all repos — site @ e4fdf655850d65ef2e6e61770ff928b27104c5eb

source for my site, found at icyphox.sh

pages/blog/intel-conundrum.md (view raw)

 1---
 2template:
 3title: The intelligence conundrum
 4subtitle: To protect an asset, or to protect the people?
 5date: 2019-10-28
 6slug: intel-conundrum
 7---
 8
 9I watched the latest [S.W.A.T.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.W.A.T._(2017_TV_series))
10episode a couple of days ago, and it highlighted some interesting issues that
11intelligence organizations face when working with law enforcement. Side note: it's a pretty
12good show if you like police procedurals.
13
14## The problem
15
16Consider the following scenario:
17
18- There's a local drug lord who's been recruited to provide intel, by a certain 3-letter organization.
19- Local PD busts his operation and proceed to arrest him.
20- 3-letter org steps in, wants him released.
21
22So here's the thing, his presence is a threat to public but at the same time, 
23he can be a valuable long term asset -- giving info on drug inflow, exchanges and perhaps even 
24actionable intel on bigger fish who exist on top of the ladder. But he also
25seeks security. The 3-letter org must provide him with protection, 
26in case he's blown. And like in our case, they'd have to step in if he gets arrested.
27
28Herein lies the problem. How far should an intelligence organization go to protect an asset? 
29Who matters more, the people they've sworn to protect, or the asset? 
30Because afterall, in the bigger picture, local PD and intel orgs are on the same side.
31
32Thus, the question arises -- how can we measure the "usefulness" of an
33asset to better quantify the tradeoff that is to be made? 
34Is the intel gained worth the loss of public safety?
35This question remains largely unanswered, and is quite the 
36predicament should you find yourself in it.
37
38This was a fairly short post, but an interesting problem to ponder
39nonetheless.