Posted in

DoD wants to scan service members’ emails

In an effort to foresee events like soldier suicides and the shooting spree committed by Nidal Hasan at Fort Hood, the Pentagon provided $35 million to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) so they can develop a way to scan emails of service members according to CNN;

“Each time we see an incident like a soldier in good mental health becoming homicidal or suicidal or an innocent insider becoming malicious, we wonder why we didn’t see it coming,” DARPA says. “When we look through the evidence after the fact, we often find a trail — sometimes even an “obvious” one. The question is: Can we pick up the trail before the fact, giving us time to intervene and prevent an incident.”

Yeah, that sounds good, but privacy concerns aside, someone tell me what the politically correct military will do with this information. The FBI had emails between Hasan and radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki that should have raised flags and perhaps prevented the Fort Hood shooting spree, but the FBI didn’t even warn the Army about it.

Of course, Hasan was making noises in his unit to commanders and supervisors that should have raised flags, too. So, given all of things they want to accomplish with this new system, the Pentagon and the military still failed. Throwing money at a problem and developing a new whiz-bang won’t do anything unless they correct their personnel problems first.

This is like the TSA strip searching 80-year-old women. They want to act like they’re doing something, but the whole process is more about appearances than actual security. Unless they overcome the political climate, it’s just an exercise in mental masturbation.

11 thoughts on “DoD wants to scan service members’ emails

  1. I couldn’t tell you the exact USMJ ruling on this, but as a service member you do have a reduced expectation of privacy, free speech and other “rights” that would normally be guaranteed in the Constitution. I can still remember JAG in-briefings to call attention to the fact that you’re in a whole ‘nother world now and you may not have the rights you think you have.

    That said, there is a long history of screening service member mail, think back to the censor duties of service members in WWII and other wars to screen and redact content being sent back home to protect OPSEC.

    So-is this an invasion of privacy? Yes, but quite possibly service members may not have this as a protected privacy.

    Is this likely to do any good? That’s obviously still a question, although whatever the FBI did with it is technically not relevant here because this is an entirely new group of people with an entirely new implementation.

    Time will tell ultimately, but initially I’m not 100% turned off by the idea.

  2. S6R: I tend to agree with Jonn on this issue. The military had actionable intelligence on Hasan and yet failed to do anything with it due to, what I believe is, political correctness. Their reading member’s email definitely falls under OPSEC & PERSEC, but unless they’re willing to act, it’s a moot point.

  3. @Thor: Oh,I grant you that Jonn’s point on Hasan and the failed action was on the money. Mostly for the reasons you cite to. I just think this is one of those thoughts that gets thrown out there with no nod to what the ultimate implementation will be. If it has teeth, I have no problem with it. If it’s another typical, wanking, do nothing project-then it’s probably a useless invasion of privacy.

  4. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander right?

    Let’s just give up all expectations of privacy entirely as a public. Forget just the .mil! We have a dangerous society. Terrorists are plotting somewhere as we speak. We must allow protection of ourselves from ourselves! Only the Govt knows what’s best for us. We don’t need silly things like liberty if it impairs security. Of course not!

    When do I get fitted for my helmet that disrupts thinking? I’m hoping for an extra heavy model with random blasts of static and conflicting audio- constant but alternating. Wouldn’t want to accidentally think enough to take it off!

    VA pills rock, right? Zombie time. count to 10. Breathe. We’re the issue and the problem. Damn untrustworthy Vets, Soldiers, Marines, etc.

    In the immortal words of Rockwell: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bQwin3Vv0k

  5. I’m a little confused as to what the story is here – other than, most likely, more contractors to be lining their pockets. Any military member who doesn’t already know that the government is screening their email anyway must be, I don’t know, living in a cave? All you have to do is read the warnings that pop up on your computer screen whenever you’re logging in to know that everything you do, including any hardware that is attached, is subject to monitoring.

  6. Anonymous- You must be reading a different article than the rest of us. Nowhere in the article do they propose this will be limited to AKO or the like.

    Of course anyone in the military who uses AKO or whatever their branch’s equivalent is, as well as theater specific email should be aware that it is subject to and may be monitored.

    What they are proposing here, in light of that, should indicate they would seek ways to monitor communications of personal email.

    “Well, just don’t give them a real email address”, one might say. In AKO, you have the option to use an external email address in case of password errors etc. Most people would tend to use their go to personal email for that. In light of the provisions within the Patriot Act, it would not surprise me if this is already being done on a small scale line weighted and baited for the prey.

    In an overall broader aspect as a net concept…I find issue with that.

    If this is done, and made known, the DOD will not like the backlash both internally and on the front lines of recruiting.

  7. I don’t know the specifics of things, but the warning pops up on several .mil of .gov sites when you log in and it says, basically, that use of their system, including any hardware attached to it, constitutes consent to monitoring. In any event, that is about enough for me to conclude that I don’t have a whole lot of privacy…

  8. Also, did you notice how they lifted the previous restrictions on accessing Facebook, Yahoo, Gmail, stuff like that, from a government computer…

Comments are closed.