The European Union is seeking to make it easier for police and law enforcement agencies to retrieve electronic evidence from US tech firms, including directly from cloud storage.
The so-called Shadow Brokers, who claimed responsibility for releasing NSA tools that were used to spread the WannaCry ransomware through the NHS and across the world, said they have a new suite of tools and vulnerabilities in newer software. The possible targets include Microsoft’s Windows 10, which was unaffected by the initial attack and is on at least 500m devices around the world.
it’s possible to make sure that your private conversations are actually private. It starts with installing an app known as Signal, and getting your friends to install it too. Then you’ll want to tweak the settings to lock everything down.
Fearless, adversarial journalism that holds the powerful accountable.
From Russian hacking to WikiLeaks, Edward Snowden and CIA cyber weapons, does digital surveillance mean the end of privacy?
Yesterday, WikiLeaks released its latest batch of pilfered CIA material, five documents describing malicious software for taking over Apple MacBooks and iPhones, and wrote in an accompanying post that “the CIA has been infecting the iPhone supply chain of its targets,” prompting concerned readers to wonder if their iPhone or MacBook had been infected on the factory floor. In a statement, Apple says that is almost certainly not the case.
Both the Snowden revelations and the CIA leak highlight the variety of creative techniques intelligence agencies can use to spy on individuals, at a time when many of us are voluntarily giving up our personal data to private companies and installing so-called “smart” devices with microphones (smart TVs, Amazon Echo) in our homes.So, where does this leave us? Is privacy really dead, as Silicon Valley luminaries such as Mark Zuckerberg have previously declared?
It’s difficult to buy a new TV that doesn’t come with a suite of (generally mediocre) “smart” software, giving your home theater some of the functions typically found in phones and tablets. But bringing these extra features into your living room means bringing a microphone, too — a fact the CIA is exploiting, according to a new trove of documents released today by Wikileaks.
Los alcaldes de las comunas acomodadas del sector oriente de Santiago han liderado una iniciativa por sumar tecnología de vigilancia a las medidas para reducir la delincuencia. Esta tendencia fue estrenada por las comunas de Lo Barnechea y Las Condes a mediados del año 2015, al instalar tres globos de video vigilancia de naturaleza militar en sus comunas. Luego de las elecciones municipales de 2016, el alcalde Felipe Alessandri anunció que un globo de similares características sería instalado en la comuna de Santiago, cuya implementación sigue pendiente. Este año el debate ha vuelto a la palestra pública luego del anuncio de las municipalidades de Las Condes y Providencia, quienes pretenden utilizar drones a control remoto equipados cámaras de alta resolución para vigilar los parques y calles de sus comunas para reducir la tasa de criminalidad.
For example, the bureau’s agents can decide that a campus organization is not “legitimate” and therefore not entitled to robust protections for free speech; dig for derogatory information on potential informants without any basis for believing they are implicated in unlawful activity; use a person’s immigration status to pressure them to collaborate and then help deport them when they are no longer useful; conduct invasive “assessments” without any reason for suspecting the targets of wrongdoing; demand that companies provide the bureau with personal data about their users in broadly worded national security letters without actual legal authority to do so; fan out across the internet along with a vast army of informants, infiltrating countless online chat rooms; peer through the walls of private homes; and more. The FBI offered various justifications of these tactics to our reporters. But the documents and our reporting on them ultimately reveal a bureaucracy in dire need of greater transparency and accountability.
Earlier on Wednesday, Maria Zakharova, a foreign ministry spokeswoman, wrote on Facebook that Snowden’s right to stay had recently been extended “by a couple of years”. Her post came in response to a suggestion from the former acting CIA director Michael Morell that Vladimir Putin might hand over Snowden to the US, despite there being no extradition treaty between the countries.
Like most people, I’ve long known that factual falsehoods are routinely published in major media outlets. But as I’ve pointed out before, nothing makes you internalize just how often it really happens, how completely their editorial standards so often fail, like being personally involved in a story that receives substantial media coverage. I cannot count how many times I’ve read or heard claims from major media outlets about the Snowden story that I knew, from first-hand knowledge, were a total fabrication.We have a perfect example of how this happens from the New York Times today, in a book review by Nicholas Lemann, the Pulitzer-Moore professor of journalism at Columbia University as well as a long-time staff writer for The New Yorker.
The European Union’s top court has severely undermined the British government’s mass surveillance powers in a new ruling that could rein in police and spy agency investigations.In a judgment handed down in Luxembourg on Wednesday, the European Court of Justice declared that the “general and indiscriminate retention” of data about people’s communications and locations was inconsistent with privacy rights. The court stated that the “highly invasive” bulk storage of private data “exceeds the limits of what is strictly necessary and cannot be considered to be justified, within a democratic society.”
Perhaps the most controversial aspect of the new law is that it will give the British government the authority to serve internet service providers with a “data retention notice,” forcing them to record and store for up to 12 months logs showing websites visited by all of their customers. Law enforcement agencies will then be able to obtain access to this data without any court order or warrant. In addition, the new powers will hand police and tax investigators the ability to, with the approval of a government minister, hack into targeted phones and computers.
“DeepMind/Google are getting a free pass for swift and broad access into the NHS, on the back of persuasive but unproven promises of efficiency and innovation,” said Ms Powles. “We do not know——and have no power to find out——what Google and DeepMind are really doing with NHS patient data, nor the extent of Royal Free’s meaningful control over what DeepMind is doing.”
A bill giving the UK intelligence agencies and police the most sweeping surveillance powers in the western world has passed into law with barely a whimper, meeting only token resistance over the past 12 months from inside parliament and barely any from outside.The Investigatory Powers Act, passed on Thursday, legalises a whole range of tools for snooping and hacking by the security services unmatched by any other country in western Europe or even the US.
Following on from our recent victory against unlawful surveillance by the British intelligence services, Privacy International is taking the British Government to court again. Why? Because it is using ‘general warrants’ to hack the electronic devices (computers, phones, tablets, and the increasing number of things that ‘connect’ to the internet) of sweeping groups of unidentified people at home and abroad. General warrants permit the government to target wide categories of people, places or property (e.g. all mobile phones in London) without any individualised suspicion of wrongdoing.
He’ll control an unaccountable drone program, and the prison at Guantanamo Bay. His FBI, including a network of 15,000 paid informants, already has a record of spying on mosques and activists, and his NSA’s surveillance empire is ubiquitous and governed by arcane rules, most of which remain secret. He will inherit bombing campaigns in seven Muslim countries, the de facto ability to declare war unilaterally, and a massive nuclear arsenal — much of which is on hair-trigger alert.
While most eyes are focused on the presidential race between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, three major events prove how widespread, and dangerous, mass surveillance has become in the West. Standing alone, each event highlights exactly the severe threats that motivated Edward Snowden to blow his whistle; taken together, they constitute full-scale vindication of everything he’s done.
While cybersecurity companies traditionally aim to ensure that the code in software and hardware is free of flaws — mistakes that malicious hackers can take advantage of — DarkMatter, according to sources familiar with the company’s activities, was trying to find and exploit these flaws in order to install malware. DarkMatter could take over a nearby surveillance camera or cellphone and basically do whatever it wanted with it — conduct surveillance, interfere with or change any electronic messages it emitted, or block the signals entirely.
Fuente: Spies for Hire
Estamos orgullosos de anunciar el lanzamiento de “Ojos que no parpadean: El estado de la vigilancia en América Latina”, un proyecto que analiza las leyes y prácticas de vigilancia en doce países de América Latina. Por más de un año, EFF trabajó con nuestros partners en América Latina (Red en Defensa de los Derechos Digitales, Fundación Karisma, TEDIC, Centro de Estudios en Libertad de Expresión y Acceso a la Información, Hiperderecho, Derechos Digitales, InternetLab, Fundación Acceso), documentando y publicando informes individuales que analizaban el estado de la vigilancia en doce países. Entonces, a partir de esa investigación, EFF elaboró un informe más amplio que compara las leyes y prácticas de vigilancia en Argentina, Brasil, Chile, Colombia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Perú, México, Nicaragua, Paraguay y Uruguay.
América Latina tiene un triste historial de autoritarismo y gobiernos que han buscado utilizar el aparato estatal para controlar a sus ciudadanos. Más preocupante que esta constatación es el hecho de que, pasadas varias décadas del período dictatorial de nuestro continente, los gobiernos latinoamericanos parecen empecinados en retroceder, en vez de avanzar, en estándares de Derechos Humanos en temas de vigilancia y privacidad.
Contrary to a denial by Yahoo and a report by the New York Times, the company’s scanning program, revealed earlier this week by Reuters, provided the government with a custom-built back door into the company’s mail service — and it was so sloppily installed that it posed a privacy hazard for hundreds of millions of users, according to a former Yahoo employee with knowledge of the company’s security practices.
By what legal authority do the National Security Agency and the FBI ask Yahoo to search its users’ emails? Neither the government nor the tech company would say, after Reuters first reported on Tuesday that Yahoo “secretly built a custom software program” it used on behalf of the NSA and CIA to scan customer emails.
Finally, Yahoo’s possible betrayal of its users is another example of why whistleblowers and leaks to the press are so important. The US government considers this type of surveillance “legal” even though it shocks the conscience of many ordinary Americans and dozens of civil liberties groups have been attempting to have courts rule it illegal for years.
Yahoo last year secretly built a custom software program to search all of its customers’ incoming emails for specific information provided by US intelligence officials, sources have told Reuters.The company complied with a classified US government directive, scanning hundreds of millions of Yahoo Mail accounts at the behest of the National Security Agency (NSA) or FBI, said two former employees and a third person who knew about the programme.
Ten organizations – including Privacy International, the American Civil Liberties Union, and Amnesty International – are taking up the landmark case against the U.K. government in the European Court of Human Rights (pictured above). In a 115-page complaint released on Thursday, the groups allege that “blanket and indiscriminate” surveillance operations carried out by British spy agencies in collaboration with their U.S. counterparts violate privacy and freedom of expression rights.
America has always had an underground sex trade, and for decades most pimps followed the same general script: they’d recruit sex workers on the street, in bars and in strip clubs.But over the past 20 years, the internet has become the major marketplace for the sex trade, with online advertisements and recruitment through social media sites greatly expanding the reach and enhancing the elusiveness of pimps.
Nadie quiere vivir en una ciudad tonta. La idea de marketing detrás de las Smart Cities -así, en inglés, porque le da un toque de modernidad a lo Silicon Valley- es, en ese sentido, impecable. Pero ¿podemos si quiera considerar a una ciudad como estúpida? Al parecer, para los evangelistas de las ciudades inteligentes, y siguiendo la lógica de los pares binarios (bueno/malo; inteligente/tonto), sí.
Con mucho orgullo y de manera oficial, Derechos Digitales presenta hoy la Amistosa Caja Anti Vigilancia, un conjunto de herramientas y consejos prácticos que te ayudarán a resguardar mejor tu información personal y la de otros. Pareciera ser que hoy más que nunca es necesario proteger nuestros datos, pues siempre hay alguien intentando acceder a ellos: empresas privadas, cibercriminales y el mismo Estado.
in the heart of the tranquil English countryside, is the National Security Agency’s largest overseas spying base. Originally used to monitor Soviet communications through the Cold War, its focus has since dramatically shifted, and today it is a vital part of the NSA’s sprawling global surveillance network.
The bulk collection of personal data by British spy agencies is vital in preventing terrorist attacks, an independent review of draft security legislation has found.David Anderson QC, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, concluded that laws giving MI5, MI6 and GCHQ the right to gather large volumes of data from members of the public had a “clear operational purpose”.