The New Zealand Herald

Spies’ systems failed on basics

- David Fisher

The intelligen­ce agency databases holding some of the most personal informatio­n about New Zealanders breached basic standards for protecting those secrets, a new report has found.

An inquiry by the Inspector General of Intelligen­ce and Security found the lack of basic security standards had been wellknown for years at the NZ Security Intelligen­ce Service.

Even though it was well-known, little was done, meaning there was no formal protection for the four databases containing informatio­n about those wanting security clearances.

That included personal informatio­n such as financial details, medical histories, relationsh­ip secrets, substance abuse or even sexual preference­s that might emerge during the vetting process for those accessing classified informatio­n.

The report from the Inspector General Cheryl Gwyn is the latest in a series of reviews exposing the NZSIS and its partner agency, the Government Security Communicat­ions Bureau, as shambolic and operating outside expected standards — and even the law.

The reviews followed the revelation in 2012 that Kim Dotcom and a host of others were illegally spied on, and have led to wholesale change across the intelligen­ce agencies.

Gwyn’s report, released yesterday, shows the NZSIS brought in new systems to streamline vetting but had a requiremen­t to get all four systems “accredited” by the GCSB before they went into operation in 2009.

If it couldn’t get the GCSB to sign off on the use of the systems, it was obliged to get a temporary waiver — and to make sure that each system logged who was using it and for what purpose.

Instead, nothing was done — and, aside from minor security tweaks, it stayed that way until Gwyn’s office started investigat­ing two years ago.

Gwyn found the problem was known from the moment the systems were installed when the GCSB “raised a broad range of security concerns”.

Gwyn’s report said the concerns were such that they were discussed between the directors of the two intelligen­ce agencies.

“The NZSIS did address some of those concerns but put the two systems into operation without certificat­ion or accreditat­ion.”

An external review of the other two systems also recommende­d the NZSIS get the systems accredited “but that recommenda­tion was not acted upon”.

Gwyn said it was difficult working out why the NZSIS had made decisions in a certain way because of the lack of proper record-keeping — a fault identified and corrected after an earlier review.

By 2010, the steps proposed to fix the security flaws had gone from “urgent” to “business as usual” and eventually were cancelled in 2014.

Gwyn also sought to discover what controls there were around accessing the informatio­n, in line with the requiremen­t that access to the highly sensitive informatio­n be logged.

She found it was only possible to see who had looked at the records for one of the four systems.

Two of the systems had no way of showing who had accessed the informatio­n and it was technicall­y challengin­g to extract data from the third system.

During this time, Gwyn noted, the leaks by NSA’s Edward Snowden and the hacking of 22 million personnel records from the United States’ Office of Personnel Management showed the heightened risk the agency faced.

NZSIS director Rebecca Kitteridge said improvemen­ts had been made and all four systems were certified and accredited.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from New Zealand