Since it was first mooted, the system -- which uses public, commercial databases to verify travelers' identities and intelligence information in order to allocate them individual threat ratings -- has been lambasted by privacy and civil liberties advocates and has faced a rough ride from Congress. Last year, lawmakers wrote language into several bills barring any funding for the program until a series of eight privacy, civil liberty and effectiveness goals were met. A report last month by congressional auditors found it had met only one of those eight targets.

Frustrated lawmakers vented at Stone. "We keep being told, 'CAPPS II is coming, CAPPS II is coming,'" said Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., the chairman of the Aviation Subcommittee, pointing out that there was currently no firm date even to begin testing of the system.

Rep. Bill Pascrell, D-N.J., echoed the views of many committee members when he said that the agency needs "to do a much better job of assuring the American people that CAPPS II is not Big Brother."

Stone explained that the planned appointment of a privacy officer and an external privacy oversight panel was designed to provide just such reassurance. It would "also result in an improvement in our privacy practice and compliance," he said.

The news was welcomed by the Department of Homeland Security's own privacy officer, Nuala O'Connor Kelly, who told United Press International she was "thrilled" by the move.

Kelly, who is seen as a tough advocate for privacy rights within the department, said that the appointee would be the fourth specialist privacy officer within the department. The national cybersecurity division and the biometric border control program called US-VISIT have already announced similar appointments. The officers report to senior officials within their division or program, but they also report to Kelly.

She says this duality is "the hardest thing about being a privacy officer: you have to be both inside and outside. You have to be a part of the team, to be involved in all the policy discussions at the highest levels; but at the same time, you have to be ready to make constructive criticisms when they're necessary, and you have to remember your broader responsibility. As privacy officer, I have a statutory duty not just to the department, but to Congress and through them to the public."

One senior administration official said that the agency had been under pressure to make the appointment for more than a year. The official said it was only the public chastisement they received recently over the agency's role in facilitating the possibly unlawful transfer of data from Jet Blue to a defense contractor that persuaded its leadership to take the plunge. "It's just a shame it took them so long," the official said.

Privacy experts cautioned that in order to be truly effective and independent, the oversight board would need to include people who are willing to challenge and question the agency. "They ought to include persistent critics of the program," said one long-time privacy professional who asked not to be named. "If they're all ex-TSA employees, that will be a danger sign."

All rights reserved. Copyright 2004 by United Press International. Sections of the information displayed on this page (dispatches, photographs, logos) are protected by intellectual property rights owned by United Press International. As a consequence, you may not copy, reproduce, modify, transmit, publish, display or in any way commercially exploit any of the content of this section without the prior written consent of by United Press International.

Community
Email This Article
Comment On This Article

Related Links
SpaceDaily
Search SpaceDaily
Subscribe To SpaceDaily Express
Cyberwar - Internet Security News - Systems and Policy Issues

Memory Foam Mattress Review

SPACE MEDIA NETWORK PROMOTIONS Solar Energy Solutions Tempur-Pedic Mattress Comparison ... Newsletters :: SpaceDaily :: SpaceWar :: TerraDaily :: Energy Daily XML Feeds :: Space News :: Earth News :: War News :: Solar Energy News