ITH all the speculation about American intentions for Iraq, there has been one place where, to the chagrin of the administration, people can find a few hard facts. Since August, any Web surfer has been able to view detailed satellite photographs of construction and expansion at an American air base in the Persian Gulf state of Qatar.

Published by Globalsecurity.org, a military watchdog group, and taken over the last six months, the photographs show that the base, al-Udeid, has new aircraft shelters, storage tanks and parking ramps.

The close-ups have clearly irked the Pentagon.

Commenting on the ability of outsiders to get them, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld grumbled, "I wish we didn't have to live with it." But that wish is unlikely to be granted, because the commercial satellite industry is blossoming. The existence of such photographs highlights what many consider to be the next information revolution and the government's sputtering efforts to control it.

It used to be that only the spy agencies of the two superpowers had the ability to take snapshots from space. That changed 16 years ago when a French commercial-government joint venture launched the world's first satellite offering photographs for sale. The quality of those early pictures wasn't particularly good, but in late 1999, an American company, Space Imaging, launched the first high-resolution satellite, Ikonos. It can take pictures with a clarity 10 times that of the French satellite ó enough to spot a car on the ground or an American airfield. Ikonos, as well as another American commercial satellite launched this year, took the photographs of al-Udeid. As with the Internet and Global Positioning Satellites, the Defense Department invented the satellite imaging technology, and it has tried since to keep some control over it. A 1992 law allows the government to declare any part of the earth off-limits to American commercial satellites to "meet significant national security or significant foreign policy concerns."

But news media organizations and freedom-of-information advocates contend that the provision, known as "shutter control," is so vague that it is unconstitutional. "There has long been a standard in which national security concerns can be invoked to limit the free flow of information," said Ann Florini, a fellow at the Brookings Institution. "It's that there must be a clear and present danger. This law forgets that."

The issue remained theoretical until last October. That's when the government, concerned that Al Qaeda or the Taliban could use the satellites to peek at American maneuvers in Afghanistan, paid Space Imaging about $4 million for exclusive rights to photographs over the war zone. Though the deal was billed as a straightforward commercial transaction, the 1992 law requires American satellite companies to give exclusive rights to the government when it requests them. But no similar contract has been signed for the gulf, and in what appears to be a sign that the government is reconsidering the policy of shutter control, it says it may not seek such a contract. "It's no longer our first option," says David Burpee, spokesman at the federal National Imagery and Mapping Agency, which regulates commercial satellites. "That kind of deal can have a chilling effect on the industry, which runs counter to our efforts to promote it."

International competitors have also started to emerge. A company operating in Cyprus and owned by Israelis has launched a satellite that is only slightly less capable than its American counterparts. France, Germany, Italy, Korea and India are planning to launch satellites that are as good or even better than the ones offered by the United States. Foreign satellite companies are free to ignore American laws.

Some experts are suggesting other efforts to prevent images from getting into the wrong hands.

"The U.S. ought to be talking to other countries about developing international controls," said Ray Williamson, a professor at George Washington University's Space Policy Institute.

One proposal, by Maj. Robert Fabian, a former chief of space control strategy for the United States Air Force, suggests using "space blockades" against foreign satellites suspected of selling photos to an enemy. Should a company and the country where it is based ignore diplomatic and economic pressure, Major Fabian recommends temporarily blinding the satellite.

If that doesn't work, he suggests a more lasting solution: "lethal enforcement," which "would likely include the physical destruction of the satellite."

Eric Umansky is a writer for Slate.com