The president of the American Society for Microbiology has sought the advice of the National Academy of Sciences on whether scientific journals should withhold information that may aid bioterrorists or countries contemplating biological warfare. He wrote, "We are now being asked to allow authors to withhold critical information because of concern that significant data could be misappropriated or abused." Don Kennedy, editor at _Science_, argues against such a proposal. For the record, the computer security industry has already covered this problem. There may be some lessons there. 1. People often publish for the purpose of recognition. When you are dealing with sensitive subjects some responsibility must be taken. Publish your results to those who need to know, and make them more public if you feel the public needs to know. 2. When publishing to the public, make sure that you alter your directions in such a matter that experienced scientists can replicate your results, but inexperienced scientists won't be able to figure them out. 3. Uphold ethical/moral standards in your profession. 4. Do not create unreasonable barriers to entry for people who just want to learn. 5. Do not allow capable, creative people to wind up in a situation where the easiest path to economic security or intellectual freedom is by working for the enemy. Cases in point: Bolivian virus writers, Russian nuke scientists, the Canadian guy who built long range cannons for Iraq after the U.S. fired him... It is possible for us to act responsibly, and this IS a two way street. There is a balance that can be obtained which provides barriers to terrorists without creating barriers to free thought. The difficulty is in getting everyone to agree on what enlightened self interest consists of. Frankly, scientists are more likely to "get it" then many other communities. However, this will be hard. Scientists Worry Journals May Aid Terrorists | 
