Senate Judiciary Panel Examines
Passport Breaches At State Department


WASHINGTON (Thursday, July 10,
2008) – The Senate Judiciary Committee today held a hearing to
examine a report released late last week by the State Department
Acting Inspector General about unauthorized access to the
passport files of high-profile Americans by contractors and
State Department workers. Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
noticed the hearing Monday following the release of the
report.
The Inspector General report
stated that 85 percent of the passport records included in a
sample of high-profile Americans had been searched at least once
during a five and a half year period. The report also found
alarming security gaps in the State Department’s system, and
revealed that the records of millions of ordinary Americans are
in danger of being breached. Acting Inspector General
Ambassador
Harold W. Geisel and Assistant Inspector General for Audits
Mark W. Duda testified at Thursday’s hearing. They were
joined by a panel of privacy experts, including
Marc Rotenberg of the Electronic Privacy Information Center,
Ari Schwartz of the Center for Democracy and Technology, and
Alan Charles Raul of Sidley Austin LLP.
“Millions of Americans entrust
their personal information to the State Department in order to
obtain passports and other services, and our government has a
duty to protect the private information of its citizens,” said
Leahy. “The Inspector General’s findings raise serious concerns
about possible violations of the Privacy Act and other federal
laws meant to protect Americans’ privacy.”
Following press reports in March
that the passport files of presidential candidates Sens. Barack
Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John McCain had been inappropriately
accessed, Leahy, joined by Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.),
sent a letter to Attorney General Michael Mukasey asking
that the Department of Justice open a criminal investigation
into the unauthorized conduct. The Attorney General stated that
the Justice Department would wait for the results of the State
Department Inspector General’s report before taking action.
“We both strongly believe that our
government has a duty to protect the private information of its
citizens,” Leahy and Specter wrote in March. “The Justice
Department should not wait to be handed ‘a box full of
evidence,’ as you said at your recent briefing, before
determining whether Federal laws were broken.”
At an
oversight hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee
Wednesday, Mukasey testified that the Inspector General’s office
had referred the matter to the Justice Department, and that the
criminal division was investigating the matter.
Leahy has been a longtime leader
in privacy issues. Last year, Leahy and Specter
introduced the Personal Data Privacy and Security Act, which
was
passed by the Judiciary Committee in May 2007. Leahy has
since
urged the Senate to take up the legislation. Following the
passport file breaches in March,
Leahy and Specter sent a letter to the Majority and Minority
Leaders urging the Senate consider the legislation.
# # # # #
Statement Of Sen. Patrick Leahy
(D-Vt.),
Chairman, Senate Judiciary
Committee,
Hearing On “Passport Files:
Privacy Protection Needed For All Americans”
July 10, 2008
Today, the Committee holds an
important hearing on the unauthorized access of Americans’
passport files. Millions of Americans entrust their personal
information to the State Department in order to obtain passports
and other services, and our government has a duty to protect the
private information of its citizens. But, sadly, the State
Department has failed to honor this duty, leaving millions of
ordinary Americans vulnerable to privacy violations, identity
theft and other crimes.
Last week -- while Americans were
celebrating Independence Day – the State Department’s Acting
Inspector General issued a report finding that State Department
workers and contractors repeatedly accessed the passport files
of entertainers, athletes and other high-profile Americans
without proper authorization. This disturbing revelation of
passport snooping comes after press reports in March that the
passport files of three presidential candidates – Senators Obama,
Clinton and McCain -- were improperly accessed by State
Department contractors.
The Inspector General’s findings
raise serious concerns about possible violations of the Privacy
Act and other Federal laws meant to protect Americans’ privacy.
According to the report, 85 percent of the passport records
included in a sample of high-profile Americans had been searched
at least once -- and many files were searched multiple times --
during a five and a half year period. In fact, one individual’s
passport records were searched 356 different times by 77
different users, according to the report.
More significantly, the Inspector
General’s report reveals that the records of millions of
ordinary Americans are also vulnerable to privacy breaches.
There are no checks in the system to even determine if the
passport files of ordinary Americans are accessed. Although
these passport files contain sensitive personal information,
including name, date and place of birth, and Social Security
numbers, the Inspector General’s report found widespread control
weaknesses at the State Department -- including a general lack
of policies, procedures, guidance and training -- to prevent and
detect the unauthorized access of Americans’ passport files.
According to the report, the Department’s Passport Information
Electronic Records System (PIERS) contains the passport records
for approximately 127 million passport holders. As more
Americans need a passport just to travel to visit family and
friends in our neighboring countries, like Canada, due to the
Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, the number of passport
files to protect grows.
The State Department could not
readily identify the universe of government workers and
contractors who have access to this information. The Inspector
General estimates that this figure exceeds 20,000 government
employees from various agencies and outside contractors. The
tip of the iceberg in this report is the fact that passport
information is shared with other agencies and we have no idea
what procedures are followed to protect information once it
leaves the State Department. The State Department Inspector
General has referred this serious matter to the Justice
Department, and I hope the Department’s Criminal Division will
investigate this thoroughly.
The lax data security at the State
Department is not unique. A week does not go by without reports
of personal data privacy breaches at government agencies and
private businesses. Just recently, front page headlines have
delivered news about the theft of sensitive medical information
from the National Institutes of Health, and earlier reports of
data breaches have involved virtually every department of our
Federal Government. The Inspector General’s report is just the
latest example of why swift action is needed on the
Leahy-Specter Personal Data Privacy and Security Act – a
comprehensive privacy bill that would help to prevent data
security breaches and provide further protections in the
handling of American’s private data by Federal agencies and
government contractors. I hope that the Senate will promptly
consider and pass this bill, so that we can help make a
difference for all Americans.
Data privacy and security at our
federal agencies is a serious and growing problem that Congress
must address. To do so, we must not only understand what went
wrong at the State Department, but also look forward to how best
to prevent these kinds of privacy violations in the future. I
am pleased that the Department’s Acting Inspector General and
Assistant Inspector General for Audits are here to share their
findings. We also have a distinguished panel of privacy experts
to address this issue. I thank all of our witnesses for coming
and I look forward to a productive discussion.
# # # # #
For Background
Summary of the
Leahy–Specter Personal Data Privacy and Security Act of 2007
·
Provides new measures to protect the
privacy and security of personal data. Provides Americans with
notice when they have been harmed, and also addresses the
underlying problem of lax security and lack of accountability in
dealing with personal data.
·
Addresses the government’s use of
personal data by: (1) requiring the General Services
Administration to evaluate the privacy and security practices of
potential government contractors handling personal data and to
include penalties in government contracts for failure to protect
data privacy and security; (2) requiring Federal departments and
agencies to audit the information security practices of
commercial data brokers hired for projects involving personal
data and to include protections and penalties in contracts with
data brokers to protect data privacy and security; and (3)
requiring Federal departments and agencies to conduct privacy
impact assessments on their use of commercial databases to
access personal data on U.S. persons, and to adopt regulations
to ensure the security and privacy of data obtained through
commercial data brokers.
·
Adds unauthorized access to
sensitive personally identifiable information to the criminal
prohibition against computer fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)
(2).
·
Requires data brokers to let
individuals know what information they have about them, and
where appropriate, allow individuals to correct demonstrated
inaccuracies. There are exemptions for products and services
already subject to access and correction rules under the Fair
Credit Reporting Act, as well as companies subject to Gramm-Leach-Bliley
and the Health Information Portability and Accountability Act.
In addition, there are also exemptions for proprietary, fraud
prevention tools and marketing data.
·
Requires companies that have
databases with personal information on more than 10,000
Americans to establish and implement data privacy and security
programs, and vet third-party contractors hired to process
data. There are exemptions for companies already subject to
data security requirements under Gramm-Leach-Bliley and the
Health Information Portability and Accountability Act.
·
Requires notice to law enforcement,
consumers and credit reporting agencies when digitized sensitive
personal information has been compromised. The trigger for
notice is tied to significant risk of harm with appropriate
checks-and-balances to prevent over-notification as well as
underreporting. There are exemptions for national security and
law enforcement needs, credit card companies using
fraud-prevention techniques or where a breach does not result in
a significant risk of harm.
·
Provides tough monetary penalties
for failing to provide privacy and security protections and
notices of security breaches. Imposes a criminal penalty in the
cases were there is intentional and willful concealment of a
security breach known to require notice.
# # # # #