DYNAMIC PAGE -- HIGHEST POSSIBLE CLASSIFICATION IS
TOP SECRET // SI / TK // REL TO USA AUS CAN GBR NZL
(U) Write Right: Is That Collateral, or Is It a Comment?
FROM:
of the Reporting Board (S12)
Run Date: 05/18/2006
(U//FOUO) Recent articles in SID today have stressed the
importance of including analytic insight in SIGINT reports.*
Coincidentally, the latest issue of the Reporting Forum addressed a
crucial aspect of this matter:
Collateral vs. Comments = Research vs. Analysis
(U) Routine reviews of SIGINT reporting indicate the need to
refresh the analytic workforce on the uses of Collateral and Analyst
Comments. We hope the following helps ensure that the use of
comments and collateral can withstand close scrutiny when sources
are being examined or questioned.
(U) USSID CR1400 (formerly USSID 300) defines these two terms
thus:
(U) Collateral is information not derived from SIGINT. It is
published in written form or broacast in audio or video form by a
person or organization outside the SIGINT Community. Collateral
may be classified or unclassified.
(FOUO) A COMMENT is a sentence or paragraph that contains the
reporter's interpretation of the SIGINT facts. As such, it is given
the same classification as those SIGINT facts.
(U//FOUO) What these "Cs" have in common is that they are not
"SIGINT fact." Our reporting classes state that collateral is intended
to "support, enhance, clarify, or refute" SIGINT facts, and this is
also the purpose of analytic comments - to provide SIGINT
customers with the benefit of our experience and knowledge. To
serve the customer appropriately, though, these two classes
of information must be clearly worded and distinctly
labeled.
(U//FOUO) The customer has to know everything we can provide
about "what was said in the traffic" but only in a way that clearly
distinguishes "what was said in the traffic" from "what we know
about what was said." To put it another way, "Collateral" is
information; "Comment" is knowledge. Collateral is the result of
research; Comment is the result of analysis. You could call a library
or other information repository for collateral, but you would want a
subject-matter expert to do analysis.
(U//FOUO) The distinction is particularly important in this day of
close scrutiny of intelligence sources. Collateral can be easily
referenced and usually represents a straightforward source;
Comments, as analytic interpretation, are subject to close
examination by policy-makers, decision-makers, law-enforcement
authorities -- a range of our customers and authorities.
(C//SI) Historically, inclusion of analysis in NSA reporting has been
cyclical -- in response to customer requirements and in accordance
SERIES:
(U) Write Right '06
1. Write Right : Grab
Bag
2. Write Right :
Frequently Asked
Question: Where Do
I Go for Help With
USSID SP0018
Issues?
3. Write Right : The
Style Manual vs.
USSID 300 -- er,
USSID CR1400
4. Write Right : The
Paperless Society
5. Write Right : Is That
Collateral, or Is It a
Comment?
6. Write Right : What's
a URS Center?
7. Write Right : Caveat
Scrutator (Or, 'But I
Saw It on the
Internet!')
8. Write Right : Seven
Things Not To Do in a
SIGINT Report
9. Write Right :
Breaking an Old
Reporter's Heart
10. Write Right : Where
Does It Say I Can't?
11. Write Right : Urban
Myths of SIGINT: 'I
Can Just Mark It
ORCON'
12. Write Right : Loaded
Words: Don't
Politicize Reports
with developments in the outside world. There have been times
when circumstances, whether they represented our customers'
requirements, or zeal in protecting NSA's sources and methods,
dictated that our reports contain a straightforward transcription of
foreign intercept. It's been a long time since that was the case,
though.
(C//SI) It would be doing our customers a disservice to refrain, for
instance, from including pertinent information such as "The
minister has made this threat before, but only when speaking
privately to his secretary" or "this unit's activity may be related to
the upcoming Air Defense exercise." (Note that these two are
straightforward Comments; a statement such as "the minister's
claim conflicted with a recent press release by his government"
would be a Comment that includes Collateral; both USSID CR1400
and the Reporter's Style and Usage Manual contain instructions for
correct formatting of both.)
(C//SI) The complexities of our targets and our customers have
grown to the point where analytic Comments unthinkable in an
earlier day and age are absolutely necessary. We MUST tell our
customers when we have information indicating, for instance, that
the communicant is practicing disinformation, and we MUST clearly
label our analytic interpretation so that, for instance, law
enforcement personnel use only the SIGINT facts as leads (leads,
not evidence!) in a criminal investigation.
(U//FOUO) If we do not express our analytic conclusions clearly
and succinctly, we risk having a customer misinterpret SIGINT
facts -- leading to consequences ranging from failure to protect
U.S. forces to Congressional investigation. It is impossible to
overstate the importance of this issue.
(U) "Tell me what you know, tell me what you don't know, tell me
what you think; always distinguish which is which." -- Colin Powell
(U//FOUO) Addendum: Our Second Party partners appear to be
grappling with this issue, as shown by the October 2005 issue of
DSD's "Esquatir" .
*(U) Note: See the recent articles (U) SIGINT Reporting: The Right
Stuff and (U) No Comment .
(U) For earlier articles, see the Write Right '05 series.
"(U//FOUO) SIDtoday articles may not be republished or reposted outside NSANet
without the consent of S0121 (DL sid_comms)."
DYNAMIC PAGE -- HIGHEST POSSIBLE CLASSIFICATION IS
TOP SECRET // SI / TK // REL TO USA AUS CAN GBR NZL
DERIVED FROM: NSA/CSSM 1-52, DATED 08 JAN 2007 DECLASSIFY ON: 20320108