Tag Archives: privacy

Social Media is Not Your Friend

20 Saturday Apr 2019

Posted by in News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on Social Media is Not Your Friend

Tags

, , , ,

Just last weekend, someone told me that I really, really, really need to get on the Gram, Instagram. I never entertained the thought, even before I found out that Facebook owns Insta. And, surprise! they’re pulling the usual Farceberg tricks on the Gram too.

Given the terrible run of form it’s been on over the last year, it probably shouldn’t be that surprising that Facebook waited until the highly anticipated report on Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election to deliver some bad news.

While just about every reporter was poring over the document, Facebook updated a blog post from March indicating that passwords had been exposed, stored as readable text (as opposed to securely encrypted), for hundreds of millions of Facebook users and thousands of Instagram users. It added a new paragraph to the middle of the post today indicating that a lot more Instagram users were affected than it originally thought:

(Update on April 18, 2019 at 7AM PT: Since this post was published, we discovered additional logs of Instagram passwords being stored in a readable format. We now estimate that this issue impacted millions of Instagram users. We will be notifying these users as we did the others. Our investigation has determined that these stored passwords were not internally abused or improperly accessed).

Just a small update from “thousands” to “millions,” then.

Facebook said it would notify the impacted users and that there’s no evidence that anyone within or outside Facebook had access to the passwords. But still, those users, and perhaps anyone else, might want to change their password or enable two-factor authenticationjust to make sure. That’s never a bad idea anyway.

Now that I know what Instagram is and who runs it, there is no way in hell I’d have anything to do with it. If you’re okay with all of this, and most users are, then enjoy your post-literate pictures and videos and the loss of even the pretense of privacy.

Investigate Zuckerberg for Privacy Piracy, Whatever

19 Friday Apr 2019

Posted by in Legal/Political Columns

≈ Comments Off on Investigate Zuckerberg for Privacy Piracy, Whatever

Tags

, ,

Ha! Here we go:

Screenshot 2019-04-19 at 8.07.29 AM

From the Washington Post’s Tech Page.

Federal regulators investigating Facebook for mishandling its users’ personal information have set their sights on the company’s chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, exploring his past statements on privacy and weighing whether to seek new, heightened oversight of his leadership.

The discussions about how to hold Zuckerberg accountable for Facebook’s data lapses have come in the context of wide-ranging talks between the Federal Trade Commission and Facebook that could settle the government’s more than year-old probe, according to two people familiar with the discussions. Both requested anonymity because the FTC’s inquiry is confidential under law.

If there’s to be no prison, then how about this: each individual account compromise amounts to a single regulatory violation, max fine for each violation, and the problem is $olved.

Why Would Anyone Want a New Car?

12 Friday Apr 2019

Posted by in News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on Why Would Anyone Want a New Car?

Tags

, , ,

Or, more accurately, a spy computer on wheels.

If you’re driving a late model car or truck, chances are that the vehicle is mostly computers on wheels, collecting and wirelessly transmitting vast quantities of data to the car manufacturer not just on vehicle performance but personal information, too, such as your weight, the restaurants you visit, your music tastes and places you go.

A car can generate about 25 gigabytes of data every hour and as much as 4,000 gigabytes a day, according to some estimates. The data trove in the hands of car makers could be worth as much as $750 billion by 2030, the consulting firm McKinsey has estimated. But consumer groups, aftermarket repair shops and privacy advocates say the data belongs to the car’s owners and the information should be subject to data privacy laws.

And, Congress fails to act for the people. Surprise, surprise.

It has been some time but I have covered this topic before. That was over four years ago. Things have changed; it’s worse now.  The alternatives are slim. One can get a used car as an end-around. But, one has to go back 20 years or so for a guarantee. Why do you think they did cash for clunkers?

Another possibility is for someone in tech to design a blocker or a patch that masks the car’s multiple computers. This is probably illegal. Congress, never quick to act for us, has acted for “them;” the car companies have proprietary software. You either take it to their dealership or to an independent who pays a fee for access. And, the way these things work, masking or shutting off the CPU may well totally disable the car.

We’ve been backed into a corner for a reason – total control. They will soon try to mandate automated bot cars that you can’t control and which log your every move. Goodbye, last shreds of freedom.

The only other possibility I can think of is a reverse EM shield that stops outward wireless transmissions. They’ll probably make that illegal too.

Drive on.

Kiss Internet Privacy Goodbye?

20 Thursday Sep 2018

Posted by in Legal/Political Columns

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

A “fight” looms:

Now industry groups are pushing Congress to pass a national privacy bill that would block states from implementing their own standards.

Privacy advocates are skeptical of the industry proposals and concerned that internet giants will co-opt the process in order to get protections that are weaker than the California standard implemented across the country.

“They do not want effective oversight. They do not want regulation of their business practices, which is really urgently needed,” Jeff Chester, the executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy (CDD), told The Hill. “They’re going to work behind the scenes to shape legislation that will not protect Americans from having all of their information regularly gathered and used by these digital giants.”

“They see federal law as an opportunity to preempt stronger rules,” he added.

Next week, executives from Google, Apple, AT&T and other major technology and telecommunications companies will testify before the Senate Commerce Committee as the panel’s Republican chairman, Sen. John Thune (S.D.), prepares to introduce a new privacy law.

I noted this potential probability back in April in a TPC column:

His other motive was the afore-mentioned collusion. A dirty little secret of the political world is that large corporations are absolutely, head over heels, in love with government regulation. State mandates price out competition, prevent startup challenges, foster monopolies, and raise profits. One of “your” political heroes hinted around this fact; Zuck nodded along sheepishly.

And preempt stronger rules. One will note that its the giant tech companies that are invited to speak to Congress, the same companies with a history of privacy violation, spying, and selling to the highest bidder. I imagine the law, as they want it, is already drafted. Just a matter of bribes now.

Another Rare (Odd) Victory for the Fourth Amendment

22 Friday Sep 2017

Posted by in Legal/Political Columns

≈ Comments Off on Another Rare (Odd) Victory for the Fourth Amendment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Another court has quashed the warrantless use of “Stingray” devices by the police.

A device that tricks cellphones into sending it their location information and has been used quietly by police and federal agents for years, requires a search warrant before it is turned on, an appeals court in Washington ruled Thursday. It is the fourth such ruling by either a state appeals court or federal district court, and may end up deciding the issue unless the government takes the case to the U.S. Supreme Court or persuades the city’s highest court to reverse the ruling.

The case against Prince Jones in 2013 involved D.C. police use of a “StingRay” cell-site simulator, which enables law enforcement to pinpoint the location of a cellphone more precisely than a phone company can when triangulating a signal between cell towers or using a phone’s GPS function. Civil liberties advocates say the StingRay, by providing someone’s location to police without court approval, is a violation of an individual’s Fourth Amendment right not to be unreasonably searched. The D.C. Court of Appeals agreed in a 2 to 1 ruling, echoing similar rulings in the Maryland Court of Special Appeals and federal district courts in New York City and San Francisco.

For those only concerned with “law and order,” this was just a case of bad police work. That is why all of their evidence and any hope of subsequent conviction is gone. The perp had two stolen cellphones in his possession, either of which could have been tapped with explicit permission. Instead, they opted to spy directly on the bad guy’s phone, sans the warrant. You get what you pay for – or skip.

As a victory, I’m sure there is a technological way around all of this anyway. That, or the Supremes will ultimately find that such illegal spying is really just a tax or something.

For now, it’s another small victory for the Bill of Rights.

Cashing Out: The Banksters Wage War On You

17 Thursday Nov 2016

Posted by in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Power. Unlimited power!

Such was the battle cry of Darth Sidious in one of those Star Wars movies, one of the new ones that didn’t stink too bad. It’s the real cry of Darth Citious, a.k.a. Citibank. Theirs is a quest for unlimited power through total control of the economy, your finances included.

Cash money is one of the very last safety measures for privacy in a world gone mad. Citi wants to eliminate cash.

Less than a week after India’s surprise move to scrap its highest denomination cash notes, another front in the War on Cash has intensified down under in Australia.

Yesterday, banking giant UBS proposed that eliminating Australia’s $100 and $50 bills would be “good for the economy and good for the banks.”

(How convenient that a bank would propose something that’s good for banks!)

This isn’t the first time that the financial establishment has pushed for a cashless society in Australia (or anywhere else).

In September 2015, Australian bank Westpac published its “Cash Free Report”, suggesting that the country would become cashless by 2022.

In July 2016, Australian payments firm Tyro published an enormously self-serving blog post touting the benefits of a cashless society and saying, “it’s only a matter of time.”

Most notably, two days ago, Citibank (yes, THAT Citibank) announced that it was going cashless at some of its Australian branches.

…

Bank deposits would rise as a result, and consequently, so would bank profits.

Governments would benefit from a cashless society because all savings would be in the banking system, and they have full regulatory control over the banks.

This means that your politicians would have more control over your savings and fewer obstacles to impose capital controls or engage in Civil Asset Forfeiture.

Even policy wonk academics would have a rare opportunity to take their lousy theories and PhD dissertations for a test drive.

Everyone benefits from a cashless society… except for you.

For individuals, cash still has plenty of important advantages.

Cash is one of the few remaining options for financial privacy that doesn’t create a permanent record of every purchase or transaction you make.

It’s also an easy way to reduce your exposure to risks in the broader financial system.

Think about it– the banking system is full of institutions that never miss an opportunity to demonstrate they cannot be trusted with our money.

Hardly a month goes by without some major banking scandal; they’re caught colluding on exchange rates, manipulating interest rates, fraudulently establishing fake accounts without customer consent (and then charging us fees on top of that).

It’s disgraceful.

That it is. Good for the banks, good for the government, bad for you. Decrease your security and privacy so banks can make higher profits and government can do what they do worst.

fbf146d521509678306fd828b82b6f8458c28c5f92c013b11c4705762635be24

Quickmeme / Lucas / Fox.

Bankster pirates and government highwaymen in the U.S. and in Europe are itching to get rid of cash. I’m sure Citi’s Australian experiment is a trial run for global implementation.

What to do about it? For now, if your bank goes cashless, close your accounts there. Tell them why in no uncertain terms. If you hit them where it hurts, they’ll stop. That or other, more honest banks will fill the void. And vote out any political rat who backs cashless totalitarianism or who supports the banking cartel. For every rodent, a trap.

This issue doesn’t get the coverage it should. Digital money in a bank’s computer is just that. Whatever it is, it is theirs. They’ll have total control over everything you “own” and they’ll be more than willing to share it with the state. The state will be more than willing to take it. This is to be the biggest reverse bank robbery in history. Treat it as such.

They Really Don’t Need a Stinking Warrant

01 Wednesday Jun 2016

Posted by in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

America: THE land of freedom, right? Well, economically speaking, we certainly are freer than most of the world, say countries like Somalia or North Korea. It terms of developed, civilized nations, we’re number 11.

nimbus-image-1464816580423

Freedom Index 2016, Heritage.

Switzerland and Australia are numbers 4 and 5 under “free” by the way. Again, that’s economic freedom or the lack thereof – taxes, business regs, etc.

In terms of personal freedom America is nowhere near where it used to be. Those specific rights protected by the Constitution are all but a memory. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals just sided with the 5th, 6th and 11th Circuits to deep-six the Fourth Amendment and the protection against unreasonable searches of persons, papers, and things.

When law enforcement asks a company for cellphone records to track location data in an investigation, is that a search under the Fourth Amendment?

By a 12-3 vote, appellate court judges in Richmond, Virginia, on Monday ruled that it is not — and therefore does not require a warrant.

The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld what is known as the third-party doctrine: a legal theory suggesting that consumers who knowingly and willingly surrender information to third parties therefore have “no reasonable expectation of privacy” in that information — regardless of how much information there is, or how revealing it is.

Research clearly shows that cell-site location data collected over time can reveal a tremendous amount of personal information — like where you live, where you work, when you travel, who you meet with, and who you sleep with. And it’s impossible to make a call without giving up your location to the cellphone company.

This issue will likely make it to the high court one day where this precedent will be upheld. The developing theory is that no-one, outside of government criminals like Hillary Clinton, has any right or expectation to privacy – anywhere or regarding anything.

Google.

There are ways around such blatantly  Unconstitutional measures. However, the “law” has decided that taken such tactical precautions is evidence of wrong-doing all by itself. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. Such measures also elude the technical capabilities of most people anyway.

The worn-out line of the sheep goes: “If you’re not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about.” Two problems there: 1) you don’t know what they consider “wrong”, and; 2) how about when the government is wrong? What then? Move to a freer country? There are at least ten out there – one right next door to the U.S. Sit in your house and do absolutely nothing? That can be considered an indication of criminal intent or an invitation for a “welfare check-in” by the police.

The odds are you do not have anything to worry about. Obey the government in general, don’t make any waves, and they will probably leave you alone. Probably was not what the Founders had in mind with the Bill of Rights though. They desired protection from ALL government overreach.

Overreach is all the government does these days. I noted the other day that the FDA is out to kill off the cigar industry. The draconian regulations are about to begin. I’ve got a lot more coming on that soon. Please note thought, if you read my thoughts on a cellular device (or most any device) the cops may be watching. Worried about that? You should be…

Hertz Films You in the Driver’s Seat

18 Wednesday Mar 2015

Posted by in News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on Hertz Films You in the Driver’s Seat

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

Lately I’ve been harping on spying, hacking, drones, etc. a bit more than I might.  But, darn, things these days are just ridiculous.  Just when one thinks Big Brother can’t get any more intrusive – Hertz puts cameras in its rental cars!

The rental car giant has a little navigation device in some of its cars called NeverLost. Some of these units are equipped with a camera which is capable of filming the inside of the car.  “Hertz added the camera as a feature of the NeverLost 6 in the event it was decided, in the future, to activate live agent connectivity to customers by video.”

screen-shot-2015-03-13-at-6-19-14-am

(Every turn you make, every call you take…  Fusion.com.)

Of course, it will only be used to “help” hapless drivers – clovers on vacation.  They would never spy on you, record your doings, or pass said recordings along to our benevolent friends in the government.  “See Judge, the defendant was eating a cheeseburger when he sped through the red light.  Here’s a video!”

This is getting out of hand.  Remember, the next time you rent a car play the radio really loud and put some electrical tape over the little camera in the dash.  Then again, that would probably violate some idiotic law – the Interstate Rental Car Secret Surveillance Security, Anti-Terrorism, and Education/Agriculture Banking Act of 2015…  Geesh…..

 

 

The Unfriendly Skies: Drones Banned In Augusta

18 Wednesday Mar 2015

Posted by in Legal/Political Columns, News and Notes

≈ Comments Off on The Unfriendly Skies: Drones Banned In Augusta

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Should you have the honor of attending this years Masters Tournament you may breathe easy – no pesky drones will disturb your golf gazing.  I doubt you were concerned to begin with.  You probably hadn’t even considered the idea.

Never apt to miss out on a non-issue the idiots of the Augusta City Commission has outlawed the (private) use of unmanned aircraft during this year’s tournament. “Hoping to prevent a drone disruption at this year’s Masters Tournament, Augusta commissioners approved a county-wide ban on launching or operating the remote-controlled aircraft between April 2 and April 13.”  Susan McCord, Drone ban in effect April 2-13, Augusta (GA) Chronicle, March 18, 2015.

The reasoning behind the ban is as solid as the air above the Augusta National: “Drones ‘have gotten very sophisticated,’ and Augusta has a ‘very big, international event’ coming up, said sheriff’s Col. Robert Partain.”  This is as logically connected as saying there are a lot of people in India and pillows are very soft, thus we must own lawnmowers…

drone1

(Bad drone.  Google Images.)

I was not present for the drafting, discussion or voting on this ordinance.  I really don’t think that matters.  The thing smells funny.  The Chronicle mentions a single incident whereby an event was disrupted by a drone – one event in Europe.  I have heard of no threat posed by non-government drones in America.  Government drones are another story; see: Don’t Drone Me, Bro! and Droning On and On.

Drone11111111-156150-165663-166189-172588-640x480

(Good drone.  Google.)

Other American cities (Charlottesville, VA, Syracuse, NY, etc.) have previously banned drones.  However, their bans are directed towards drones nefariously used by government agents in an effort to defend civil liberties.  Charlottesville, home of Thomas Jefferson’s home and University, has a “long tradition of promoting civil liberties.” Augusta has a long tradition of the opposite kind.

Here follows the pertinent and sensible resolutions of Syracuse’s ordinance:

BE IT RESOLVED, that this Resolution declares that no agency of the City of Syracuse, nor any agents under contract with the City, will operate Drones in the airspace over the City of Syracuse until federal and state laws, rules and regulations regarding the use of Drones are adopted that adequately protects the privacy of the population as guaranteed by the First and Fourth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Syracuse Common Council urges our Federal and State officials to create and adopt such laws, rules and regulations regarding the use of Drones which ensures Constitutional protections of individuals; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that, to the extent permitted by law, it is the policy of this Common Council that no Drones will be purchased, leased, borrowed, tested or otherwise utilized by the City of Syracuse or its agencies, directly or through contract, until such Constitutional safeguards are in place, the appropriate personnel are trained and fully authorized by the FAA to safely operate Drones and that the Corporation Counsel of the City of Syracuse certifies that all City of Syracuse personnel engaged in the use of Drones have been trained in federal, state and local privacy laws, regulations, and enforcement mechanisms affecting drone operations and any data collected by drone operations…

Note that this ordinance is aimed at ensuring “Constitutional protections of individuals.” The Georgia version ensures a media monopoly for a single sporting event at the expense of the liberty of hundreds of thousands of individuals in the surrounding area. It is as stupid and illegal as it is unnecessary.

The National naturally desires to keep the most prestigious sporting event in the world private.  That is understandable; they have a right to privacy.  Happily, their rights and the rights of their patrons and golfers are protected by existing laws.  Flying a drone over the property without permission already would constitute a trespass and a nuisance – prohibited by both existing criminal and civil tort law.

Now, should you, as a news reporter, wish to film from the air the crowd entering the National patron gate, you are out of luck.  If you’re the President needing to remotely bomb demonstrators (terrorists), no problem.  A real estate broker surveying land, not this week.  A cop spying on a gardener, sure, why not.  Concerned citizen keeping an eye on one of the cops’ illegal roadblocks, you are a criminal.  See where this is going?

Something tells me that, if challenged, the Augusta ordinance will fall in Court – after the tournament is over, of course.  I have already heard of plans to defy the law.  One aviator proposes to use a balloon or kite to launch a camera skyward.  Whether the city defines these devices as drones or not they will likely prosecute this man.  They will lose. They will face a lawsuit.  Those hundreds of thousands of citizens whose liberties have been infringed will be forced to pay damages.  Sadly, those citizens will continue to re-elect the Commission.  The beat goes on.

If you come to Augusta for the tournament, enjoy it.  You’ll have a great, drone free experience.  If you live in the Garden City, consider moving somewhere else where your rights are valued.