DOCSLIB.ORG

Assessing Security Threats to Canada's Energy Infrastructure

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Assessing Security Threats to Canada's Energy Infrastructure Assessing Security Threats to Canada’s Energy Infrastructure: The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline By Jenny Benoit B.A., University of Guelph, 2011 Research Project Submitted In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in the School of Criminology Faculty of Arts and Social Science Jenny Benoit 2014 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY Summer 2014 Approval Name: Jenny Benoit Degree: Master of Arts (Criminology) Title of Thesis: Assessing Security Threats to Canada’s Energy Infrastructure: The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline Examining Committee: Chair: William Glackman Associate Professor J. Bryan Kinney Senior Supervisor Associate Professor Garth Davies Supervisor Associate Professor Andrea Curman External Examiner Research Analyst, Police Services Division, Road Safety Unit BC Government, Ministry of Justice Date Defended/Approved: July 29, 2014 ii Partial Copyright Licence iii Abstract Safe and secure critical infrastructure is essential for the functioning of Canada's society. A robust system of infrastructure allows Canada to be a leader on the world stage but also presents potential security risks. Using open source data, this paper identifies why energy infrastructure is the ideal target for malicious attack and includes a focus on the proposed Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline. Using the Harmonized Threat and Risk Assessment Methodology, to perform a risk based analysis; the likelihood of an attack on the Northern Gateway was assessed. A risk rating of low to medium was found, with a variety of vulnerabilities and possible threat actors identified. Keywords: Energy infrastructure, risk assessment, Northern Gateway pipeline iv Dedication To R.A. – Thank you. v Acknowledgements I would like to thank Dr. Bryan Kinney and Dr. Garth Davies for the support, assistance and suggestions you provided throughout this process. “I get by with a little help from my friends” (The Beatles). vi Table of Contents Approval .......................................................................................................................... ii Partial Copyright Licence ............................................................................................... iii Abstract .......................................................................................................................... iv Dedication ....................................................................................................................... v Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................ vi Table of Contents .......................................................................................................... vii List of Acronyms ............................................................................................................. ix 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Protecting Critical Infrastructure.............................................................................. 3 1.2. Threats to Critical Infrastructure.............................................................................. 6 2. Energy Infrastructure ........................................................................................... 7 2.1. Government Oversight ........................................................................................... 9 2.2. Protecting Energy Infrastructure ........................................................................... 10 2.3. Energy Infrastructure as a Target ......................................................................... 11 2.4. Identifying Potential Targets ................................................................................. 12 2.4.1. Nuclear Facilities ....................................................................................... 13 2.4.2. Hydroelectric Facilities .............................................................................. 13 2.4.3. Petroleum Infrastructure ............................................................................ 15 2.4.4. Wind and Solar Energy Infrastructure ....................................................... 15 3. Theory ................................................................................................................. 16 3.1. Managing Risk and Playing Odds ......................................................................... 16 4. Security Threat and Risk Assessment .............................................................. 18 4.1. Methodologies ...................................................................................................... 18 4.1.1. Harmonized Threat and Risk Assessment Methodology (HTRA) .............. 18 4.1.2. American Petroleum Institute and National Refiners Association Security Vulnerability Assessment (SVA) .................................................. 20 4.1.3. Security Risk Assessment for Non-Government Organizations (SRA) ........................................................................................................ 21 4.2. Case Study: Threat and Risk Assessment – Enbridge Northern Gateway ............ 21 4.2.1. Scope ....................................................................................................... 21 4.2.2. Aim ........................................................................................................... 21 4.2.3. Vulnerabilities............................................................................................ 21 Physical .................................................................................................... 21 Exporting by using Tankers ....................................................................... 22 Pipeline supervisory control and data acquisition systems (SCADA)......... 23 Personnel ................................................................................................. 23 4.2.4. Threats...................................................................................................... 24 Terrorism .................................................................................................. 24 Sunni Islamic Extremism ..................................................................... 24 Domestic Extremism ................................................................................. 25 First Nations .............................................................................................. 26 vii Maritime Piracy ......................................................................................... 27 Insider Threat ............................................................................................ 27 4.2.5. Potential Consequences ........................................................................... 28 Loss of Assets .......................................................................................... 28 Economic Consequences ......................................................................... 28 Environmental Consequences .................................................................. 29 Political Consequences ............................................................................. 29 4.2.6. Likelihood of an Attack .............................................................................. 30 Sunni Islamic Extremism ........................................................................... 30 Environmental Extremists ......................................................................... 30 First Nations .............................................................................................. 31 Pirates ...................................................................................................... 32 4.2.7. Concluding Remarks ................................................................................. 32 5. Discussion .......................................................................................................... 34 5.1. Cyber Attack ......................................................................................................... 34 5.2. Connection with the United States ........................................................................ 35 5.3. Data on Energy Infrastructure ............................................................................... 36 5.4. Future of Government Oversight .......................................................................... 36 6. Limitations .......................................................................................................... 38 7. Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 39 References ................................................................................................................... 40 Appendices .................................................................................................................. 48 viii List of Acronyms CI Critical infrastructure CSE Communication Security Establishment CSIS Canadian Security Intelligence Service EI Energy infrastructure HTRA Harmonized Threat and Risk Assessment Methodology NGOs Non-government organizations RCMP Royal Canadian Military Police SRA Security Risk Assessment for Non-Government Organizations SVA American Petroleum Institute and National Refiners Association Security Vulnerability Assessment ix 1. Introduction Critical infrastructure (CI) is any service, system or material
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Eco-Terrorist Wave (1970-2016)
    THE ECO-TERRORIST WAVE (1970-2016) By João Raphael da Silva Submitted to Central European University Department of International Relations In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in International Relations Supervisor: Professor Matthijs Bogaards Word Count: Budapest, Hungary 2017 CEU eTD Collection 1 ABSTRACT The present research aims to shed light on the geographical and temporal spread of the ecological typology of terrorism – hereinafter referred as “Eco-Terrorism” – through the lens of the David C. Rapoport’s Wave and Tom Parker and Nick Sitter’s Strain Theories. This typology that has posed high levels of threats to the United States and the European Union member States remains uncovered by these two theoretical frameworks. My arguments are that, first, like many other typologies previously covered by the above-mentioned theories, Eco-Terrorism spread. Second, “Wave”, “Strain” or “Wavy Strain” should be able to explain the pattern followed by Eco-Terrorism. Making use of the “Contagion Effect” as an analytical tool, the present research found that, like in other typologies, as an indirect way of contagion, literary production has played a crucial role in the spread of Eco-Terrorism, with a slight difference on who was writing them. Eventually, they became leaders or members of an organization, but in most of the cases were philosophers and fiction authors. In addition, it was found that the system of organization of the ALF and the ELF contributes to the spread. As a direct way of contagion, aside from training like in other typologies, the spread occurs when members of a certain organization disaffiliate from an organization and found a new one, and sometimes when two organizations act in cooperation.
    [Show full text]
  • Greenpeace, Earth First! and the Earth Liberation Front: the Rp Ogression of the Radical Environmental Movement in America" (2008)
    University of Rhode Island DigitalCommons@URI Senior Honors Projects Honors Program at the University of Rhode Island 2008 Greenpeace, Earth First! and The aE rth Liberation Front: The rP ogression of the Radical Environmental Movement in America Christopher J. Covill University of Rhode Island, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/srhonorsprog Part of the Environmental Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Covill, Christopher J., "Greenpeace, Earth First! and The Earth Liberation Front: The rP ogression of the Radical Environmental Movement in America" (2008). Senior Honors Projects. Paper 93. http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/srhonorsprog/93http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/srhonorsprog/93 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Honors Program at the University of Rhode Island at DigitalCommons@URI. It has been accepted for inclusion in Senior Honors Projects by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@URI. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Greenpeace, Earth First! and The Earth Liberation Front: The Progression of the Radical Environmental Movement in America Christopher John Covill Faculty Sponsor: Professor Timothy Hennessey, Political Science Causes of worldwide environmental destruction created a form of activism, Ecotage with an incredible success rate. Ecotage uses direct action, or monkey wrenching, to prevent environmental destruction. Mainstream conservation efforts were viewed by many environmentalists as having failed from compromise inspiring the birth of radicalized groups. This eventually transformed conservationists into radicals. Green Peace inspired radical environmentalism by civil disobedience, media campaigns and direct action tactics, but remained mainstream. Earth First’s! philosophy is based on a no compromise approach.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Law Section Newsletter
    LAW SECTION Susan Richardson, Editor Kilpatrick Stockton LLP Spring 2002 Protecting Against Environmental Terrorism by Robert D. Schmitter Senior Scientist and Head of Environmental Management and Technology Branch In This Issue: Georgia Tech Research Institute1 Protecting Against Introduction Environmental Protection of the environment is a major concern of both the public and private sectors, but it is now seen in a new light since the September 11 attacks exposed the vulnerabil- Terrorism . pg. 1 ity of certain segments of the country’s infrastructure to terrorist acts. Most environ- mental protection efforts have been directed at operations with the potential to cause From the Chair’s environmental damage as a result of accidental spills or releases of toxic materials. Desk . pg. 2 Attention has now turned to addressing issues of environmental terrorism, which can include the intentional release of hazardous materials via terrorist activities at facilities The Enviromental or operations, with a resultant tremendous adverse impact on the environment and the Litigator’s Procedual public. Primer on the Office of State Administra- What is Environmental Terrorism? tive Hearings . .pg. 3 The FBI defines terrorism as “the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment An Overview of the thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”2 Terrorism takes on many Small Business forms, including assassinations, homicide/suicide bombings, chemical or biological Liability Relief and attacks, and concerns about attacks on the environment and the associated impact on the public. Environmental terrorism has been defined as “the unlawful use of force Brownfields Revital- against in situ environmental resources as to deprive populations of their benefits and/ ization Act .
    [Show full text]
  • The Criminal Conduct of Radical Environmental and Animal Rights Groups: a Rational Choice Perspective
    ABSTRACT Title of Document: THE CRIMINAL CONDUCT OF RADICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND ANIMAL RIGHTS GROUPS: A RATIONAL CHOICE PERSPECTIVE Jennifer Varriale Carson, Doctor of Philosophy, 2010 Directed By: Professor Gary LaFree, Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice In this dissertation, I examine whether members of radical environmental and animal rights groups are deterred by legal sanctions, morality, both, or neither. From a rational choice framework, I hypothesize that members of these groups weigh costs and benefits and act based on expected utility. I measure an increase in costs through three federal sentencing acts targeted at reducing the criminal behavior of these groups and hypothesize that this legislation decreased the total, serious, and ideologically-specific activity of extremists. I also contend that two terrorist events, the nearly fatal tree-spiking of George Alexander and the assassination of Hyram Kitchen, also increased the costs of criminal conduct for members of radical eco- groups. I evaluate interviews with twenty-five activists and analyze a database of 1056 incidents through both time-series and series hazard modeling. The interviews yield support for the rational choice perspective, particularly in regards to micro-level considerations of legal sanctions and morality. My quantitative findings indicate that the legislation was influential, albeit varying in direction by the method employed. Specifically, the time-series models yield significant increases in the frequency of criminal conduct after the legislation, while the series hazard analyses demonstrate a decrease in the hazard of an attack. I also find that the two major terrorist events did not significantly impact the criminal conduct of these groups.
    [Show full text]
  • Sentinel Species: the Criminalization of Animal Rights Activists As Terrorists, and What It Means for the Civil Liberties in Trump's America
    Denver Law Review Volume 95 Issue 4 Symposium: Animal Rights Article 5 November 2020 Sentinel Species: The Criminalization of Animal Rights Activists as Terrorists, and What It Means for the Civil Liberties in Trump's America Will Potter Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/dlr Recommended Citation Will Potter, Sentinel Species: The Criminalization of Animal Rights Activists as Terrorists, and What It Means for the Civil Liberties in Trump's America, 95 Denv. L. Rev. 877 (2018). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Denver Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],[email protected]. SENTINEL SPECIES: THE CRIMINALIZATION OF ANIMAL RIGHTS ACTIVISTS AS "TERRORISTS," AND WHAT IT MEANS FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES IN TRUMP'S AMERICA WILL POTTERt ABSTRACT The animal rights movement has pioneered new, diverse forms of so- cial activism that have rapidly redefined how we view animals. But those remarkable successes have been met with an increasingly aggressive back- lash, including new terrorism laws, widespread surveillance, experimental prisons, and legislation explicitly criminalizing journalists and whistle- blowers. This Article will explain how, if left unchecked, these attacks on animal advocacy will become a blueprint for the wider criminalization of dissent. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION................................................ 878 I. MEET THE WORLD'S NEWEST TERRORIST .......... ............ 879 II. NUMBER ONE DOMESTIC TERRORISM THREAT ... .............. 882 III. MOBILIZING LAW ENFORCEMENT ...................... ....... 883 IV. ANIMAL ENTERPRISE TERRORISM............. ............... 887 V. FROM THE MARGINS TO THE MAINSTREAM: "AG-GAG" LAWS .....
    [Show full text]
  • Geospatial Analysis of Terrorist Activities
    The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: Geospatial Analysis of Terrorist Activities: The Identification of Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Preparatory Behavior of International and Environmental Terrorists Author: Brent L. Smith ; Jackson Cothren ; Paxton Roberts ; Kelly R. Damphousse Document No.: 222909 Date Received: May 2008 Award Number: 2005-IJ-CX-0200 This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federally- funded grant final report available electronically in addition to traditional paper copies. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. University of Arkansas NIJ Grant 2005-IJ-CX-0200 Geospatial Analysis of Terrorist Activities: The Identification of Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Preparatory Behavior of International and Environmental Terrorists Brent L. Smith Terrorism Research Center in Fulbright College University of Arkansas Jackson Cothren Center for Advanced Spatial Technologies University of Arkansas Paxton Roberts Terrorism Research Center in Fulbright College University of Arkansas Kelly R. Damphousse KayTen Research and Development, Inc. February 2008 http://trc.uark.edu Terrorism Research Center in Fulbright College University of Arkansas TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Number Table of Contents...............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • An Overview of Bombing and Arson Attacks by Environmental and Animal Rights Extremists in the United States, 1995-2010
    An Overview of Bombing and Arson Attacks by Environmental and Animal Rights Extremists in the United States, 1995-2010 Final Report to the Resilient Systems Division, Science and Technology Directorate, U.S. Department of Homeland Security May 2013 National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism A Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Center of Excellence Based at the University of Maryland 8400 Baltimore Ave, Suite 250 • College Park, MD 20742 • 301.405.6600 www.start.umd.edu National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism A Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Center of Excellence About This Report The authors of this report are: Steven M. Chermak, Ph.D., National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism & Responses to Terrorism (START), and School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State University; Joshua D. Freilich, J.D; Ph.D., National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism & Responses to Terrorism (START), and Doctoral Program in Criminal Justice, The Graduate Center & John Jay College, CUNY; Celinet Duran, Michigan State University; and William S. Parkin, Ph.D., National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism & Responses to Terrorism (START), and Criminal Justice Department, Seattle University. Questions about this report should be directed to [email protected]. This research was supported by the Resilient Systems Division of the Science and Technology Directorate of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security through Award Number 2009ST108LR0003 made to the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START). The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Domestic Terrorist Threat: Background and Issues for Congress
    The Domestic Terrorist Threat: Background and Issues for Congress Jerome P. Bjelopera Specialist in Organized Crime and Terrorism January 17, 2013 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R42536 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress The Domestic Terrorist Threat: Background and Issues for Congress Summary The emphasis of counterterrorism policy in the United States since Al Qaeda’s attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11) has been on jihadist terrorism. However, in the last decade, domestic terrorists—people who commit crimes within the homeland and draw inspiration from U.S.-based extremist ideologies and movements—have killed American citizens and damaged property across the country. Not all of these criminals have been prosecuted under terrorism statutes. This latter point is not meant to imply that domestic terrorists should be taken any less seriously than other terrorists. The Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) do not officially list domestic terrorist organizations, but they have openly delineated domestic terrorist “threats.” These include individuals who commit crimes in the name of ideologies supporting animal rights, environmental rights, anarchism, white supremacy, anti-government ideals, black separatism, and anti-abortion beliefs. The boundary between constitutionally protected legitimate protest and domestic terrorist activity has received public attention. This boundary is especially highlighted by a number of criminal cases involving supporters of animal rights—one area in which specific legislation related to domestic terrorism has been crafted. The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (P.L. 109-374) expands the federal government’s legal authority to combat animal rights extremists who engage in criminal activity.
    [Show full text]
  • Cyberterrorism Formatted.Doc 4/15/2010 4:21 Pm
    CYBERTERRORISM FORMATTED.DOC 4/15/2010 4:21 PM CYBERTERRORISM: ARE WE LEGALLY READY? Aviv Cohen∗ INTRODUCTION Human beings, by their very nature, have a tendency to find the destructive side of most innovations and advancements. Current technological developments present us with opportunities to enrich our lives by using simple, quick and high-quality devices. At the same time, these technological developments also hold the potential to be used as weapons in the hands of terrorists. When I first became acquainted with the idea of cyberterrorism, I was fascinated by the large amount of ink that had already been spilled on the gloom prospects that cyberterrorism is not a question of “if” but of “when.” However, there was no reference as to how the international community can react to such an attack after it had happened. This article is an attempt to take that next step, and try to analyze whether the international tool kit is well equipped to handle cyberterrorism. I have focused on the legal aspects, rather than discussing the technological options to combat cyberterrorism. While existing counter-terror conventions could, by way of legal interpretation, apply to cyberterrorism, there could be a better direct way of addressing this threat, via the creation of an explicit regime for the suppression of cyberterrorism consisting of conventional prohibitions, Security Council resolutions and international criminal laws. The article includes four parts. Part I sets the stage for the arguments presented above, and provides a brief introduction to the concept of terrorism and the international response to these terrorist threats. Part II defines what cyberterrorism is and what distinguishes it from other manifestations of terrorism.
    [Show full text]
  • Domestic Terrorism: an Overview
    Domestic Terrorism: An Overview Jerome P. Bjelopera Specialist in Organized Crime and Terrorism August 21, 2017 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R44921 Domestic Terrorism: An Overview Summary The emphasis of counterterrorism policy in the United States since Al Qaeda’s attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11) has been on jihadist terrorism. However, in the last decade, domestic terrorists—people who commit crimes within the homeland and draw inspiration from U.S.-based extremist ideologies and movements—have killed American citizens and damaged property across the country. Not all of these criminals have been prosecuted under federal terrorism statutes, which does not imply that domestic terrorists are taken any less seriously than other terrorists. The Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) do not officially designate domestic terrorist organizations, but they have openly delineated domestic terrorist “threats.” These include individuals who commit crimes in the name of ideologies supporting animal rights, environmental rights, anarchism, white supremacy, anti-government ideals, black separatism, and beliefs about abortion. The boundary between constitutionally protected legitimate protest and domestic terrorist activity has received public attention. This boundary is highlighted by a number of criminal cases involving supporters of animal rights—one area in which specific legislation related to domestic terrorism has been crafted. The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (P.L. 109-374) expands the federal government’s legal authority to combat animal rights extremists who engage in criminal activity. Signed into law in November 2006, it amended the Animal Enterprise Protection Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-346).
    [Show full text]
  • Downloads/EJF Viral-Diseases- From-Wildife-In-China-2003-final.Pdf (Accessed on 1 July 2020)
    sustainability Article A Prognostic View on the Ideological Determinants of Violence in the Radical Ecological Movement El˙zbietaPosłuszna Faculty of Aviation Safety, Military University of Aviation, 08-521 D˛eblin,Poland; [email protected] Received: 2 July 2020; Accepted: 9 August 2020; Published: 13 August 2020 Abstract: Ecologically motivated violence that manifests itself in the animal-rights and environmental forms is not a declining phenomenon. The fluctuating increase of the number of ecologically motivated crimes during the last 50 years, the multiplicity of the methods used (arson, food poisoning in supermarkets, destruction of equipment, attacks with the use of incentivized devices) should make us look at eco-extremism as a dynamic and difficult to grasp phenomenon. The paper is of both explanatory and prognostic nature; its goal is to present the genesis and essence of ecological radicalism, as well as to formulate the predictions for the future. In these forecasts, I wish to depart from the frequent, albeit somewhat simplistic, argument that, since the environmental extremist groups have not yet resorted to direct violence (targeting humans), and the animal-rights groups have reached for it very rarely, this state of affairs will continue in the future. This claim does not necessarily have to be true. I argue that some aspects of ideology can induce, in certain circumstances (a growing ecological catastrophe, further departure from the anthropocentric perspective), a change of the potential of radicalism within the environmental and animal-rights movements. In the case of animal-rights groups, the principle of not causing harm to people may be openly rejected, and in the case of environmental groups, the actions aimed at the annihilation of the whole human species may be undertaken.
    [Show full text]
  • Patterns of Precursor Behaviors in the Life Span of a U.S. Environmental Terrorist Group
    patterns of precursor behaviors in the life span of a u.S. environmental terrorist group Brent L. Smith University of Arkansas Kelly R. Damphousse University of Oklahoma Research Summary This article discusses the paucity of data available for assessing the “life span” of a terrorist group. It introduces a new methodology that allows researchers to examine when terrorist groups perform their preincident activities. The findings suggest that differences exist in the temporal patterns of terrorist groups: environmental terrorist groups engage in a relatively short planning cycle compared with right-wing and international terrorists. The article concludes by examining a case study on “the Family,” which is a unique environmental terrorist group that conducted activities over a relatively long period of time. This group provides an interesting contrast to other environmental terrorists. Despite significant orga- nizational differences, their patterns of preparatory conduct were highly similar. Policy Implications The findings suggest that (1) temporal and spatial data about preincident terrorist activity can be collected from unclassified and open sources and (2) law-enforcement agencies that are investigating environmental groups have relatively little time to observe and infiltrate their individual cells (compared with right-wing and international terrorists). Finally, the data suggest that environmental terrorists—at least so far—have engaged in attacks that are less deadly than the comparison groups. Keywords environmental terrorism, extremism, terrorism, eco-terrorism, preincident patterns support for this research was provided by grants 2003-DT-cX-0003, 2005-IJ-cX-0200, and 2006-IJ-cX00037 from the national Institute of Justice and grant number mIPt 106-113-2000-064 from the national memorial Institute for the Prevention of terrorism and the department of Homeland security.
    [Show full text]