Login:
Password:

Commerce Dept. Loses 1,137 Laptops

By Scott M. Fulton, III, BetaNews

September 22, 2006, 11:39 AM

In advance of a House Committee on Government Reform hearing, in which the matter would have come up anyway, the U.S. Commerce Dept. responded to a Committee request by disclosing in a private briefing yesterday that it believes as many as 1,137 laptop computers have been lost from the Dept.'s inventory since 2001.

Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez delivered the message personally to three Committee members, presumably including Chairman Tom Davis (R - Virginia), and ranking member Henry Waxman (D - Calif.), who first inquired about how the DOC manages its computer inventory in a letter dated July 10.

In a statement released late yesterday, the DOC credited "broad, government-wide Congressional and public inquiries" for having led to the notification of these systems' loss, rather than a single letter from a prominent Democrat.

It then went on to provide statistics, including the revelation that 672 of the missing laptops had been distributed to the U.S. Census Bureau, representing about 3.4% of all laptops used by the Bureau over a five-year period. Of those lost, 246 "contained some degree of personal data," says the DOC, though typically no more than about 100 households.

That figure suggests the 100 households on a computer at any one time could be the maximum amount that is cached on the system's local hard drive, as it browses entries from the broader government network. As to whether the persons into whose hands the missing systems fall may have access to that network -- and thus to potentially millions of records -- the DOC statement said, "Access passwords, complex database software, systemic safeguards and/or encryption technology significantly limit the potential for misuse of data on the laptops."

"Perhaps the most shocking thing here is that the public might not have ever known of these breaches, and their scope, if we hadn't specifically asked for the information," Rep. Davis said in a statement released by his office this morning. "Why aren't these inventories taken automatically, instinctively?"

Incidentally, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reported 325 missing laptops over the period, at least one of which had been stolen last July from a NOAA office in Seattle. On it were records of at least 146 federal employees and contractors, all of whom received complementary credit counseling.

Meanwhile, since 2004, the Census Bureau has been experimenting with the use of handheld devices for use in surveying. Of the 2,400 handheld units in use since 2004, the DOC said, 15 of those lost contained personal information on a total of 558 households. The DOC did not say how many other handhelds were lost that did not contain vital data, although it asserts that all its handhelds being tested were fully encrypted.

Full encryption as well as two-factor authentication would be a nice thing for laptops to have going forward, Sec. Gutierrez is recommending. In addition, he is asking for the U.S. Inspector General perform a full investigation of the matter, and that a senior DOC management team be assembled to perform a "team review" of the Census Bureau. That might be convenient, seeing as how a law was passed in 2002 requiring government agencies to make such assessments on an annual basis.

The Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002 (FISMA), championed by Rep. Davis, "requires the head of each agency to implement policies and procedures to cost-effectively reduce information technology security risks to an acceptable level," the congressman said this morning.

"FISMA requires agency program officials, Chief Information Officers, and Inspectors General to conduct annual reviews of the agency's information security program and report the results to OMB. And every year, the Government Reform Committee releases its FISMA scorecard, grading each agency, A through F. Commerce went from F in '04 to D+ in '05."

"The reality is, we are incapable of storing, moving and accessing information," Rep. Davis added. "No government does these things well, especially big governments. We spend tens of billions of dollars a year on information technology. You'd think we could share information by now. But we are still an analog government in a digital economy and culture."

BetaNews has contacted Rep. Waxman's office for comment and a statement, which is expected later today. A section of Waxman's Web site has been set aside for information concerning identity theft and personal protection against it.

Add a Comment (16 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By Gunnar Ruthstrom

edited Sep 23, 2006 - 12:57 PM

The government was never authorized to get personal information, but just a head count for representation. The U.S. Census Bureau in collecting personal information goes against the
Bill of Rights which makes it unconstitutional. You don't have to be a lawyer to read and understand; Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
You don't have to answer any questions unless you are sitting in a court room and the judge tells you to answer the question.
When you are being arrested for a crime,you are warned not to say anything or it could be used against you.
Be a patriot, hold on to the Bill of Rights.

Score: 0

By foxfyre

edited Sep 23, 2006 - 2:22 PM

Yep...

Take a seat over there with the wackos who maintain you don't have to pay Federal Income Taxes as they are 'unconstitutional' as well...

Well, we at least know where they spend part of their time...

Score: 0

By unistyle

posted Sep 24, 2006 - 12:36 AM

you sir, are an idiot..

do you not understand the point of the bill of rights? do you think they are a joke, or that they aren't of use anymore? im not quite sure how you managed to relate not paying federal income tax, and his posting the 4th amendment.. have you ever read the bill of rights? are you aware of their purpose, and value? or do you think you could do a better document depicting our civil rights and liberties than the founding fathers of this nation.. im really confused how your tiny and clearly ignorant brain has decided that anyone defending the 4th amendment is a whacko, but somehow you've managed it.. bravo!

Score: 0

By joeshmoe7

posted Sep 23, 2006 - 8:22 PM

way to reply with something that has nothing to do with the point he was making :|

Sad that many nowadays see the Bill of Rights and Constitution as something like anceint documents with no use in modern times and anyone who brings them up is a "whacko"

Some of us whackos prefer to view them as timeless. Ill gladly take my seat over there.

Score: 0

By foxfyre

edited Sep 24, 2006 - 10:57 AM

Take a seat next to the guy wearing the tin foil hat. Bye. We'll miss you.

You are not guaranteed the right to privacy, as much as you might desire that. And this is a very old debate, although I am sure that as a 19 year erudite scholar this seems very new and profound. You might want to spend more time actually going to class.

Since you evidently believe the census is unconstitutional (something that is not an emotional feeling, but something that is determined judicially) you are just like those rabid folks who claim to be able to tell you how to successfully refuse to pay federal income tax since it is unconstitutional as well (the nexus between the 2 groups for the scholar above! - they both believe that these actions are unconstitutional!!! DUH!), you'll probably believe that we'll miss you too! ;-))

Score: 0

By billweh

posted Sep 22, 2006 - 2:13 PM

I'm willing to bet that rather than "lost", these units went home with employees after they left the DOC.

It's sad to say, but I know when my company laid off a bunch of people in my division, there were a number of things that turned out to be "unaccounted" for that were in our inventory before, but not afterwards.

Just my opinion.

Score: 0

By bourgeoisdude

posted Sep 22, 2006 - 3:49 PM

You're probably right. Actually--in some way or another, I'm sure it must be allGWB's fault :)

Score: 0

By Fickleflame

posted Sep 22, 2006 - 12:13 PM

Very true. Although it seems like the government is more concerned about getting our personal records than protecting them.

Oh Canada, oh Canada, can fed up Americans migrate over to thee?

Score: 0

By deminicus

posted Sep 22, 2006 - 1:34 PM

the grass is always greener..... believe it or not, US is probably the best place to be in the world. It's easy to complain but unless you lived in both places your comment means nothing.

Score: 0

By jbaltz69

posted Sep 22, 2006 - 12:45 PM

Have fun in Canada, other than cheap skiing, it sucks REAL bad!

Score: 0

By skimore

posted Sep 22, 2006 - 3:09 PM

Come on.. They have great skiing. (when they have snow! not like last year!!)

Score: 0

By jbaltz69

edited Sep 22, 2006 - 5:51 PM

The skiing is excellent, I was referring to cheap lift tickets on very nice mountains. Other than that, Canada indeed sucks badly.

Score: 0

By mjm01010101

posted Sep 22, 2006 - 12:01 PM

733T! : )

Look on the bright side: At least they know the number they lost!

Score: 0

By MTrush

posted Sep 22, 2006 - 8:08 PM

goverment needs civilian oversite. departments of gov looking over other departments of gov dont work well. like the rip off to rebuild iraq.

Score: 0

By foxfyre

edited Sep 23, 2006 - 4:38 PM

Yep... Another one...

As if the abstraction known as "the government" is a tangible commodity...Funny, I have never seen a "government", depite having grown up in Northern Virginia...but then a 'government' is an abstraction actually comprised of various (more than a few) "civilians".

So what we really need are more civilians overseeing other civilians who are overseeing other civilians.

What you have just justified is even greater layers of bureaucracy to oversee the other bureacracy who is supposed to be watching the fundamental bureacracy...

Yeah, and then we can create an additional layer of bureacracy to oversee that bureacracy which is not to be trusted and... Why stop there? While we have everyone here, why not propose yet again another layer of civilian oversight to oversee the other civilians you propose to oversee those who are overseeing....

Its time for you to go join the "the census is unconstitutional" wackos...

And some have the audacity to suggest that our schools aren't working ...

Score: 0

By Gunnar Ruthstrom

posted Sep 29, 2006 - 10:44 PM

Yep... Another one.. I'll bet you will be first in line to get 666 stamped on your forehead.

Score: 0