Terrorism and Technology

One need not be clairvoyant to know what's on the minds of Americans these days. What may be more difficult to fathom is exactly what the recent acts of war have to do with the world of technology.

The impact of the September 11 tragedy on technology has already been great. In the name of increased security, efforts are being made to pass unnecessary legislation aimed at technology. At the same time, the terrorist attack clearly demonstrated the need for more effective use of technology by the U.S. government.

The terrorist attacks appear to have been surprisingly low-tech. After years of fear based on the Y2K bug, cyber-terrorists, and domestic hackers, in New York City and at the Pentagon knives and jet fuel were the elements of terror.

This is not to belittle the critical importance of the nation's cyber-security. In fact, in many ways, the events of September 11 have demonstrated how important the protection of our society and infrastructure are, and how sorely lacking that protection has been in some ways.

This is particularly true in the area of cyber-security. As recently as the last week of August, the Information Technology Association of America gave the U.S. government and private sector a C- grade for their cyber-security efforts.

Combating Terrorism with Technology

Cyber-security is not the only realm where technology and security meet. State and federal government agencies should seek out ways to improve their use of technology in other security-related areas as well.

Take immigration, for instance. Modified customer relationship management software would make tracking the visa status of legal immigrants much easier. Many of the September 11 terrorists were living in the United States on "lapsed" visas. Had the government employed a higher-tech, more effective visa tracking system, they might well have been deported long before they had the opportunity to attack our country.

Our airport security system, too, suffers from obsolete technology. Most of the machines used to x-ray carry-on baggage are approaching 30 years old, and they were originally designed to spot handguns. Today, the threats are more varied and more subtle; they demand the use of dramatically better technology that is already available.

The liberties afforded us in this country come with an equally important demand for responsibility. We must use the tools at our disposal to protect ourselves.

The federal government's technology weaknesses are widely recognized. Keith A. Rhodes, chief technology officer of the General Accounting Office, admitted, "Virtually all of the largest federal agencies have significant computer security weaknesses that place critical federal operations and assets at risk to computer-based attacks." He predicted the situation would get worse.

"Over 100 countries already have or are developing computer attack capabilities . . .," said Rhodes. "NSA [the National Security Agency] has determined that potential adversaries are developing a body of knowledge about U.S. systems and methods to attack them."

Don't Go Overboard

The growing realization that we need heightened technological security need not--indeed, must not--lead to new federal laws or regulations.

Because of the very nature of technology, no law or regulation could have denied cyber-terrorism tools to the terrorists, and no law or regulation could have protected the United States against a cyber-attack. Only the increased proliferation of high-technology products will create the tight security system we so desperately need now.

This is particularly true with respect to encryption technology. Many of the protocols of strong cryptography are in the public domain. Dozens of programs were created overseas, beyond the control of the U.S. Congress. Moreover, strong encryption is one of the best ways to secure U.S. transactions of all sorts against those who would cause us harm.

What we don't need now are grandstanding or opportunistic members of Congress looking to pass pet technology policy legislation because "the environment seems right." Legislation that was unattractive a year ago, or even weeks ago, is probably still unattractive, even if some may argue that now is exactly the time to limit our technological advancement.

As Attorney General John Ashcroft has quipped, we have spent more time focusing on illegal gambling, including the online variety, than we have on preparing to defend ourselves against terrorists. Many policymakers have simply ignored the very realities of technology--both its abilities and its limitations.

Now is the time to remove those blinders and do what is right.

Bartlett Cleland is director of the IPI Center for Technology Freedom. Formerly he served as Technology and Policy Counsel for Americans for Tax Reform, and earlier he was counsel to Senator John Ashcroft.

For more information ...

Tech Briefing 2001: A Free-Market Guide to Navigating Tech Issues in the 107th Congress. There ought to be a law--against making lots of new laws, especially in the tech sector. The authors discuss market and regulatory considerations in 20 subject areas that have made considerable news. (Competitive Enterprise Institute, 2001)

request PolicyBot documents #7213434 (part 1, 26pp.), #7213435 (part 2, 26pp.), #7213436 (part 3, 30pp.), and #7213437 (part 4, 21pp.)