Contrasting Indiana and Idaho Intelligent Security Policies

Indiana’s Privacy Policy and Idaho’s License Plate Reader Policy

An IT security policy is a documentation of the guidelines and the events that all individuals that access and use organizational IT assets and resources should follow (Dunham, 2018). An IT security policy is the prototype of an organization’s culture whereby its guidelines and dealings are resultant from the employees’ attitude to their data as well as work. An IT security policy helps to reserve privacy, reliability and accessibility of information systems (Dunham, 2018). Indiana Intelligence Fusion Centres (IIFC) licence plate reader (LPR) policy and Idaho Criminal Intelligence Centre (IC²) privacy policy are two IT security policies that work in ensuring that they protect civil rights and ensure that the respective citizens have their personal privacy.

 IC² main mission is to collect, store and analyse any crime information and this includes even any suspected offences which ensures that there is protection of human civil rights (Indiana Intelligence Fusion Center License Plate Reader Policy, 2018). The aim of licence plate reader (LPR) policy provides proper guidelines and principles for the collection, access, dissemination of information to IIFC personnel. LPR helps in increasing public safety and improvement of the state, local, tribal and national security. It helps in minimizing potential risks to individuals’ privacy, civil constitutional rights and civil independences and it helps in fostering truth in the government by strengthening transparency.

Similarities

1. Employment and training

For new employees, both these policies ensure that special training in regard to their policy requirements is given. All of them ensure that the new employees understand the concept protecting information and ensuring accuracy in collection, analyses and dissemination of information. The training normally entail subjects such as; role of the policy, constituent and intent of the provision of the policies, originating and participating agency responsibilities and obligation, ways to device the policies in genera daily activities, mechanisms of reporting violations and the nature and possible penalties for the violations (The Idaho Criminal Intelligence Center Privacy Policy, 2019).

1. Security

Both of the policies operate in a secret environment thus ensuring that they protect the facility from any external intrusion. Both IC² privacy policy and PLR policy apply protected internal and external precautions against network interferences and entree to the database from outside the facility is only permissible over protected systems. IC² stores data in such a way that it cannot be supplemented, ruined or even eliminated except by the approved personnel (Indiana Intelligence Fusion Center License Plate Reader Policy, 2018). The right to use of the analysis and distribution of information is only settled to the specific employees whose job positions and obligations require such kind of admittance and this are also employees that are appropriately trained, have completed all the background checks and the appropriate security clearances (The Idaho Criminal Intelligence Center Privacy Policy, 2019).

• Supremacy and oversight

The governance board of IC² normally consist of one command staff member from each of the agencies that provide staff to IC². The governance board is also responsible for the approval of all policy and procedures of IC² (Indiana Intelligence Fusion Center License Plate Reader Policy, 2018). Just like with IC² IIFC director is normally responsible for the overall overseeing and administration of the LPR program to ensure compliance with appliance laws, regulations, standards and policy (The Idaho Criminal Intelligence Center Privacy Policy, 2019).

1. Information gathering and acquisition of IC² and IIFC

Both IC and IIFC do not at any given time pursue, admit or even preserve data from an distinct or a nongovernmental data supplier who may or may not accept a charge, for providing the data if they knows that the provider is legally prohibited from obtaining or disclosing the information. IC² Privacy Policy just with PLR only seeks and retains information that is based on possible threats, reasonable suspicions, pertinent to an exploration and tribunal of a criminal activity (Indiana Intelligence Fusion Center License Plate Reader Policy, 2018). All this information that is acquired is normally received by the policies and analysed according to priorities and needs.

Differences

Idaho Criminal Intelligence Centre (IC²) privacy policy

1. With IC², in order to help avert unintentional public disclosure and any susceptibility, data is not usually stored with publicly accessible data. The qualified and capable members are generally elected by the IC² director (Indiana Intelligence Fusion Center License Plate Reader Policy, 2018).
2. The IC² privacy policy is compliant with the U.S Constitution, the constitution of Idaho and also the Criminal Intelligence Systems Operations and the Idaho Public Records. When a sanctioned user does not conform with the requirements of IC² when it comes to the gathering, use, obliteration and classification of information, this user’s access to information is suspended and the matters may then be referred to the appropriate authorities and the required disciplinary measures are applied (Indiana Intelligence Fusion Center License Plate Reader Policy, 2018).
3. IC² privacy policy is normally retained by Idaho State Police and the director has the key role of the daily procedures which include; managing of the personnel, exploration and allocation or disclosure of information (Indiana Intelligence Fusion Center License Plate Reader Policy, 2018).

Indiana Intelligence Fusion Centres (IIFC) licence plate reader (LPR) policy

1. Privacy generals are normally taught and designated through the command of the Executive director (The Idaho Criminal Intelligence Center Privacy Policy, 2019).
2. Privacy agreement is normally directed by a proficient privacy officer that is normally taught by the management director (The Idaho Criminal Intelligence Center Privacy Policy, 2019).
3. Violations of the policy can be reported directors or to the privacy officers where the necessary punishment will be given (The Idaho Criminal Intelligence Center Privacy Policy, 2019). The reporting can be made either in person; it can be written or made via any electronic communication.

Best policy

Idaho’s IC² private policy is much better as compared to Indiana’s IIFC licence plate reader because it the policy is much more detailed and it very clearly explained. The policy adheres to the criminal Intelligence Guidelines that are conventional under the U.S department of justice (Indiana Intelligence Fusion Center License Plate Reader Policy, 2018). It has very clear guidelines as to how the policy is effected and the consequences that come with not doing in accordance to the policy which makes it very easy for every individual to understand as compared to LPR that does not clearly state its purpose or give clear guidelines on how the policy can be effected (The Idaho Criminal Intelligence Center Privacy Policy, 2019).

Conclusion and recommendations

Cyber security has been a major issue affecting government agencies which has led to amplified need for improved cyber security risk management strategies.  States have worked hard to come up with strategies that can help deal with cyber security and though they are helping, these policies need to properly strategize to make them more effective. There are things that states should adopt when it comes to cyber security management and one of them includes training employees on cyber security and ways to ensure that data is secure in their various security sites (Dunham, 2018). Another important factor is ensuring that frequent analysis on citizen and employees’ data and classifying the data in both the external and internal clouds and also management of mobile devices. The state governments should always ensure that they inspire and support the development and sustainment of a workforce that is skilful in cyber security as a basis for attaining government aims in cyber security (Dunham, 2018).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Cooke, M. (2015, September 11). Desperately Seeking Security Frameworks – A Roadmap

for State CIOs. Retrieved from https://www.nascio.org/Publications/ArtMID/485/ArticleID/189/Desperately-Seeking-Security-Frameworks-–-A-Roadmap-for-State-CIOs

Dunham, R. (2018, July 26). Information Security Policies: Why They Are Important to Your

Organization. Retrieved from https://linfordco.com/blog/information-security-policies/

Indiana Intelligence Fusion Center License Plate Reader Policy. (2018). Indiana Intelligence

Fusion Center, 1-6. Retrieved from https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=2ahUKEwiWmaGVifDgAhXK2OAKHQdCCVMQFjAAegQIChAC&url=https://www.in.gov/iifc/files/Indiana_Intelligence_Fusion_Center_LPR_Privacy_Policy.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1JZNoJqflmeyOJRJVSkK5p.

The Idaho Criminal Intelligence Center Privacy Policy. (2019). Idaho Criminal Intelligence,

1-20. Retrieved from https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjuiI2mivDgAhVS2OAKHbgvAZEQFjAAegQICBAC&url=https://www.isp.idaho.gov/icic/documents/IdahoCriminalIntelligenceCenterPrivacyPolicy.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2PxrQvJoR5iJrkXX-r6fkp.