Posted on 12/28/2005 4:03:39 PM PST by T. P. Pole
NEW YORK - The National Security Agency's Internet site has been placing files on visitors' computers that can track their Web surfing activity despite strict federal rules banning most of them.
These files, known as "cookies," disappeared after a privacy activist complained and The Associated Press made inquiries this week, and agency officials acknowledged Wednesday they had made a mistake. Nonetheless, the issue raises questions about privacy at a spy agency already on the defensive amid reports of a secretive eavesdropping program in the United States.
"Considering the surveillance power the NSA has, cookies are not exactly a major concern," said Ari Schwartz, associate director at the Center for Democracy and Technology, a privacy advocacy group in Washington, D.C. "But it does show a general lack of understanding about privacy rules when they are not even following the government's very basic rules for Web privacy."
Until Tuesday, the NSA site created two cookie files that do not expire until 2035 — likely beyond the life of any computer in use today.
Don Weber, an NSA spokesman, said in a statement Wednesday that the cookie use resulted from a recent software upgrade. Normally, the site uses temporary, permissible cookies that are automatically deleted when users close their Web browsers, he said, but the software in use shipped with persistent cookies already on.
"After being tipped to the issue, we immediately disabled the cookies," he said.
Cookies are widely used at commercial Web sites and can make Internet browsing more convenient by letting sites remember user preferences. For instance, visitors would not have to repeatedly enter passwords at sites that require them.
But privacy advocates complain that cookies can also track Web surfing, even if no personal information is actually collected.
In a 2003 memo, the White House's Office of Management and Budget prohibits federal agencies from using persistent cookies — those that aren't automatically deleted right away — unless there is a "compelling need."
A senior official must sign off on any such use, and an agency that uses them must disclose and detail their use in its privacy policy.
Peter Swire, a Clinton administration official who had drafted an earlier version of the cookie guidelines, said clear notice is a must, and `vague assertions of national security, such as exist in the NSA policy, are not sufficient."
Daniel Brandt, a privacy activist who discovered the NSA cookies, said mistakes happen, "but in any case, it's illegal. The (guideline) doesn't say anything about doing it accidentally."
The Bush administration has come under fire recently over reports it authorized NSA to secretly spy on e-mail and phone calls without court orders.
Since The New York Times disclosed the domestic spying program earlier this month, President Bush has stressed that his executive order allowing the eavesdropping was limited to people with known links to al-Qaida.
But on its Web site Friday, the Times reported that the NSA, with help from American telecommunications companies, obtained broader access to streams of domestic and international communications.
The NSA's cookie use is unrelated, and Weber said it was strictly to improve the surfing experience "and not to collect personal user data."
Richard M. Smith, a security consultant in Cambridge, Mass., questions whether persistent cookies would even be of much use to the NSA. They are great for news and other sites with repeat visitors, he said, but the NSA's site does not appear to have enough fresh content to warrant more than occasional visits.
The government first issued strict rules on cookies in 2000 after disclosures that the White House drug policy office had used the technology to track computer users viewing its online anti-drug advertising. Even a year later, a congressional study found 300 cookies still on the Web sites of 23 agencies.
In 2002, the CIA removed cookies it had inadvertently placed at one of its sites after Brandt called it to the agency's attention.
So-freakin'-WHAT!!??
I hope you washed those hands, young man (or lady).
Oh my!!! So does the DNC website!!! The world is coming to an end!!!!!!
Apparently, terrorists check the NSA website frequently to see if their names are mentioned.
AP dumps a half dozen or so cookies on your computer when you visit them(even if you didn't intend to visit them). Can we say overblown alarmist rhetoric intended to inflame and discredit the WOT and President Bush. SOP for the MSM. DRB they are.
cookies found:
www.democrats.org
www.washingtonpost.com
reuters.com
nytimes.com
www.latimes.com
abcnews.go.com
cbsnews.com
cnn.com
cnnaudience.com
That DU post nails their thinking dead-on: Play on ignorance, spoof people, wail about non-issues. They know they do it and think it's funny to sucker Americans. The poster spotlighted the rot at their core.
Yup
No Shame
"We had no intention of this ever being found out. Excuse please."
By the way, I discovered that David Van Os, the attorny of Bill Burkett (who foisted the fake GWB TANG documents) is a DUer and even uses his own name.
Im sure he had nothin to do with the scandle tho
It's even worse than you think.
NSA "cookies" are... PEOPLE!!!!
Here is what I don't get. Why would an al-qaeda type terrorist go to, of all the places, NSA's website ?
As long as they don't flouridate my water, I am ok.
Because the best source of classified information is our own government and the protections afforded to Al-queda by the Al-qaeda Constitutional Liberties Union.
And... the bastards charge me for it, and... trust me, Times Select ain't got no sprinkles...
Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
Prideful continental soldier bump :-)
Not sure which part is more disconcerting though...
The spying...
Or the fact that most people these days could care less that it happens (including me).
What did the MSM expect when they conveniently let the Democrats get away with throwing our privacy rights away for 8 years??
We've got cameras on the street corners, GPS on our phones, etc. Law abiding citizens don't care about these things.
Thing is, that requires a LOT of trust in a government that our framers warned us NOT to trust.
As a Libertarian and a web page developer I have to say: "This is the stupidest non-story I've read in awhile" It is meant only to agitate the half-wit sheeple and is a glaring example of lefty media bias.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.