For the past year and a half, the FBI has been using a secret scoring system to judge the likelihood that someone will carry out a violent attack. The survey, called “Indicators of Mobilization to Violence,” assigns points based on factors like religious observance, travel history, financial transactions, and physical appearance.

A copy of the survey in a classified FBI document was obtained by The Intercept.

The survey itself consists of 48 questions that agents are supposed to answer about terror suspects as part of an investigation. The document also includes a set of frequently asked questions about the scoring system aimed at agents working counterterrorism investigations.

According to the document, the program was rolled out in the fall of 2015.

Many of the questions in the survey have obvious relevance to whether someone is plotting a violent act, such as whether the person has access to weapons, has trained or fought overseas, or has tried to acquire bomb-making materials.

But some of the activities the survey flags are more ordinary. They include using encryption or masking internet browsing, showing an interest in previous bombings, or “participating in activities that simulate military or operational environments (e.g. paint ball, airsoft, laser tag, shooting ranges, camping/survival trips, etc.).”

Other questions are far more subjective and deal with the individual’s emotional state. For example, the survey asks if the person has changed their appearance or habits, has “experienced a recent personal loss or humiliation,” or has a history of mental health problems or substance abuse.

Still other questions gauge ideological leanings. “Does the Subject hold a belief or ideology that supports the use of violence?” Or, “Has the Subject become more extreme in their beliefs?”

While the survey is, in theory, meant to be universal, it contains several references to Islamic terminology and seems to be focused on concerns about Muslim terrorism.

Sahar Aziz, a law professor at Texas A&M University and expert on programs aimed at countering violent extremism, told The Intercept that some of the questions are subject to bias by FBI agents.

“Any effort to create ideological prototypes of people that are presumed to be susceptible to violence can have a chilling effect on constitutionally protected free speech,” Aziz said. “When government agents are screening people based on ideological beliefs or lifestyles that are not directly associated with criminal activity, it casts a wide net, and that can create serious consequences for targeted communities.”

Trying to understand the factors behind terrorism is understandable, but the FBI survey illustrates the perils of trying to use past examples to predict and prevent violent attacks.

“Set the civil liberties issues aside for a moment, and this says that we are grasping at straws to try to figure out what the factors involved in radicalization are,” said Karen Greenberg, the director of Fordham Law School’s Center on National Security. “They are so individualized. How much will algorithms really tell us about the threat?”

The FBI in recent years has taken an aggressive stance in sting operations designed to catch potential terrorists. These and other government efforts under the banner of “countering violent extremism” have been criticized by lawyers and activists who say law enforcement is looking for terror threats in the wrong places, painting Islamic and immigrant communities as uniquely susceptible to violence. The Trump administration has indicated it will make this direction explicit, changing the name of the program to specify Islamic extremism and dropping efforts aimed at other threats such as those from white supremacist groups.