Criminal Database Stirs Privacy Concerns

[HardOCP News]

The Justice Department is building a huge database called OneDOJ that allows state and local police officers around the country to search millions of case files from other agencies like the FBI and DEA.

The system, known as "OneDOJ," already holds approximately 1 million case records and is projected to triple in size over the next three years, Justice officials said. The files include investigative reports, criminal-history information, details of offenses, and the names, addresses and other information of criminal suspects or targets, officials said.

Is it just me or did anyone else hear Arnold in their head saying "Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th. In a panic, they try to pull the plug" as they read this article? It’s probably just me.

 

[lyme]

I forgot, you want to protect the privacy of criminals why?

 

[UrielDagda]

Maybe because people shouldn't be crucified for life over a mistake... The attitude of the general populace these days is if anybody breaks any law they should be publicly humiliated and ridiculed for life... Then these same people complain about recidivism.

But that's not the biggest problem I see here. This kind of database could get really bad really fast, considering online identity theft and database hacking issues we deal with already on a regular basis.. Imagine what kinds of messes could be created with this kind of material if it's not locked down properly.

 

[Exavior]

But are you expecting the police to just start running every single person they meet to see if they should harash them? Data protection might be an issue, but I dont' see how this will increase police harassment. While police might be assholes at times I don't see them looking up random people for the hell of it to screw with them. They probably already have a list of people in their area they know that they can screw with.

 

[Team Obi Juan]

Seems to me it would just improve efficiency.

Pull a dude over, write him a ticket, find out several days later that he was a major baddie.

Sounds good to me.


Should we not post sex offenders information online?

 

[thedude42]

This is a total double edged sword, and I have first hand experience at what can go wrong with this kind of thing. My experience is as follows:

I got a job offer from a big company everyone here at [H] knows very well. Working there would expose me to their intellectual property directly, so they do security background checks. The outsource this service to a professional investigation company who also does things like drug testing, and have access to databases and resources for determining people's credit, employment and criminal background information.

Let me say here that this company they outsource to is a professional company serving many businesses in the area locally. These businesses are publicly traded, big name businesses and the company doing the investigations provide a direct, local resource for the portions of the businesses located here in Austin, Texas. Therefore you wouldn't go through the exact same company, say, if you were hired at a California location. However, the investigation would still be accomplished by a local investigation service.

My final word on getting hired was heald up for 2 weeks. That was 2 weeks without pay, 2 weeks not learning the new environment that is probably one of the most complex in the country, if not the world. 2 weeks where they did not have the extra person working to fill their empty position. I took it upon myself as soon as I found out that my security check was taking longer than normal to see what was up.

Personally, I have an honorable discharge from the US Air Force, and am still covered by a SECRET security clearance (through 2008). I couldn't think of anything that would make this company question my security risk, as I am in no more debt than any college student, and probably have a better credit rating than any of them.

After 3 days of making calls, someone finally gave me a case number for Honolulu County (where I lived between 1996 and 1998) that they claimed concerned me. This was news to me, because the most I ever encountered the law in Hawaii was traffic stops, none of them criminal in nature. I was told that Honolulu County did not provide an easy way to get this information directly, and they were waiting on delivery of the complete report from Honolulu County Courthouse.

The next 2 days I made some phone calls to Hawaii, and someone finally gave me a web site they used for DIRECT ACCESS to ALL of their case files dating back 20 years.

As it turns out, I had ample resources to prove (once I saw the complete case file myself, online, free of charge) that the person who just so happened to have my same name was, in fact, not me. Simple looking at the date of the arrest, and then looking at my military records, I was definitely not in Hawaii at the time of this arrest (unless I'm the uber-military stereotype, who can accomplish tasks which awarded me a medal supporting the Kosovo conflict, AND get arrested for drunk and disorderly on the other side of the world AT THE SAME TIME!)

OK, now the point of this drawn out little tale: this experience proved to me that even "professional" private services lack the completeness required for efficiency in accomplishing proper background investigations. This demonstration showed that the people providing the investigation services relied more on their processes than on human thinking, prudent measures and initiative to take matters the distance required, no matter how short that distance was, to complete their tasks.

One may argue that a federal database would be more complete, but being a former federal employee, I beg to differ. If anything, police will view such a database as another way for them to justify their actions on paper, and the implimentation and training for such a database will lack the completeness required for effective use of such an information based tool.

In other words, you get pulled over, you have a state drivers license. OK, first name, last name, DOB into the database, and look what pops up! Felony conviction in another state 10 years ago, and warrant out for another misdemeanor. Except that you aren't the person who turned up on the search, and there is no way to prove that right at the moment of the traffic stop.

Another scenario may be getting arrested for "disorderly conduct in public" say, for demonstrating on your state's capital against an anti-net neutrality bill (I use this because I would go to jail for something like that) and the same thing happens: a quick search against the most fundamental human statistics matches a number of other people, and your life is put on hold while you sit in jail for someone else's criminal offense (last I checked, demonstrating in public is not criminal provided you did nothing more than demonstrate, ie, no vandalism, even if unruly demonstrators did commit criminal acts).

Final word, don't get me wrong, I'm all for a unified information system in this country, akin to interpol in the EU and pre-EU Europe. But the USA has a track record of poorly implementing these kinds of national projects that waste more than resources than they serve, and on an issue like this that DIRECTLY impacts the lives of citizens, we need to question the government closely on their motives and actions less we loose our fundimental freedoms through technicalities and clerical mistakes.

 

[Teknikallysekure]

I imagine this would work about as well as the national do not fly list, or any of the other bumbling sink holes spurned by the TSA.

How long will it take Americans to realize that these new implementations of security are simply large transfers of our tax dollars into fat cats pockets which leave most of us with no more security than we had before, while adding new layers of insecurity?

Doesn't anyone know what lobbyists do for a living, or why most of our politicians eat out of their hands?

Just keep on sacrificing those liberties for freedom, great tradeoff.