The Executive branch has feared a data breach like the hacking of the Office of Professional Management for over forty years. Looking back to the administration of President Gerald Ford, it is instructive to compare federal policy now and then.

Soon after Gerald Ford took office following the departure of Richard Nixon, his national security team told him the Soviets were accessing US government data streams by intercepting microwave communications in Washington, DC. They feared that the Soviets would use information on government employees to suborn them.

Over the course of the next three years, the Ford Administration undertook the protection of federal data. First, it worked with its telecommunication providers to reroute telecommunications onto more secure, wired infrastructure. Second, it began requiring its telecommunication service providers to implement encryption by working with the National Security Agency (NSA) which was at the time, at the forefront of encryption research and an agency whose existence was officially denied. Third, it initiated the process leading to the formation of the National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee (NSTAC) which would bring together the heads of major US government contractors with the White House and the intelligence community to consider emerging threats beginning with the Reagan administration. Fourth, it laid the groundwork for the first federal data protection laws which were passed by Congress during the subsequent Carter Administration.

Finally, President Ford chose not to disclose this to Congress or the American people. He reasoned that after the Watergate scandal, public confidence in government would be irrevocably damaged. Moreover, the sensitivity of the vulnerability and involvement of the intelligence community would be unacceptable to many despite the necessity.

Today, the Obama administration faces a similar threat in a new medium. The Snowden revelations have damaged its credibility with many in the Internet community, though telecommunications providers are still quietly cooperating. While the president supports encryption, testimony from the FBI and the intelligence community is equivocal if not contrary. They want backdoors allowing them to circumvent encryption. The problem as many in Congress and the technical and academic communities have pointed out is that the solution sought is not a difficult problem; it is an impossible one and backdoors necessarily create vulnerabilities.

NSTAC still exists today and over the years has made valuable contributions. It has also remained out of sight to most people despite its regular and influential semiannual meetings. It remains an influential body and has transitioned from the pre-Internet world to the Internet world. It is representative of the nexus of technological and political power that Americans increasingly fear but which in reality is simply a pragmatic response to the uncertainty and change facing the US government.

While many in Congress call for new data protection laws, few of these proposals focus on actually protecting user data. They view collected data as owned property of the collector rather than information held in trust and on behalf of individuals. Holders of data are stewards, managing it on behalf of and in the best interests of individuals. This distinction has been lost over time. The Ford administration recognized this essential truth when citizens provided data to it either as employees or taxpayers or citizens. In today’s big data era, data is often collected from users unconscious of surveillance. Their ignorance is not a license to own.

Congress has an additional problem in that it has demonstrated that it is increasingly reluctant to address Internet issues. From SOPA to Network Neutrality, Congress has spoken loudly but proved itself unwilling to act. Traditional corporate lobbying has proved ineffectual against the public outcry inspired by an Internet vanguard of companies, advocacy groups and media figures. Congress has grown to think of the Internet as a third rail of politics. It is too sensitive to legislate, unless that legislation is in line with public sentiment.

In the forty years since the White House first became concerned with data security much has changed. Architecturally we have moved from telephone lines to the Internet. Encryption has become an off the shelf technology. State espionage is not the only threat to privacy.

The political climate has also changed. Discussions of data breaches are commonplace. Users are more knowledgeable about information technology and the use of data. Ford was only the second US president to have a computer in the White House. President Obama is probably the most Internet savvy president in history. Ford was the father of US government data security and the course he set on encryption and privacy in the pre-Internet era bear reexamination by the current administration. At the same time, the current administration’s openness on data breaches speaks to an important evolution and reassessment.