Spying for Fun and Profit

New technology has become ubiquitous in the post-Sept. 11 world. Biometric devices record the facial bone structures, iris scans, voices and other physical attributes of every person who walks by in an airport, stadium or park. Electronic monitors track web page visits or bank transactions. Even good old-fashioned video surveillance cameras are being used more than ever in conjunction with facial recognition software.

All these technologies raise serious questions about invasions of privacy and violations of civil liberties. They also cost a lot of money. Taxpayers fund this massively beefed up security. Private corporations and even individuals are also paying large amounts to boost their own security procedures in light of the war on terrorism. Naturally, someone is also profiting off this boom.

Market analysts and corporate watchdog groups note that there have been a raft of upstart companies jumping into the security/ surveillance market, and existing major security and defense companies have expanded their product lines and sales.

"There's definitely more demand," noted Lee Tien, a staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which monitors electronic-related privacy and civil liberties issues. "For example you see this stuff popping up in airports, and then that creates secondary effects where all these vendors realize they have something to sell and start marketing it, and then legislation like aviation security helps. And then there's this ripple effect where people [and corporations] say, 'Well if the government's doing it, maybe we better be doing it too.'"

There are several main technologies driving the market: bomb and explosives detection devices used at airports and other high security areas; biometrics technology used all across the spectrum for screening and identifying people; smart card technology to combine data on an all-purpose ID card, as has been discussed with the standardized national driver's license; and electronic data-mining technology of the type that would be used to compile records for the Terrorism Information Awareness (formerly Total Information Awareness) program.

The Spy-Tech Boom

One of the first widespread security technologies to be discussed after the Sept. 11 attacks was face recognition software in airports. Almost immediately after the terrorist attacks, two providers of this software -- Visionis and Viisage -- started marketing their products as terror prevention solutions.

"Their publicity stunt worked," said Chris Hoofnagle of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) in a Nov. 2001 interview with the Multinational Monitor. "Their stock prices doubled very quickly, and it appeared as though different public transportation centers would adopt the technology. In fact, Oakland International Airport has."

Since then, various other airports including Dallas, Rhode Island and Boston and other tourist destinations including the Virginia Beach oceanfront and a Tampa nighlife district have purchased facial recognition systems. One of the main beneficiaries has been Pelco Inc., the world's largest maker of video security systems.

The growth in demand for software alone to comply with the PATRIOT Act has been huge -- the act requires financial institutions, including banks, credit card companies and insurance carriers, to closely monitor customer activity. Cisco, Sybase, Sun Microsystems and Oracle are just a few of the various software companies ready to meet these demands, often by expanding their existing lines of anti-money laundering (or AML) software.

"Compliance with the USA PATRIOT Act has never been easier, thanks to Sybase's PATRIOT compliance solution," says a promo on the company's web site.

There has been some small protest within the companies; in March 2003, Groove Networks Inc. board member Mitch Kapor quit in protest over Groove selling its software to the government for anti-terrorism surveillance. And one vendor refused to sell its software to the government. But, for the most part, companies have jumped at the chance of government contracts.