Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

THE CRIPPLING EFFECT OF ENCRYPTION

The ability to collect information and evidence that will aid in the apprehension of terrorists—and more importantly, aid in the prevention of terrorist acts is critical to our counterterrorism efforts. Electronic surveillance and lawful searches and seizures are among law enforcement's most effective tools in gathering this type of information. The proliferation of technologies that enable criminals to encrypt information and communications transmitted or stored in computers or passed across telephone lines, however, is rapidly destroying the usefulness of these tools.

Recently, the Administration announced a 60-90 day effort to have industry come to the table with government to see if agreement can be reached on how best to preserve the ability of law enforcement to access the "plaintext" of encrypted communications pursuant to court order. If the critical public safety needs to law enforcement cannot be accommodated through this process, then I intend to continue to press for legislation that requires all encryption products manufactured in or imported into the United States to allow law enforcement access to key-recoverable plaintext versions of encrypted information.

Currently, encryption products are widely available, and for the criminal user afford a cheap way of ensuring that he can conduct his activities via telephone and computer without leaving any decipherable trail of evidence. I am joined by the entire law enforcement community in contending that non-recoverable encryption is perhaps the single biggest challenge facing law enforcement. For this reason, I strongly support the bill adopted by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on September 11, 1997. The Committee's mark-up of H.R. 695 effectively addresses all of law enforcement's public safety and national security concerns regarding encryption products, unlike several bills being considered in the Senate, all of which will devastate our ability to protect public safety if enacted. If the United States hopes to continue to wage a serious war against terrorism and drugs, legislation securing the public safety and national security needs in any national encryption scheme must be passed.

We must remember that Ramzi Yousef, responsible for carrying out the bombing of the World Trade Center, used his laptop comoputer to store encrypted details of his plot to bomb United States airliners and flight schedules. Fortunately, the FBI was able to decrypt this information which was recovered in the lawful seizure of Yousef's computer. Had the information been encrypted using a non-recoverable type of encryption, the plan to plant explosive devices on flights to the United States might never have been discovered and thus prevented.

Today, five years later, most encryption products on the market are, in fact, nonrecoverable; law enforcement attempts to decipher the information, pursuant to court authorization, are unsuccessful. We must recognize the valuable lessons learned from the World Trade Center bombing and support law enforcement efforts to combat terrorism. There can be no clearer indication of such support than by providing law enforcement access to key-recoverable "plaintext" versions of encrypted information.

In the five years since the World Trade Center bombing, the FBI has made significant progress in combating terrorism in the United States; the Counterterrorism Center, the Domestic Preparedness programs, and the NIPC each evidence the great strides we have made in protecting this Nation from terrorist attack. Unfortunately, these and other efforts will have been in vain if would-be terrorists are allowed to utilize encryption technology with impunity.

Sincerely yours,

LOUIS J. FREEH,

Director.

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY,
Washington, DC, March 31, 1998.

Hon. DORIS MEISSNER,

Immigration and Naturalization Service,
Department of Justice, Washington, DC.

DEAR COMMISSIONER MEISSNER: We are concerned that the INS has failed to commit the resources necessary to develop in a timely way the Foreign Student Tracking Program mandated by Congress in 1996, P.L. 104-208 §641. While the law required the national program to begin on January 1, the INS has yet to implement even the pilot program. As you are well aware, this tracking program was borne out of national security concerns expressed by FBI Director Freeh and former Dep

uty Attorney General Jamie Gorelick in 1995 about the inability of the INS to track foreign students' whereabouts, courses of study, and sources of funding. An INS task force created to address these issues stated that the "guiding principle to [its] effort" was that "the American public needs to have some basic level of comfort in the knowledge that its government is guarding against the danger. * * * [of] instances where terrorists and criminal aliens have been linked to student visas". In 1996, this report became the basis for a law requiring INS to develop a national system for tracking foreign students.

In response to this mandate, INS prudently initiated development of a pilot program in preparation for developing the national system. Our understanding is that to date INS has had to spend only about $3 million on developing the pilot, and that only another $2 million is required to get the pilot up and running in the near future. However, immediately prior to Chairman Kyl holding a hearing in the Judiciary Subcommittee on Technology, Terrorism, and Government Information on February 24, INS management cut funding to mere "maintenance" of an incomplete pilot, and cut out all funding for development of the national program. It was only after public discussion by Senators Kyl and Ranking Member Feinstein about this program that INS reallocated the funds necessary for development through 1998. We find this record disturbing.

In that light, below are questions which we believe require clarification. Your responses will be entered into the record of the February 24 subcommittee hearing. Value of program to counterterrorism efforts. What is your assessment of the value of this program to INS' overall counterterrorism efforts?

INS commitment to the program. Have you made the commitment to continue full funding for information technology development and the program support of this system necessary for implementation and deployment?

Status of national development. Considering that this Congress appropriated nearly $4 billion to INS this past year, can you tell me the exact funding levels committed for development of the pilot in 1998? For the national development of the program in 1998? Through 2001?

Request for demonstration. Please make available an operational demonstration of the currently developed prototype for our staffs. Sincerely,

JON KYL,
U.S. Senator.

RICK SANTORUM,

U.S. Senator.

Hon. JON KYL,

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Washington, DC, August 20, 1998.

Chairman, Subcommittee on Technology, Terrorism, and Government Information, Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in response to your March 31 inquiry regarding your support of the Immigration and Naturalization Service's (INS) efforts to develop an effective foreign student/exchange visitor monitoring and reporting system as mandated in Section 641 of Public Law 104–208. As stated in our July 16 letter to you, the INS implemented last year a cooperative interagency pilot initiative in partnership with the U.S. Information Agency (USIA) and the Department of State (DOS) for monitoring and reporting on F academic students, M vocational students, and J exchange visitors. The pilot is known as the Coordinated Interagency Program Regulating International Students (CIPRIS). Phase I of the CIPRIS pilot was implemented in April of last year, well before the statutory start date of January 1, 1998. Subsequent major operational enhancements to the CIPRIS pilot were developed in September 1997 and April 1998 respectively.

When it commenced in April of 1997, the CIPRIS pilot was in limited operation, enabling the 21 pilot schools to create an initial student record electronically and immediately transmit it via the Internet to the INS' CIPRIS system. By early April of this year we successfully implemented a fully functional pilot electronic tracking, screening, and reporting of students and exchange visitors by the pilot schools to INS' CIPRIS system through deployment of the Phase III CIPRIS pilot enhancements to all the pilot institutions, the USIA, the INS Texas Service Center, and our Port-of-Entry at Atlanta-Hartsfield International Airport.

There was a very brief period in which the full funding necessary to continue operational support for full enhancement of the pilot and funds to continue to develop requirements for a national CIPRIS program had to be identified. The CIPRIS contractor support for program and national development was interrupted for only a brief period. Funds, however, were allocated to support full pilot enhancements and continued development of the functional requirements for a national system.

Our July 16 letter addressed your March 31 questions. The same basic information follows, with additional clarification of INS' Fiscal Year 2000 funding plans for CIPRIS. As mandated by the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRĪRA), the Fiscal Year 2000 budget will include a provision to begin collecting a fee for this program. The fees collected will fund continual implementation of the program.

Question 1. Value of program to counter terrorism efforts. What is your assessment of the value of this program to INS' overall counter terrorism efforts?

Answer. The INS maintains various databases relating to the entry, exit, and immigration status of foreign nonimmigrants such as visitors, students, temporary workers, and diplomats. These systems are integral to our mission of maintaining control of our borders. A peripheral benefit of these systems, in concert with the databases of other government agencies, is the tracking of the movements and activities of persons who are subjects of law enforcement or national security interest. There are diverse reasons for tracking the educational activities of foreign students. Among those are non-proliferation of sensitive scientific information and prevention of the release of such information to terrorist supporting states or states which may be regarded as real or potential military rivals of the United States. A system such as CIPRIS, if instituted nationally, would increase our ability to track such data efficiently and improve our ability to implement laws or policy which restrict the availability of such information.

Question 2. INS commitment to the program. Have you made the commitment to continue full funding for information technology development and the program support of this system necessary for implementation and deployment?

Answer. The INS is identifying funding options for Fiscal Year 1999 to continue planned development and is in the midst of developing the Fiscal Year 2000 budget estimates. As mentioned above, we expect the program to be funded through fees as mandated in IIRIRA beginning in Fiscal Year 2000. At this point, we believe that the phasing in of CIPRIS will reach completion in 2002.

Question 3. Status of national development. Can you tell me the exact funding levels committed for development of the pilot in Fiscal Year 98: For the national development of the program in Fiscal Year 1998? Through 2001?

Answer. For Fiscal Year 1998, the INS is providing $3.2 million for the full funding required for program support, operation and maintenance of the pilot, as well as to support programmatic and Information Technology functional requirements for national development of the program. For Fiscal Year 1999, as noted previously, the INS is identifying funding options to continue development. Beginning in Fiscal Year 2000, the system should be self-supported through fees.

Thank you for your continued interest in this important program. Should have any further questions or concerns regarding this or any other matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

DORIS MEISSNER,
Commissioner.

ISLAMIC INFORMATION CENTER,
Phoenix, AZ, May 22, 1998.

In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

Senator JOHN L. KYL

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

DEAR SENATOR KYL: We Muslims are very concerned and are therefore writing to request your assistance in correcting a terrible injustice which has been perpetrated against millions of law abiding citizens who live in the United States.

In reviewing a statement made by Mr. Steven Emerson, a known opponent of Islam, to the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Terrorism, Technology and Government Information, we detected several gross inaccuracies about Islam and Muslims. If left without correction, this false information could lead those who make policy decisions to reach many wrong conclusions about Muslims.

As was the case following the Oklahoma City bombing, Mr. Emerson has distorted the facts and made numerous false statements; which leads us to conclude that Mr. Emerson is being less than just when it concerns the Muslims. It concerns us that his comments are being taken seriously without being verified for accuracy. Why were Muslims singled out as they were; and why wasn't an Islamic organizations such as ISNA, ICÑA, or the American Muslim Council invited to present balance to the hearings. Omar Ashmawy's comments about "moderate" versus "extreme" Muslims in no way represents the Muslim body within the United States.

We recognize that there are fanatics in every segment of society who will use religion as an excuse to justify their hostility, yet, this fact should never be used as an excuse for denying justice to others. Anyone knowledgeable about Islam knows that it is forbidden to kill innocent men, women, or children, and that the punishment for this is Hell. The ideology of Islam is the same as the ideology and teachings of Abraham, Moses, and Jesus, you will find this for yourselves if you read the Qur'an. The same message was preached by all of them, "worship one God, the Creator of the Heavens and Earth, and associate no partners with God."

We also recognize that it is important to the security of the United States that proper intelligence information is gathered, that it is the responsibility of those gathering such information to ensure that it is accurate, and that misinformation should not be used in such a way as to injury the innocent. Mr. Emerson made false and inflammatory statements following the Oklahoma City bombing which resulted in assaults on innocent Muslims, an innocent Muslim died, and others were terrorized. This occurred because of one man's hatred and the unwillingness of others to search for the truth.

We strongly request that our enclosed write-up be attached as an addendum to the hearings. As you will surely agree, a just and balanced approach is clearly the best way to ensure the safety and security of every citizen within the United States. We also urge the Senate to involve a recognized İslamic organization the next time a hearing touches on Islamic issues.

On behalf of the Public Relations Subcommittee of the Islamic Information Center in Arizona, and all the Muslim constituents in Phoenix, thank you for your assist

ance.

cc. Senate Subcommittee members.

GAMAL M. HEGAZI.
AMMAR HALLOUM.
DAVID HADLEY.
HAFEZ TURK.
ANEESAH NADIR.

О

[merged small][merged small][merged small][graphic]
« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »