Attacks Put Spotlight on Boston Counterterrorism Center
http://blogs.wsj.com/cio/2013/04/16/attacks-put-spotlight-on-boston-counterterrorism-center/
Boston's Regional Intelligence Center is poised to aid investigators as they
search for suspects in yesterday's bombing.
The center is one of America's 77 intelligence-sharing facilities, known as
fusion centers, that allow investigators to pool data from local, state and
federal sources. The state-run centers were funded by the Department of
Homeland Security in the years after 9/11 to address the lack of information
sharing among agencies, an issue cited as a factor in the government's
failure to prevent the 2001 attacks.
As investigators attempt to connect the dots in yesterday's attack, Boston's
fusion center will allow authorities to tap thousands of law enforcement
data sources, along with public data like information from credit agencies,
said Mike Sena, president of the National Fusion Center Association, and a
state commander of the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center.
"This is what fusion centers were built for," Mr. Sena said.
Boston's fusion center can help investigators scour for connections among
potential suspects, by mining hundreds of law enforcement sources around the
region, ranging from traffic violations, to jail records and criminal
histories, along with public data like property records, Mr. Sena said. As
the investigation widens, and investigators identify suspects, the system
can help lead authorities to co-conspirators. For example, the system could
flag a possible associate of the suspect by finding a past traffic ticket
issued to someone driving the perpetrator's car.
The system also allows local investigators to access the federal Homeland
Secure Data Network, giving screened personnel access to classified reports
from federal agencies like the Department of Homeland Security and the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, Mr. Sena said.
The fusion center system has its shortcomings, however. Despite their
strengths, fusion centers are hampered by the kinds of data silo issues that
are familiar to any CIO of a large company, according to Mr. Sena.
For example, while authorities can access an array of data sources from
their own state, data collected in fusion centers in other states cannot be
automatically accessed-that information needs to be requested and manually
uploaded. And interoperability issues that stem from a multiplicity of
proprietary search tools-as well as police record systems built by different
vendors-means even information from within California's 70 data systems,
often has to be reformatted before it can be pooled and analyzed, slowing
investigations, Mr. Sena said. And for security reasons, classified reports
from federal agencies cannot be accessed on the same machines, Mr. Sena
said. "Not being able to pull that data together is a huge problem," Mr.
Sena said. "When you are dealing with having to pull in information from 70
systems you can never be that speedy and time is of the essence with real
time crime support and investigation."
Last year, the Senate subcommittee on investigations released a report
questioning the effectiveness of the centers in fighting terrorism and
protecting privacy.
Still, without the fusion centers, investigators would need to physically
pull paper records from dozens of sources, and would need to obtain federal
reports through a lengthy request process, Mr. Sena said. "It gives
investigators access to an array of data they would not even know about
otherwise - it would be stovepiped away."
==========================================
(F)AIR USE NOTICE: All original content and/or articles and graphics in this
message are copyrighted, unless specifically noted otherwise. All rights to
these copyrighted items are reserved. Articles and graphics have been placed
within for educational and discussion purposes only, in compliance with
"Fair Use" criteria established in Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976.
The principle of "Fair Use" was established as law by Section 107 of The
Copyright Act of 1976. "Fair Use" legally eliminates the need to obtain
permission or pay royalties for the use of previously copyrighted materials
if the purposes of display include "criticism, comment, news reporting,
teaching, scholarship, and research." Section 107 establishes four criteria
for determining whether the use of a work in any particular case qualifies
as a "fair use". A work used does not necessarily have to satisfy all four
criteria to qualify as an instance of "fair use". Rather, "fair use" is
determined by the overall extent to which the cited work does or does not
substantially satisfy the criteria in their totality. If you wish to use
copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you
must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
THIS DOCUMENT MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. COPYING AND DISSEMINATION IS
PROHIBITED WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT OWNERS.
No comments:
Post a Comment