SAFE BRIEFING FOR(Sanitized) ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR INTELLIGENCE, DOD

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 39
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 16, 2002
• Sequence Number: 49
• Publication Date: August 18, 1975
• Content Type: MFR

Approved For Release 2002/1 -00498A000400050049-9
Lire
10 AIU615
ECT: SAFE Briefing for :'r. Albert Hall,
'assistant Secretary of Defense for Intellig nCe, DOD
ATINTL
~TI NTL
1. On 13 August the undersigned was asked by John
Slack (OX 5-7072, Grey 2289), OASD (Intel), whether a
SAFE briefing could be arranged for Dr. Hall, ASO (Intel).
He said that Dr. Hall had attended an IRAC meeting on
11 august and had his interest in SAFE stimulated by a-a
DC 7s comments on SAFE. =.e added that Dr. Hall is very
interested in any modernization techniques which would
assist the analysts in their work and was also interested
in the relationship between SAFE and existing systems, such
as COINS.
2. 1 explained to ;1r. Slack that SAFE was in its
early stages and we would not he able to talk about any
technical system concepts or designs. our major effort
was in the analysis of the analysts working environment and
the detailing of requirements that should be satisfied by
the SAFE system. We had recently formed a SAFE Project
Office that would eventually translate the requirements into
a system specification and design. I also mentioned that
we had an interim SAFE system which was being used as a
test-bed for trying out some of the ideas for using a coraf.
pater to facilitate the analysts work. I told Mr. Slack
that we probably could put togst1n ar a briefing for Dr. Hall
which would describe the SAFE requirerints in some detail
followed by a description of the SAE Project Office and
the approach we plan to use to bring the SAFE' systeTi into
the world. :r r. Slack said this sounded great, and asked if
we would include some description of what is being done on
the Interim SAFE system and how it has L n' roved the analysts
capabilities.
After coordination with the Acting D/CP.S, 14r.
Iand the SAFE PD, I called *".r. Slack and
suggested a one hour briefing at a time convenient to
Dr Hall between 8 and 12 S epte ..bier. He later confirmed
this for 9 eptea')er, 0930-1030 hours in Dr. HHall's office,
3E-282, the Pentagon. We agreed that about 45 minutes
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
would b t1evotad to the briefing and 15 minutes for dis-
cussion. The majority of the 45 minutes would he on the
AVI requirements and Interim System with about 10 mintttes
devoted to the implementation approach. a told -r,-r. Slack
that the briefing would probably be given by
and they would probably be acco-mpanied-Uy-77-7.
Azenbe: :3 and Zr. fFitzwater. Eke said "fine" and added
that Dr. Hall prefers not I -o gave a large entourage for
such briefings. I told hii-it we would confirm our attend--o a
STATINTL
STATINTL
STAT
STAT
i epu .y Director of Joint computer -Support
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
i RANSMITTAL SLIP
DATE
TO:
ROOM NO. I
-,:I 1j.26
BUILDING
gv-4r
-
REMARKS:
FROM:
ROOM NO.
BUI DING
EXTENSION
FORM RFEB M NO 24I REPLACES FORM 3e~8
WHICH MAY BE USED.
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050
25X1A
Project SAFE
Feasibility of an Agency-wide Information System
to Support the Analysts File Environment
Confidential
October 1974
N2 71
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION
Unauthorized Disclosure Subject to Criminal Sanctions
25X1A
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9 ''j C; t=i4
25X1A
MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD
SUBJECT Facility Proposed for Project SAFE
REFERENCE: Memo dtd 16 October 74 to DDA from D/OJCS
Same Subj
1. A ost estimate to support project SAFE is included in
Paragraph-C' The estimate is based on the data presented in the
referenced memo and based on the following assumptions:
a. Central utility systems required in support
of OJCS proposed expansion will be available.
Specifically, a new 2500 kW automatic start
generator will be procured and installed, and
the Carrier Dunham/Bush chillers will be repiped
to a parallel configuration.
b. The installation will be located on the
first floor of the South end of the Headquarters
Building. The first floor slab to slab height
will allow adequate raised floor clearance, and
the central utility systems are located in the
South end of the building.
c. There will be no unique security requirements.
Costs include the provision of a special purpose
vault similar to the ORACLE installation.
d. There is no reason to believe that the proposed
configuration will exceed the load capacity of the
floor. However, a structure analysis cannot be made
until an equipment layout is provided.
e. There will be no emanation problems, i.e., a
screen room will not be required.
f. The provision of standard environmental
requirements for this type computer center is
included in the cost. There is no provision for
uniquely tight tolerances for the control of
humidity, dust or temperatures.
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 STAT Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
Next 3 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved for Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
OJCS 1363-74
i',U ORANDUM FOR: Director of Central Reference Service
SUBJECT Comments on Draft SAFE Report
1. General. The SAFE report provides an excellent
historical base and a good picture of the kind of system
which can and should be developed for the analyst. From
our vantage point, the following are important elements of
the planned development effort described in the report:
a. The system should be designed as an integrated
system, and the development of each sub-system should be well
coordinated to fit with the others. A single coordinating
group would serve this purpose.
b. The SAFE terminal should be specially selected
to meet the SAFE requirements, and this implies that the
terminal may be different from the OJCS standard remote
terminal.
c. The use of distributed processors for terminal
support will reduce the cost and improve the usefulness of
the system.
d. The development of a SAFE system should be
done in phases with provision to accommodate user feed-back.
Our major Concerns about the report are in a few technical
areas and with the means for achieving your goals. The spe-
cific comments below are separated into those which you may
want to consider before. publication and those which should be
the subject of further discussion near the beginning of the
next phase of SAFE.
2. Comments relevant to the drafting of the report:
1.. The issue` of sec ri should. be treated in
the report. We note that it was emphasize'd in the vendor
Departs. Protecting this vast amount of information from
both deliberate penetration and unintentional disclosure,
and maintaining the "need-to-kno:,-" principle, may require a
significant effort.
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
b. The report should clearly identify the critical
technical elements of the proposed system, particularly those
where some risk is involved. Specifically, the report should
caution the reader about the crucial issue of the high-speed
search of large volumes of textual information. An additional
feasibility and design study must be undertaken to find an
.propriate searching technique and understand its response
characteristics. We believe it is quite possible that such
a study would conclude that response time requirements would
have to be relaxed, and this might threaten the viability of
the whole project.
c. We believe the report should state clearly
the best estimates on the'size of the system. Each of the
five contractors had different impressions of the size of
the problem, as did the OJCS members of the team. Clearly,
the major driving forces in choosing a configuration are
the number of the various types of records, the amount of
expected activity from all of the terminals, and the maximum:
acceptable access times.
d. The report emphasizes the need for system
reliability and mentions the need for processor redundancy.
Of equal or greater importance is the need for the file back-
up, considering the large volume of data which would be
vulnerable to both hardware and software failures. The
report should mention this. The greatest vulnerability in
tee entire system is likely to be the file indexes, which, if
lost or subtly modified by malfunctioning software, could
result in long periods of file unavailability during repro-
cessing and restructuring. A scheme will have to be devised
to maintain the huge backups without draining the resources
of the system.,
e. We believe the report should state that the
SAFE system should be integrated into the Agency's data pro-
ceessing environment as much as possible. For example, the
terminal sub-system should be able to access current OJCS
,ervi.ces, such as GIM and CP/CMS. Many SAFE users will also
be users of OJCS services such as APL, SCRIPT, GIM and others,
and should not be required to have two terminals in order to
access all of these systems.
f. Because of our Agency-wide responsibilities in
ADP and because of the size of the investment, OJCS repre-
sentation in the next phase of SAFE should be more significant
t'iin the draft report suggests. Specifically, it is suggested
that the statement on OJCS participation in the section on
he Development Plan }e modified to add "one OJCS analyst
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
responsible for hardww;are:~ configuration and operating syste-m
sof tware. " If you agree with this addition, you may wish to
reduce the number of CRS people on system configuration
an -is from two to one.
g. Given our experience (and yours) on equipment
acquisition and installation, the proposed ecu::ipment instal-
lation schedule is ambitious. if maintaining such a schedule
is vital, you should include and underline a statement that
extraordinary procedures and priorities are justified and
will be needed to achieve your goals.
h. A minor point: the report should not presume
that the AMPEX Terrabit memory is the most appropriate mass
storage system for the application. it will be available,
but other devices exist which might be better for archiving
and other purposes (such as the Precision Instruments UNICOL'T).
3. Points for future discussion:
a. The report says that SAFE is only viable if
the entire task is implemented ("all or nothing"--page 8).
While the design of the system should certainly be broad
enough to accommodate all of the S aFE concepts (and more) ,
we believe that each specific sub-system should be evaluated
on its individual merits. Many of the services proposed
here are valuable; however, unless a cost-benefits analysis
is performed on each separate service, it is unclear which
services gill be worth the cost of implementation. Further,
some of the requirements might well be trimmed down to
reduce the cost'.
b. Must all of the services required in SAFE be
written specifically for SAFE? Some of the services
mentioned in the design can be supported by existing software,
although it is certainly worth the effort to modify outside
packages to add consistency of operation to the Trwhole SAFE
system.
serve
C. We. believe that backup rei-ui ?_e en s de
much more scrutiny. The report implies that all users of
c Ate SAFE sys temt require cho same level o t: Ci t. , a thou ~
degraded system (all terminals not supported) might be ade-
quate during major system failures if these occur infrequently.
This is one example of the need for an important next step;
an identification of the critial performance components is
necessary to determine the appropriate type and amount of
u ipro. ent .
d. It is no'L clear tha. the sysbeta, as outlined in
iJ. report, is state-of-the--art or, in tact, implementcble.
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: c lA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
'O he endorsements of the vendors are devalued somewhat by the
fact that their o:w7n implementation ideas are either unworkable
or would require significant amounts of untried technology
such as special purpose equipment. The use of hardware en--
l ncements, such as associative processors, should be evaluated
against the risk implied by esoteric or one-of-a-kind hard-
1re. Other vendors with implementation experience in large
scale text searching systems (such as the New York Times In-
formation Bank and Mead Data Central) should be consulted for
design ideas and implementation software.
d. Much of the high cost of the system. can be
related to the requirements for rapid access to huge amounts
of data. Would the system concept still be viable if less
were retained in the computers, or if the response time
requirements were relaxed?
e. The S_UE team should consider the use of a
common procedure language facility (such as the CMS EXEC or
GIN PROC facilities) as a means of reducing the complexity
to the user. This technique could be used in place of a
common language like SQUIRL to provide assistance and to
restructure input lines for the neophyte user while allo,,ring
total access to the full range of query complexities for more
sophisticated users.
4. When taken one at a time, the above points can prob-
a l.y be resolved, but I must confess to an uneasy personal
feeling about the totality of the problem that we face in
ui_lding and operating the proposed system. I am advised that
the volume of data, the interactions of data elements, the
response time and system availability requirements will pro-
duce complexity which no other computer system has ever faced.
The _'Agency has no experience in building systems of this size;
in fact, no text handling system of this scope has been built
anywhere. The risks are considerable, and I caution against
letting the analysts' enthusiasm and the absorbing challenge
C` t:he job ~ ~" hypnotize us into dism_ssin them or utg ~~ putting off a
x": v.Le of them to a later phase. In conclusion, it is neces-
Nary that we face up to potential problems in the early stages
o;. the proposed program to ensure against non_recover able
=ills that .may occur in the future.
STAT
L. N
y
Director
Joint omputer Support
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
4
 STAT Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11C/04 : IA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
Project SAFE
October 1974
CONFIDENTIAL.
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
CONFIDENTIAL
CONTENTS
Page
1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 1
Introduction ........ 1
Summary .. 1
IL HISTORY OF PROJECT SAFE .................... 5
CRS Initiatives ...... ........................... ............ 5
Agency Directive ..... ........................................ 5
CRS Response .. ............................................. S
III. SAFE CONCEPTS ........... ........................... ...... 7
Remote Computer Power ............... ................... .. 7
A Spectrum of Resources ........................ . ...... . ... 7
Single SAFE Language .............................. ...... .. 9
Single Document Storage ............................ 9
A Symbiosis Between Personal and Central Files ....... ..... 10
The "Paperless Office" Concept ................................ 11
IV. DATA COLLECTION PLAN .................................... 13
Introduction ...... ........................................... 13
The Computer Merger ....................................... 14
Activities During the Merger-CY 1973 .......................... 14
Activities After the Merger-CY 1974 ........................... 20
SAFE Data Collection Techniques .............................. 27
Preliminary System Design ..................................... 32
V. DATA COLLECTION PHASE EVALUATION ..... .... ........ 33
Introduction .................................................. 33
Evaluation of the SAFE Pilot Operation .................... .... 33
Analysts Reports ....... ...................................... 48
Contractor Reports ..... ...................................... 53
VI. PROPOSED SAFE INFORMATION SYSTEM OUTLINE .... ..... 65
Introduction .............................. ................ .. 65
System Overview .......................................... 65
File Operation .................................... ........... 68
Preliminary Hardware Design .......................... ....... 72
VII. COST-BENEFIT CONSIDERATIONS 77
Introduction ......... ........ .................... ..... .. 77
Improved Intelligence Product ....... ................... ...... 77
Improving Computer Resources Allocation ............ .... 78
Potential Savings ................... ............... ........ . 79
iii
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
CONFIDENTIAL
Page
VIII. DEVELOPMENT PLAN ...... ..... ........ 81
Introduction ............ ................................. . 81
Detailed System Design Phase .... ........ .............. ..... 81
Other Development Phases ...................... ............. 82
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1. Spectrum of Information Resources Available to Analysts ......... 8
Figure 2. Single SAFE Language ...................................... 9
Figure 3. Single Storage Concept ... .................................. 10
Figure 4. SAFE System Design Phases ................................. 13
Figure 5A. Indexed Documents and Corresponding Aperture Card ......... 17
Figure 5B. Sample Entries of Computer Listings .... .................... 18
Figure 6. Example of an Information File . ............................. 19
Figure 7. Data Collection Plan .......... ............................. 20
Figure 8. Daily Notes ..... .... 21
Figure 9. SAFE System Outline ........................................ 22
Figure 10. File Menu .................. ............................. 22
Figure 11. Completed OLDE Form .. .... ... .............. 23
Figure 12. Record of Search ............. ................... ......... 28
Figure 13. Finished Intelligence Citation 29
Figure 14. HELP Log ............................................... 30
Figure 15. Mail Log . ................................................ 31
Figure 16. Major Subsystems of the SAFE Information System ............ 32
Figure 17. Chart .............................................. follows 54
Figure 18. File Structure ...................................... follows 60
Figure 19. Overview of the Proposed SAFE Information System ..... ..... 66
Figure 20. Document Retrieval Options for the Proposed SAFE Information
System . ................................................ 68
Figure 21. Search and Retrieval from 14-Day Temporary Text Files ........ 69
Figure 22. Search and Retrieval-Mail Files ............................ 70
Figure 23. Filing of Digitally Displayed Items from Text Files ............. 71
Figure 24. Data Entry ................................................ 72
Figure 25. Search and Retrieval of Analyst and CRS Files ................. 72
Figure 26. Proposed Hardware Configuration ........................... 73
Figure 27. SAFE Development Plan ..... ........ ....... .... 83
iv
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CI -RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CI RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
CONFIDENTL
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1. SAFE Modules ..... ........................... ....... 14
Table 2. List of Organizations Participating in Project SAFE ........ ...... 25
Table 3. List of Participating Organizations by Office ...... ...... ... 26
Table 4. Return of Data Forms by Participating Branches .. ....... . ... 35
Table 5. Volume of Use of Various Files ........... .. .......... 35
Table 6. Search Results Presented by Data Base Used .... ...... .. 36
Table 7. Did SAFE Files Provide Information that Would be Difficult or
Impossible to Locate in Other Ways? ..... ........ . ..... 37
Table 8. Purpose for Which SAFE Files Were Used ............ . ..... 37
Table 9. Time Spent in On-line Search (N=304) ........ ........ . ... 38
Table 10. Response Deadline by Branch (N=329) .. ............... . .. 38
Table 11. Response Deadline by File .. ... ............... ............ 38
Table 12. Speed of Searching SAFE Files as Compared with the Search of
Manual Files for the Same Information ..................... 39
Table 13. Rating of Various Characteristics of OLTA III ........... ...... 45
Table 14. Hierarchy of Operations ................ ..................... 57
Table 15. Filing Options Available to Analysts as They View Documents
at the SCS ............................................... 69
Table 16. System Costs ........ ...................................... 75
v~NU~
Approved For Release 2002/11W4NFEIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04 -F &- RP79-00498A000400050049-9
'CON
APPENDICES"
1. PROJECT SAFE PAPERS (October 1972, May 1973, November
II. DATA COLLECTION FORMS (Pilot and Self-Help Branches)
III. PRODUCTION ANALYST FEEDBACK (Reports/ Interviews)
IV. HELP LOG
V. PRELIMINARY DESIGN REPORT
VI. CONTRACTOR REPORTS
VII. REDBOOK INDEX
VIII. SAFE INSTRUCTION MANUALS
IX. PRELIMINARY SURVEYS
X. MAIL LOG
1973)
*Appendices I - X are located in Room 1E4808, CRS/Systems Analysis Staff, and will
be made available for reference.
Vii
CONFIDENTIAL.
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/1111 IFIIAi4 DP79-00498A000400050049-9
1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
Over the years CIA has made a wide array of intelligence resources available to its
analysts. Indeed, the Intelligence Community spends a large sum each year to provide
these resources and to find new ones. They are made available by such a variety of
processing systems and procedures that the individual analyst may have difficulty in
finding all the items he needs-particularly if lie has a short deadline.
Production offices have continually sought to better exploit intelligence resources by
creating their own data bases and files, sharing files of common interest, or introducing
new analytical methods or automation. For the most part, these efforts are made at the
office level and, at best, answer only office needs.
This report describes CRS efforts to design an Agency-wide, all-source intelligence
resource system that would offer all Agency analysts the best support today's
technology can provide. It suggests how such a system might he cheaper in the long
run than the sum of all the individual systems currently being developed or proposed.
The design that emerges is called the SAFE (Support for the Analysts File
Environment) Information System.
SUMMARY
CRS began work on Project SAFE in response to a June 1972 directive by Mr. Colby,
then Executive Director Comptroller. It said that CBS should "work with the analysts
and production offices within the Agency . . . to develop the most effective mix of
central bibliographic and document retrieval files and special purpose document
retrieval files for individual customer offices, (and) analysts...."
Preliminary development work with the production analysts soon showed what
characteristics a SAFE system should have. The concept that emerged was that of a
multipurpose Agency-wide information processing system operating through on-line
terminals widely distributed among the production offices. SAFE will permit the
individual analyst to view his daily mail on-line, route particular items to other
analysts, build machine files for himself or his office, and to maintain on-line files. The
on-line file building capability will allow the analyst to store a complete text, an
extract from it, or an indexed representation of it and to include his own comments on
such items. The system will allow the analyst to search the files he creates and, because
he has multiple access points to any item, to search them more thoroughly and more
specifically than he could normally search a conventional paper copy file. Where
document representations are stored in files, SAFE will provide the necessary full text
back-up, either by digital storage of text or, more commonly, microforms.
In addition to its role in dissemination and in the support of analyst or office files,
SAFE will give the analyst access, through his on-line terminal, to a wide range of
resources, including the major CRS data base and several files of the complete texts of
intelligence messages. Eventually the analyst may also be able to use the same
terminal to reach "external" data bases, including those within the community as we]I
as such commercially available files as the New York Times Information Bank. The
analyst thus will have, at his fingertips, a wide array of information resources needed
in the production of finished intelligence.
1
CONFIDENTIAL.
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002111104: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
CBS implemented a model of a SAFE system and made it available to a small
number of production offices over an 8-month period in 1973-74. This was defined as
the data-gathering phase of the project. Its objectives were threefold: to determine the
general feasibility of SAFE; to learn the user's reaction; and to gather data from which
to develop more detailed specifications for an Agency-wide system. The SAFE model
was modest in that it used inexpensive and relatively unsophisticated software, existing
computer resources, a small number of terminals and a selected sample of users. It
nevertheless demonstrated all of the major components of the proposed system.
Close cooperation between CRS and the analysts in the production offices has been
an important feature of the data-gathering phase. Those analysts played a key role in
the design of the pilot system. Indeed, CRS assumed from the beginning that if an
Agency-wide system is to succeed, its real users must he involved in its actual design.
The pilot branches cooperated fully, and the large amount of data collected has
enabled us to define much more clearly the requirements of an Agency-wide system.
Conclusions
The overall reaction of participants in the SAFE pilot operation has been extremely
positive. Our evaluation (described in detail in Chapter V) of the pilot system indicates
that SAFE is potentially a very powerful tool, faster and more efficient than the
resources we presently have. Most analysts who have used the pilot system are
enthusiastic about its present capabilities and its potential. Indeed, there is a strong
feeling that this is the direction the Agency must take in information processing. All
the proposed features of the system have proven valuable, but the handling of text files
and the building of analyst files will probably be the most important.
Two of the most significant values of SAFE will be its ability to get incoming
material to analysts rapidly and its ability to provide fast access to a wide array of
information. It appears to have great potential utility, therefore, in the handling of
crisis situations, as reported by one of the pilot branch users:
r.
The SAFE concepts were examined by five companies involved in the design of
large computer-operated data systems. They believe most of the concepts, with one
major exception, are within the state-of-the-art. The exception refers to the part of the
original concept that called for scanning paper copy, digitizing it and entering it into
the system. In their opinion this is not currently feasible. Because parts of the SAFE
concept are close to the outer limits of the state-of-the-art, implementation of SAFE
will present major challenges in systems design, software production, and the
coordination of much hardware. A similarly large and complex system is not known to
exist elsewhere. The individual parts do exist, however, and the contractors agree that
SAFE can be built.
Our experiment has persuaded us that the Agency should move toward the
implementation of a system of this kind, having the general configuration described in
Chapter VI, and that we should immediately begin work on a detailed system design.
Cost
To support 1I the proposed system will require a substantial investment
over a number o years. Some of this investment will be compensated by a more
efficient and integrated use of Agency computer resources; by the assimilation of
25311A
2
Approved For Release 26 $ T!I IA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/1YIFIPATBQP79-00498A000400050049-9
certain existing systems and operations; and by a considerable reduction in the
generation, movement, storage and disposal of paper copy. The system must be
justified on the grounds of benefits to the Intelligence Community not on the grounds
of economy. We consider these benefits to be improved intelligence products,
generated by analysts who are informed more rapidly, more completely and more
The estimated cost of SAFE is abou dollars. This sum would cover the
software design and development and the purchase of hardware in 1974 dollars. It
does not include past costs, personnel costs of CIA employees involved in the project,
logistic costs (which may be high), or OJCS costs for continued support of the pilot
program. Our estimated cost would be less if the software could be developed in-house
(which is highly desirable) and if much of our existing equipment could be used. We
have deliberately used the high figure of our cost range to make sure that approval of
Project SAFE carries a realistic recognition of the potential financial impact (excluding
logistic costs). Development of the SAFE effort is a commitment of up t~
dollars and a development period of at least 5 years. It would also represent a major
effort-not yet defined-for logistics as well as an undetermined communications
investment.
These dollar and time costs are as firm as we can determine from current experience.
Both could increase, however, during SAFE's development and implementation.
Because we have used the higher cost figure, such increases should not have a major
impact on the overall cost of the system.
Finally, the SAFE Information System faces three major problems. First, there are
important security considerations involved in the development of a computerized file
environment which have not been addressed in this report.
Second, it was noted earlier that, although the concepts of SAFE are within the
state-of-the-art, there is no system in existence of comparable size and complexity.
There is a related risk. SAFE will become an integral part of the analyst's working
environment; if it fails him, he is out of business. Therefore reliability and backup are
critical. The Agency has limited experience in building and operating applications
where the computer is so intimately tied to an Agency function. What experience we
do have tells us that, in addition to high equipment reliability, extraordinary
developmental and operational discipline is required even for simple applications of
this kind. SAFE will represent a challenge different from any that our computer
systems people have ever encountered.
Third, the project need not necessarily be completed by FY 1980; but prolonging the
work would probably increase both the cost and risk. The funding need not be so
heavily concentrated in the first years as we have proposed; but spreading the funds
evenly across all the years will delay implementation and probably increase the risk.
Most importantly, SAFE must rationally be a complete intelligence processing system.
Because of the cost, we expect to hear proposals to create one-half or two-thirds of the
system-to handle some sources of information, but not all; or to serve some production
offices, but not all; or to perform some of the functions that are technically possible,
but not all. We oppose all such proposals.
3
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
25X1A
25X1A
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
CONFIDENTIAL
II. HISTORY OF PROJECT SAFE
CRS INITIATIVES
In December 1971 the Director of CRS created a task team to write a detailed plan
for upgrading the 1,300,000-record, computer-based CRS reference file (AEGIS).'
The general plan was to convert an off-line batch mode of operation to an on-line
interactive mode. This would improve service by allowing interactive searches to be
made at remote computer terminals as search requests were received. The ability to
enter search requests from remote computer terminals would also theoretically allow
Agency production analysts to bypass CRS analysts, who presently serve as
intermediaries.
The task team was also to consider methods by which production analysts could add
keywords, codes, and documents to the basic reference file. It had long been
recognized that many of the analysts' special interests could not be adequately
handled by the more general indexing performed by CRS.
In March of 1972 the task team began discussions with representatives from OCI,
OER, OSI, DDO (then DDP), OSR, and OBGI in order to inform them of the CRS
objective, to learn the extent of their interest as potential input or output users of such
a system, and to determine whether any of their requirements should be considered in
the proposed upgrading of AEGIS.
OCI and OBGI immediately expressed interest in a system that would give them a
computer search capability for their manual office files. OCI was especially interested
in reducing the size of its paper files by using a computer control system.
As a result of this interest, the task team conducted an OCI/CRS and OBGI/CRS 2-
week experiment, which simulated production analyst input to the CRS AEGIS file.
The results were encouraging, and in May 1972 OCI asked if CRS could implement
interim measures to allow continued OCI input prior to the upgrading of AEGIS.
AGENCY DIRECTIVE
In June of 1972 the Director of CIA, Mr. Richard Helms, approved a series of
recommendations by Mr. Colby, then Executive Director Comptroller. The series
included a directive that CRS "work with the analysts and production offices within
the Agency, and with such other Intelligence Community agencies as may be feasible,
to develop the most effective mix of central bibliographic and document retrieval files
and special purpose document retrieval files for individual customer offices, analysts,
or other requesters."'
CRS RESPONSE
Responding to this directive, CRS first critically reviewed its major file building and
information processing capabilities:
1. The MAD system, an Agency-wide Machine-Assisted Dissemination
system developed by CRS for SI electricals;
'Already Existing General Information System-this reference file is often referred to by the acronym
AEGIS, which is also the name of the computer data management program for this file. Other programs
could also "manage" the reference file. In fact, later in this paper the RECON program is introduced
as one such alternative.
'MEMORANDUM FOR THE DIRECTOR, SUBJECT: Automatic Dissemination, June 1972.
(Confidential)
5
Approved For Release 2002/114$ FI@nAIkbP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
CONFIDENTIAL
2. The AEGIS system and an on-line version of AEGIS (which, although not
considered a candidate for the upgraded AEGIS system as discussed above,
allowed for searching from remote computer terminals);
3. The OLDE computer program, an On-Line Data Entry program by which
computer files are created and maintained at remote computer terminals
(OLDE was developed as part of the task team's AEGIS follow-on activity);
4. The OCI and OBGI experiments, which gave some evidence that the
analysts were willing to switch from their manual document files to a
computer/ microfilm system;
5. The CRS computer center, a center developed to maintain systems like
MAD, AEGIS and OLDE.
These five capabilities were the building blocks upon which two related proposals
were based:
I.-Proposal for a Demonstration of an On-line System to Provide Production
Analysts with Access to Personal, Office and General Bibliographic Files."
This work was written in August 1972
is purpose was "to demonstrate a concept, with the
object of generating interest and support within the various production
offices ... As the capabilities are demonstrated, user reaction will be observed
and gauged . . . We can learn much more about user needs and attitudes from
such a working model than we can possibly learn by a paper model and more
conventional interviews or questionnaire surveys.''
This working model would attempt to simulate the ultimate system
"... (which) will give the individual production analyst on-line, interactive
access to his personal document file, his parent office files, specially prepared
extract files, and a wide range of CRS bibliographic files."
2." Prototype of a CRS Production Analysts File Support System as an Interim
Step Toward an Operational CRS On-Line System."
This work was written in August 1972 by
Analysis Staff in response to OCI's request Tor an interim capa i ry. if
proposed that OCI analysts would mark the terms by which their documents
should be indexed; CRS would input the index records for those documents
into a special AEGIS file created solely for OCI. CRS would also microfilm
the documents for permanent retention and have computer listings printed
regularly, to give OCI analysts an index to their microfilm file holdings. The
use of microfilm in this remote system would significantly decrease the
volume of OCI holdings, and the printed indexes would give OCI analysts
improved access to their documents. This experiment with OCI was the origin
of the SAFE concept (later called Module 1.) that production analysts would
create their own document index files.
A Project SAFE paper based on these two proposals was published in October 1972.
The paper (See Appendix 1) described a set of concepts that, taken together,
postulated and partly defined a new Agency-wide information processing system for
intelligence materials.
The paper also proposed a data collection period during which production analysts
would evaluate the utility (not the cost-benefits per se) and practicality of the
concepts. First, the concepts would be partly implemented through test systems (called
"modules" in the SAFE paper) set up with existing or easily developed
computer/microfilm techniques; and then a representative sample of analysts would
work with and evaluate the test systems.
6
Approved For Release 2002t4)14iQ4ErCIARDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 25X1 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
Next 54 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11(@KQP79-00498A000400050049-9
VI. PROPOSED SAFE INFORMATION SYSTEM OUTLINE
We interpret the analysts' evaluations of the SAI'E modules and SAFE concepts as a
general endorsement-with qualifications, or reservations. The qualifications, which
relate to system reliability, file contents, user aids, response times, etc., are being
studied.
We interpret the contractors' evaluations of the technical feasibility of the SAFE
concepts as a general endorsement with qualifications. These qualifications relate to
the technical difficulties of digitally converting and storing data obtained on paper
copy medium; the problems of response time for large files; and the inherent
difficulties in the SQUIRL concept. They are being studied and are taken into
consideration in the system proposed in this report.
This chapter outlines a proposed SAFE Information System that will satisfy the
analysts' two fundamental needs: computer searching of digitally stored message
traffic (Text Files) and maintenance of computer-based analyst files.
The proposed system resembles that system hypothesized in the SAFE Concepts
chapter of this report and described in the Preliminary Design Report (Appendix V).
However, because of current technical and cost restrictions, this design differs from the
hypothesis in four important aspects:
1. Material received in paper copy form will be stored in microform rather
than in digital form. The conversion to digital form is still an objective.
2. An item received by electrical transmission need only be stored once,
regardless of the number of analysts who may have "filed" it; but, as a
corollary of item 1, material received in paper copy form will have to be stored
in as many microform collections as are required.
3. External files, such as the New York Times Information Bank, will not be a
part of the present system proposal; their inclusion is still an objective.
4. The system response time (time required to complete an analyst's
transaction) will vary depending on the size of the files and the "operation"
being performed. The original hypothetical response times now appear
impractical.
The first step in a system development program would be to design the system in
detail; this design would require 4-6 months to complete. The description that follows
is in three parts: System Overview of proposed SAFE capabilities; File Operation,
which outlines the relationships among the major files; and Preliminary Hardware
Design, which includes an estimate of total costs.
The system capability can be summarized by describing the SAFE Console Station
(SCS), the files it can access and the processes it can perform. (See Figure 19). The
SAFE system should, where practical, be integrated into the general Agency data
processing environment; a SAFE terminal should be able to access other Agency data
bases in addition to SAFE files.
65
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 20MF16KTILIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
SAFE
STATION
ENTER
DATA
TEXT
FILES
ANALYST
FILES
MAIL
FILES
CRS
FILES
1. Compute functions not to be considered in early SAFE System
but is a future objective. Compute would tie the file system
outputs into existing (or new) OJCS compute programs.
2. External file not to be considered in early Safe System but is
future objective.
Figure 19. Overview of the Proposed SAFE Information System
SAFE Console Station (SCS)
The production analysts will use the SAFE Information System through an SCS.
The SCS is more than a simple cathode ray tube (CRT) device. For example, it may
consist of a "local" terminal (digital viewing screen and keyboard) stationed at every
few desks; a digital printer reasonably close to the terminal; and a "regional"
microfilm viewing screen, film storage device and printer. The keyboards will have
66
Approved For Release 206{)6F4NT611A-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/114@*nI ,ATBDP79-00498A000400050049-9
function keys that control the file categories to be accessed and the functions to be
performed.
The viewing screens must feature readability and general ease of use consistent with
today's state-of-the-art. The SCS will be designed with either two screens or a split
screen, so that an analyst can. view information on one part while entering data on
another. The SCS will have an alerting device which will bring a predetermined
''priority" message to the analyst's attention. Analysts will be advised automatically of
any operating abnormalities.
File Categories
1. Text Files are those electrically received transmissions that may be
processed and stored in digital form. They currently include:
-FBIS field traffic
-SI messages
-Doll Ills
-State cables
-OAKS
-CIA/IAS
-Military cables
-Wire services (Reuters, AP, etc.)
-DDO selected information cables
These items (except for certain sensitive or highly classified items) will be held
for 14 days, during which time analysts with the proper clearances can access
them for processing and possible inclusion in their own files.
2. Analyst Files are those created and maintained by analysts. They may be
document reference files (which contain indexes to specific documents) or
information files (which contain data and may or may not refer to the source
documents).
3. Mail Files are a subset of the Text Files; each mail file contains a selection
of electrically received transmissions that have been processed into it by the
Cable Dissemination System. A "distribution index" ties a specific message to
a specific set of analysts.
4. CRS Files include the Subject Index File (two million records and growing),
a major document reference system. CRS indexers select documents for
indexing in this file according to predetermined criteria. Other documents of
special merit may be "activated" for the system. SAFE proposes an additional
selection criterion, whereby CRS will index any additional document if two or
more analysts have "filed" it and if the security classification of the document
permits a "public" index record. (The process is described below in the section
on Indexing and Filing of Digitally Displayed Items.) CRS files will also
probably include certain biographic and installation information files and
certain library reference files.
Processing Functions
1. Search-Analysts will be able to perform searches on any of the above files.
In the case of Text Files, they may search by specifying any word or
combination of words and asking to see the documents in which they appear.
The other files will have different search capabilities, but to the extent
practical a common language/procedure will guide the analysts through their
searching. A search in the Mail File would probably be a simple scan of items
67
CONFIDENTIAL
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
CONFIDENTIAL
received since the last search. Special aids will be made available to analysts
who are unfamiliar with any particular file.
2. Retrieval-Documents or information that match a search parameter can
be displayed on the screen and printed at the SCS. The mode of retrieval will
vary depending on the file and the file storage medium. Figure 20 shows the
retrieval options available.
3. File-Analysts can "file" any document being viewed on the SCS display
screen, whether it is a microfilm or digital display. Table 15 shows the file
options available. If the document is a paper copy receipt the filing
instructions are considered to he in the Data Entry category discussed below.
4. Data Entry-Analysts may create or add to analyst files by calling up the
appropriate "form" on the screen and then entering data directly on the
displayed form.
5. Compose-Analysts may use the compose function to write and edit. This
"document" can then be filed with other intelligence items or in a special
project file to which other items can he added.
This section describes briefly how the proposed system will work. For the most part,
this description was developed from the outline contained in the more detailed
Preliminary Design Report, published in May 1974.
Search and Retrieval-14 Day Temporary Text Files
Figure 21 shows the proposed schema. Digital message traffic is received after being
processed through CDS (1) or other OC sources (2). This traffic is processed through
the SAFE Automatic Cataloging program (3), which sets up one computer index file
record (called the Basic SARDINE record) for each message. The record (4) contains
the standard SAFE Number (SANS), classification, date, and file name. Messages in
this temporary text file are held for approximately 14 days (5).
TEXT whole messages, or segments, or comments are viewed/
FILES printed at the SCS. Messages are stored centrally
ANALYST
FILES
r If digital, same as above
If microform, item is automatically selected & displayed at
the SCS; item may be printed if necessary
MAIL FILES Same as text files
CRS
FILES
( If digital, same as "text files"
If microform, item is automatically selected & displayed at
the SCS, with printing as necessary
Some items, however, because of age or security restrictions
will be stored only centrally. Such items are requested at the
SCS, and are manually processed at the central store.
(automatic processing is also possible)
Figure 20. Document Retrieval Options for
the Proposed SAFE Information System
N
68
Approved For Release 2 tfiV6V" t1A-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
CONFIDENTIAL
1. Indicate file name........
Document will appear to be filed
Microfilm and digitally dis-
under that file name.
played documents.
2. Add index terms to the
One or more words, or word phrases
Same as above.
document.
may be used to further describe the
document.
3. Add comments..........
The analyst may add evaluative
Same as above.
comments about the document.
4. Extract data ............
Analysts may extract data from the
Digitally displayed data only.
document; whole paragraphs or
specific segments.
When an analyst searches (6) this file, he may limit his search to any parameter he
chooses, e.g., date, post number, security classification, keyword in text, etc. If the
number of hits exceeds a certain level, he will have the option of refining his query to
reduce the number ofhits or having them printed in the OJCS center. Otherwise, he
can ask for the whole item to be displayed, or he may ask for only the segment of the
item that contains the search terms. lie further has the option of printing (7) or filing
(8).
Search and Retrieval-Mail File
When a message from CDS is routed into the temporary text file, at the same time
(see Figure 22) the list (Distribution Index, DI) of who gets that message is routed to
the DI file (2). When an analyst asks to search and retrieve from his mail file, this index
determines what messages are sent. The analyst need only ask for "mail" to start
scanning the items that have been selected for his office since the last time he viewed
his mail file. The analyst can also elect to further route (8) the messages being scanned.
1 COS 2 OTHER DC
AUTOMATIC
CATALOGING
SARDINE
RECORDS
14-DAY TEMPORARY
TEXT FILE
STATE CABLES,
SI ELECTRICALS,
MILITARY CABLES,
FBIS,
etc.
SEARCH and
RETRIEVE
Figure 21. Search and Retrieval From 14-Day Temporary Text Files
69
Approved For Release 2002/11.1 I$." VATJRDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
CONFIDENTIAL
AUTOMATIC
CATALOGING
TO
SARDINE
FILE
STATE CABLES,
SI ELECTRICALS,
etc.
DISTRIBUTION INDEX
(01)
DISTRIBUTION
CONTROL
SEARCH and
RETRIEVE
PRINT FILE
This routing automatically updates the Distribution Index so that it will be available
on some other screen-if that analyst has been cleared for the item. Analysts can also
print (9) and file (10).
Indexing and Filing of Digitally Displayed Items
The creation (see Figure 23) of temporary text files (4) from OC (1,2) and the
creation of the Basic SARDINE record (5) have been discussed above under Search
and Retrieval of 14 Day Temporary Text Files. When an analyst chooses to "file" (6) a
digitally displayed text item, what he really does is add his file criteria (be they file
names, keywords, or whatever) to a record (7) associated with the SARDINE record
already created for that item. He may also use a data entry form to create a comments
file (8) for the text of comments he wishes to make on the document. When he next
retrieves that document, his own comments (but not those of other analysts) will
appear with it.
SARDINE relates the proper comment to the proper user and to the proper text
document. The above connections are made as the analyst views the document on his
SCS screen, and his data entry form is displayed concurrently with the message. If any
analyst has added a file sub-record to the Basic SARDINE, it will affect the file
reorganization (9), because after 14 days each item in the temporary text file must be
moved to another storage area.
If a given item has not been put into any file, even that of CRS, then it is processed
via computer output microfilm (10) to a central microform collection (11) or is
processed to the lower order digital storage, the Tera-Bit Memory (TBM) (12), which
may be an alternative to microform storage. The SARDINE record continues to exist
for that item.
If an item has been entered into one or more files, it will be transferred to the
primary text file (13). Analysts will be able to do text searching on all items so stored.
Items remain stored in primary text until the next reorganization, when the date and
activity of each record are automatically reviewed. If an item has not been retrieved
for a given period of time, it too will be routed to microform or TBM storage and out of
the more expensive digital primary text.
70
Approved For Release 200Z/jANCJ-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
CONFIDENTIAL
TEMPORARY TEXT
FILE
7?
FILE REORGANIZATION
10
r---.J
cam
I
12
SARDINE
RECORDS
MICROFORM COLLECTIONS
PRIMARY TEXT
FILES
COMMENTS
FILES
Figure 23. Filing of Digitally Displayed Items From Text Files
Indexing and Filing of Non-Digitally Received Items
In a typical sequence (see Figure 24), an analyst receives a document in paper copy
form (1) and reads and marks data (2) that are to be filed. Ile enters the data on a form
that appears as a display on the SCS (3). The particular form is tailored to the kind of
file being built. Data so entered goes into term files (4) or comments files (5) as
appropriate, and the location is recorded in the SARDINE record (6), which "points"
to the CRS microform version of the original document (7). Whenever the SARDINE
record is retrieved, it references that document.
An analyst may see only a microform copy of a document. Ile can still file it by
following steps 2-7.
Search and Retrieval-Analyst and CRS Files
When the analyst searches and retrieves from his own or from the CRS files (see
Figure 25), he uses various term files (1) and the SARDINE data structure (2) related to
them. When the search is complete, he may view the SARDINE records and the term
file entries that satisfy his search statement. These may themselves contain the
information that answer his question, or the analyst can retrieve the pertinent
documents. Documents in digital form are retrieved from a primary text file (3) or the
lower-speed TBM (4) device. Once a set of these digital documents (or analyst
comments (5) about them) are retrieved, they are available to the analyst in a special
computer file called a "work space" (6). Documents thus retrieved can be further
searched by text search techniques (7) or refiled (8). Documents in microform are
retrieved from the regional storage facility (9) associated with an analyst's SCS.
Some documents will be beyond a given age limitation or will be of a special
security category. Such documents must be retrieved from central storage (10).
Requests can be made directly from the analyst's SCS; the documents are processed
manually.
71
Approved For Release 2002/114 f](NN 1.4P79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
CONFIDENTIAL
REGIONAL
CENTRAL
1 _
DOCUMENT F---~- READ and
_J ANNOTATE
MICROFORM
CONVERSION
MICROFORM
COLLECTIONS
l
TERM
FILES
F------ J SARDINE
SEARCH
and
RETRIEVE
COMMENTS
FILES
PRIMARY
TEXT
TBM
10COMMENTS
WORK
SPACE
Figure 25. Search and Retrieval of Analyst and CRS Files
Introduction
The preliminary concepts of the system design were discussed by a joint CRS/OJCS
task team, which had been directed to determine the major parameters for an updated
SAFE Information System and to consider how those parameters would influence the
system design. Once the parameters were established, the team considered various
ways of implementing them and discussed the merits of special versus general purpose
computers and of distributed versus central processing. The team decided on a
distributed network of minicomputers attached to general purpose computers doing
central processing.
The following, more detailed hardware design was made by a team of CRS
computer specialists, based upon a consensus of the overall system configuration
determined by the joint CRS/OJCS task team. This system design indicates the
possible magnitude and cost of a SAFE Information System.
72
Approved For Release 20021 mM4E:rJM-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
CONFIDENTIAL
Because many of the SAFE requirements are still approximations, the team
considered two possible configurations. The larger and more expensive one might be
able to do the job; the smaller and less expensive one probably will not be able to
handle peak workloads. Because of the large volume of data that will be vulnerable to
both hardware and software failures, file backup and alternate routing procedures will
be required at all levels of the system. In addition to backup equipment, SAFE will
require processing and electronic file storage equipment to restore service after either
an external problem (e.g., fire) or an internal problem (e.g., equipment malfunction)
destroys some part of the electronic files in the system.
As exact SAFE requirements are derived, the detailed system design phase of the
Development Plan (Chapter VIII) will determine the final system configuration,
which will probably lie between the minimum and maximum configurations
presented.
SAFE Configuration Description
The proposed system requires hardware for four processing levels: the analyst's
console, forward processing, central processing and central microfilm storage (see
Figure 26).
? Analyst's Console Level: It is proposed to install some 500 consoles, about one
for every two analysts. For every five consoles (approximately) there will be a
regional microfilm reader and storage device. This device will contain
microfilm images of documents (nonelectrical receipts) that were filed by the
analysts and a sub-set of the central (CRS) microfilm storage. The contents of
this sub-set will be controlled by security and document age.
FORWARD
PROCESSING
LEVEL
CENTRAL
PROCESSING
LEVEL
CENTRAL
STORAGE
CONSOLE
MINI-
COMPUTER
MAIN
PROCESSORSI
CONSOLE
CRS
LIBRARY 2
CENTRAL
MICROFILM
STORE
1. may consist of two general purpose main frames (small system); or may
consist of four special purpose main frames (large system)
2. central processing may remain manual (low-cost system) or may be
automated (hi-cost system)
73
Approved For Release 2002/11kNFL9P79-00498A000400050049-9
-------------------
CONSOLE CONSOLE
REGIONAL
MICROFORM STORE
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
CONFIDENTIAL
? Forward Processing Level: It is proposed to station about 50 minicomputers in
the Agency, averaging one mini for every 10 consoles. This network of
minicomputers allows the SAFE consoles to be less sophisticated and therefore
less costly. It also allows the processing of simpler tasks (reading mail, writing
and editing reports, and checking syntax of commands for errors) to be
accomplished at a level closer to the analyst and relieves some of the work
load on the central processors.
? Central Processing Level: The complex computer functions of monitoring the
system, text searching, index searching and maintaining the data base will
take place at the central processing level. The minimum computer
configuration needed is two large (IBM 370/168 size) general purpose
computers. All of the functions will be performed in either machine, and each
will back up the other. Some members of the task team doubt that this
minimum system will have enough computing power to handle the workload,
especially during peak periods. The failure of either computer would seriously
degrade the entire system. An alternate design uses four large computers (IBM
370/168 size). They are specialized; two maintain the data base and search
text files, and the other two search the private and public index files and do
text searching of the current 14 day text file. Should any one computer fail, its
mate would be able to maintain the function with little or no system
degradation. This system is more expensive but guarantees maximum backup
and high computing speed.
In both systems the electrically received data and index files are stored in a
two-level storage heirarchy. The primary storage level consists of
approximately 75 disk drives (IBM 3330 size) with a couple of fixed head
devices used as a buffer. Depending on age and frequency of use, the data will
be reassigned to a mass storage TBM system.
? Central Microfilm Storage (CRS): The central storage facility will contain all
items processed by CBS as well as some aging items sent back from regional
locations because of security restrictions. The minimum system design would
continue the present manual system with one additional feature: analysts at
their consoles would be able to automatically order those documents not
available regionally. The subsequent delivery would be manual. The
alternate design calls for automating the central facility so that documents
ordered automatically could be delivered automatically. The expense of an
automated system might be justified if document requests levied on the
central facility were to increase significantly. At present, however, the SAFE
plan does not include automating the central microfilm facility.
Comparative costs of the two computer systems are shown in Table 16. The price of
iBM equipment was used to judge the cost of the main processors and disk/drum
storage system. When specifications are better defined, perhaps some other type of
equipment of the same computing power could be used. The terminal cost is
calculated for 500 terminals. The mini-processor/communication system is based upon
50 mini-processors and the associated computer communication lines. The cost shown
for the mass storage (TBM) is not that of a complete system but of an expansion of the
system the Agency is currently purchasing. The programming costs include the initial
programming of all the software for the system and the maintenance programming
needed thereafter. The costs cited do not include the expense of altering existing
74
Approved For Release 2008MVIratA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
CONFIDENTIAL
facilities to accommodate the new equipment, nor the expense of additional personnel
to maintain it. The next chapter will discuss some of the cost savings and benefits
associated with the SAFE Information System.
System Costs
(In Millions of Dollars)
Terminals ......................
Mini computers and communication
lines .........................
Main computers .................
Card reader/punch, printers disk/
tape storage ..................
'I'BM--mass storage .............
Microfilm system ................
Software .......................
Initial rental for main computer,
and total system maintenance
cost .........................
Total cost ....................
2 General 4 General
Purpose Purpose
Computers Computers
2.5 2.5
11.0 18.0
4.0 4.0
1.0 1.0
1.5 1.5
6.0 6.9
75
Approved For Release 2002/11 4'.'R; TJRt P79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11~lRATWP79-00498A000400050049-9
VII. COST-BENEFIT CONSIDERATIONS
A cost-benefits analysis of the proposed SAFE Information System
is not possible at this time. We cannot assign a dollar figure to the potential value of
the system to the production analysts for whom it would be built. We can, however,
cite the arguments of the analysts that the SAFE system would improve the finished
intelligence product by offering new analytic techniques, data bases and data base
access. Also we can show that the SAFE system could improve the organization and
allocation of Agency computer resources. And we can suggest areas where dollar
savings may occur that would at least partly offset the cost of SAFE.
25X1
The arguments offered here are those made by the analysts in their critiques of the
pilot system. They have already been cited in Chapter V but are quoted here, in part,
because of their particular relevance.
"SF/C is a self-help user of the SAFE system. I would venture to say SF/C
is more dependent upon SAFE and possibly more convinced of SAFE's indis-
pensability than any other branch ... SF/C's SAFE system does not merely
supplement the branch files; it is the branch research file ... We are striving
to establish in SF/C the finest, most comprehensive, most usable repository of
all-source information on command and control subjects in the intelligence
community. We could not aspire to so ambitious a goal without SAFE ...
Scraps of information of interest to us can be found in all of the file mod-
ules being considered for incorporation in SAFE in the future ... The more
files we can dig through, the better chance we have of coming up with
meaningful tidbits, and no one can predict where those tidbits will be found.
Given the fantastic capabilities of computers, I see no reason to arbitrarily
restrict the scope of our search for information by limiting the number of files
to which we will have access. We want them all!!! And I promise you that we
will learn how to exploit them." (OSR/SF/C comments).
"The most immediately evident one (benefit) is the ability to store and
search vastly more information than previously possible . . . A more
fundamental consequence is that, with masses of data more easily available,
an analyst can bring more evidence to bear on a given problem. Further, the
analyst feels more inclined to check his files before writing because he knows
it (checking) can be done quickly- and comprehensively ... An interesting
effect of having files available on the computer is being able to do searches
or use data in ways not previously possible." (OSR/SEC comments.)
"During the Cyprus crisis and more recently in relation to events in the
Balkans, I had an opportunity to use the SAFE system in a crisis management
mode. The system proved to be an extraordinarily useful device in this respect.
The mail distribution system (OLTA) and COLTS were of particular im-
portance . . . SEC was able to receive relevant reports through the OLTA
system many hours before the reports were available in hard copy. This
capability allowed us to stay well ahead of possible threatening developments
77
Approved For Release 2002/1 fWl jAbP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
CONFIDENTIAL
and, in fact, alerted us to potentially interesting developments in the Balkans
before reports of this were available through regular channels. I believe that
the SAFE system has an enormous potential for crisis management."
(Comments of one OSR/SEC analyse.)
"The SAFE system holds the promise of being able to make the ever
increasing flow of information a manageable phenomenon, and to help stave
off the accumulation of innumerable safes with unmanageable files."
(OSR/TF comments.)
"The year-long experiment with Project SAFE has proven that ... analytic
capabilities can be enhanced. The savings of time and space afforded by the
system, plus the rapid search capability, represent a highly desirable
electronic package." (OER/D/TA comments.)
in summary, we believe that the data collection experiment demonstrated that the
proposed system will help Agency analysts provide a better intelligence product. A
better product may be a piece of incoming intelligence more thoroughly indexed and
annotated for later reference; or information routed to users faster and more
efficiently; or a more thoroughly researched piece of finished intelligence.
We believe the SAFE system will offer analysts improved techniques for monitoring
and manipulating a large amount of incoming intelligence items, for searching files
they could not otherwise use in the time before their deadlines, and for scanning
incoming mail minutes after it arrives in the Agency.
in acquiring new technology, the Agency has traditionally emphasized the
information collection side of the intelligence problem rather than the information
analysis side. As this continues, it resembles building an ever larger cone for a funnel
while keeping the same sized neck, and expecting the flow to increase. Agency analysts
cannot now digest all the information they receive; they often cannot quickly find
yesterday's piece of intelligence when it suddenly becomes relevant today. The task
force feels that the development of the SAFE Information System represents the
required parallel emphasis on the analysis side of the intelligence problem.
IMPROVING COMPUTER RESOURCES ALLOCATION
Computer and microfilm information systems to support production analysts have
often been developed on an essentially individual basis. Each office would set out to
meet its particular needs without knowledge of or coordination with other offices with
similar problems, and the overall development of the Agency's information system has
suffered. Proper development requires a unifying concept that would relate, for
example:
-a file building requirement in OSR with one in OBGI,
-a text search and edit requirement in OSI with a text indexing requirement
in CRS, and
-a text segment extract requirement in OWI with an automatic cataloging
requirement in CRS.
A unifying concept would reveal the relationships between such varying
requirements, and enable the task force to derive a common denominator.
Lack of a unifying concept has resulted in unnecessary developmental costs and,
probably, unnecessary acquisition of computer equipment.
The task force suggests that the SAFE Information System could be such a unifying
concept; that it is wide enough to embrace most of the information processing
requirements of the production analysts; and, in short, that SAFE could improve the
organization and allocation of Agency computer resources.
78
Approved For Release 20021OM4ENCIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/1~ rDtr DP79-00498A000400050049-9
POTENTIAL SAVINGS
Savings could follow the adoption of the proposed SAFE methods for handling the
Agency's electrical and paper receipts and the proposed SAFE text searching system.
SAFE would also change the pattern of CRS use of computers and manpower. These
changes are discussed below, but no dollar figures are projected.
Handling of Electrical Receipts
Approximately 20 million copies of electrical messages are disseminated yearly at
the Agency. The cost of the existing operation is considerable; the existing equipment,
supplies, space and manpower will no longer be needed if they are replaced by more
efficient equipment and more efficiently used space and manpower.
Handling of Paper Receipts
The SAFE system plans to continue the current routine microfilming of documents
that are received only as paper copy. Instead of keeping them all in a central location,
however, SAFE would make a large collection of the microform documents available
in regional storage devices and thus lighten this load on the central storage facility.
This central facility now manually microfilms documents that were received as
electrical messages. SAFE will enable the central facility to receive computer output
microfilm (COM) processing, reducing the use of manpower.
Text Searching
During the data collection period analysts used the digitally stored text files to
obtain messages that they may or may not have expected to receive through the
regular delivery of SI messages, State cables, FBIS field traffic, military cables or DoD
IR electricals. Analysts used various parameters in their search of those files apd could
change the parameters as their requirements changed from day to day. They found
these searches valuable:
"I've used COLTS (text searching program) primarily to retrieve messages referred
to in other cables but nowhere to be found in our mail."
"COLTS produces messages faster than hand delivery."
The proposed SAFE Information System would regularly update the text files as
messages are received from OC. Its improved text search capability will allow analysts
to repeat a question without having to reformulate it every time, and to view only titles
or segments rather than the whole text, whenever they are scanning many messages for
relevant items.
The task force anticipates that text searching will at least partially replace the
dissemination of messages to user offices; and, possibly that someday intelligence
messages will not have to be read and reread before reaching the ultimate customer.
To the extent that shuffling, carrying and reading the mail are reduced, the Agency
can save money.
Changes within CRS
If project SAFE becomes an operational reality, it would satisfy most of the present
CRS requirements for computer support, as well as some other Agency requirements,
and release a significant amount of OJCS resources.
Under SAFE, CRS will continue to analyze documents to create the "public" index
record. Some increase in indexing may be required, but we feel money would be saved
overall because CRS will be able to use the on-line analysis and automatic cataloging
functions. Also, CRS will need fewer specialized analysts for routine reference work,
because SAFE will permit production analysts to search many of the CRS files for
themselves.
79
CpNFID NTH
Approved For Release 2002/11/04 C~A-RbP79-00498A000400050049-9
 Approved For Release 2002/1 JA4 -,Dqi-RPP79-00498A000400050049-9
VIII. DEVELOPMENT PLAN
INTRODUCTION
Chapter VI of this report outlined the proposed SAFE Information System, its
capabilities, possible hardware configuration, and cost estimates. This chapter
describes the development plan of the SAFE Information System and projects the
number of developmental phases required through FY 1980 and the expenditure
required each fiscal year for the same period. These estimates arc tentative and will
certainly change as a result of the first phase activity (detailed system design).
DETAILED SYSTEM DESIGN PHASE
In the first phase of the SAFE Information System development, the task force must
draw up detailed design specifications. It will have to verify that the system hardware
configuration suggested in Chapter VI is correct or spell out the new configuration.
Once the hardware configuration is fixed, the task force must draft detailed
specifications on individual components. If the minicomputer/main processor
configuration remains the preferred one, studies must be performed to determine the
optimum mix of the functions performed by the mini and main computers. The task
force must spell out the requirements for the SAFE Console Station and decide
whether or not to use existing terminal equipment. The task force must also fix the
detailed specifications for the computer software, and determine how the overall
project is to be managed.
Task Team
Project SAFE will demand a new task team composed of various specialists. Many
are already Agency employees; some must be hired. This team would guide the
detailed system design phase and the project management plan mentioned above. It
would also maintain the interim SAFE system now in use in the various developmental
branches. The analysts who are still working with the pilot system-at their oven
request-will continue to play an important role as SAFE is developed Agency-wide.
The task team would consist of 13 to 1,5 full-time analysts from the following
organizations:
? CRS/SAS-Six or seven analysts engaged in project management, system
design, and interim system management.
? CRS/SSD and OJCS-Two analysts studying hardware configuration.
? OJCS-One analyst, engaged in coordination, would keep OJCS informed
of SAFE progress and would seek OJCS expertise as required.
? Contractors-Four or five systems analysts from a major software/system
firm to analyze the implications of the expected load and queueing through
computer simulation and modeling.
It would also need four part-time personnel as follows:
? OC-One person, familiar with the Cable Dissemination System of the
Cable Secretariat, who will coordinate the SAFE requirements with those
of the Secretariat.
? ORD-One person who would monitor industrial and academic research
developments in areas of interest to SAFE.
81
Approved For Release 2002/1 l1 -T t P79-00498A000400050049-9
 25X1 Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9
Next 2 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2002/11/04: CIA-RDP79-00498A000400050049-9