Department of Homeland Security Tries to Dodge Freedom of Information Act
By Terri Harel | 01/10/2013 | Activism, In-Depth, Movements, Organizations | 14 Comments
A court ordered the Department of Homeland Security on Tuesday to follow through with a request from the Electronic Privacy Information Center, which asked for papers regarding a cybersecurity pilot program via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request back in July of 2011.
The Department of Justice additionally requested the ability to “claw back” documents that they determine, at a later time, to have breached their classification or jeopardize the program in any way. The court denied this request.
Judge Gladys Kessler noted the DHS did not take EPIC’s original request seriously and it wasn’t until the Center filed a lawsuit against the government agency in March of last year that they began to process any documents.
The program in question is a joint effort by the Department of Homeland Security and National Security Agency to prevent cyber attacks on government contractors and their ISPs. The program has yet to be given a public name, but the NSA partnered with AT&T, Verizon, and CenturyLink (all ISPs) to intercept defense contractors’ communications.
The NSA denies any “direct” monitoring of the networks, but the Department of Justice has expressed concern about, once again, the legality and ethics of such monitoring. It also appears that such activity necessitates scanning all information, which could, hypothetically, then be translated, surveyed, and assessed.
The one-of-a-kind program would include surveillance of the contractors’ e-mail correspondence and other traffic, according to The Washington Post’s original report on the pilot program in 2011. The topic has since all but disappeared from discussion.
EPIC filed their request for documents no more than a month after the Washington Post story was published, and has been engaged in a court battle for the information ever since. The DHS acknowledged the request in August 2011, but on one point they could not acquiesce: “Any privacy impact assessment performed as part of the development of the new NSA pilot program.” To this, “the DHS determined they could not locate or identify any responsive records.”
Apparently, this was because the “pilot program belongs to another agency.” The DHS referred the request to the appropriate agency, which sits under the DHS, called the National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD). EPIC was not contacted until January 23, 2012, by phone, with no official response ever transmitted to the center.
The DHS continued to request more time to begin handing over information to EPIC, including one 16-month delay.
Now, almost a year and a half later, EPIC has yet to receive a single page of documentation for review. Interestingly, only last week, the 2013 National Defense Authorize Act (NDAA) was signed into law. This year’s budget includes a provision that distinctly calls out defense contractors’ obligation to hand over to the government any cybersecurity threats, breaches, and all subsequent relevant information regarding such activity.
Sure, cybersecurity is an important branch of national security, but the concern lies within the deployment of such technologies into general domestic web traffic. In 2011, James X. Dempsey, a public policy expert at the Center for Democracy and Technology, which tracks civil liberties, notes, “We wouldn’t want this [type of program] to become a backdoor form of surveillance.”
The protective order attempted by the DHS is, according to the director of EPIC’s open government program, in blatant violation of FOIA and contrary to the law which makes public information about government activity available. A slow erosion of government transparency is more dangerous than a sudden 180, for it is such subversion of civil liberties that leaves them lost for good.





Leave Your Comment →
14 Comments
Angela Towry
01.11.2013
you would think yes
Nicholas Péti
01.11.2013
The only thing is that hoMelAnd seCuRity is NOT a government agency. It is free and independent from the government !!!!
Mitchell Miranda
01.11.2013
The very word secrecy is repugnant in a free and open society.~JFK
Jeff Long
01.11.2013
Of course they should!!!
John McKanna
01.11.2013
What a stupid question.
Chandler Stalvey
01.11.2013
Some things are no available under FIOA and this would be one of them.
Susan Jefferson
01.11.2013
Should governmental agencies comply more effectively with transparency measures? … Well, yes. Especially when they ran on a platform promising transparency. I mean … that is what Obama said, right? Transparency in government?
Jenny Jo
01.11.2013
In 2011, James X. Dempsey, a public policy expert at the Center for Democracy and Technology, which tracks civil liberties, notes, “We wouldn’t want this [type of program] to become a backdoor form of surveillance.”
Too late.
Terri Harel
01.11.2013
@tlharel
Definitely. But isn’t that the whole problem? EPIC asks for documents and 16 months later still not a single document is released. By then, they’ve probably done what they wanted to in the first place…no repercussions.
Jenny Jo
01.11.2013
Yep.. Done what they wanted and with no oversight by the people. Also conveniently for them, no one can ever be held accountable for abuse of powers. Congressmen cannot be held liable for the workings of the agencies they create, and the agencies have no citizen appointed oversight, they are all controlled by the administration. Quite the scheme to remove power from the people. But what do you expect, when no one even objects to what they have been doing for decades? Too blind to see, too complacent to worry, leaves people ripe for plundering.
Christopher Hood
01.11.2013
Yes
Micheal Cosby
01.11.2013
Yes! Same as for any other person or company…not excuses please.
Adora Buckley Libertucci
01.11.2013
If homeland security is a private agency, why are we paying for it? And if we’re paying for it, it should abide by rules we create – like FOIL and transparency. Along with performing for profit – adding costs to us – these are problems associated with privatization of governmental agencies. I recently went to a post office subcontractor. They had no stamps.
Edward Theilmann
01.11.2013
No,we should just let them walk all over us and our constitutional rights.I mean come on,they are taking away your freedom to make you safe.What’s wrong with you,don’t you want to be safe ?