Paying Off Your Credit Card Is Letting The Terrorists Win
from the homeland-security dept
Recently, a Texas couple learned that making a large credit card payment would trigger the alarm bells at Homeland Security, which scans transactions looking for unusual activity. Eventually, because the couple weren't terrorists, the matter was cleared up. Bruce Schneier has a compelling column on why data mining, which works well for discovering credit card fraud, doesn't work for anticipating terrorism. Credit card fraudsters work in very consistent patterns, and verifying a case is as simple as making a phone call. It's not so easy to just call up a potential terrorist and ask whether they've recently commited wire fraud to obtain a dirty bomb. Data mining leads to the same problems that allowed 9/11 to happen -- so many red flags pop up, security forces can't know what's worth responding to. As anyone who reads a lot of blogs knows, simply adding more to the list isn't a good way to get information. Not only is separating noise from signal a problem, it's easy to confuse noise for signal, and go on bad information. Considering the time wasted sifting through data, trying to find what's good, and developing aggregators that give the appearance of relevancy, it's worrisome that Homeland Security is using a similar approach.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0308/p04s01-woeu.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
teens having sex video
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
Well, since these laws have been around since about 1985, I don't think we can blame Bush. Maybe you could blame Reagan if you wanted to.
http://www.irs.gov/irm/part4/ch26s12.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No Subject Given
The government has aways monitored financial transactions of Americans, and for good reason...we are the vendors, consumers, everything that makes our American economy turn.
If you purchase stock, don't you monitor the financial decisions of that company?
The government's constant tracking of our finances (note: they tend to not care until the transactions are rather large or quite numerous) is a way for the IRS to monitor their investments. (especially if you own a business)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mining thin ore
If data mining is going to be useful it has to start with information which is known to be associated with terrorists and build forward from there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
More worrisome...
More worrisome is that someone honestly expects homeland security to actually provide any security from professional terrorists.
It's a burocratic and political quagmire lead and controlled not by specialists and experts in whatever relevant field but rather political appointee’s (aka "Yes" men of Bush)
Only thing HS is good for? Making life difficult and terrorising the American people
I could also say for giving people a false sense of security but imo only the dumb actually believe they are more secure
Sad thing is it will probably take a dozen more 9/11's for "the people" to actually "fix" HS so that it does work
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: More worrisome...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: More worrisome...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: More worrisome...
http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/rids/20060303/i/r1442414268.jpg?x=283&y=345&sig=_yY_ OCpXf0J1AGsRk14c5Q--
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: More worrisome...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
for the greater good
they may not exactly be suicide bombing terrorists, but it cant hurt to put away drug dealers either
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: for the greater good
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: for the greater good
Ive been working with RCMP (Canadian highest police) FBI and Interpole..
Ive been working on a special project for a the National banque in Canada where EVERY transaction over 10k PER WEEK (all combined) trigers and event automaticly...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: for the greater good
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: for the greater good
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: for the greater good
>they may not exactly be suicide bombing terrorists, but it cant hurt to put away drug dealers either
Because taking drugs are the same as killing 3000 people by crashing planes into buildings, or killing yourself and 300 others by blowing yourself up in a building?
Keep your puritanical assumptions of right and wrong to yourself. At most taking drugs only hurts the person taking them, if they dont go driving or other irresponsible things.
I have more to worry about from people like you who want to regulate other peoples lives than junkies.
Oh! The children. Have to protect those innocent little creatures from heaven. If you care so much, protect your own, and leave others to do the same in the manner they choose.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: for the greater good
by Mousky on Thursday, March 9th, 2006 @ 08:52AM
http://mousky.blogspot.com/
"What is even more scary is the fact that Americans are letting the government monitor their financial transactions in the name of security. The land of the free and brave? I don't think so. "
The governments been monitoring this for 60+ years. The agency that's been doing the monitoring is, among other, called the IRS. The government hand is in a tremendous amount of financial tranactions, from sales taxes, to permits fees, to tax returns, to liscense fees. (Is it right?, that's a another whole subject) It's probably no better in any other European or Asian countries. (Don't think for an instant that Swiss accounts aren't monitored, if you want to see a messed up banking system look at China) Just for reference, if you deposited more then 10,000 dollars in a bank at one time in the US. The bank has to report that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: for the greater good
Is a parent supposed to single-handedly rid the streets of drug dealers pushing to kids? I believe the government has a responsibility there as well.
I don't have a problem with drug dealers, but I do have a problem with stereo-typical drug dealers, the ones shooting people in broad daylight on a neighorhood street and/or the ones pushing to young kids.
"Keep your puritanical assumptions of right and wrong to yourself. At most taking drugs only hurts the person taking them, if they dont go driving or other irresponsible things"
Most people, except the few responsible users, go out and drive while influenced. Sometimes they run from the cops, sometimes they get really smart and decide to rob something or shoot something.
It's a parents responsibility to raise, educate, and protect their children. It's the governments responsibility to protect the entire American family from the idiots in the world who feel no need for protection.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
SAVE THE CHILDREN!!! THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!!!
Your hysteria has reached a new high Dani.
You seem to believe that drug dealers are some sort of zombies, or vampires, running around forcing drugs on kids who don’t want them and turning them in to horribly disfigured criminal drug users.
You want to make drug dealers disappear? It’s easy. Get rid of the demand for drugs.
A parents job is not to rid the streets of drug dealers. As you well know. The parents job is to raise self secure, well educated, well rounded children who have no use, or time for drugs in their lives.
If the kids don’t want drugs, they won’t get them. If they do want drugs, you can’t stop them. Don’t blame the dealer for your failure as a parent.
As for the “governments responsibility” to protect the “entire American family...” the very idea of such a responsibility, or such a family is Orwellian beyond my most frightening nightmares. It frightens me to no end that that there are people alive who seem to equate the American people with children, and the government with those children’s parents. Are you getting kickbacks from W. or something? You are seriously frightening.
You give me the creeps woman.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: for the greater good
But back to terrorism. What right does the government have to snoop in your finances without a warrant? Read the Fourth Amendment. It says the following:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. They have no right to go snooping unless they have a warrant. The warrant needs probable cause. They did not have it when they flagged the credit account for payment. So no snooping allowed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: for the greater good
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: for the greater good
When you reply to a posting where there are several posts with the same title perhaps you could identify exactly which one of us you are trying to start a flame war with.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: for the greater good
Drug users are not just hurting themselves. They have a severe impact on their families lives and finances. They are also responsible for a large number of crimes such as robbery and burglary.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: for the greater good
The laws were passed to 'catch terrorists'.
Now you want it to to be used in non-terror ways.
Good. I look forward to your support when it is used to catch tax cheats and later people who are engaged in unhealthy behavior when the government gets into the health care business.
After that, how about enforcement of the government backed marriage contract?
(And if you have been following the story, Homeland Security didn't call them. And, because of the governement cancelled payment, the credit card company ding'ed 'em $140 for late payment.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tracking financial transactions...
In Europe, Council of Europe directives require the electronic reporting of most financial transactions, coordinated through Moneyval. Unlike what is going on in the US, this is only indirectly controlled by the political process and the CoE is outside of the EU structures.
That's not to say that any of this is bad, as there is so much volume, it's very rare for anything to show up other than egregious patterns. Also, most of this was setup to combat drugs, not terrorism. Part of the government's role is to protect it's citizens, and failing to do so can result in spectacular fallout (see Katrina), but implementing these sorts of tracking measures can also result in a backlash (see the recent NSA troubles). Damned if you do, damned if you don't and it's hard to find the right balance.
Just keep in mind, if you are trying to hide from the Feds, keep your transactions substantially under $9k .... ;-)
Chris.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yes
Big Brother is Watching you...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Suspicious Activity Reports
"Under 12 CFR 21, national banks are required to report known or suspected criminal offenses, at specified thresholds, or transactions over $5,000 that they suspect involve money laundering or violate the Bank Secrecy Act. Similar regulations by other regulators apply to other financial institutions." - Comptroller of the Currency Administrator of National Banks, "Reports of Suspicious Activities, and Bank Secrecy Act Compliance Program" - US Treasury, Google Search
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
911
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The root cause is...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]