1---
 2template:
 3title: The intelligence conundrum
 4subtitle: To protect an asset, or to protect the people?
 5date: 2019-10-28
 6---
 7
 8I watched the latest [S.W.A.T.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.W.A.T._(2017_TV_series))
 9episode a couple of days ago, and it highlighted some interesting issues that
10intelligence organizations face when working with law enforcement. Side note: it's a pretty
11good show if you like police procedurals.
12
13## The problem
14
15Consider the following scenario:
16
17- There's a local drug lord who's been recruited to provide intel, by a certain 3-letter organization.
18- Local PD busts his operation and proceed to arrest him.
19- 3-letter org steps in, wants him released.
20
21So here's the thing, his presence is a threat to public but at the same time, 
22he can be a valuable long term asset -- giving info on drug inflow, exchanges and perhaps even 
23actionable intel on bigger fish who exist on top of the ladder. But he also
24seeks security. The 3-letter org must provide him with protection, 
25in case he's blown. And like in our case, they'd have to step in if he gets arrested.
26
27Herein lies the problem. How far should an intelligence organization go to protect an asset? 
28Who matters more, the people they've sworn to protect, or the asset? 
29Because afterall, in the bigger picture, local PD and intel orgs are on the same side.
30
31Thus, the question arises -- how can we measure the "usefulness" of an
32asset to better quantify the tradeoff that is to be made? 
33Is the intel gained worth the loss of public safety?
34This question remains largely unanswered, and is quite the 
35predicament should you find yourself in it.
36
37This was a fairly short post, but an interesting problem to ponder
38nonetheless.