SoylentNews

It's Not Secret, It's Controlled Unclassified Information

posted by CoolHand on Friday May 15 2015, @09:02PM   
from the keep-it-secret-keep-it-safe dept.

takyon writes:

Steven Aftergood at the Secrecy News blog is reporting that the U.S. is planning to adopt a new government-wide designation for information that is unclassified, yet withheld from the public, replacing "100 different markings for such information [that] existed across the executive branch":

After years of preparation, the executive branch is poised to adopt a government-wide system for designating and safeguarding unclassified information that is to be withheld from public disclosure. The new system of "controlled unclassified information" (CUI) will replace the dozens of improvised control markings used by various agencies that have created confusion and impeded information sharing inside and outside of government. A proposed rule on CUI was published for public comment on May 8 in the Federal Register. While CUI is by definition unclassified, it is nevertheless understood to require protection against public disclosure on the basis of statute, regulation, or agency policy. In many or most cases, the categories of information that qualify as CUI are non-controversial, and include sensitive information related to law enforcement, nuclear security, grand jury proceedings, and so on.

One of the striking features of the new CUI program is that it limits the prevailing autonomy of individual agencies and obliges them to conform to a consistent government-wide standard. "CUI categories and subcategories are the exclusive means of designating CUI throughout the executive branch," the proposed rule states. "Agencies may not control any unclassified information outside of the CUI Program." Nor do agencies get to decide on their own what qualifies as CUI.

"The mere fact that information is designated as CUI has no bearing on determinations pursuant to any law requiring the disclosure of information or permitting disclosure as a matter of discretion," the new proposed rule said. The possibility that CUI information could or should be publicly disclosed on an authorized basis is not precluded. More specifically, a CUI marking in itself does not constitute an exemption to the Freedom of Information Act, the rule said. However, a statutory restriction that justifies designating information as CUI would also likely make it exempt from release under FOIA.

More subtly, noted John P. Fitzpatrick, the director of the Information Security Oversight Office, there is a large mass of material that is neither CUI nor non-CUI– until someone looks at it and makes an assessment. In all such cases (other than voluntary disclosure by an agency), public access would be governed by the provisions and exemptions of the FOIA.

Public comments are due by July 7.

• Re:Put your tinfoil hat back in the closet (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 17 2015, @03:23AM

  by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 17 2015, @03:23AM (#183937)

  This is a massive change from the current situation.

  Perhaps you did not read what I wrote. CUI has existed for a while now. It looks like these rules are merely a standardization of the process of handling CUI.

  This could make it illegal for a federal agent to email an unclassified intel report to another law enforcement officer.

  This is just plain bullshit fear mongering. Shame on you!

  That's ignoring the massive violation of transparency that the President has promised. Instead, the administration wants to control things even further.

  Massive violation of transparency? Really? The most significant changes I have seen are tightening of the rules regarding under what circumstances information can be classified as SECRET and for how long. In addition, the federal government is now tightening the rules on handling of PII of federal employees. These are the types of changes I have seen over the last few years. Why would you think the general public should, for example, have free access to the DOB and SSN of all federal employees? Or, to turn the tables on you, why shouldn't I be allowed to request your DOB and SSN from the IRS. They have that information. In the name of transparency, why shouldn't I be allowed to see it?

  But in most cases, it presents the type of logistical nightmare that real cops dread. This is the type of thing that kept the CIA from talking to the NSA. This is the type of change that makes it difficult for law enforcement officers and agents to efficiently communicate regarding legitimate threats to public safety. Nothing here benefits public safety. It merely benefits the existing power structure.

  Again, this is just bullshit fear mongering. For example, how would public release of the identities of informants, victims, and/or protected witnesses aid public safety?

  No, if it's not classified, let the information flow. Let it flow to other law enforcement networks in a timely manner, and let it flow to the public when it's requested properly. Keeping people in the dark benefits nobody but the criminals.

  There is a lot of information the federal government handles on a daily basis that should not be allowed to "flow". PII, for example. Why do you think the general public should have access to this information? What public interest would be served by this? Or why should the DoD be compelled to give DoJ access to the PII of all DoD employees? It is not classified SECRET and it would certainly be "free flow" of information, but what public interest would be served?

  Parent