Digital Age Defense

On regulation of technology

Six degrees of Mohamed Atta

 Analysis/commentary, Privacy from government  No Responses »
Sep 302013
 

Have you met me? Are we acquainted, either in real life or in social media, or even just had a passing exchange at some point via email? If so, congratulations – you are now connected to a 9/11 mastermind, and the NSA probably knows it.

I am not, of course, a 9/11 mastermind, nor have I been personally acquainted with anyone who was. In fact, by the time I learned of this connection, 9/11 had long since happened and Mohamed Atta was long since dead. But I have a friend in Germany who has a friend who was at the same college in Hamburg that Atta attended, and now, by the NSA’s logic, we are all tainted by the association.

Which is complete and utter nonsense, of course. Mere acquaintance (even when not so attenuated) is not a proxy for influence. Even friendship itself is not a proxy for influence. Relationships between people are many and nuanced and the simple knowledge of one person by another (or even a close social or familial tie) in no way connotes endorsement of every, or even any, aspect of one’s life by the other. Unfortunately the NSA doesn’t seem to realize this (or, more likely, doesn’t care).

In mapping the connections of everyone – every American and everyone else – the NSA presumes meaning in the bare connection itself, which is absurd. Decontextualized metadata showing a connection offers no insight as to what sort of relationship it might represent, and as such it’s wrong to consider it a proxy for any particular kind.

It’s also just as wrong to attempt to derive meaning from these connections because it turns out we are all connected. There is a reason we play “Six Degrees of Separation,” because it reveals the miracle of how upwards of seven billion people spread out on a planet surface of nearly 200 million square miles share this nonetheless pretty small world after all.

Obviously some people share in it more constructively than others. There are some who would choose to do violence to it. But not all of us, or even most of us, and in mapping all of our connections so indiscriminately we are all treated with the same suspicion and surveillance as the few actual bad actors. The NSA might argue that such surveillance of our interconnectivity is necessary to “discover and track” these bad actors, but by putting all of our lives under such scrutiny the NSA presumptively treats the innocent as equally guilty by association.

  • Share:
  • digg Digg this post
  • facebook Share on Facebook
  • linkedin Share on Linkedin
  • posterous Share on Posterous
  • reddit share via Reddit
  • stumble Share with Stumblers
  • tumblr Tumblr it
  • twitter Tweet about it
  • vkontakte Share on vkontakte
  • bookmark Bookmark in Browser
 Posted by Cathy Gellis on September 30, 2013  Tagged with: 4th Amendment, metadata, NSA

Search the blog archives:

About Digital Age Defense

Tracking, discussing, pontificating, and, where necessary, defending against liability for technology use and development.

Read more about this project's reason for being.

Site maintained by Cathy Gellis

Professional site
Personal blog

Follow Digital Age Defense

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
RSS feed for all posts

General categories

  • Examples
    (RSS)
  • Quicklinks
    (RSS)
  • Analysis/commentary
    (RSS)
  • Project news
    (RSS)

Topic categories

  • Regulating speech
    (RSS)
  • Criminal IP Enforcement
    (RSS)
  • Intermediary liability
    (RSS)
  • Unauthorized access
    (RSS)
  • Privacy from government
    (RSS)
  • Privacy from private parties
    (RSS)
  • Jurisdiction
    (RSS)
  • Judicial process
    (RSS)
  • Other regulation
    (RSS)

Frequent topics:

4th Amendment 47 USC Section 230 anonymity anonymous speech California Canada censorship CFAA China copyright data protection discovery DMCA drones e-discovery England EU Facebook First Amendment free speech FTC India intermediaries intermediary liability Internet governance Iran meta mobile communications NSA online surveillance PII privacy professional regulation public photography Section 230 Section 512 SESTA social media subpoenas surveillance surveillance - online Trump TSA unauthorized access Wiretap Act

Archives:

  • September 2018
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • February 2017
  • December 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • January 2016
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • May 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • September 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • September 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • May 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011

Recent posts:

  • Congress And The CASE Of The Proposed Bill That Helps Copyright Trolls
  • We Interrupt The News Again With Hopefully The Last Update From The Monkey Selfie Case
  • If Trump Is So Worried About Protecting Attorney-Client Privilege, He Should End The NSA’s Bulk Surveillance (And CPB Device Seizures)
  • We Interrupt Today’s News With An Update From The Monkey Selfie Case
  • Yet Another Case Highlights Yet Another Constitutional Infirmity With The DMCA
  • Tenth Circuit Issues A Troubling Ruling Limiting New Mexico’s Anti-SLAPP Statute In Federal Court
  • Wherein Facebook Loses Recess For Everyone
  • Internet Wins, And The Need To Appreciate What We’ve Got Before It’s Gone
  • Anti-NRA Censorship Efforts Echo Earlier Pro-NRA Censorship Efforts, And Learn No Lessons From Them
  • Section 230 Isn’t About Facebook, It’s About You

Recent Comments

  • Rekrul on How Section 1201 of the copyright statute threatens innovation
  • Paul Spitz on Regulating lawyer blogging
  • David on Deal v. Spears
  • Prenda Law, A San Francisco Treat | Popehat on Prenda Law and the CFAA
  • Cathy on A crime of permission
  • Greg on A crime of permission
  • Blawg Review #322 | Cyberlaw Central on On regulating privacy and technology
  • John G on The PayPal Problem – a comment on intermediary liability
© 2012 Digital Age Defense Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha