, that several major universities have categorically refused to participate.
According to Jeffrey Schiller of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the federal government has set far too stringent conditions for handling the review.
"...basically can edit the report, omit sections of the report and decide never to release it."
The terms required by the Justice Department would essentially invalidate any independence of a review committee. The Justice Department would have veto power over the participation of individual researchers - and reserves the right to pursue criminal charges against researchers who released information about Carnivore that the Justice Department did not pre-approve.
In other words - "if you tell the public what it really does, we'll take you away and imprison you."
In addition to MIT, many other prestigious universities decided the Justice Department's terms were unacceptable - and would prevent a fair and full review of this domestic spying technology.
The University of Michigan, Dartmouth College, Purdue University, and the University of California at San Diego have all told the Justice Department to forget about their participation.
According to Thomas Perrine at UCSD, the reason is clear.
"They came to the exact conclusion that we did, that this would not constitute an independent review."
Jeffrey Schiller of MIT was even more blunt.
"This is not a request for an independent report. They want a rubber stamp."
Here are USA Today and CNN links for more information.
On Wednesday, September 6th, the U.S. Senate held additional hearings on Carnivore. The assessment there was equally pessimistic about the FBI's commitment to use tools such as Carnivore strictly within the law.
Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) expressed his serious concern regarding this matter.
"I want to hear... what controls the FBI has in place when Carnivore is used to ensure the program is operated only as authorized by the court order. This keeping in mind the fact that usually the court order isn't going to be designed the way the government wants it to be."
In other words, what is to prevent the Government, in the form of the Justice Department and the FBI - from using Carnivore in a manner which violates the law - in order to get around "inconvenient" legal restrictions for its use?
If the American people cannot be assured of the way that Carnivore operates, through an independent and unrestricted review of this tool - how can we trust its use?
Georgetown University law professor Dr. Jeffrey Rosen told the Senate that the issue is absolutely unequivocal:
"The costs of social uncertainty about covert monitoring are simply too high to justify Carnivore in its current form."
Robert Teesdale agrees.
He requests that all Americans continue to stay informed of these events and this issue. It isn't over yet.
Check back with us!
BOULDER, COLORADO
Web posted on 9/07/00
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has set such confining terms for the review of its Carnivore surveillance tool, that several major universities have categorically refused to participate.
According to Jeffrey Schiller of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the federal government has set far too stringent conditions for handling the review.
"...basically can edit the report, omit sections of the report and decide never to release it."
The terms required by the Justice Department would essentially invalidate any independence of a review committee. The Justice Department would have veto power over the participation of individual researchers - and reserves the right to pursue criminal charges against researchers who released information about Carnivore that the Justice Department did not pre-approve.
In other words - "if you tell the public what it really does, we'll take you away and imprison you."
In addition to MIT, many other prestigious universities decided the Justice Department's terms were unacceptable - and would prevent a fair and full review of this domestic spying technology.
The University of Michigan, Dartmouth College, Purdue University, and the University of California at San Diego have all told the Justice Department to forget about their participation.
According to Thomas Perrine at UCSD, the reason is clear.
"They came to the exact conclusion that we did, that this would not constitute an independent review."
Jeffrey Schiller of MIT was even more blunt.
"This is not a request for an independent report. They want a rubber stamp."
Here are USA Today and CNN links for more information.
On Wednesday, September 6th, the U.S. Senate held additional hearings on Carnivore. The assessment there was equally pessimistic about the FBI's commitment to use tools such as Carnivore strictly within the law.
Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) expressed his serious concern regarding this matter.
"I want to hear... what controls the FBI has in place when Carnivore is used to ensure the program is operated only as authorized by the court order. This keeping in mind the fact that usually the court order isn't going to be designed the way the government wants it to be."
In other words, what is to prevent the Government, in the form of the Justice Department and the FBI - from using Carnivore in a manner which violates the law - in order to get around "inconvenient" legal restrictions for its use?
If the American people cannot be assured of the way that Carnivore operates, through an independent and unrestricted review of this tool - how can we trust its use?
Georgetown University law professor Dr. Jeffrey Rosen told the Senate that the issue is absolutely unequivocal:
"The costs of social uncertainty about covert monitoring are simply too high to justify Carnivore in its current form."
Robert Teesdale agrees.
He requests that all Americans continue to stay informed of these events and this issue. It isn't over yet.
Check back with us!