Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory



March 16, 2017

In the wake of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the Patriot Act expanded U.S. government's authorities to surveil suspected terrorists in order to prevent future attacks. In the 15 years since, the US government has used those intelligence collection authorities to detect terrorist plotting and disrupt attacks. However, following the Edward Snowden unauthorized disclosures in 2013-2014, significant privacy questions were raised in the United States and around the world about the extent of such government surveillance activities. Privacy advocates and some in the technology sector have called to increase security of communications technology to better protect the privacy of individuals. However, there is the concern that such encryption measures could result in terrorists’ communications “going dark” and the loss of critical insight into terrorist plotting, leaving the intelligence and law enforcement communities blind to prevent an incoming attack. So how should the government and citizens negotiate the desire for privacy with the need for security and public safety? What is the right balance? And what role should the commercial sector – especially the technology sector – play in all of this moving forward? This briefing seeks to provide historical context to this debate, explore the position of each side, and highlight the challenges that lie ahead in balancing activities to counter extremism with measures to protect privacy.

Ms. Beaghley is a senior international/defense policy researcher at the RAND Corporation, where she focuses her research on counterterrorism plans and policies, cyber strategy, and intelligence and surveillance issues. She previously served as Director for Intelligence and Information Security on the National Security Council (NSC) staff. She also served as chief of planning at the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) and worked in the Pentagon in the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) on counterterrorism and cyber policy issues.