(The information referred to follows:) THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN LAW SCHOOL, Hon. EDWARD V. LONG, Subcommittee on Administrative Practice and Procedure, DEAR SENATOR LONG: During my testimony before the Subcommittee on March 16 I made reference to developments in the technology of optical scanning and the possibility of these devices being used in connection with mail-cover operations. This letter is in response to Mr. Waters' request to provide the Subcommittee with any additional information on this subject that might come to my attention. I trust it will be inserted at the appropriate place in the record. Optical scanners have been under development for approximately 15 years. By and large, the promises in this area of computer technology have outstripped the commercial realities because of technological obstacles and high costs. The objective has been to develop a device with multi-font capacity, that will operate at high speeds, read reliably (i.e., with a high incidence of character recognition and a low incidence of recognition error), and be economical. Single-font readers have been available and in use for several years and currently are in operation in several agencies of the federal government. To my knowledge, they can be found in the Social Security Administration, the Air Force, and the Post Office. I am sure that other governmental organizations use them. The largest and most successful scanner manufacturer appears to be the Rabinow Corporation, which is located in Florida. I am told that they have installed about 60 single-font scanners and that these units cost approximately $84,000 each. Scanners also are manufactured by IBM and the Intelligent Machines Corporation. Multi-font readers have been under development for about a decade and are now being used on an experimental basis in various places. The three corporations mentioned in the preceding paragraph appear to be the leaders in the multi-font field. At present, multi-font readers are available on a customized basis but are not being mass produced. I am told that the Rabinow Corporation is working on customized multi-font readers for the Post Office and that an experimental unit is currently in use in the Detroit Post Office for sorting Zip Code numbers. IBM recently announced a "break-through" in the multi-font scanning field and this may herald the production of such units on a commercial basis. I have been reliably informed that the new multi-font scanners can be programmed to recognize a variety of type fonts and handwriting. The basic problem has been to develop machines that have wide recognition capacities coupled with high speed and low error rate. By and large availability of these characteristics depends upon how much one is willing to pay for the machine, although the technology still is not matured to the point of not requiring some trade-offs among the three main attributes. I am also told that the type of optical scanning for mail-cover operations I described to you during my testimony before the Subcommittee is feasible and that the transfer of the information picked up by the scanner to individualized computer dossiers is simply a question of proper programming. I trust that this letter will be of some aid to you and the Subcommittee. ARTHUR R. MILLER, Mr. WATERS. We have heard the saying, Professor Miller, that knowledge is power. Certainly it appears to me that whoever has the key to the knowledge stored up in this vast apparatus is going to have an awful lot of power. I thank you very much, Professor Miller. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Professor MILLER. Thank you. Senator LONG. Thank you, Professor. Your statement has been unusually helpful. I am very much impressed with it, and very grateful for your being here today. Professor MILLER. Thank you, sir. Senator LONG. Thank you. That concludes the hearing this morning. The subcommittee will now stand in recess until tomorrow at 10 o'clock in this same room where we will resume hearings at that time. The subcommittee is in recess. (Whereupon, at 12:30 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned, to reconvene tomorrow, Wednesday, March 15, 1967, at 10 a.m.) COMPUTER PRIVACY WEDNESDAY, MARCH 15, 1967 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATIVE PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, at 10:10 a.m., in room 1318, New Senate Office Building, Senator Edward V. Long, of Missouri (chairman of the subcommittee), presiding. Present: Senators Long, of Missouri (presiding), and Thurmond. Also present: Bernard Fensterwald, Jr., Chief Counsel; Bernard J. Waters, Senator Dirksen's Office, Minority Counsel; and Benny L. Kass, Assistant Counsel. Senator LONG. The committee will be in order. The committee has a telegram from the director of the New York State Identification and Intelligence System, of Albany, dealing with the subject at hand which, without objection, will be placed in the record at this time. (The telegram referred to follows:) Senator EDWARD V. LONG, ALBANY, N.Y., Chairman, Subcommittee on Administrative Practice and Procedure, DEAR SENATOR LONG: It has been brought to my attention that professor Arthur Miller, school of law, University of Michigan, in a statement before your subcommittee on March 14, 1967, referred to my testimony on July 28, 1966, concerning the New York State identification and intelligence system before the House of Representatives' Special Subcommittee on Invasion of Privacy. Some of Professor Miller's statements do not fully reflect the import of my testimony in that: (1) Professor Miller says: "A massive computer installation containing extensive files on criminals and alleged criminals that can be reached simply by digit dialing and is available to governmental or private offices not involved in law enforcement poses a serious threat to the individual. Nowhere in my testimony do I make or imply such a statement. On the contrary, the record of transcript reads as follows: "Mr. ROSENTHAL. Inspector Gallati, does the statute that set you up limit the people that you can provide information to?" "Mr. GALLATI. This sets up the limitation that is designed for qualified agencies concerned with the administration of criminal justice. And it expressly states that this means courts of record, probation departments, sheriffs' offices, district attorneys' offices, State division of parole, New York City Parole Commission, State department of correction, New York City, department of correction, and police forces and departments having responsibility for enforcement of the general criminal laws of the State." (2) Professor Miller states: "A State official may direct an inquiry to the computer file of 'known' criminals, find an entry under the name of his subject, and rely on that entry to the subject's detriment without attempting to verify its accuracy or exploring the possibility that additional information might eliminate the inuendo of the computer record." 101 The burden of my testimony before the special subcommittee was that the system would provide a greater degree of accuracy and files would be more complete and timely. In addition, security design for the system includes methods of verifying the accuracy of submitted data and provides for review by an individual of his arrest record and correction of inaccuracies or prejudicial omissions therein. (3) In an oral statement Professor Miller is reported to have said that it was "frightening" that the director of NYSIIS will freely exchange with other law enforcement agencies information without any guarantees of safeguards. It is very difficult to reconcile this conclusion with my testimony which is replete with references to safeguards such as the following: "Internal discipline of the users within the system"; "restriction of input of information"; "exclusions of information from the system"; "Criminal code and criminal law restraintsupon the misuse of information"; "access to the information is to be security controlled"; "receive from the system that information which he has a right to know and need to know"; "scramblers that would be required for very highly sensitive information"; "person who contributes the information can put whatever restraint he desires upon the information"; "it is within this context of security and a climate of concern for the protection of individual rights and liberties that NYIIS is being developed." In view of the importance of assuring that pioneering efforts such as NYSIIS are not misinterpreted, I respectfully request that this statement which is intended to clarify the commitment of NYSIIS to system and legal controls with a dedication to assuring the individual rights to privacy be included in the record of proceedings before your subcommitee on March 15, 1967. Dr. ROBERT R. J. GALLATI, Director New York State Identification and Intelligence, System. ALFRED E. SMITH, State Office Building, Albany, N.Y. Senator LONG. Senator Thurmond, we are delighted to have you back with us today. Senator THURMOND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator LONG. Our first witness this morning is Mr. A. Ross Eckler, Director of the Bureau of the Census. Mr. Eckler, will you come around, please? Mr. Eckler, for the record, will you state your name, address and official connection with the Bureau of the Census and then introduce to the committee the members of your staff you have accompanying you? STATEMENT OF A. ROSS ECKLER, DIRECTOR, BUREAU OF THE CENSUS Mr. ECKLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am A. Ross Eckler. I am serving as Director of the Bureau of the Census, and I am pleased to introduce my colleagues, Mr. Howard C. Grieves, who is Deputy Director of the Bureau of the Census, on my right; on my left Mr. Robert F. Drury, who is our Assistant Director for Operations. Senator LONG. Thank you, sir. We are delighted to have all of you gentlemen this morning. You have a prepared statement, I believe, Mr. Eckler, if you would care to proceed with it. It will be placed in the record in its entirety. You may summarize it or handle it however you care to. Mr. ECKLER. I believe I have found from experience when I attempt to summarize that it takes longer than if I read it, so, with your permission, I will read it as expeditiously as possible. Senator LONG. All right, since it is only about seven pages the Chair will agree. |