Homeland Security 2.0, Terrorist Networks Analyzed

from the chair-of-the-math dept

Mon, Mar 13th 2006 9:02am — Joseph Weisenthal

Just in case the web 2.0 set ever gets bored of applying their understanding of network effects to things like MySpace clones and tagging sites, their services could be employed by the government for some weightier issues. Some believe that network theory could be a potent tool in thwarting terrorism. However, some of the early attempts sound less than stellar. One network expert drew a map showing that all of the 9/11 hijackers were strongly connected to ringleader Mohammad Atta (duh!). Other charts produced were over 20 feet long, packed with so much information, that they were useless. The problems with this technique are similar those of data mining, namely that there's so much information, and so many red flags, that security forces can't respond efficiently. Still, as long as security officials take their cues from the TV show Numb3rs, quantitative techniques to fighting terrorism will persist.

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

7 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 13 Mar 2006 @ 10:13am

Yeah and now that it's all over the media... I'm sure the *real* terrorists will simply communicate using other methods.

And what have we gained?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ben McNelly, 13 Mar 2006 @ 11:06am

Muhahahaha!
Just by hitting this post, you have been added to the network! Just by saying Mohammad Atta, or words like bomb, plane, knife, hijack, ect... you are adding more meat to the muddle that is online datamining inteligence. not that saying Mohammad Atta is a bad thing, or saying Mohammad Atta automaticaly suggest you have anything to do with him, just that Mohammad Atta is a know leader in the terror world.

- Now you only get about seven links to this artical before your officialy a hub point, so dont be posting in any blogs that link to this post! And dont say "praise Allah" and Mohammad Atta, in the same sentence.

Now you have to realise that (according to the artical) the N.S.A. intercepts around 650 million communications worldwide every day, and we all know GB is listening, so combine that with a bunch of geeks at the CIA trying to magicaly generate a 3d web of links that will predict the rapture and/or the next terror atack (of course involving Mohammad Atta), it seems likely that in the future, this artical should be able to get you arested or at least your phone tapped...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jezsik, 13 Mar 2006 @ 11:34am

Read "Blink"
In "Blink : The Power of Thinking Without Thinking" Malcolm Gladwell tells the story of a general who was put in charge of the "bad guys" in a mock war. The "good guys" had an unbelievable amount of data and charts and profiles and, naturally, a whole lotta technological advantages -- there was no way they could lose! No way? The general, using a minimal amount of information and instructions to his troops, cleaned their clocks! He wasn't hampered by data overload and analysis paralysis.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
giafly, 13 Mar 2006 @ 12:00pm

Look amongst the Republicans
Data mining is very effective, when used with large numbers of people who don't try to hide their true opinions. I expect the FBI can use this technique to track Islamic extremists.

But any sensible Islamacist terrorist will know this. So he will be clean-shaven and neatly dressed - no beard or turban - and will deliberately avoid the company of extremists. If questioned about politics, he may support George Bush.

For example: "The photograph of the brother in these documents should be without a beard. It is preferable that the brother's public photograph [on these documents] be also without a beard. If he already has one [document] showing a photograph with a beard, he should replace it." - Al Queda Manual

Data mining would show such terrorists as linked to Republicans rather than Al Queda.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Abram Gutang, 13 Mar 2006 @ 12:02pm

Trip over "intelegance"
The problem is the bureaucracy of the government. The technology to translate and understand human language by machine is available a long time ago, however by the time the congress writes a legislation / the president gets interested / the house votes / the congress overturns / the president vetoes the congress / the supreme court rules in favor / etc. the hardware they are buying is outdated... if govt. wishes to get something done, the ought to be able to switch to new technology in atleast a few months. I bet CIA is still running Win3.1 on Intel DX/2
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Andrew Strasser, 13 Mar 2006 @ 1:24pm

I HIGHLY DOUBT THAT.
I would be more suspect of them running a machine that isn't even on the market in their main facilities. The parts you may ever see may look like that though what they have buried deep within their walls is much more computer power than anyone on the block can get. It may have been outdated, however it was outdated classified which normally runs how many years ahead of schedule on technology?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
US Protection Agency, 29 Mar 2006 @ 5:09pm

I Highly doubt that also
I have to agree with Mr Strasser on that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]