Wire Encrypted Messenger

 

Wire is a cross-platform, encrypted instant messaging client created by Wire Swiss. It is available for iOS, Android, Linux, Windows, macOS and Web browser clients. It uses the Internet to make voice and video calls; send text messages, files, images, videos, audio files and user drawings depending on the clients used. It can be used on any of the available clients, requiring a phone number or email for registration. It is hosted inside the European Union and protected by European Union laws. Many employees working on Wire have previously worked with Skype, and Skype's co-founder Janus Friis is backing the project. Audio quality is one of Wire's key selling points. https://wire.com/en/

Wire offers end-to-end encryption using the Proteus protocol which is based on the fully audited and secure Signal protocol from Open Whisper Systems. Wire's video and audio calls are protected by SRTP and DTLS and all communication with the server is done over a secure TLS connection. The software uses cryptographic fingerprints that users can compare to assure that their communication is secure and not being intercepted by a "man in the middle".

Wire boasts high quality voice calls, although this is something that has come to be expected from voice messaging apps. It should also be stated that, unlike Skype, Wire is not able to call standard telephone numbers; all calls have to be to other Wire users. It should be noted that also, unlike Skype, calls between Wire users are very secure.

Wire Swiss, the company behind Wire, has progressively made less and less information about its users available to even themselves. Before 23 March, 2017, Wire only stored user generated information for 72 hours after which the logs were scrubbed. As of 23 March, however, the company announced that they no longer store any data about users calling habits, preventing anyone from having even passing access to that information. Unlike Signal, Wire does not require a telephone number in order to sign up meaning that the user can easily sign up to the service and remain near completely anonymous. Since Wire does not store information about users or their calling habits, it is therefore unable to share such information with advertisers and/or law enforcement.

Wire is free for personal use or 5 Euro per month for a business license. Download your copy of Wire here https://wire.com/en/pricing/

I have only recently started using Wire, but so far I have had no issues with it whatsoever. It works well, and the security it adds to one's communications is impressive. As another tool for securing your personal communications, I think it is definitely worth while to add Wire to your communications options.

Read Wire’s independent security review.

And the discussion of that review on TechCrunch: Messaging app Wire now has an external audit of its e2e crypto

Signal Private Messenger

 

Signal is a free and open source software application for Android, iOS, and Desktop that employs end-to-end encryption, allowing users to send end-to-end encrypted group, text, picture, and video messages, and have encrypted phone conversations between Signal users. Although Signal uses telephone numbers as contacts, encrypted calls and messages actually use your data connection; therefore both parties to the conversation must have Internet access on their mobile devices.

 

Now, I don't suggest that Signal should be the only secure messaging app that you use, but it absolutely should be one of the secure messaging apps that you have installed on your smartphone and desktop. Signal is well-proven and highly secure. It is cross-platform, so whether you use Android, iOS, or the Desktop application you have secure communications.    

 

Installing Signal - Private Messenger on your iPhone  

Installing Signal on your Android phone 

Installing Signal on your Desktop

Signal, the secure messaging app: a guide for beginners

How to Use Signal Without Giving Out Your Phone Number (Micah Lee, Sept. 28, 2017)

12 Signal App Tips for Secure Chats

Introduction to Signal Private Messenger (Video 16:25 min)

Surveillance and Counter-Surveillance

Responding to a troubling rise in law enforcement’s use of high-tech surveillance devices that are often hidden from the communities where they’re used, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) launched the Street-Level Surveillance Project (SLS), a Web portal loaded with comprehensive, easy-to-access information on police spying tools like license plate readers, biometric collection devices, and "Stingrays". Law enforcement agencies at the federal, state, and local level are increasingly using sophisticated tools to track our cell phone calls, photograph our vehicles and follow our driving patterns, take our pictures in public places, and collect our fingerprints and DNA. But the public doesn’t know much about those tools and how they are used. The SLS Project provides a simple but in-depth look at how these surveillance technologies work, who makes and uses them, and what kind of data they are collecting.  

 

https://www.eff.org/issues/street-level-surveillance

 



Security & Counter-Surveillance: Information Against the Police State

 

 

New Hi-Tech Police Surveillance: The "StingRay" Cell Phone Spying Device

Blocked by a Supreme Court decision from using GPS tracking devices without a warrant, federal investigators and other law enforcement agencies are turning to a new, more powerful and more threatening technology in their bid to spy more freely on those they suspect of drug crimes. That’s leading civil libertarians, electronic privacy advocates, and even some federal judges to raise the alarm about a new surveillance technology whose use has yet to be taken up definitively by the federal courts. The new surveillance technology is the StingRay (also marketed as Triggerfish, IMSI Catcher, Cell-site Simulator or Digital Analyzer), a sophisticated, portable spy device able to track cell phone signals inside vehicles, homes and insulated buildings. StingRay trackers act as fake cell towers, allowing police investigators to pinpoint location of a targeted wireless mobile by sucking up phone data such as text messages, emails and cell-site information.

 

(Video: How do Stingray, IMSI Catchers and Cell Tower Simulators Work?)

 

 

 A Secret Catalogue of Government Gear for Spying on Your Cellphone

 

  

          https://goo.gl/qAecai

 

 

 

The Motherboard Guide to Not Getting Hacked

 

Digital Security Low Hanging Fruit

 

Digital Security and Privacy for Human Rights Defenders

 

 





Privacy Resources

 

Maintaining your personal privacy requires that you are aware of the threats to your privacy, have knowledge of the things you can do to safeguard your personal information, and have access to resources to apply that knowledge in an effective manner. The following privacy resources can help you protect yourself from an ever-increasing number of threats that target our private information and infringe upon our right to personal privacy. 

 



EFF Privacy

New technologies are radically advancing our freedoms, but they are also enabling unparalleled invasions of privacy. National and international laws have yet to catch up with the evolving need for privacy that comes with new digital technologies. Respect for individuals' autonomy, anonymous speech, and the right to free association must be balanced against legitimate concerns like law enforcement.

Library Freedom Project - Online Privacy Basics

Perfect for anyone regardless of skill level, this course starts by explaining basic privacy concepts and outlines different steps you can take today to live a more private, secure life. Learn the best practices of passwords, surfing the web, and how to communicate without fear of creepy surveillance.

 

EPIC Online Guide to Practical Privacy Tools

 

Golden Frog Internet Privacy Guides

 

The Ultimate Online Privacy Guide

Restore Privacy - Your Online Privacy Resource Center

Portland Community College - Privacy Online: Privacy 101

Auburn University - Best Practices for Protecting Data within the Office Environment

University of Michigan - Privacy: Recommended Resources

Privacy Journal

Privacy Rights Clearinghouse

Privacy Tools

World Privacy Forum

Wikipedia - Privacy

Microsoft Online Privacy Resources

Resisting Doxing & Protecting Privacy: Resources For Vulnerable People

Jolly Roger's Security Guide for Beginners

Security In A Box - Digital Security Tools and Tactics

EFF Surveillance Self-Defense

Encryption Works - A Guide to Protecting Your Privacy

PRISM Break



Using MS Outlook Auto Archive

 

Do you use MS Outlook to send and receive e-mail, a common practice in many business settings? Has your e-mail become a filing cabinet filled with months, or even years of old messages? Do any of these old messages contain sensitive or personal information?

 

Keeping a large number of old e-mails creates a target for hackers and cyber-criminals. As an OPSEC best practice you should not retain old e-mail within MS Outlook. Once you have read and if necessary responded to an e-mail, you should delete that e-mail from the system. The Auto Archive Settings in MS Outlook will allow you to do this automatically.

To set-up Auto Archives click on:  File - Options - Advanced - AutoArchive Settings...

The Auto Archive Settings allow you to set a frequency in days, week, or months for items to be cleaned out of your e-mail folders. It is a good idea to delete e-mail that is more than a month old. This keeps your e-mail folders small, and reduces that amount of information that could be compromised if your e-mail account was hacked. Establishing an e-mail retention policy that requires e-mail to be deleted on a frequent basis helps to shield you against records requests, discovery motions, journalistic queries, and government seizures. You can’t be forced to disclose that which doesn’t exist. If there is an e-mail that you think you may need more than a month after you received it, you can always save it to an encrypted folder on your computer.

 



Should You Take a Field Sobriety Test?

 



You’ve been stopped by the police, and the officer asks that you perform a standardized field sobriety test (SFST), or that you submit to a preliminary breath test (PBT). Should you take these road-side tests? Maybe you’ve had a couple of drinks, maybe you’re stone cold sober, but in all cases the opinion of attorneys in Washington State seems to be that You Should Not Submit to the SFST or PBT. These road-side tests are voluntary and submitting to these tests cannot benefit you, but they can provide the police officer with the probable cause needed to arrest you.

 

In Washington State, the courts have held that your refusal to submit to SFST or PBT can be used at trial to show “consciousness of guilt”.  Of course, this could be the case, but another reasonable explanation for refusing to submit to SFST and PBT is that legal counsel advises you not to submit to these tests.  Below are the recommendations from a dozen Washington attorneys, as published on their web-sites, concerning field sobriety tests. 

 

Emerald City Law Group, Seattle, WA 98119
I have a blanket rule - always say no. Even if you are stone cold sober, refuse to participate in these tests [field sobriety tests]... in Washington State, at least, you do not have to take field tests. You can say no without fear of any retribution whatsoever (you might get arrested, but you’re probably getting arrested anyway). You may be thinking, "even if I do bad on the tests and I’m sober my breath test level will come up low and I’ll be released." Think again. You do not have to have a breath test over .08 to be charged with DUI. If your breath test is under .08 they will use whatever other evidence they have to try to convict you - LIKE YOUR PERFORMANCE ON FIELD TESTS!

 

Webb Law Firm, Seattle, WA 98101
I'm always asked whether someone should (or more commonly should have) take field sobriety tests when asked.  My common answer is no!  Now there is new case law in Washington, specifically State v. Mecham, wherein the court held that although the tests are voluntary the "refusal" to participate in them can be used to show a consciousness of guilt!  Really!  If you decline a voluntary test a prosecutor can say you are guilty?  Yup, according to our Washington State Court of Appeals...  In response, what I would recommend is that you make sure and point out the reason you are declining the tests, some examples would be: (1) a prior or current injury, (2) I was advised to do so by an attorney, (3) if you aren't going to record them I don't want to take them because you could say I "failed" when I didn't, (4) I've been advised they are impossible to pass, they are subjective, and I don't believe I am guilty but I am declining these tests.

Cowan, Kirk, Kattenhorn Law Firm, Kirkland, WA 98033
Do I have to take the "field sobriety tests?" - Unlike blood and breath testing, submitting to "field sobriety tests" is strictly voluntary, although few police officers will tell you so. In many respects, these tests are designed for failure and of the several tests the officer might ask you to take, only three have been shown to have any relevance to proving legal intoxication...

Dellino Law Group, Seattle, WA 98134
Drivers have no obligation to submit to any field sobriety tests or answer any questions by the officer. Until the driver is officially detained and charged with a DUI, they have the right to refrain from all of this. The officer may say that it will go better for them if they submit to the tests or are honest about drinking, but this is rarely the case. The officer wants probable cause or an admission of guilt so that they can make the arrest and legally require the driver to take a chemical BAC test. Never submit to a field sobriety test, regardless of what type of situation you’re in.

Blair | Kim, Attorneys At Law, Seattle, WA 98121
As a driver, you should keep in mind that you are not required by Washington State law to take these tests, and you should respectfully decline these tests so that evidence cannot be used against you. The only tests that you are actually required to take are the evidential chemical tests that are administered at the jail, hospital or police station.

 

Raymond W. Ejarque, Attorney At Law, Tacoma, WA 98402
The field sobriety tests are voluntary, which means you have every right to politely decline the tests and diminish the strength of the State’s case if you are inevitably charged with a DUI. These tests are pretty challenging in nature and the nervousness that follows law enforcement can make them even more difficult. This is the reasoning behind our suggestion to decline all types of field sobriety tests while simultaneously remaining cooperative with law enforcement.

 

Matthew R. Hoff, Attorney At Law, Vancouver, WA 98663
These tests [field sobriety tests] are incredibly problematic in determining if an individual can drive safely. In fact, someone who has not had a drop of alcohol might be unable to perform all of the field sobriety tests. Each person’s individual body, balance and coordination can skew the test results, giving law enforcement an inaccurate determination of whether that individual is drunk. Finally, you have rights. Field Sobriety Tests are voluntary. In the State of Washington you are under no obligation to perform field sobriety tests. The burden of proof is on the State. Why make their job easier by voluntarily agreeing to perform a test sober individuals are capable of failing?

The Law Offices of Barbara A. Bowden, Lakewood, WA 98499
If you have been pulled over by law enforcement or otherwise contacted by law enforcement, and you have been asked whether you will submit to voluntary field sobriety tests, you have the right to refuse to submit to these tests. There is no penalty for refusing these tests.  It is unlawful for the police officer to arrest you solely for refusing field sobriety tests.  Chances are, if the officer is asking you whether you mind performing some tests to "make sure you’re O.K. to drive", the officer is going to arrest you anyway.  The officer has presumed you to be guilty unless you prove yourself innocent beyond all doubt. In sum, it is in your best interests to politely decline all field sobriety tests.  Without the field sobriety tests, the officer may not have probable cause to arrest you.

 

The Law Offices of Jason S. Newcombe, Everett, WA 98201
Washington field sobriety tests - just say NO. Field sobriety tests are not required by Washington State law. Regardless of why you are pulled over or the officer’s suspicions, you are under no obligation to take these tests. If you have been pulled over by Snohomish County law enforcement, or by any other law enforcement agency in Washington State for that matter, you have an absolute right to refuse to submit to any field sobriety tests, and you should refuse to take them. Be polite, but firm.

West Law Office, Russell West - Attorney, Spokane, WA 99204
Field sobriety tests are common tests performed to indicate impairment. These tests are voluntary. If the officer asks you to do these tests do not take them. Refuse to take them in a courteous manner. You could say a simple no thank you I would prefer not to take them. Or you could ask the officer if they are 100% accurate and then say no as any officer should not say they are.  By refusing these tests there is no penalty on your part and only helps them determine a reason to take an evidential chemical test wither through a breathalyser of blood test. The field sobriety tests are subjective on how the officer writes down the results and are commonly failed by someone who is sober. They are asking you to perform a test that is not normal behavior and is difficult to do.

Padula & Associates, LLC, Seattle, WA 98122
If you are pulled over on suspicion of Driving Under the Influence (DUI), the police officer may ask you to submit to a Field Sobriety Test (FST). In Washington State you are under no obligation to submit to a FST. If an officer asks you to exit your vehicle and complete a [FST], it is critical that you know your rights. Washington State law does not require you to submit to FSTs. A police officer may lead you to believe that you must take the FSTs, but you are under no legal obligation to do so. In general, you can and should politely refuse to take any FST. These tests are not measured by an objective standard and typically will only serve to harm your DUI defense.

Lustick, Kaiman, & Madrone, PLLC, Bellingham, WA 98225
When police stop a driver after dark on a weekend, chances are they already think the person is driving under the influence. However, in order to make a DUI arrest, police need "probable cause". This means they must have facts leading a reasonable person to believe that the person is driving under the influence of intoxicants. In other words, police cannot just arrest someone on a mere hunch that the person is intoxicated while driving. They need specific facts suggesting the person is actually driving drunk. Police officers develop probable cause, or facts, through their own observations. Much of these facts come when the driver performs and fails the field sobriety tests (FSTs). The common FSTs include an eye test following a pen, the 9-step line walk and turning test, and standing on one foot for 30 seconds. In addition to these three FSTs that people typically think of, there is also a Preliminary Breath Test (PBT). This is a small, hand-held, electronic breathalyzer tester used for roadside breath tests. Just like the FSTs, the PBT test is entirely optional. Drivers are under no legal requirement to take a PBT.

 

 

 



Your Privacy Rights

Whenever you are requested to provide personal information to a Federal agency, you are entitled to know:

• the legal authority for requesting the information;
• the purpose for collecting it;
• what routine uses (disclosures) might be made of the information you provide;
• whether disclosure of the requested information is mandatory or voluntary;
• and what effect your refusal to provide the information would have.

The Privacy Act focuses on four basic guidelines:

1. To restrict disclosure of personally identifiable records maintained by agencies.
2. To grant individuals increased rights of access to agency records maintained on themselves.
3. To grant individuals the right to seek amendment of agency records maintained on themselves upon a showing that the records are not accurate, relevant, timely or complete.
4. To establish a code of "fair information practices" which requires agencies to comply with statutory norms for collection, maintenance, and dissemination or records.

  

DoD Privacy Program (DOD Directive 5400.11, dated: October 29, 2014)

 

Introduction to The Privacy Act

Defense Privacy and Civil Liberties Office