Access
This article is part of Nature's premium content.
Published online 24 October 2007 | Nature 449, 959 (2007) | doi:10.1038/449959a
News
Security issues plague US research
National Academies call for commission to limit restrictions.
A high-level 'science and security commission' is needed in the United States to limit bureaucratic restrictions on research that could thwart terrorist attacks, says a report from the National Academies.
The report's authors — an independent panel convened from the US research and security communities — agreed that universities must keep an open culture to make discoveries, even if some of those discoveries could be used by terrorists.
To read this story in full you will need to login or make a payment (see right).
Comments
Reader comments are usually moderated after posting. If you find something offensive or inappropriate, you can speed this process by clicking 'Report this comment' (or, if that doesn't work for you, email webadmin@nature.com). For more controversial topics, we reserve the right to moderate before comments are published.
The term "sensitive but not classified" has no legal status, as the NAS properly notes. In my experience, however, its overuse is not some cold war legacy but rather the direct result of the culture of secrecy promulgated by the current U.S. administration. Even when there are no directives from the top, junior contract officers slip restrictive clauses into contracts because they do not want to run the risk of being criticized as lax by their superiors. There are difficult issues and cases to be sure, but from what I've seen a good deal of the problem could be solved with a good dose of reason and commonsense at the contracting officer level.
I would like to comment on 'Ease of Visa' issue. I have to wait for US Visa to work as Postdoc for 92 days in UK with uncertainity and sans money. Without undermining the issue of security they should speed up the security checks if required. A definite deadline for issuance of visa should be set so that stranded people can take a life supporting job (especially when you are not stranded in your home country).
Unfortunately, and I stress unfortunately, the term "sensitive but unclassified" does indeed have standing legal status. While we find it used for the most part by contracting officers and agency regulators, the term has been included in legislation but (and this is even worse) has never been effectively or clearly defined within that legislation. For instance, see the Homeland Security Act (PL 107-296). Also, the Computer Security Act of 1987 (PL 100-235), refers to "sensitive data" which is ill-defined in the statute. What is troubling is that this legal authority has encouraged agency regulators to draft requirements for "sensitive but unclassified data" that are in direct conflict with NSDD 189 which essentially stated that if restrictions are to be placed on the dissemination of data, it is to be done via the classification system. The most troubling aspect to me is that NSDD 189 includes the limitation on that prescription "except as provided in applicable statutes." The two acts above have given agency regulators a kernel of justification for their actions.