Showing posts tagged privacy.
x

baubles of my mind's eye

anarcho-queer:

The UN Asks To Surveille The World’s Internet
Members of the United Nation’s International Telecommunications Union (ITU) have agreed to work towards implementing a standard for the Internet that would allow for eavesdropping on a worldwide scale.
At a conference in Dubai this week, the ITU members decided to adopt the Y.2770 standard for deep packet inspection, a top-secret proposal by way of China that will allow telecom companies across the world to more easily dig through data passed across the Web.
According to the UN, implementing deep-packet inspection, or DPI, on such a global scale will allow authorities to more easily detect the transferring and sharing of copyrighted materials and other protected files by finding a way for administrators to analyze the payload of online transmissions, not just the header data that is normally identified and interpreted.
“It is standard procedure to route packets based on their headers, after all it is the part of the packet that contains information on the packet’s intended destination,” writes The Inquirer’s Lawrence Lati, “but by inspecting the contents of each packet ISPs, governments and anyone else can look at sensitive data. While users can mitigate risks by encrypting data, given enough resources encryption can be foiled.”
Tim Berners-Lee, a British computer scientist widely regarded as the ‘Father of the Internet,’ spoke out against proposed DPI implementation on such a grandiose scale during an address earlier this year at the World Wide Web Consortium.
“Somebody clamps a deep packet inspection thing on your cable which reads every packet and reassembles the web pages, cataloguing them against your name, address and telephone number either to be given to the government when they ask for it or to be sold to the highest bidder – that’s a really serious breach of privacy,” he said.
Blogger Arthur Herman writes this week for Fox News online that the goal of the delegates at the ITU “is to grab control of the World Wide Web away from the United States, and hand it to a UN body of bureaucrats.”
“It’ll be the biggest power grab in the UN’s history, as well as a perversion of its power,” he warns.
In a report published this week by CNet, tech journalist Declan McCullagh cites a Korean document that describes the confidential Y.2770 standard as being able to identify “embedded digital watermarks in MP3 data,” discover “copyright protected audio content,” find “Jabber messages with Spanish text,” or “identify uploading BitTorrent users.”

anarcho-queer:

The UN Asks To Surveille The World’s Internet

Members of the United Nation’s International Telecommunications Union (ITU) have agreed to work towards implementing a standard for the Internet that would allow for eavesdropping on a worldwide scale.

At a conference in Dubai this week, the ITU members decided to adopt the Y.2770 standard for deep packet inspection, a top-secret proposal by way of China that will allow telecom companies across the world to more easily dig through data passed across the Web.

According to the UN, implementing deep-packet inspection, or DPI, on such a global scale will allow authorities to more easily detect the transferring and sharing of copyrighted materials and other protected files by finding a way for administrators to analyze the payload of online transmissions, not just the header data that is normally identified and interpreted.

“It is standard procedure to route packets based on their headers, after all it is the part of the packet that contains information on the packet’s intended destination,” writes The Inquirer’s Lawrence Lati, “but by inspecting the contents of each packet ISPs, governments and anyone else can look at sensitive data. While users can mitigate risks by encrypting data, given enough resources encryption can be foiled.”

Tim Berners-Lee, a British computer scientist widely regarded as the ‘Father of the Internet,’ spoke out against proposed DPI implementation on such a grandiose scale during an address earlier this year at the World Wide Web Consortium.

“Somebody clamps a deep packet inspection thing on your cable which reads every packet and reassembles the web pages, cataloguing them against your name, address and telephone number either to be given to the government when they ask for it or to be sold to the highest bidder – that’s a really serious breach of privacy,” he said.

Blogger Arthur Herman writes this week for Fox News online that the goal of the delegates at the ITU “is to grab control of the World Wide Web away from the United States, and hand it to a UN body of bureaucrats.”

It’ll be the biggest power grab in the UN’s history, as well as a perversion of its power,” he warns.

In a report published this week by CNet, tech journalist Declan McCullagh cites a Korean document that describes the confidential Y.2770 standard as being able to identify “embedded digital watermarks in MP3 data,” discover “copyright protected audio content,” find “Jabber messages with Spanish text,” or “identify uploading BitTorrent users.”

— 1 year ago with 159 notes

#Internet Surveillance  #Government Surveillance  #Privacy  #Censorship  #Copyright  #ITU  #International Telecommunications Union  #UN 
The U.N.'s Internet Sneak Attack →

Many of the U.N.’s 193 member states oppose the open, uncontrolled nature of the Internet. Its interconnected global networks ignore national boundaries, making it hard for governments to censor or tax. And so, to send the freewheeling digital world back to the state control of the analog era, China, Russia, Iran and Arab countries are trying to hijack a U.N. agency that has nothing to do with the Internet.

For more than a year, these countries have lobbied an agency called the International Telecommunications Union to take over the rules and workings of the Internet. Created in 1865 as the International Telegraph Union, the ITU last drafted a treaty on communications in 1988, before the commercial Internet, when telecommunications meant voice telephone calls via national telephone monopolies.

Next week the ITU holds a negotiating conference in Dubai, and past months have brought many leaks of proposals for a new treaty. U.S. congressional resolutions and much of the commentary, including in this column, have focused on proposals by authoritarian governments to censor the Internet. Just as objectionable are proposals that ignore how the Internet works, threatening its smooth and open operations.

Having the Internet rewired by bureaucrats would be like handing a Stradivarius to a gorilla. The Internet is made up of 40,000 networks that interconnect among 425,000 global routes, cheaply and efficiently delivering messages and other digital content among more than two billion people around the world, with some 500,000 new users a day.

Many of the engineers and developers who built and operate these networks belong to virtual committees and task forces coordinated by an international nonprofit called the Internet Society. The society is home to the Internet Engineering Task Force (the main provider of global technical standards) and other volunteer groups such as the Internet Architecture Board and the Internet Research Task Force. Another key nongovernmental group is Icann, which assigns Internet addresses and domain names.

The self-regulating Internet means no one has to ask for permission to launch a website, and no government can tell network operators how to do their jobs. The arrangement has made the Internet a rare place of permissionless innovation.

(Source: , via iamlittlei)

— 1 year ago with 32 notes

#internet freedom  #internet  #net neutrality  #politics  #news  #privacy  #censorship  #liberties  #rights  #freedom of speech 
anarcho-queer:

Senate Bill Rewrite Lets Feds Read Your E-mail Without Warrants (MUST READ)
A Senate proposal touted as protecting Americans’ e-mail privacy has been quietly rewritten, giving government agencies more surveillance power than they possess under current law.
CNET has learned that Patrick Leahy, the influential Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee, has dramatically reshaped his legislation in response to law enforcement concerns. A vote on his bill, which now authorizes warrantless access to Americans’ e-mail, is scheduled for next week.
Leahy’s rewritten bill would allow more than 22 agencies — including the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Communications Commission — to access Americans’ e-mail, Google Docs files, Facebook wall posts, and Twitter direct messages without a search warrant. It also would give the FBI and Homeland Security more authority, in some circumstances, to gain full access to Internet accounts without notifying either the owner or a judge. (CNET obtained the revised draft from a source involved in the negotiations with Leahy.)
It’s an abrupt departure from Leahy’s earlier approach, which required police to obtain a search warrant backed by probable cause before they could read the contents of e-mail or other communications. The Vermont Democrat boasted last year that his bill “provides enhanced privacy protections for American consumers by… requiring that the government obtain a search warrant.”
Leahy had planned a vote on an earlier version of his bill, designed to update a pair of 1980s-vintage surveillance laws, in late September. But after law enforcement groups including the National District Attorneys’ Association and the National Sheriffs’ Association organizations objected to the legislation and asked him to “reconsider acting” on it, Leahy pushed back the vote and reworked the bill as a package of amendments to be offered next Thursday. The package (PDF) is a substitute for H.R. 2471, which the House of Representatives already has approved.
One person participating in Capitol Hill meetings on this topic told CNET that Justice Department officials have expressed their displeasure about Leahy’s original bill. The department is on record as opposing any such requirement: James Baker, the associate deputy attorney general, has publicly warned that requiring a warrant to obtain stored e-mail could have an “adverse impact” on criminal investigations.
Christopher Calabrese, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said requiring warrantless access to Americans’ data “undercuts” the purpose of Leahy’s original proposal. “We believe a warrant is the appropriate standard for any contents,” he said.

anarcho-queer:

Senate Bill Rewrite Lets Feds Read Your E-mail Without Warrants (MUST READ)

A Senate proposal touted as protecting Americans’ e-mail privacy has been quietly rewritten, giving government agencies more surveillance power than they possess under current law.

CNET has learned that Patrick Leahy, the influential Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee, has dramatically reshaped his legislation in response to law enforcement concerns. A vote on his bill, which now authorizes warrantless access to Americans’ e-mail, is scheduled for next week.

Leahy’s rewritten bill would allow more than 22 agencies — including the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Communications Commission — to access Americans’ e-mail, Google Docs files, Facebook wall posts, and Twitter direct messages without a search warrant. It also would give the FBI and Homeland Security more authority, in some circumstances, to gain full access to Internet accounts without notifying either the owner or a judge. (CNET obtained the revised draft from a source involved in the negotiations with Leahy.)

It’s an abrupt departure from Leahy’s earlier approach, which required police to obtain a search warrant backed by probable cause before they could read the contents of e-mail or other communications. The Vermont Democrat boasted last year that his bill “provides enhanced privacy protections for American consumers by… requiring that the government obtain a search warrant.

Leahy had planned a vote on an earlier version of his bill, designed to update a pair of 1980s-vintage surveillance laws, in late September. But after law enforcement groups including the National District Attorneys’ Association and the National Sheriffs’ Association organizations objected to the legislation and asked him to “reconsider acting” on it, Leahy pushed back the vote and reworked the bill as a package of amendments to be offered next Thursday. The package (PDF) is a substitute for H.R. 2471, which the House of Representatives already has approved.

One person participating in Capitol Hill meetings on this topic told CNET that Justice Department officials have expressed their displeasure about Leahy’s original bill. The department is on record as opposing any such requirement: James Baker, the associate deputy attorney general, has publicly warned that requiring a warrant to obtain stored e-mail could have an “adverse impact” on criminal investigations.

Christopher Calabrese, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said requiring warrantless access to Americans’ data “undercuts” the purpose of Leahy’s original proposal. “We believe a warrant is the appropriate standard for any contents,” he said.

— 1 year ago with 414 notes

#Government Surveillance  #Internet Privacy  #Senate  #Warrantless Surveillance  #civil liberties  #privacy  #Big Brother  #surveillance 
danceforthatanarchy:

1. On December 31, 2011, Obama signed the NDAA, giving him the ability to indefinitely detain any U.S. civilian without charge or trial. 
2. Obama supports internet censorship/surveillance. He plans to issue an executive order this year that resembles CISPA if the bill is not passed. 
3. Despite his claims, Obama has killed thousands of people, including civilians and children, with drone strikes.
4. The president redefined the word ‘militant’ to mean ‘all military-age males in a strike zone’. This allows him to refer to civilians killed in a drone strike as ‘militants’ to avoid counting civilian deaths.
5. President Barack Obama signed the FAA Air Transportation Modernization and Safety Improvement Act of 2012 earlier this year allowing 30,000 drones to be used on U.S. soil by law enforcement, government agencies, corporations, etc.
6. Obama granted immunity to all government officials involved in torturing detainees. 
7. When a federal judge barred the white house from indefinitely detaining U.S. civilians, the Obama Administration appealed the decision and won the ‘right’ back. 
8. The Obama Administration and Lamar Smith (the creator of SOPA) are working together to have FISA renewed*. FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) allows the government to electronically eavesdrop on Americans’ phone calls and e-mails without a probable-cause warrant.
9. When ACLU challenged the constitutionality of FISA, the Obama Administration asked the Supreme Court to dismiss the challenge.
10. Internet censorship has increased under Obama. The government has seized more than 750 domains in the past two years under a program called “Operation in Our Sites.” (.pdf)
11. William Binney, a former official with the National Security Agency, recently said that domestic surveillance in the U.S. has increased under President Obama, and trillions of phone calls, emails and other messages sent by U.S. citizens have been intercepted by the government.
12. Recently, the Obama Administration told a federal court that civilians have no “reasonable expectation of privacy” in cellphone location data, and hence the authorities may obtain documents detailing a person’s movements from wireless carriers without a probable-cause warrant.
13. The Obama Administration argued in court earlier this year that they can spy on U.S. civilians with impunity. 
14. Even while denouncing Syria’s dictator, Obama has been arming Bahrain’s dictatorship with weapons that has killed several pro-democracy protesters.
15. When journalist Abdulelah Haider Shaye reported on a U.S. drone strike that killed 14 women, 21 children and more in Yemen, he was arrested and sentenced to 5 years imprisonment. After public outcry, Yemen’s president nearly released Shaye until Barack Obama called him on February 2, 2011 to request Shaye remain imprisoned. 
16. Drone strikes have dramatically increased under Obama. From 2000-2008, Bush authorized a drone strike in Pakistan every 28 days. During Obama’s administration, he authorized a drone strike in Pakistan every 6 days.
17. The Obama Administration is training and arming 15,000 African troops to fight a proxy war in Somalia, possibly violating an UN Embargo.
18. When a group of lawmakers sought documents that proved the Obama Administration illegally sold guns to Mexican drug cartels, Obama invoked executive privilege for the first time to keep to documents hidden. 
19. A few months ago, Obama’s trade documents were leaked. The documents revealed the Obama secretly gave big corporations the right to break domestic laws and violate national sovereignty. 
20. In 2009, Obama secretly cut a deal with lobbyist group PhRMA to reassure’ that industry would be protected against policies it disliked in exchange for support of the legislation and acceptance of other policies.”
21. President Obama deported undocumented immigrants at a faster rate then any other president in history. He is also close to deporting more undocumented immigrants than Bush did during his 8-year presidency. 
22. Obama has been extremely strict when it comes to whistleblowers. In fact, he has indicted more whistleblowers under the Espionage Act than all past administrations combined.
23. Income inequality is worse under Obama than it was under Bush. The 1% received 65% of every dollar created from 2002-2007. The the recovery, 2009-2010, the 1% received 93% of every dollar created.
24. In 2008, Obama promised to increase the federal minimum wage to $9.40/hour. The current minimum wage remains at $7.25.
25. Obama has helped close hundreds of public schools nation-wide and replace them with for-profit charter schools.

danceforthatanarchy:

1. On December 31, 2011, Obama signed the NDAA, giving him the ability to indefinitely detain any U.S. civilian without charge or trial. 

2. Obama supports internet censorship/surveillance. He plans to issue an executive order this year that resembles CISPA if the bill is not passed. 

3. Despite his claims, Obama has killed thousands of people, including civilians and children, with drone strikes.

4. The president redefined the word ‘militant’ to mean ‘all military-age males in a strike zone’. This allows him to refer to civilians killed in a drone strike as ‘militants’ to avoid counting civilian deaths.

5. President Barack Obama signed the FAA Air Transportation Modernization and Safety Improvement Act of 2012 earlier this year allowing 30,000 drones to be used on U.S. soil by law enforcement, government agencies, corporations, etc.

6. Obama granted immunity to all government officials involved in torturing detainees

7. When a federal judge barred the white house from indefinitely detaining U.S. civilians, the Obama Administration appealed the decision and won the ‘right’ back. 

8. The Obama Administration and Lamar Smith (the creator of SOPA) are working together to have FISA renewed*. FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) allows the government to electronically eavesdrop on Americans’ phone calls and e-mails without a probable-cause warrant.

9. When ACLU challenged the constitutionality of FISA, the Obama Administration asked the Supreme Court to dismiss the challenge.

10. Internet censorship has increased under ObamaThe government has seized more than 750 domains in the past two years under a program called “Operation in Our Sites.” (.pdf)

11. William Binney, a former official with the National Security Agency, recently said that domestic surveillance in the U.S. has increased under President Obama, and trillions of phone calls, emails and other messages sent by U.S. citizens have been intercepted by the government.

12. Recently, the Obama Administration told a federal court that civilians have no “reasonable expectation of privacy” in cellphone location data, and hence the authorities may obtain documents detailing a person’s movements from wireless carriers without a probable-cause warrant.

13. The Obama Administration argued in court earlier this year that they can spy on U.S. civilians with impunity. 

14. Even while denouncing Syria’s dictator, Obama has been arming Bahrain’s dictatorship with weapons that has killed several pro-democracy protesters.

15. When journalist Abdulelah Haider Shaye reported on a U.S. drone strike that killed 14 women, 21 children and more in Yemen, he was arrested and sentenced to 5 years imprisonment. After public outcry, Yemen’s president nearly released Shaye until Barack Obama called him on February 2, 2011 to request Shaye remain imprisoned. 

16. Drone strikes have dramatically increased under Obama. From 2000-2008, Bush authorized a drone strike in Pakistan every 28 days. During Obama’s administration, he authorized a drone strike in Pakistan every 6 days.

17. The Obama Administration is training and arming 15,000 African troops to fight a proxy war in Somalia, possibly violating an UN Embargo.

18. When a group of lawmakers sought documents that proved the Obama Administration illegally sold guns to Mexican drug cartels, Obama invoked executive privilege for the first time to keep to documents hidden. 

19. A few months ago, Obama’s trade documents were leaked. The documents revealed the Obama secretly gave big corporations the right to break domestic laws and violate national sovereignty. 

20. In 2009, Obama secretly cut a deal with lobbyist group PhRMA to reassure’ that industry would be protected against policies it disliked in exchange for support of the legislation and acceptance of other policies.

21. President Obama deported undocumented immigrants at a faster rate then any other president in history. He is also close to deporting more undocumented immigrants than Bush did during his 8-year presidency. 

22. Obama has been extremely strict when it comes to whistleblowers. In fact, he has indicted more whistleblowers under the Espionage Act than all past administrations combined.

23. Income inequality is worse under Obama than it was under Bush. The 1% received 65% of every dollar created from 2002-2007. The the recovery, 2009-2010, the 1% received 93% of every dollar created.

24. In 2008, Obama promised to increase the federal minimum wage to $9.40/hour. The current minimum wage remains at $7.25.

25. Obama has helped close hundreds of public schools nation-wide and replace them with for-profit charter schools.

(via anarcho-queer)

— 1 year ago with 3253 notes

#Obama  #civil liberties  #NDAA  #internet freedom  #privacy  #drones 
thepeoplesrecord:

FBI begins installation of $1 billion face recognition system across USSeptember 8, 2012
Birthmarks, be damned: the FBI has officially started rolling out a state-of-the-art face recognition project that will assist in their effort to accumulate and archive information about each and every American at a cost of a billion dollars.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has reached a milestone in the development of their Next Generation Identification (NGI) program and is now implementing the intelligence database in unidentified locales across the country, New Scientist reports in an article this week. The FBI first outlined the project back in 2005, explaining to the Justice Department in an August 2006 document (.pdf) that their new system will eventually serve as an upgrade to the current Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS) that keeps track of citizens with criminal records across America .
“The NGI Program is a compilation of initiatives that will either improve or expand existing biometric identification services,” its administrator explained to the Department of Justice at the time, adding that  the project, “will accommodate increased information processing and sharing demands in support of anti-terrorism.”
“The NGI Program Office mission is to reduce terrorist and criminal activities by improving and expanding biometric identification and criminal history information services through research, evaluation and implementation of advanced technology within the IAFIS environment.”
The agency insists, “As a result of the NGI initiatives, the FBI will be able to provide services to enhance interoperability between stakeholders at all levels of government, including local, state, federal, and international partners.” In doing as such, though, the government is now going ahead with linking a database of images and personally identifiable information of anyone in their records with departments around the world thanks to technology that makes fingerprint tracking seem like kids’ stuff.
According to their 2006 report, the NGI program utilizes “specialized requirements in the Latent Services, Facial Recognition and Multi-modal Biometrics areas” that “will allow the FnewBI to establish a terrorist fingerprint identification system that is compatible with other systems; increase the accessibility and number of the IAFIS terrorist fingerprint records; and provide latent palm print search capabilities.”
Is that just all, though? During a 2010 presentation (.pdf) made by the FBI’s Biometric Center of Intelligence, the agency identified why facial recognition technology needs to be embraced. Specifically, the FBI said that the technology could be used for “Identifying subjects in public datasets,” as well as “conducting automated surveillance at lookout locations” and “tracking subject movements,” meaning NGI is more than just a database of mug shots mixed up with fingerprints — the FBI has admitted that this their intent with the technology surpasses just searching for criminals but includes spectacular surveillance capabilities. Together, it’s a system unheard of outside of science fiction.
New Scientist reports that a 2010 study found technology used by NGI to be accurate in picking out suspects from a pool of 1.6 million mug shots 92 percent of the time. The system was tested on a trial basis in the state of Michigan earlier this year, and has already been cleared for pilot runs in Washington, Florida and North Carolina. Now according to this week’s New Scientist report, the full rollout of the program has begun and the FBI expects its intelligence infrastructure to be in place across the United States by 2014.
In 2008, the FBI announced that it awarded Lockheed Martin Transportation and Security Solutions, one of the Defense Department’s most favored contractors, with the authorization to design, develop, test and deploy the NGI System. Thomas E. Bush III, the former FBI agent who helped develop the NGI’s system requirements, tells NextGov.com, “The idea was to be able to plug and play with these identifiers and biometrics.” With those items being collected without much oversight being admitted, though, putting the personal facts pertaining to millions of Americans into the hands of some playful Pentagon staffers only begins to open up civil liberties issues.
Jim Harper, director of information policy at the Cato Institute, adds to NextGov that investigators pair facial recognition technology with publically available social networks in order to build bigger profiles. Facial recognition “is more accurate with a Google or a Facebook, because they will have anywhere from a half-dozen to a dozen pictures of an individual, whereas I imagine the FBI has one or two mug shots,” he says. When these files are then fed to law enforcement agencies on local, federal and international levels, intelligence databases that include everything from close-ups of eyeballs and irises to online interests could be shared among offices.
The FBI expects the NGI system to include as many as 14 million photographs by the time the project is in full swing in only two years, but the pace of technology and the new connections constantly created by law enforcement agencies could allow for a database that dwarfs that estimate. As RT reported earlier this week, the city of Los Angeles now considers photography in public space “suspicious,” and authorizes LAPD officers to file reports if they have reason to believe a suspect is up to no good. Those reports, which may not necessarily involve any arrests, crimes, charges or even interviews with the suspect, can then be filed, analyzed, stored and shared with federal and local agencies connected across the country to massive data fusion centers. Similarly, live video transmissions from thousands of surveillance cameras across the country are believed to be sent to the same fusion centers as part of TrapWire, a global eye-in-the-sky endeavor that RT first exposed earlier this year.
“Facial recognition creates acute privacy concerns that fingerprints do not,” US Senator Al Franken (D-Minnesota) told the Senate Judiciary Committee’s subcommittee on privacy, technology and the law earlier this year. “Once someone has your faceprint, they can get your name, they can find your social networking account and they can find and track you in the street, in the stores you visit, the government buildings you enter, and the photos your friends post online.”
In his own testimony, Carnegie Mellon University Professor Alessandro Acquisti said to Sen. Franken, “the convergence of face recognition, online social networks and data mining has made it possible to use publicly available data and inexpensive technologies to produce sensitive inferences merely starting from an anonymous face.”
“Face recognition, like other information technologies, can be source of both benefits and costs to society and its individual members,” Prof. Acquisti added. “However, the combination of face recognition, social networks data and data mining can significant undermine our current notions and expectations of privacy and anonymity.”
With the latest report suggesting the NGI program is now a reality in America, though, it might be too late to try and keep the FBI from interfering with seemingly every aspect of life in the US, both private and public. As of July 18, 2012, the FBI reports, “The NGI program … is on scope, on schedule, on cost, and 60 percent deployed.”
Source
The surveillance state is here, full throttle.

thepeoplesrecord:

FBI begins installation of $1 billion face recognition system across US
September 8, 2012

Birthmarks, be damned: the FBI has officially started rolling out a state-of-the-art face recognition project that will assist in their effort to accumulate and archive information about each and every American at a cost of a billion dollars.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has reached a milestone in the development of their Next Generation Identification (NGI) program and is now implementing the intelligence database in unidentified locales across the country, New Scientist reports in an article this week. The FBI first outlined the project back in 2005, explaining to the Justice Department in an August 2006 document (.pdf) that their new system will eventually serve as an upgrade to the current Integrated Automated Fingerprint Identification System (IAFIS) that keeps track of citizens with criminal records across America .

“The NGI Program is a compilation of initiatives that will either improve or expand existing biometric identification services,” its administrator explained to the Department of Justice at the time, adding that  the project, “will accommodate increased information processing and sharing demands in support of anti-terrorism.”

“The NGI Program Office mission is to reduce terrorist and criminal activities by improving and expanding biometric identification and criminal history information services through research, evaluation and implementation of advanced technology within the IAFIS environment.”

The agency insists, “As a result of the NGI initiatives, the FBI will be able to provide services to enhance interoperability between stakeholders at all levels of government, including local, state, federal, and international partners.” In doing as such, though, the government is now going ahead with linking a database of images and personally identifiable information of anyone in their records with departments around the world thanks to technology that makes fingerprint tracking seem like kids’ stuff.

According to their 2006 report, the NGI program utilizes “specialized requirements in the Latent Services, Facial Recognition and Multi-modal Biometrics areas” that “will allow the FnewBI to establish a terrorist fingerprint identification system that is compatible with other systems; increase the accessibility and number of the IAFIS terrorist fingerprint records; and provide latent palm print search capabilities.”

Is that just all, though? During a 2010 presentation (.pdf) made by the FBI’s Biometric Center of Intelligence, the agency identified why facial recognition technology needs to be embraced. Specifically, the FBI said that the technology could be used for “Identifying subjects in public datasets,” as well as “conducting automated surveillance at lookout locations” and “tracking subject movements,” meaning NGI is more than just a database of mug shots mixed up with fingerprints — the FBI has admitted that this their intent with the technology surpasses just searching for criminals but includes spectacular surveillance capabilities. Together, it’s a system unheard of outside of science fiction.

New Scientist reports that a 2010 study found technology used by NGI to be accurate in picking out suspects from a pool of 1.6 million mug shots 92 percent of the time. The system was tested on a trial basis in the state of Michigan earlier this year, and has already been cleared for pilot runs in Washington, Florida and North Carolina. Now according to this week’s New Scientist report, the full rollout of the program has begun and the FBI expects its intelligence infrastructure to be in place across the United States by 2014.

In 2008, the FBI announced that it awarded Lockheed Martin Transportation and Security Solutions, one of the Defense Department’s most favored contractors, with the authorization to design, develop, test and deploy the NGI System. Thomas E. Bush III, the former FBI agent who helped develop the NGI’s system requirements, tells NextGov.com, “The idea was to be able to plug and play with these identifiers and biometrics.” With those items being collected without much oversight being admitted, though, putting the personal facts pertaining to millions of Americans into the hands of some playful Pentagon staffers only begins to open up civil liberties issues.

Jim Harper, director of information policy at the Cato Institute, adds to NextGov that investigators pair facial recognition technology with publically available social networks in order to build bigger profiles. Facial recognition “is more accurate with a Google or a Facebook, because they will have anywhere from a half-dozen to a dozen pictures of an individual, whereas I imagine the FBI has one or two mug shots,” he says. When these files are then fed to law enforcement agencies on local, federal and international levels, intelligence databases that include everything from close-ups of eyeballs and irises to online interests could be shared among offices.

The FBI expects the NGI system to include as many as 14 million photographs by the time the project is in full swing in only two years, but the pace of technology and the new connections constantly created by law enforcement agencies could allow for a database that dwarfs that estimate. As RT reported earlier this week, the city of Los Angeles now considers photography in public space “suspicious,” and authorizes LAPD officers to file reports if they have reason to believe a suspect is up to no good. Those reports, which may not necessarily involve any arrests, crimes, charges or even interviews with the suspect, can then be filed, analyzed, stored and shared with federal and local agencies connected across the country to massive data fusion centers. Similarly, live video transmissions from thousands of surveillance cameras across the country are believed to be sent to the same fusion centers as part of TrapWire, a global eye-in-the-sky endeavor that RT first exposed earlier this year.

“Facial recognition creates acute privacy concerns that fingerprints do not,” US Senator Al Franken (D-Minnesota) told the Senate Judiciary Committee’s subcommittee on privacy, technology and the law earlier this year. “Once someone has your faceprint, they can get your name, they can find your social networking account and they can find and track you in the street, in the stores you visit, the government buildings you enter, and the photos your friends post online.”

In his own testimony, Carnegie Mellon University Professor Alessandro Acquisti said to Sen. Franken, “the convergence of face recognition, online social networks and data mining has made it possible to use publicly available data and inexpensive technologies to produce sensitive inferences merely starting from an anonymous face.”

“Face recognition, like other information technologies, can be source of both benefits and costs to society and its individual members,” Prof. Acquisti added. “However, the combination of face recognition, social networks data and data mining can significant undermine our current notions and expectations of privacy and anonymity.”

With the latest report suggesting the NGI program is now a reality in America, though, it might be too late to try and keep the FBI from interfering with seemingly every aspect of life in the US, both private and public. As of July 18, 2012, the FBI reports, “The NGI program … is on scope, on schedule, on cost, and 60 percent deployed.”

Source

The surveillance state is here, full throttle.

(Source: thepeoplesrecord, via jjarichardson)

— 1 year ago with 325 notes

#creepy  #surveillance  #Big Brother  #Orwellian  #democracy  #privacy  #liberties 

occupyallstreets:

John McCain Introduces CISPA-like Bill

The Strengthening and Enhancing Cybersecurity by Using Research, Education, Information and Technology Act of 2012 (SECURE IT), introduced by Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and widely supported by Republicans, would essentially do the same thing as CISPA.

(via anarcho-queer)

— 2 years ago with 91 notes

#internet freedom  #civil liberties  #privacy  #cispa 
occupyallstreets:

New Internet Service Provider Will Defy Government Surveillance (Must Read)
Nicholas Merrill is planning to revolutionize online privacy with a concept as simple as it is ingenious: a telecommunications provider designed from its inception to shield its customers from surveillance.
Merrill, 39, who previously ran a New York-based Internet provider, told CNET that he’s raising funds to launch a national “non-profit telecommunications provider dedicated to privacy, using ubiquitous encryption” that will sell mobile phone service and, for as little as $20 a month, Internet connectivity.
The ISP would not merely employ every technological means at its disposal, including encryption and limited logging, to protect its customers. It would also — and in practice this is likely more important — challenge government surveillance demands of dubious legality or constitutionality.
By contrast, Merrill says his ISP, to be run by a non-profit called the Calyx Institute with for-profit subsidiaries, will put customers first. “Calyx will use all legal and technical means available to protect the privacy and integrity of user data,” he says.
More (It’s worth the read)

occupyallstreets:

New Internet Service Provider Will Defy Government Surveillance (Must Read)

Nicholas Merrill is planning to revolutionize online privacy with a concept as simple as it is ingenious: a telecommunications provider designed from its inception to shield its customers from surveillance.

Merrill, 39, who previously ran a New York-based Internet provider, told CNET that he’s raising funds to launch a national “non-profit telecommunications provider dedicated to privacy, using ubiquitous encryption” that will sell mobile phone service and, for as little as $20 a month, Internet connectivity.

The ISP would not merely employ every technological means at its disposal, including encryption and limited logging, to protect its customers. It would also — and in practice this is likely more important — challenge government surveillance demands of dubious legality or constitutionality.

By contrast, Merrill says his ISP, to be run by a non-profit called the Calyx Institute with for-profit subsidiaries, will put customers first. “Calyx will use all legal and technical means available to protect the privacy and integrity of user data,” he says.

More (It’s worth the read)

(via anarcho-queer)

— 2 years ago with 885 notes

#internet freedom  #privacy 

theatlantic:

What If Your Emails Never Went to Gmail and Twitter Couldn’t See Your Tweets?

A new tool under development by Oregon State computer scientists could radically alter the way that communications work on the web. Privly is a sort of manifesto-in-code, a working argument for a more private, less permanent Internet. 

The system we have now gives all the power to the service providers. That seemed to be necessary, but Privly shows that it is not: Users could have a lot more power without giving up social networking. Just pointing that out is a valuable contribution to the ongoing struggle to understand and come up with better ways of sharing and protecting ourselves online. 

“Companies like Twitter, Google, and Facebook make you choose between modern technology and privacy. But the Privly developers know this to be false choice,” lead dev Sean McGregor says in the video below. “You can communicate through the site of your choosing without giving the host access to your content.”

Through browser extensions, Privly allows you to post to social networks and send email without letting those services see “into” your text. Instead, your actual words get encrypted and then routed to Privlys servers (or an eventual peer-to-peer network). What the social media site “sees” is merely a link that Privly expands in your browser into the full content. Of course, this requires that people who want to see your content also need Privly installed on their machines.

Read more.

(via anomalisticdotnet)

— 2 years ago with 454 notes

#privacy  #internet privacy 
socialuprooting:

Obama Administration Releasing New Rules To Expand Ability To Hold Citizens’ Data
The U.S. intelligence community will now be able to store information about Americans with no ties to terrorism for up to five years under new Obama administration guidelines.
Until now, the National Counterterrorism Center had to immediately destroy information about Americans that was already stored in other government databases when there were no clear ties to terrorism.
Giving the NCTC expanded record-retention authority had been called for by members of Congress who said the intelligence community did not connect strands of intelligence held by multiple agencies leading up to the failed bombing attempt on a Detroit-bound airliner on Christmas 2009.
“Following the failed terrorist attack in December 2009, representatives of the counterterrorism community concluded it is vital for NCTC to be provided with a variety of datasets from various agencies that contain terrorism information,” Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said in a statement late Thursday. “The ability to search against these datasets for up to five years on a continuing basis as these updated guidelines permit will enable NCTC to accomplish its mission more practically and effectively.”
The new rules replace guidelines issued in 2008 and have privacy advocates concerned about the potential for data-mining information on innocent Americans.
“It is a vast expansion of the government’s surveillance authority,” Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said of the five-year retention period.
The government put in strong safeguards at the NCTC for the data that would be collected on U.S. citizens for intelligence purposes, Rotenberg said. These new guidelines undercut the Federal Privacy Act, he said.
“The fact that this data can be retained for five years on U.S. citizens for whom there’s no evidence of criminal conduct is very disturbing,” Rotenberg said.
“Total Information Awareness appears to be reconstructing itself,” Rotenberg said, referring to the Defense Department’s post-9/11 data-mining research program that was killed in 2003 because of privacy concerns.

socialuprooting:

Obama Administration Releasing New Rules To Expand Ability To Hold Citizens’ Data

The U.S. intelligence community will now be able to store information about Americans with no ties to terrorism for up to five years under new Obama administration guidelines.

Until now, the National Counterterrorism Center had to immediately destroy information about Americans that was already stored in other government databases when there were no clear ties to terrorism.

Giving the NCTC expanded record-retention authority had been called for by members of Congress who said the intelligence community did not connect strands of intelligence held by multiple agencies leading up to the failed bombing attempt on a Detroit-bound airliner on Christmas 2009.

“Following the failed terrorist attack in December 2009, representatives of the counterterrorism community concluded it is vital for NCTC to be provided with a variety of datasets from various agencies that contain terrorism information,” Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said in a statement late Thursday. “The ability to search against these datasets for up to five years on a continuing basis as these updated guidelines permit will enable NCTC to accomplish its mission more practically and effectively.”

The new rules replace guidelines issued in 2008 and have privacy advocates concerned about the potential for data-mining information on innocent Americans.

“It is a vast expansion of the government’s surveillance authority,” Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said of the five-year retention period.

The government put in strong safeguards at the NCTC for the data that would be collected on U.S. citizens for intelligence purposes, Rotenberg said. These new guidelines undercut the Federal Privacy Act, he said.

“The fact that this data can be retained for five years on U.S. citizens for whom there’s no evidence of criminal conduct is very disturbing,” Rotenberg said.

Total Information Awareness appears to be reconstructing itself,” Rotenberg said, referring to the Defense Department’s post-9/11 data-mining research program that was killed in 2003 because of privacy concerns.

(via anarcho-queer)

— 2 years ago with 76 notes

#privacy  #big brother 
It's Official: Google Is Evil Now →

baudelaired:

bellafaim:

In a radical privacy policy shift, Google announced today that it will begin tracking users across all services—email, Search, YouTube and more—sharing information with no option to opt out. The change was announced in a blog post today, and will go into effect March 1.

(via djacidpink)

— 2 years ago with 6070 notes

#privacy  #google  #orwell 
mohandasgandhi:

 
From the Washington Post’s series “Top Secret America”: Monitoring America
 

Nine years after the terrorist attacks of 2001, the United States is  assembling a vast domestic intelligence apparatus to collect information  about Americans, using the FBI, local police, state homeland security  offices and military criminal investigators.
The system, by far  the largest and most technologically sophisticated in the nation’s  history, collects, stores and analyzes information about thousands of  U.S. citizens and residents, many of whom have not been accused of any  wrongdoing.
The government’s goal is to have every state and local  law enforcement agency in the country feed information to Washington to  buttress the work of the FBI, which is in charge of terrorism  investigations in the United States.
Other democracies - Britain  and Israel, to name two - are well acquainted with such domestic  security measures. But for the United States, the sum of these new  activities represents a new level of governmental scrutiny.
This  localized intelligence apparatus is part of a larger Top Secret America  created since the attacks. In July, The Washington Post described an alternative geography of the United States,  one that has grown so large, unwieldy and secretive that no one knows  how much money it costs, how many people it employs or how many programs  exist within it.
Today’s story, along with related material on  The Post’s Web site, examines how Top Secret America plays out at the  local level. It describes a web of 3,984 federal, state and local  organizations, each with its own counterterrorism responsibilities and  jurisdictions. At least 934 of these organizations have been created  since the 2001 attacks or became involved in counterterrorism for the  first time after 9/11.
The months-long investigation, based on nearly 100 interviews and 1,000 documents, found that:
*  Technologies and techniques honed for use on the battlefields of Iraq  and Afghanistan have migrated into the hands of law enforcement agencies  in America.
* The FBI is building a database with the names and  certain personal information, such as employment history, of thousands  of U.S. citizens and residents whom a local police officer or a fellow  citizen believed to be acting suspiciously. It is accessible to an  increasing number of local law enforcement and military criminal  investigators, increasing concerns that it could somehow end up in the  public domain.
* Seeking to learn more about Islam and terrorism,  some law enforcement agencies have hired as trainers self-described  experts whose extremist views on Islam and terrorism are considered  inaccurate and counterproductive by the FBI and U.S. intelligence  agencies.

* The Department of Homeland Security sends its state  and local partners intelligence reports with little meaningful guidance,  and state reports have sometimes inappropriately reported on lawful  meetings.

The need to identify U.S.-born or naturalized citizens who are  planning violent attacks is more urgent than ever, U.S. intelligence  officials say. This month’s FBI sting operation involving a Baltimore  construction worker who allegedly planned to bomb a Maryland military recruiting station is the latest example. It followed a similar arrest of a Somali-born naturalized U.S. citizen allegedly seeking to detonate a bomb near a Christmas tree lighting ceremony in Portland, Ore. There have been nearly two dozen other cases just this year.
“The  old view that ‘if we fight the terrorists abroad, we won’t have to  fight them here’ is just that - the old view,” Homeland Security  Secretary Janet Napolitano told police and firefighters recently.

The Obama administration heralds this local approach as a much-needed evolution in the way the country confronts terrorism.

However, just as at the federal level, the effectiveness of these  programs, as well as their cost, is difficult to determine. The  Department of Homeland Security, for example, does not know how much  money it spends each year on what are known as state fusion centers,  which bring together and analyze information from various agencies  within a state.
The total cost of the localized system is also  hard to gauge. The DHS has given $31 billion in grants since 2003 to  state and local governments for homeland security and to improve their  ability to find and protect against terrorists, including $3.8 billion  in 2010. At least four other federal departments also contribute to  local efforts. But the bulk of the spending every year comes from state  and local budgets that are too disparately recorded to aggregate into an  overall total.
(Read more)

I HIGHLY suggest reading the rest of this article.  This is what I briefly discussed in my previous post highlighting current intelligence concerns.  The Post did an absolutely fantastic job with this piece and it’s a shame it hasn’t gotten more attention.

mohandasgandhi:

From the Washington Post’s series “Top Secret America”: Monitoring America

Nine years after the terrorist attacks of 2001, the United States is assembling a vast domestic intelligence apparatus to collect information about Americans, using the FBI, local police, state homeland security offices and military criminal investigators.

The system, by far the largest and most technologically sophisticated in the nation’s history, collects, stores and analyzes information about thousands of U.S. citizens and residents, many of whom have not been accused of any wrongdoing.

The government’s goal is to have every state and local law enforcement agency in the country feed information to Washington to buttress the work of the FBI, which is in charge of terrorism investigations in the United States.

Other democracies - Britain and Israel, to name two - are well acquainted with such domestic security measures. But for the United States, the sum of these new activities represents a new level of governmental scrutiny.

This localized intelligence apparatus is part of a larger Top Secret America created since the attacks. In July, The Washington Post described an alternative geography of the United States, one that has grown so large, unwieldy and secretive that no one knows how much money it costs, how many people it employs or how many programs exist within it.

Today’s story, along with related material on The Post’s Web site, examines how Top Secret America plays out at the local level. It describes a web of 3,984 federal, state and local organizations, each with its own counterterrorism responsibilities and jurisdictions. At least 934 of these organizations have been created since the 2001 attacks or became involved in counterterrorism for the first time after 9/11.

The months-long investigation, based on nearly 100 interviews and 1,000 documents, found that:

* Technologies and techniques honed for use on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan have migrated into the hands of law enforcement agencies in America.

* The FBI is building a database with the names and certain personal information, such as employment history, of thousands of U.S. citizens and residents whom a local police officer or a fellow citizen believed to be acting suspiciously. It is accessible to an increasing number of local law enforcement and military criminal investigators, increasing concerns that it could somehow end up in the public domain.

* Seeking to learn more about Islam and terrorism, some law enforcement agencies have hired as trainers self-described experts whose extremist views on Islam and terrorism are considered inaccurate and counterproductive by the FBI and U.S. intelligence agencies.

* The Department of Homeland Security sends its state and local partners intelligence reports with little meaningful guidance, and state reports have sometimes inappropriately reported on lawful meetings.

The need to identify U.S.-born or naturalized citizens who are planning violent attacks is more urgent than ever, U.S. intelligence officials say. This month’s FBI sting operation involving a Baltimore construction worker who allegedly planned to bomb a Maryland military recruiting station is the latest example. It followed a similar arrest of a Somali-born naturalized U.S. citizen allegedly seeking to detonate a bomb near a Christmas tree lighting ceremony in Portland, Ore. There have been nearly two dozen other cases just this year.

“The old view that ‘if we fight the terrorists abroad, we won’t have to fight them here’ is just that - the old view,” Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told police and firefighters recently.

The Obama administration heralds this local approach as a much-needed evolution in the way the country confronts terrorism.

However, just as at the federal level, the effectiveness of these programs, as well as their cost, is difficult to determine. The Department of Homeland Security, for example, does not know how much money it spends each year on what are known as state fusion centers, which bring together and analyze information from various agencies within a state.

The total cost of the localized system is also hard to gauge. The DHS has given $31 billion in grants since 2003 to state and local governments for homeland security and to improve their ability to find and protect against terrorists, including $3.8 billion in 2010. At least four other federal departments also contribute to local efforts. But the bulk of the spending every year comes from state and local budgets that are too disparately recorded to aggregate into an overall total.

(Read more)

I HIGHLY suggest reading the rest of this article.  This is what I briefly discussed in my previous post highlighting current intelligence concerns.  The Post did an absolutely fantastic job with this piece and it’s a shame it hasn’t gotten more attention.

(via bohemianarthouse)

— 3 years ago with 48 notes

#surveillance  #privacy  #liberties  #police state  #government  #authoritarian 
"If Facebook wanted radical transparency, they could communicate to users every single person and entity who can see their content. They could notify then when the content is accessed by a partner. They could show them who all is included in “friends-of-friends” (or at least a number of people). They hide behind lists because people’s abstractions allow them to share more. When people think “friends-of-friends” they don’t think about all of the types of people that their friends might link to; they think of the people that their friends would bring to a dinner party if they were to host it. When they think of everyone, they think of individual people who might have an interest in them, not 3rd party services who want to monetize or redistribute their data. Users have no sense of how their data is being used and Facebook is not radically transparent about what that data is used for. Quite the opposite. Convolution works. It keeps the press out. The battle that is underway is not a battle over the future of privacy and publicity. It’s a battle over choice and informed consent. It’s unfolding because people are being duped, tricked, coerced, and confused into doing things where they don’t understand the consequences. Facebook keeps saying that it gives users choices, but that is completely unfair. It gives users the illusion of choice and hides the details away from them “for their own good.”"

apophenia

. :: azspot :: .

— 4 years ago with 15 notes

#privacy  #internet  #internet rights  #facebook 
New Oklahoma Law Will Put Details Of All Abortions Online →

kimclit:seanxvx:

kriiistina:

new Oklahoma law will require the details of every abortion to be posted on a public website. Proponents say this will prevent abortion — apparently by shaming and burdening women and doctors.

Are you fucking serious?

Holy fuck!

— 4 years ago with 155 notes

#privacy  #civil liberties  #misogyny  #reproductive rights