Travel News - Eight airlines gave feds passenger data

Eight airlines gave feds passenger data (http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20040623-064901-2527r)

WASHINGTON, June 23 (UPI) -- A total of eight airlines and airline-reservation systems gave personal data about millions of passengers to the Transportation Security Administration and its contractors to help them test data-mining technology, officials admitted Wednesday.

TSA acting chief Adm. David Stone told the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee that in addition to previously disclosed data transfers from American Airlines and Jet Blue, agency contractors received data from Delta, Continental, America West, Frontier and the Galileo International reservation system. He said they also "possibly" received data from the Apollo reservation system. TSA itself received Passenger Name Record data from the Sabre reservation system -- one of the world's largest and the one used by most Internet travel sites.

Stone admitted that no "system of records notice" was prepared either by his agency or by the contractors. Such a notice is generally required by the Privacy Act, but Stone said the agency's legal advisers decided that one was not necessary in this case.

-------------------


You can read David Stone's testimony to Congress here (http://govt-aff.senate.gov/_files/062304stone_q16.pdf). It's particularly interesting that in written testimony, see page 6 of the above, Stone says:

"To date, TSA has not secured PNR data to test CAPPSII. Until we are confident that both the security system and redress procedures meet privacy and security muster, we have no intention of collecting PNR data for any reason."

It apparently depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is.

Bring on the lawsuits!!!

Well, on the bright side, at least NW isn't in the minority any more! :D

aloha

The U.S. Government knows my name, address, age, and social security number. It knows how much I earn. It knows the names of my children. It knows when I fly into the U.S. and when I leave.

It knows what (if any) declarable items I bring with me on my trips.

This is just new information -- I don't want to think of what the government knows from the days I had a security clearance and had to fill out background statements.

What can an airline possibly tell it about me?

What can an airline possibly tell it about me?

Who you're traveling with. How many bags you checked. Details of your internal U.S. travels. Domestic travelers have never been subject to government record-keeping like this before. That is, not in the United States. In the former Soviet Union it was all the rage.

And since all travel data may soon be subject to laws like this, your hotel may be telling the government: when you're traveling with that woman who's not your wife, whether you shared one bed or had two, and whether you watched a pay-per-view porn movie.

It gets worse. Once the airline tells the gov't some possibly erroneous datum about you, like that you requested the seat next to some wanted Libyan, you might find yourself banned from air travel for the rest of your life, with no right to review the evidence against you, much less correct it.

You may find the plan innocuous, but that's only because you've bought David Stone's "just trust us", hook, line, and sinker.

:( :( :( :mad: :mad: :mad:

GradGirl, I am not in favor of this program because I find it to be an incredible waste of taxpayer dollars. For all that, I don't share your fears. Let's look at some of the points you raised:

Who you're traveling with.

Only if I put them on the same itinerary. If I don't want it known, my travelling partner and I can have separate itineraries.

How many bags you checked.

Is the government really interested in that? If so, it already has access to those bags. It does not have to restrict itself to the number (which tells it almost nothing) but can actually open each one and look to see what is inside.

Details of your internal U.S. travels.

Admittedly, this would make it easier for the government. On the other hand, it if is truly interested about my travels it can subpoena my credit card records. (I can't remember ever paying cash for a plane ticket.)


And since all travel data may soon be subject to laws like this, your hotel may be telling the government: when you're traveling with that woman who's not your wife

This is already routine procedure in most European countries and has been for years. When I check into a hotel in France or Italy, I am required to present my passport and my stay is reported the same day to the local police. I have never heard of this being abused in Western Europe.

whether you shared one bed or had two, and whether you watched a pay-per-view porn movie.

See above. If the carabinieri walk into my Venice hotel, I doubt they will have much difficulty getting this information.

It gets worse. Once the airline tells the gov't some possibly erroneous datum about you, like that you requested the seat next to some wanted Libyan, you might find yourself banned from air travel for the rest of your life, with no right to review the evidence against you, much less correct it.

That is indeed a possibility. In fact, as has been reported on this forum before, it is already happening -- without any new program. Of course, it is also true that a number of completely innocent people are sitting in prisons having been convicted of crimes they never committed. No program -- especially no government program -- is free of errors. However, just as I am not going to worry about being indicted for the kidnapping/murder of Jimmy Hoffa, I am not going to worry about getting a lifetime flying ban because of some error.

What I am going to worry about is my tax money being wasted in still another federal boondoggle.

I will stop worrying about this just as soon as:

1. The IRS no longer spends millions each year chasing down "delinquent" taxpayers who, it turns out, are not deliquent at all.

2. The Pentagon no longer buys toilet seats for $200 each.

3. The Department of Education actually ensures that intelligent Americans are offered an education.

4. The Freed Man's Bureau (no longer in existence) gives the very first Black the 40 acres and a mule promised in the 1860's.

I've had a chance to read through the Q's & A's. Stone's answers are very Clinton-esque (like GradGirl's reminding us of the famous "is" statement). I didn't read the Wired commentary, so my analysis, I hope, is "fair & balanced" (no © thanks to Bill Mahre, I believe).

1. Somebody needs to FOIA the cited non-disclosure agreements. They will tell us whether or not the TSA REALLY believed that the PNR data wasn't subject to the Privacy Act, as Stone asserts. It would be really interesting if the NDAs contradicted the internal legal advice.

2. All of these efforts were Cooperative Agreements and not contracts. The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) describes what a CA is and isn't. Stone asserts that the TSA didn't actually "possess" the PNR because a CA isn't a contract. In court, he's probably right. If these efforts were FAR-type contracts, the TSA would have owned all the deliverables.

3. There must be something in the procedures for a "National Security Special Event" that permits handling of personal information outside of the Privacy Act. If you recall, Delta was the official airline of the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics. Stone revealed an interesting tidbit of information that certainly requires some additional research by the ACLU or privacy-oriented group.

4. Although Stone said all the right words about protecting passenger data as TOP SECRET information, he's closing the door on any future citizen privacy act requests for information by setting up the scenario to refuse based on classification. I'm sure the CAPPS-II security classification guide, if it's even written yet, doesn't address anything about the classification of individual PNRs the TSA possesses (like yours and mine) as differentiated from the aggregated list's classification. Further, there's no way the TSA can run the CAPPS-II program at TS-high. All of the R&D and testing has to be done unclassified and all of the individual airport terminals in unclassified places will have to reach back into the TS system.

5. Stone mentioned the Notice of Rulemaking for data collection that will be out there for public comment. It's up to us to make them aware of our privacy concerns -- and our representatives.

6. Stone said all the right things about protecting privacy, but he made no mention of to whom outside the TSA they would share the information. (That was good staff work by the TSA Congressional Liaison testimony writers.) He didn't say he would not share the information, which leaves a huge loophole for future use.

Film at 11...

Meal preferences were submitted to this illegal, unelected, communist US government. That is a clear violation of the US constitution, the 4th Amendment (unauthorzied search of effects) and even the 5th Amendment (if eating something actually would incriminate you).

But I must say that since we NEVER get our meal choice on airlines due to improper loading, will the US government find out which meals we DON'T WANT TO EAT, give us more gas?? :mad:

The U.S. Government knows my name, address, age, and social security number. It knows how much I earn. It knows the names of my children. It knows when I fly into the U.S. and when I leave. It knows what (if any) declarable items I bring with me on my trips. This is just new information -- I don't want to think of what the government knows from the days I had a security clearance and had to fill out background statements. What can an airline possibly tell it about me?

It can tell them what you HAVEN'T told the government. Like fasting on Friday's, switching religions from Catholic to Buddist (which could be extremely damaging if one has a religious extremist influencing a local government in your area, like a child molesting cardinal or bishop and then one finds they can never get work, kids never get into private schools....it happens), and if you "may" have high cholestoral in order to take Lipitor, in cahoots. Or on a diet. Or Kosher. The US government, like it or not, is under a 4 year siege with Pat Robertson maniacs, militants and torturers. They are going to go as far as possible before January 20th.

Only after the 20th will the run and hide, but the damage has been done. Keep in mind which airlines did it and how the same airlines are not fighting it, because they're scared. Just what George W. Militant wants. Hitler.

It can tell them what you HAVEN'T told the government. Like fasting on Friday's.

Well, no, it couldn't. First off, because I don't fast on Fridays. Secondly, even if I did fast on Fridays, the airline would have no way of knowing that. I simply would say I didn't feel like having a meal.

There is no 4th Amendment violation in the government asking an airline (or anyone else) for information about you. It might be a violation of the airline's 4th Amendment rights, but only if the airline objected to giving the information.

Likewise, there is no 5th Amendment violation in asking Person A what Person B ate (or did). The 5th Amendment only says the government can not require that you testify against yourself.

If eating fried chicken is against the law (and it might be if the health fanatics ever have their way), and you eat fried chicken in an airplane, your 5th Amendment rights would in no way be infringed if the government were to require airline personnel to testify against you.

Well, no, it couldn't. First off, because I don't fast on Fridays. Secondly, even if I did fast on Fridays, the airline would have no way of knowing that. I simply would say I didn't feel like having a meal..

If you consider others, rather than yourself, I contradict you by saying, someone out there maybe flew on Fridays, ate vegitarian ONLy on Fridays and on other days (during a fasting period) ate meat. All that information is then submitted and guess what: An obvious 2 - dimensional deduction by a staff of government idiots saying "He/she must be this religion". :o


There is no 4th Amendment violation in the government asking an airline (or anyone else) for information about you. It might be a violation of the airline's 4th Amendment rights, but only if the airline objected to giving the information.

It appears you don't even know WHO it applies to. "The right of the people to be secure in their....effects". This applies to the data about you the airline carries being confiscated by the US government for INDIVIDUAL searches and seizures for a prosecution on the INDIVIDUAL! NOT a prosecution of the airline.

Likewise, there is no 5th Amendment violation in asking Person A what Person B ate (or did). The 5th Amendment only says the government can not require that you testify against yourself.

I guess you better read the full Amendment again as I refer to the first half of the paragraph, not the very last part of that statement. It comes to the debate "in times of war". The part you are quoting is the continuation of that amendment. I believe we ARE NOT AT WAR. George W. Hitler continues to claim we are. He would be found wrong if that specific argument "at war" was challenged in court.

Enjoy your flight, Dovster.

If you consider others, rather than yourself, I contradict you by saying, someone out there maybe flew on Fridays, ate vegitarian ONLy on Fridays and on other days (during a fasting period) ate meat. All that information is then submitted and guess what: An obvious 2 - dimensional deduction by a staff of government idiots saying "He/she must be this religion". :o

Let me get this straight: There is a bank robbery. A man is there but left before the police arrived. The police ask around to see who else was present and somebody says, "Well, there was a guy who gave his name as Joe Cohen."

The police ask what Joe Cohen looked like and are told "Tall fellow. Wore a skull cap."

The police then guess, "Cohen...wore a skull cap. He must be Jewish."

This, in your opinion, would somehow constitute a violation of Joe Cohen's Fifth Amendment rights?

Remarkable.

Details of your internal U.S. travels.

Admittedly, this would make it easier for the government. On the other hand, it if is truly interested about my travels it can subpoena my credit card records. (I can't remember ever paying cash for a plane ticket.)


And since all travel data may soon be subject to laws like this, your hotel may be telling the government: when you're traveling with that woman who's not your wife

This is already routine procedure in most European countries and has been for years. When I check into a hotel in France or Italy, I am required to present my passport and my stay is reported the same day to the local police. I have never heard of this being abused in Western Europe.

whether you shared one bed or had two, and whether you watched a pay-per-view porn movie.

See above. If the carabinieri walk into my Venice hotel, I doubt they will have much difficulty getting this information.



I won't speculate too much about what my rights are when I'm staying in Europe, but in the U.S., to this point, all the scenarios you're describing above would require a subpoena, a warrant, or urgent immediate cause for that search. Why are citizens being treated like suspects in a criminal investigation? Why is this suddenly okay because someone bought a plane ticket? Buying a plane ticket does not make someone a suspect, unless you ask the DHS/TSA.