In a joint essay published on Lawfare and reposted on Schneier's blog, security technologist Bruce Schneier and legal scholar Cindy Cohn mark the 25th anniversary of the September 11 attacks by calling for an end to the era of mass surveillance. They describe how the attacks prompted a government-wide move away from targeted measures—like individual wiretaps and pen register orders—toward bulk collection of communications and metadata. The authors argue this shift was a fundamental policy error, not a necessary security measure.
Schneier and Cohn contend that mass surveillance has not delivered the security benefits its proponents promised, while imposing significant costs on privacy, trust, and democratic norms. They point to the lack of evidence that bulk collection has prevented attacks, and they note that the surveillance apparatus has expanded far beyond its original counterterrorism justification. The essay does not propose a detailed legislative agenda, but it strongly advocates for rolling back these programs in favor of targeted surveillance that requires individual suspicion and judicial oversight.
The piece is notable for its timing—marking a quarter-century since 9/11—and for its clear-eyed rejection of the status quo. The authors do not offer new data or previously unreported facts; instead, they synthesize known criticisms into a coherent argument for change. Their central claim is that the trade-off between security and privacy was a false choice, and that the United States can protect itself without sacrificing the Fourth Amendment principles that mass surveillance erodes. The essay is a direct appeal to policymakers and the public to reconsider the legacy of the past 25 years.