Although there is no foolproof system of preventing unauthorized disclosures of classified information (“leaks”), there are a variety of new technical tools that can deter such disclosures or facilitate identification of those who compromise information security, according a 2002 CIA Task Force Report that was released last year under the Freedom of Information Act.
See “Interagency Task Force Report on Unauthorized Disclosure of Classified Information” (pdf), CIA Directorate of Science and Technology, 25 March 2002.
A supplementary paper argued that new legislation against leaks was “urgently needed.” The author singled out the National Security Archive and the Federation of American Scientists for propagating the “popular myth that the government over-classifies everything, and classifies way too much.” See “Leaks: How Unauthorized Media Disclosures of US Classified Intelligence Damage Sources and Methods” (pdf), Foreign Denial and Deception Committee, 24 April 2002.
The interagency process ultimately rejected the view that new legislation was needed. An October 2002 report to Congress from the Attorney General indicated that existing tools to combat leaks appeared to be adequate.
The clearinghouse will also neutrally mediate the assignment of auditors to audits—strengthening independence, trust, and ethical governance across the AI ecosystem.
The potential implication of these evidence gaps becomes more consequential when you look at how institutions actually make decisions day to day.
Every new institution inherits something – existing incentives, existing staff, decades of prior investment that shaped what’s possible.
This is not the first time Google has agreed to censor imagery at the behest of governments, but be warned: obfuscation at this broad level poses a direct threat to the public’s ability to monitor and scrutinize government operations.