Saturday, March 24, 2018
Do You Know Who Has Access to Your Gmail and Facebook?
Gmail users should go here to see every app that has privileges to access their account. To see what specifically each app has access to click it and the window will expand with details. While you can't adjust the level of access, you can remove the apps and services you no longer want.
Users should also check what third parties they've given access to their Facebook account. To do that, go to settings, then apps, then edit. Under "Apps websites and plugins," users should click disable. Facebook users should also go to "Apps Others Use," and click edit and clear that out as well.
Keep in mind that not everything that has access is insidious, but each user should be able to judge that for themselves.
JavaScrypt: Browser-Based Cryptography
JavaScrypt: Browser-Based Cryptography is a high-security data encryption solution which runs entirely in your Web browser. JavaScrypt's encryption facilities use the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) adopted by the United States as Federal Information Processing Standard 197. AES supports key lengths of 128, 192, and 256 bits; JavaScrypt uses 256 bit keys exclusively.
I have long been a fan of John Walker's "JavaScrypt: Browser-Based Cryptography".
In March 2018, he made some updates to the program, making this a good time to again recommend that you download a copy of this excellent encryption program.
You can run JavaScrypt: Browser-Based Cryptography while on-line, but I recommend downloading a copy and running it as a file within your browser. The downloaded and extracted (un-zipped) files are only 844 KB. Once you have all of the files saved to a folder on your computer, just click the "index.html" file and the program will run just like the web-page on-line, but you don't have to be connected to the Internet. JavaScrypt: Browser-Based Cryptography works precisely the same whether installed on your local computer or accessed over the Web. The only difference is that you use a "file:" URL to direct your browser to the local directory containing JavaScrypt rather than an "http:" URL pointing to a Web site.
Below is a message encrypted using JavaScrypt: Browser-Based Cryptography.
The password to decrypt this message is: H4M07TOV
##### Encrypted: decrypt with http://www.fourmilab.ch/javascrypt/
ZZZZZ GNJPF IRXFA WFCRI IOXIQ OGREC GIHGG VFEWP WMSQF EDXQU BXUAE
UGUTB ARPKC ASEBB EGKWV SEXQT KIPXW QUBWT GBCEG TXKCK BCRVW XXTGS
IMVDA XWHBO QNTGD XGRNH DIOSU NDRLN IJDAV OITTW BCERE NTVMW DUVGL
XEBXG MNERJ WLPGE QXQBC ONWIP QHEAL FMQLB MUOJO PBGUG DTPKA XPHAO
DSDJV DAAHC AKRKJ AGUNR NTMXT XBNXC SQQKM SHMVU PLXGE JPQDQ PXVMK
XBSGO JECRE OUOJA IBOSC LDBNC OSMTV IOEFK VXVFG NXOJA INBPU PMAFI
IHGSK EXBGW AALLB PLSWD RXELS ABDLD VOSHG XLGQH KWIRU CKHNI GUTIF
AAJTQ OVOKT MTBHH VOQXG EAHVC QXSQT JVJGV JDBWB NAENQ OSPWW TUSVT
IAJXM IBQCW LDVTP GTMDA NSTFR RILCM BUUHV FMGRG IFPUV YYYYY
##### End encrypted message
Friday, March 23, 2018
Up to 880,000 Credit Cards Accessed in Orbitz Data Breach
If you’ve booked trips through Orbitz, hackers may have accessed your credit card or other payment card information in a recent attack.
The consumer data in question is from an older booking platform, where information may have been accessed between October and December 2017, and data from an Orbitz partner platform, including travel booked via Amex Travel, submitted between January 1st, 2016 and December 22nd, 2017.
Reports from March 20, 2018 state that up to 880,000 payment card numbers and related information could’ve been exposed in a data breach. The additional information could include:
Customer’s full name
Date of birth
Phone number
Email address
Physical or billing address
Gender
Orbitz, which is owned by Expedia, had two different data disclosures - trips booked between October and December 2017 and trips booked via Amex Travel between January 1st, 2016 and December 22nd, 2017.
Check your credit reports, and be alert for fraud if you booked a trip during these times.
Orbitz says its current Orbitz.com website wasn’t involved in this incident. It is notifying customers who may have been impacted and is offering a year of free credit monitoring.
Google Is Evil
Google is Evil. Well, OK probably not evil, but Google is a giant corporation, and some things that big business does can be very much like Big Brother.
Google provides a wide selection of products and services, offering excellent functionality and security - but this is at the expense of privacy. When you use a Google product or service Google can see everything that you do, from the searches that you run on-line to the content of your e-mail.
A 2016 article in US News & World Report said "Google isn’t just the world's biggest purveyor of information; it is also the world's biggest censor." Google also owns YouTube, the largest video hosting site on the Internet, and we saw in a report from Bloomberg in March 2018 how YouTube videos are banned to meet Google’s political agenda.
Do I think that we need to dump everything associated with Google? No, not at all - there are some things that Google does very well. If you want to make information public - share it with the world - then Google is fine (assuming they don’t censor your content and limit your free speech). But if you want privacy and control over your data, then you may want to consider alternatives to Google.
If all you want to do is move away from Google, consider switching to Yandex and VKontakte (VK). You can think of these as the Russian versions of Google and Facebook. Telegram is also a nice messenger service that originated in Russia, but is now run out of Dubai. Switching from Google to Yandex won't do much to keep you from being monitored, the Russian FSB probably monitors everything you do, but they are looking for threats to Russia and are not likely to provide your information to outside agencies or use it for marketing.
If you are just trying to gain additional privacy and control of your data, there are some alternatives to Google that you may want to consider.
The first alternative is using a search engine that does not track and save your search history. One of the most popular privacy focused search engines is Duck Duck Go. Another is Start Page, which returns Google search results but serves as a search proxy keeping Google from tracking your search history.
Getting rid of Gmail is essential to protecting your personal privacy. I recommend both Protonmail and Tutanota for private e-mail. Likewise, don’t use Google messaging services, rather use an end-to-end encrypted messenger like Signal or Wire.
Chrome is Google’s browser. For those that don’t use Microsoft Edge / Explorer, Firefox is the most common alternative to Chrome. However, there are several other browsers available, and for privacy I like Brave. Users who want more control over their browsers might like Vivaldi. Of course, for even more privacy you may want to connect to the Internet using TOR.
Google Drive is fine for storing documents that you want to share with the public. For ensuring the privacy of your documents stored in the cloud, I recommend SpiderOak One and Tesorit. You might also be interested in Kolab Now. None of these services are free, which may be a consideration for minimal personal on-line file storage. If you choose to stay with Google Drive or maybe Dropbox because they offer free storage, I recommend using Boxcryptor to encrypt everything that you upload to these sites.
OnionShare lets you share files over the TOR network. Firefox Send, provides private, encrypted file sharing, letting you send files through a safe, private, and encrypted link that automatically expires to ensure your stuff does not remain online forever.
These are just a few of the possible alternatives to using Google. You will have to decide for yourself which, if any, of these alternatives meet your needs and what trade-offs you are willing to make between the convenience and efficiency of Google products and the ability to maintain your personal privacy and control of your data.
The Most Dangerous Town on the Internet
Norton explores the secret world of bulletproof hosting that’s hidden deep in underground bunkers, isolated at sea, and spread across the Web. Uncover the threats that lie within these services, such as botnets, malware, ransom-ware, and the black market, and learn how to protect yourself in "The Most Dangerous Town on the Internet - Where Cybercrime Goes to Hide" - Episode 2.
Also, watch Episode 1 - "The Most Dangerous Town On the Internet - Hackerville (Ramnicu Valcea)" on YouTube. The cybercrime documentary profiling the Romanian town nicknamed "Hackerville". Convicted blackhat hackers, like Guccifer (real name), talk worms, viruses, social engineering, identity theft, and even hacking Hillary Clinton's email.
Thursday, March 22, 2018
Court Rules That Medical Marijuana Card Holders Can't Buy Firearms
If you have a medical marijuana card, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals says that you can’t buy a gun.
The court ruled 3-0 on Wednesday (March 21, 2018) that a ban preventing medical marijuana card holders from purchasing firearms is not in violation of the Second Amendment, the Associated Press reports. There are nine western states under the appeals court’s jurisdiction, including Nevada, where the case originated.
According to the BATF - The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside.
When you buy a gun from a licensed dealer, you are required to fill out Form 4473. Question 11. e. on the form asks you if you're an unlawful user of marijuana or other substances. Because marijuana is illegal federally, its use will be considered to be unlawful regardless of state law.
If you answer 'YES' to Question 11. e., you will be denied a firearm.
If you lie on the form and answer 'NO' to Question 11. e., you could face serious legal consequences.
The AFT sent a letter to all federally licensed firearms dealers in 2011 instructing them not to sell guns to people with medical marijuana cards. The ATF says the card gives a dealer "reasonable cause to believe" the person uses marijuana and should be denied a firearm.
YouTube Bans Firearms Demo Videos
According to an article in Bloomberg (March 21, 2018) YouTube has banned firearms demo videos.
YouTube, a popular media site for firearms enthusiasts, this week quietly introduced tighter restrictions on videos involving weapons, becoming the latest battleground in the U.S. gun-control debate.
YouTube will ban videos that promote or link to websites selling firearms and accessories. Additionally, YouTube said it will prohibit videos with instructions on how to assemble firearms.
The video site, owned by Google, has faced intense criticism for hosting videos about guns, bombs and other deadly weapons.
For many gun-rights supporters, YouTube has been a haven. A current search on the site for "how to build a gun" yields 25 million results, though that includes items such as toys. At least one producer of gun videos saw its page suspended on Tuesday. Another channel opted to move its videos to an adult-content site, saying that will offer more freedom than YouTube.
--
YouTube is the largest video hosting site in the world, it is a site that is owned and operated by Google. Many people are trying to move away from using Google products because of privacy (and now censorship) concerns.
While YouTube's new censorship of firearms videos will certainly hurt many channel operators, there are a number of other video hosting sites that can pick up YouTube's lost business. Some of these sites are:
Vimeo.
Dailymotion.
Twitch.
LiveLeak.
Veoh.
Break.
Metacafe.
VK.
Brightcove.
South Africans Live in a Dangerous Gated World (Home Security in S.A.)
Recently I have begun looking at home security concepts as they are applied in South Africa.
Lauren Southern has a short YouTube video, "South Africans Live in a Dangerous Gated World" where she introduces some of the realities of home security in South Africa.
I found it interesting to see the steps that residents of South Africa take to secure their homes and compare that to the crime prevention measures that are common in other countries.
The South African Police Service (SAPS) provides a list of home security recommendations on their web-page. Some of the SAPS security precautions include:
- Ensure that all doors are locked at all times, and that windows are closed when you are not at home.
- Large dogs serve as a deterrent. At least one dog should be trained to sleep inside the house.
- If you leave your residence, inform your family/ neighbours of your intended destination, time you expect to return and the route you will be driving, especially if you reside in a rural area.
- Ensure that tools such as axes, spades, picks, ladders, etc. that can be used in an attack, are locked away when you do not use them.
- Vary your daily routine.
- Get into the habit of not immediately falling asleep after switching off the lights. - Remain awake for a while.
- You should not be visible in the bedroom from the outside when you are asleep.
- Always keep a torch nearby at night and when you use it, ensure that you do not give away your position.
- If you are unsure about the security status of your home after returning from work/a visit, e.g. your dogs do not come to the gate, do not enter your home.
- Contact your neighbour to assist you in securing your home.
- Identify relatively safe places of refuge, i.e.: bathroom, toilet or storeroom.
- The fewer windows and doors these rooms have, the better.
- Involve employees as they are part of the family/team.
- Employees must be involved in maintaining security on an equal footing.
- Report suspicious behaviour and information to the South African Police Service.
- Clear the areas around the gates of bushes and other hiding places.
- Take photographs of all employees. - It could be to your advantage to identify them, if required.
- Remunerate your employees when useful information is provided that contribute to the prevention of crime.
- Do not employ casual workers without a reference.
- Keep copies of all your employees - Identity Documents (ID's).
- Ensure that you have a good relationship with your neighbours so that you will be in a good position to support and help each other.
An on-line article "How to Make Your House Super-Secure in South Africa" recommends the following steps as part of your home security plan:
- CCTV on the perimeter of your home
- Using an electric fence to deter intruders
- Have a good-quality driveway gate
- Have another layer of perimeter security
- Burglar-proof windows
- Strong doors with good locks
- An intercom system
- A CCTV system in the home
- Use smart elements
- A smart alarm system
- Smoke and gas detectors
- Using a reputable security company
Do you need all of this to make your home secure? Maybe not (or maybe you do if you live in South Africa or South Philadelphia).
Wednesday, March 21, 2018
WA State Governor Restricts Police Access to SSN in DOL Records
According to an article on KOMO 4 News - Less than a month after Gov. Jay Inslee signed an Executive Order keeping state agencies from helping enforce federal immigration laws, a new policy has left police agencies across the state scrambling.
Last week police departments were notified they will no longer be able to use people’s social security numbers to search state Department of Licensing (DOL) databases. Nor can police get people’s social security numbers from DOL.
The policy, which went into effect on March 14, has hamstrung police, said Steve Strachan, who is Executive Director of the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs.
American Public Troubled by ‘Deep State’
A Monmouth University (NJ) poll (March 2018) found that a majority of the American public believe that the U.S. government engages in widespread monitoring of its own citizens and worry that the U.S. government could be invading their own privacy. Fully 8-in-10 believe that the U.S. government currently monitors or spies on the activities of American citizens, including a majority (53%) who say this activity is widespread and another 29% who say such monitoring happens but is not widespread.
This is not a new concern, according to a 2015 Gallup Poll, 75% of Americans see widespread corruption in their government (Gallup 2015). It is not just a belief that the government is corrupt, but an actual fear of this corruption by the majority of Americans that raises the greatest concern.
According to the Chapman University Survey of American Fears: "Of the 89 potential fears the survey asked about, the one that the highest share of Americans said they were either "afraid" or "very afraid" of was federal government corruption. It was also the only fear that a majority of Americans said they shared." (Rampell 2015) The Pew Research Center conducted a study of public trust in government between 1958 and 2017 and found that American’s trust of their government was at a near all-time low in 2017. Only 18% of Americans today say they can trust the government in Washington to do what is right “just about always” (3%) or “most of the time” (15%) (Pew Research Center 2017).
Earlier this month (March 2018) the Associated Press wrote that the federal government censored, withheld or said it couldn't find records sought by citizens, journalists and others more often last year than at any point in the past decade; yet in more than one-in-three cases, the government reversed itself when challenged and acknowledged that it had improperly tried to withhold that it should have released in response to a Freedom of Information Act Request.
According to the 2018 Edelman Trust Barometer America is now home to the least-trusting informed public of the 28 countries that the firm surveyed, right below South Africa. Distrust is growing most among younger, high-income Americans.
The results of these polls should concern us. The strength of our government relies on public faith that it is protecting our rights and freedoms. Yet our faith in government is not particularly robust at the moment.
Distrust of government is focused on the Federal government, and doesn't necessarily apply to other levels of government. For example, overall confidence in the police has risen slightly in the past two years, with 57% of Americans now saying they have "a great deal" or "quite a lot" of confidence in law enforcement -- matching the overall average for the 25-year Gallup trend.
The Gallup study also showed that trust in the police was divided along political lines. 73% of Republicans expressed trust in the police, but this same level of trust in the police was only expressed by 45% of Democrats.
While overall trust in the police was at 57%, overall trust in the criminal justice system itself was only 28% in 2017, and this lack of trust was generally the same regardless of political affiliation (Republicans 29% / Democrats 27%).
On the surface, Americans' confidence in the police appears strong and steady when compared with other U.S. institutions. In the 25 years Gallup has measured it, the percentage having a great deal or quite a lot of confidence has never varied by more than seven percentage points from the average of 57%. Confidence in the police has exceeded the average for all institutions by at least 10 points every year since the question was first asked in 1993.
A closer look, however, reveals a troubling loss of confidence among key groups in U.S. society. Police already must deal with low levels of trust among blacks, and a similar situation may be occurring among Hispanics. The lack of confidence among younger Americans could presage a growing loss of respect for police in the future. The continuing drop in confidence among liberals is already producing political repercussions.
Beyond those specific possible consequences, the loss of confidence among these groups creates yet another gap between young and old, whites and Hispanics, and conservatives and liberals, marking how divided the nation has become.
Overall, U.S. adults say they have the most confidence in the military, as has typically been the case since the mid-1980s, with 72% of Americans expressing a great deal of trust in our armed forces.
The Police Are Tracking Everyone By Using Google Warrants
Detectives in the Raleigh, NC Police Department convinced a Wake County Judge to issue a probable cause order, compelling Google "to hand over account identifiers on every single cell phone that crossed the digital cordon [around a crime scene] during certain times". Raleigh police used search warrants to demand Google accounts not of specific suspects, but from any mobile devices that veered too close to the scene of a crime..." These warrants also prevent the technology giant [Google] from disclosing information about the searches for months, not just to potential suspects, but to any users swept up in the search.
Users can switch off location tracking to prevent the device from pinging GPS satellites. But if your phone is on a cellular network or connected to Wi-Fi, the device is still transmitting its coordinates to third parties, even if those coordinates are less accurate than GPS.
Tuesday, March 20, 2018
Walmart Jewelry Partner Exposed 1.3 Million Customer Records
On February 6th, 2018 researchers came across another publicly accessible MSSQL database backup, which was found to hold the personal information, including names, addresses, zip codes, phone numbers, e-mail addresses, ip addresses, and, most shockingly, plain text passwords, for shopping accounts of over 1.3 million people (1,314,193 to be exact) throughout the US and Canada.
The MSSQL database belonged to MBM Company Inc., a jewelry company based in Chicago, IL, which operates mainly under the name Limogés Jewelry, a Walmart partner. The MSSQL database also contained numerous records for retailers other than Walmart. Over the years, Limogés Jewelry has done business with retailers such as Amazon, Overstock, Sears, Kmart and Target, among others.
Whenever a major data breach occurs, there are security steps that we should all take.
Keep an eye on your bank accounts
You should already be frequently checking your bank statements, looking for suspicious activity. It's even more critical when there is a massive data breach. Especially like the one just discovered at Limogés Jewelry. Since account passwords were left exposed in plain text, thieves could have enough information to break into financial accounts. If you see anything that seems strange, report it immediately to your bank. It's the best way to keep your financial accounts safe.
Beware of phishing scams
Scammers will try and piggyback on data breaches like this. They will create phishing emails, pretending to be from Limogés Jewelry or Walmart, hoping to get victims to click on malicious links that could lead to more problems.
Walk Up, Not Out - How to Respond to School Violence
Following every shooting in a school there is an almost immediate call to ban guns. Politicians propose a series of new laws and the national media proclaims the evil of guns and the danger that they pose to every child. If we could end violence in our schools, doesn’t just make sense to ban or at least severely restrict the ownership of firearms? Well, actually no! Banning firearms, creating "gun free zones", limiting magazine capacity, declaring some firearms "assault weapons" because of their appearance, or any other proposal that attempts to address school violence by focusing on an inanimate object (the firearm) simply won’t work. Firearms are not the cause of violence in schools (or anywhere else); and even if we could wave a magic wand and somehow make all firearms disappear, a student intent on committing violence in a school could easily find instructions on the Internet to build other weapons.
Research conducted by James Alan Fox, Professor of Criminology, Law, and Public Policy at Northeastern University, and doctoral student Emma Fridel, found that: "while certain policies may help decrease gun violence in general, it’s unlikely that any of them will prevent mass school shootings... Mass school shootings are incredibly rare events and no matter what you can come up with to prevent it, the shooter will have a workaround, Fox said, adding that over the past 35 years, there have been only five cases in which someone ages 18 to 20 used an assault rifle in a mass shooting. Fridel said increasing mental health resources for students is a strategy that might improve school safety, calling this a critical need that has been historically overlooked. She also said that the U.S. is facing a desperate shortage of guidance counselors. In 2014-15, the student-to-school counselor ratio was 482-to-1, according to the American School Counselor Association, nearly twice the organization’s recommended ratio."
We have a mental health problem that is a major part of our school shooting problem. Gun laws might make it a little harder to get a gun to do the deed, but someone who is mentally deranged enough to want to kill multiple people will find another way to do what they want to do.
But we need to do something! There has to be a way to ensure that our children will be safe while they attend school. We need to address the underlying causes of violence in schools, and one of those primary causes is bullying.
A 2003 research paper Bullying Behavior: What is the potential for violence at your school? found that “Bullying behavior played some role in all the school shootings during the past two years. Not only do victims of bullying behavior bear emotional scars that can lead to violence, the victim of bullying behavior is frequently disliked by peers. This double whammy, so to speak, of being picked on by a bully and ostracized by peers can have devastating consequences.”
Another study Teasing, rejection, and violence: Case studies of the school shootings (April 2003) reported that “Case studies were conducted of 15 school shootings between 1995 and 2001 to examine the possible role of social rejection in school violence. Acute or chronic rejection - in the form of ostracism, bullying, and/or romantic rejection - was present in all but two of the incidents. In addition, the shooters tended to be characterized by one or more of three other risk factors - an interest in firearms or bombs, a fascination with death or Satanism, or psychological problems involving depression, impulse control, or sadistic tendencies.”
A 2009 study The Nature and Extent of Bullying at School reported in the Journal of School Health stated: "School bullying is associated with numerous physical, mental, and social detriments. A relationship also exists between student bullying behavior and school issues such as academic achievement, school bonding, and absenteeism. Prevention of school bullying should become a priority issue for schools. The most effective methods of bullying reduction involve a whole school approach. This method includes assessing the problem, planning school conference days, providing belter supervision at recess, forming a bullying prevention coordinating group, encouraging parent‐teacher meetings, establishing classroom rules against bullying, holding classroom meetings about bullying, requiring talks with the bullies and victims, and scheduling talks with the parents of involved students."
Addressing bullying in in schools doesn’t create the political platforms and media spin that you get from calling for a ban on guns. Addressing bullying holds individuals responsible for their actions, requires that parents stay actively involved in the lives and activities of their children, and that schools enforce standards of conduct and courtesy for both staff and students.
Bullying can occur in face-to-face confrontations between students before, during, and after school; and in today’s interconnected digital world, bullying (cyberbullying) can occur on-line.
Studies have found that 28% of U.S. students in grades 6-12 experienced bullying, with that number dropping to 20% of U.S. students in grades 9-12.
9% of students in grades 6-12 experienced cyberbullying, with that number increasing to 15% for students in grades 9-12 (older students are more likely to have an on-line presence and own personal electronic devices such as smartphones).
To address bullying it is necessary to understand it. Not every person can become an expert in preventing bullying nor in the behavioral health of children, but we can all take time to learn about this cause of school violence and we can learn to take steps to prevent it.
A Bullying Prevention Training Course is available on-line to help you understand ways to effectively address bullying. The course takes approximately 90 minutes to complete.
The National White Collar Crime Center (NW3C) offers a short (30-45 min) on-line course, Cyberbullying: Our Children, Our Problem, that can help you understand cyber-bullying.
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) offers a free 20 minute course will help teachers in grades 3-7 maintain a positive classroom environment that is safe and inclusive so all students can learn and thrive.
The Friends’ Online Training Course for Adults produced in Sweden (course is available in English) aims to give adults tools to support young people’s right to safety and equality.
On March 14, 2018 students across the United States walked out of their classrooms to protest school violence. This walk out garnered some political attention and media spin, fueling demands for more gun control. On the same day however, with far less media attention and almost no political support some students seemed to have found a much more effective way to address violence in their schools.
Instead of walking out of school, these students walked up to their fellow students and offered a kind word, a handshake, a pat on the back. They included students who they previously might have excluded and listened to classmates that the might have previously ignored. They said we won’t accept bullying in our schools. To the victims of bullying they said you are not alone, let me be your friend.
Of course, one day of kindness doesn’t erase every wrong, and standing up to bullies doesn’t make them suddenly turn into saints. But what walking up instead of walking out does is address at least part of the cause of school violence by lessening the factors that build up violent intent.
Monday, March 19, 2018
See Something - Say Something?
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) (along with other agencies) uses the "See Something - Say Something" campaign to encourage people to report suspicious activity to their local police departments and to their state Fusion Centers. The idea is that by being alert for things that are out of place in your community, and by reporting these things to the authorities, terrorist acts and other crimes can be identified and hopefully prevented before they can be carried out.
Community involvement in crime prevention is nothing new. When people care about their communities, and work with their local law enforcement to identify and report criminal activity, we have safer neighborhoods.
The FBI in conjunction with the Bureau of Justice Assistance produced a series of "Communities Against Terrorism" flyers containing potential of indicators terrorist activity, for distribution to specific industries. These flyers have been distributed to multiple industries and posted to numerous web-sites as examples of what you should be alert for and what you should report.
The Communities Against Terrorism flyers were produced and distributed to the following groups and in the following categories: Airport Service Providers - Beauty/Drug Suppliers - Bulk Fuel Distributors - Construction Sites - Dive/Boat Shops - Electronics Stores - Farm Supply Stores - Financial Institutions - General Aviation - General Public - Hobby Shops - Home Improvement - Hotels/Motels - Internet Cafes - Shopping Malls - Martial Arts/Paintball - Mass Transportation - Military Surplus - Peroxide Explosives - Recognizing Sleepers - Rental Cars - Rental Properties - Rental Trucks - Storage Facilities - Tattoo Shops.
The Colorado Division of Homeland Security & Emergency Management produced a video "Eight Signs of Terrorism" that highlights indicators of potential terrorist activity and encourages reporting your observations to state Fusion Center or the local police.
There are certainly things that may indicate criminal activity - be that criminal activity terrorism or something else - and by reporting your observations of these indicators to your local police department you can help prevent crime and make a safer community in which to live.
The Problem with See Something - Say Something
Not everyone agrees that See Something - Say Something is a good idea. CSO Online published an article "25 More Ridiculous FBI Lists: You Might Be A Terrorist If..." expressing concern over the accuracy and value of these potential indicators of terrorism. The Huffington Post wrote about The Dangers of ‘See Something, Say Something’, and the ACLU has challenged the "See Something, Say Something" surveillance program, saying "this program relies on local law enforcement, security guards, shopkeepers, and neighbors to report any "suspicious activities" they observe... Those suspicious activity reports (or SARs, for short) are stockpiled in a giant database and shared with state, local, and federal government agencies throughout the country. The problem is that, contrary to a binding federal regulation, the government doesn’t require even reasonable suspicion of criminal activity for a SAR to be maintained and shared."
The indicators of potential terrorist activity listed in the Communities Against Terrorism flyers, and often repeated by law enforcement and security agencies, are so broad that they can include almost anyone.
When we look at the "Potential Indicators of Terrorist Activities Related to Internet Café" (one of the Communities Against Terrorism flyers) we see that being concerned with privacy, paying with cash, using means [like a VPN] to shield your IP address, or using encryption are things that should be considered suspicious. Yet these are some of the same types of things cyber-security experts recommend that you do to protect yourself when using a public Internet connection.
Many of indicators of potential terrorist activities listed in the Communities Against Terrorism flyers involve constitutionally protected activity by law-abiding citizens; and an individual’s mere engagement in these protected activities - whether alone or with others - cannot legally be the sole basis for negative inferences about or affirmative scrutiny of those individual(s).
No investigative activity should be conducted based solely on a person exercising his or her First Amendment rights. Constitutionally protected activities should not be reported absent articulable facts and circumstances that support an assessment that the observed behavior is reasonably indicative of criminal activity.
We have been told that photography is a suspicious activity that should be reported. According to security expert Bruce Schneier: "Since 9/11, there has been an increasing war on photography. Photographers have been harassed, questioned, detained, arrested or worse, and declared to be unwelcome. We’ve been repeatedly told to watch out for photographers, especially suspicious ones. Clearly any terrorist is going to first photograph his target, so vigilance is required. Except that it’s nonsense. The 9/11 terrorists didn’t photograph anything. Nor did the London transport bombers, the Madrid subway bombers, or the liquid bombers arrested in 2006. Timothy McVeigh didn’t photograph the Oklahoma City Federal Building. The Unabomber didn’t photograph anything, neither did the shoe-bomber Richard Reid. Photographs aren’t being found amongst the papers of Palestinian suicide bombers. The IRA wasn’t known for its photography. Even those manufactured terrorist plots that the US Government likes to talk about - the Ft. Dix terrorists, the JFK airport bombers, the Miami 7, the Lakawanna 6 - no photography."
The problem is that we have come to the point were nothing is too trivial to report (which is just wrong), and these reports generate investigative activity targeting people who have done nothing wrong. These investigations can go on for weeks, months, or even years - generating files and records about individuals who have broken no laws, yet were somehow identified as being suspicious.
When this suspicious activity reporting gets out of hand, and when government agencies conduct unwarranted investigations and apprehensions because of anti-terrorism reports, these agencies can be held accountable for their actions in lawsuits brought against them, as we see in this example: "A political activist Phil Chinn, a student at Olympia’s Evergreen State College in 2007, was driving with friends to an antiwar protest at the Port of Grays Harbor in Aberdeen [WA] in May of that year. Unbeknownst to Chinn and his friends at the time, the Washington State Patrol had issued an ‘attempt-to-locate’ code for Chinn’s license plate with a message to apprehend "three known anarchists"... Chinn’s charges were eventually dismissed and in 2009 he sued the state patrol, City of Aberdeen, and Grays Harbor County for harassment and false arrest. To avoid disclosure of what the federal government called "Sensitive Security Information," the case was quickly settled for more than $400,000." (Huffington Post)
To Say Something or Not To Say Something?
Should you report suspicious activity to your local police department, to your state Fusion Center, or to the FBI? The original concept of See Something - Say Something as a way to detect potential terrorist activity may have been a good idea, but as we read in a September 2013 report from TechDirt the "'See Something, Say Something' Campaign Creates Massive Database Of Useless Info From Citizens Spying On Each Other", and that problem has only become worse since then.
Generally speaking, I believe that suspicious activity reporting does more harm than good. It trades our essential liberties for a temporary security. Because a suspicious activity report doesn’t require even reasonable suspicion of criminal activity for the SAR to be maintained and shared, individuals who have done nothing wrong can find that they are listed in anti-terrorism databases, in police records, and are the subject of on-going investigations with no way to address the allegations made against them. Even after it is determined that no crime was committed, and that the person named in a suspicious activity report did nothing wrong, those reports don't go away.
Of course, if you see something that you believe is a real threat to your community, and can articulate why you believe it to be a threat, you should definitely report it by calling 911.
According to the Seattle, WA Police Department you should call 911:
- When you have a Police, Fire or Medical emergency.
- There is a situation that could, or does, pose a danger to life, property or both.
- There is a suspicious activity involving a person that appears to have criminal intent.
- Any situation that requires immediate dispatch of an officer.
- To report a serious crime, such as robbery, domestic violence or sexual assault.
See Something - Say Something? Well, maybe not!
Sunday, March 18, 2018
Shooting Death on I-5 - No Charges Filed
A woman (Bowlin) is riding her motorcycle on Interstate Highway 5 (I-5) in Washington state. Some accounts state the she was driving aggressively. For whatever reason another driver(Jones) becomes angered with Bowlin and boxes her in so that she cannot drive away. A physical fight ensues and after Jones drives Bowlin's head into the jersey barrier and climbs on top of her, she is forced to shoot him in self-defense.
While the news reports perhaps don't reflect the complete story, there can be little doubt that the prosecutor investigated all of the facts available in this case and found that Ms. Bowlin's life was in danger when she shot Jones - she acted in self-defense.
This is why good people should be armed.
---
TACOMA, WA - Today Prosecutor Mark Lindquist announced no charges will be filed against Aubrey Tayler Bowlin in connection with the shooting death of Bruce W. Jones on February 8, 2018 by the side of Interstate 5. Ms. Bowlin said she acted in self defense and, given the evidence, the Prosecutor’s Office cannot prove otherwise.
According to witnesses, the altercation began when Mr. Jones became upset at how Ms. Bowlin was driving her motorcycle on I-5 on February 8, 2018. He boxed her into a location she could not drive away from. After exiting his vehicle, he aggressively approached her on the shoulder of Interstate 5.
The fight that followed was initiated by Jones. At some point, Bowlin head butted Jones, who then drove Bowlin's head into the jersey barrier before taking her to the ground. Bowlin shot Jones once in the chest when he attempted to climb on top of her.
"This is another reminder to everyone to keep a cool head on our roads," said Prosecutor Mark Lindquist. "Nothing good is going to come from physically confronting another driver."
Schools Are Spending Millions on High-Tech Surveillance of Kids
A recent article in Gizmodo stated: "Advanced surveillance technologies once reserved for international airports and high-security prisons are coming to schools across America. From New York to Arkansas, schools are spending millions to outfit their campuses with some of the most advanced surveillance technology available: face recognition to deter predators, object recognition to detect weapons, and license plate tracking to deter criminals. Privacy experts are still debating the usefulness of these tools, whom they should be used on, and whom they should not, but school officials are embracing them as a way to save lives in times of crisis."
It's not just surveillance technology in schools that is an issue. Less than a year ago the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) wrote: Spying on Students: School-Issued Devices and Student Privacy, "Students and their families are backed into a corner. As students across the United States are handed school-issued laptops and signed up for educational cloud services, the way the educational system treats the privacy of students is undergoing profound changes - often without their parents’ notice or consent, and usually without a real choice to opt out of privacy-invading technology."
And according to the New York Times: Student Data Collection Is Out of Control, "The collection of student data is out of control. No longer do schools simply record attendance and grades. Now every test score and every interaction with a digital learning tool is recorded. Data gathering includes health, fitness and sleeping habits, sexual activity, prescription drug use, alcohol use and disciplinary matters. Students’ attitudes, sociability and even "enthusiasm" are quantified, analyzed, recorded and dropped into giant data systems. Some schools use radio frequency identification tags to track student location throughout the school day. Other schools use “human monitoring services” that read student email and then contact local law enforcement if something is amiss. Students and parents will never see the vast majority of information collected."
The U.S. Department of Education has published the Parents' Guide to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act: Rights Regarding Children’s Education Records: The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) is a federal privacy law that gives parents certain protections with regard to their children's education records, such as report cards, transcripts, disciplinary records, contact and family information, and class schedules. As a parent, you have the right to review your child's education records and to request changes under limited circumstances. To protect your child's privacy, the law generally requires schools to ask for written consent before disclosing your child's personally identifiable information to individuals other than you. - It is important to understand FERPA.
US Sets New Record for Censoring, Withholding Gov't Files
WASHINGTON (AP) - The federal government censored, withheld or said it couldn't find records sought by citizens, journalists and others more often last year than at any point in the past decade, according to an Associated Press analysis of new data.
People who asked for records under the Freedom of Information Act received censored files or nothing in 78 percent of 823,222 requests, a record over the past decade. When it provided no records, the government said it could find no information related to the request in a little over half those cases.
A disturbing trend continued: In more than one-in-three cases, the government reversed itself when challenged and acknowledged that it had improperly tried to withhold pages. But people filed such appeals only 14,713 times, or about 4.3 percent of cases in which the government said it found records but held back some or all of the material.
About a month ago, I discussed how to request records under FOIA and the Privacy Act.
In response to a growing culture of government secrecy, people are seeking new ways to defend their right to information and combat intensifying threats to transparency and accountability. Openness advocates, journalists, litigators and grassroots organizations working on a range of policy issues are increasingly looking to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to shine light on government actions carried out in our name, but without our knowledge. Today, Open the Government released a Best Practices Guide to FOIA Collaboration, highlighting cases where FOIA collaboration is successfully being used to fuel advocacy campaigns and advance openness policies.