NOW READ THIS
("Security Advisory")
Go Back
Submitted by: Bill Hickey
NCVA Listmaster
NRT-0624 Open source intelligence classification:
Intelligence from open sources like the Internet is now recognized as an essential part of the work of US agencies ‑ but one leading expert in the field says much more of it should be secret. "Open source intelligence is widely recognized as both an essential capability and a considerable asset in our national security infrastructure," CIA Director and retired Air Force Gen. Michael Hayden told a conference in Washington Friday. Hayden quoted the strategic plan issued this year by Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell: "No aspect of (intelligence) collection requires greater consideration or holds more promise than open source information." The director of intelligence studies at Georgetown University told United Press International there was another rationale for classifying intelligence reports, other than the traditional one of protecting sources and methods. She said under the definition of classified information ‑ data the release of which would damage the national security of the United States ‑ intelligence could, and should, be classified even when the source was open, "because of the insights you derive for the decision‑maker from that source. That requires classification because the release of it tells people what decision‑makers find insightful about the open source analysis." But a government‑transparency advocate at the Federation of American Scientists said she "made the most coherent argument for open source secrecy I have heard." But, he said, very few of the analyses produced by the Open Source Center fit her picture of material that conferred a vital advantage over the country's adversaries. "Only a small minority of OSC analytical products fits that description," he told UPI. "The overwhelming bulk has no operational relevance. They are at best contextual," he added, comparing them to the research backgrounders prepared by the Congressional Research Service. His conclusion was echoed by the center's deputy director, who told UPI that "the vast majority of what we produce is not classified ... and doesn't have to be." "In some cases," he added, "OSC reports end up being classified 'because of the sensitive nature' of their conclusions. If the information will ... reveal intentions and capabilities, then it ought to be protected in some way, even if the (underlying) information is unclassified," she explained. But in most cases the restrictions on the circulation of OSC reports was a matter of copyright, not classification, she said. She acknowledged there might be times when even unclassified information should be protected ‑ for instance, by being labeled as "Controlled Unclassified Information."
[16Sep08]
Last Modified: Friday, 10-Oct-2008 12:54:12 EDT
