MinBane

I write what I like.

Archive for the tag “Spies”

White House Report: U.S. Wire taps that occur without warrants and where security organization clearly violates privacy laws!

fitz-the-wire

Fitz: “What’s up, hotshot?”

McNulty: “I got a technical question. Remember those analog units we used to use to pull cell numbers out of the air? The C.F. something-something”

Fitz: “Yeah, Cell Frequency Identification Device”.

McNulty: “The triggerfish, yeah”.

Fitz: “That one, it could flag a number. Right, but the old analog machines? We used to have to follow the guy around stay close while he used the phone New digitals bing, we just pull the number right off the cell towers”.

McNulty: “So, you got any down out at Woodlawn that daddy can borrow?”

Fitz: “What about yours? – What? City has three of ’em, I remember right.

Homeland security grant sent ’em to you every big county department in the state”

McNulty: “No fucking way. Thanks” (the Wire season 3 episode 11, 2004).

Well, so there we have it, the U.S. Security Organization that are working tirelessly to protect and arrest criminals. On the way to do so, there are questions being made and questionable approaches made by the Security Agencies as they are using technology not to attain information on their possible suspects, but at the same time going into the privacy of innocent civilians. In this way by monitoring areas where well-known criminals are staying and taking information on bystanders and such; these acts can violate their trust in the security agencies as they are using this level of intelligence to attain the suspects. This can also be seen as a violation of the Fourth Amendment as they have rights who protect innocent civilian’s privacy. At the same time, the security agencies need technics to able to get intelligence on their suspects. This is the real-life The Wire and here is what I collected for the recently dropped White House report on the matter.

“[P]eople have a reasonable expectation that their cell phones will not be used as real-time tracking devices by law enforcement, and – recognizing that the Fourth Amendment protects people and not simply areas – that people have an objectively reasonable expectation of privacy in real-time cell phone location information. Thus, we hold that the use of a cell site simulator requires a valid search warrant, or an order satisfying the constitutional requisites of a warrant, unless an established exception to the warrant requirement applies” (U.S. Committee, 2016, P: 30).

“The Department of Justice has 310 cell-site simulation devices and spent more than $71 million in fiscal years 2010-14 on cell-site simulation technology” (…) “The Department of Homeland Security has 124 cell-site simulation devices and spent more than $24 million in fiscal years 2010-14 on cell-site simulation technology” (U.S. Committee, 2016 P:5).

“Cell-site simulators are devices that effectively transform a cell phone into a real time tracking device. A cell-site simulator—also known as an “IMSI catcher”—is a device that mimics a cell phone tower. These devices are commonly referred to as “Stingrays,” which is both a generic name and also refers to a specific type of IMSI catcher that is manufactured by the Harris Corporation. When the device is activated, cell phones in the surrounding area connect to the device in a similar way that the cell phones would connect to a cell tower. Once a phone connects to the cell-site simulator, the device is capable of obtaining specific identifying information for the phone, including information that enables law enforcement to determine the location of the phone and, more importantly, its user” (U.S. Committee, 2016 P: 7).

“From April to August 2015, Committee staff met with the component agencies and officials from DOJ and DHS leadership; from those meetings, two things became clear: (1) use of these devices was widespread; and (2) there was a lack of uniformity across the agencies regarding what court authority was required to deploy cell-site simulation technology under different operating scenarios” (U.S. Committee, 2016 P: 8).

danbury-cease-and-desist-threat-jpeg-page-two

No Warrant before the surveillance:

“The Committee obtained information from federal, state, and local law enforcement that shows the majority of situations where a cell-site simulator is deployed involve the search for a specific, known cell phone. In this scenario, law enforcement first obtains the target cell phone’s number through traditional investigative methods. Once the target cell phone number is ascertained, law enforcement generally obtains the IMSI number that is associated with that cell phone number from the cellular service provider. A warrant is generally not a prerequisite to requesting the IMSI number from the service provider; in many instances, law enforcement obtains the IMSI number by issuing an administrative subpoena to a cell phone service provider” (U.S. Committee, 2016, P: 11).

Bystanders caught monitored to find the criminal phone:

“Whenever a cell-site simulator is deployed, there are collateral consequences for the non-target phones in the area. While searching for the target phone, the simulator will also make contact with other, non-target cell phones that happen to be within range of the simulator device, even if those phones’ owners are innocent bystanders who are not suspected of any criminal wrongdoing. The simulator identifies and collects these non-target phones’ unique identifiers as well. When searching for a specific IMSI number, the device identifies and drops contact with the non-targeted phones within a few seconds” (U.S. Committee, 2016, P: 12).

Difference between home and in public:

“During the course of the Committee’s investigation, it became clear the FBI was drawing a distinction between deploying cell-site simulators on targets in public places and deploying the devices to collect information when a person was in a private space, such as a home. If the device were to be deployed to detect a person when they were believed to be in their home, the FBI would obtain a warrant. When an individual was believed to be on a street or some other public space, however, the FBI relied upon an order under the Pen Register Statute” (U.S. Committee, 2016, P: 21).

IRS use of Cell phone surveillance:

“For each of the 37 investigations that the IRS reported using a cell-site simulator, the agency reported that it worked with an Assistant United States Attorney or State Prosecutor, and obtained “an order or a warrant” based on a finding of probable cause in 36 instances. On one occasion out of the 37, the IRS obtained authorization to deploy a cell-site simulator by obtaining an order pursuant to the Pen Register Statute. Ten of the federal cases resulted in indictments. Indictments were obtained in every instance where the IRS assisted a state or local police department’s investigation” (U.S. Committee, 2016, P: 25).

Use of the Technology in ill-intent:

“Cell-site simulator use inside the United States raises far-reaching issues concerning the use, extent, and legality of government surveillance authority. While the Committee’s investigation and hearing focused on law enforcement’s use of these devices, non-law enforcement and/or foreign government use of cell-site simulation technology also raises serious concerns” (…) “Law enforcement agencies are not the only groups who may use cell-site simulation technology. It is possible, if not likely, bad actors will use these devices to further their aims. Criminals and spies, however, will not be adopting the DOJ and DHS policies and procedures or any other ethics of surveillance. They will not be self-limiting in their use of these devices so as to not capture the content of others’ conversations. Criminals could use these devices to track potential victims or even members of law enforcement. One can imagine scenarios where criminals or foreign agents use this type of technology to intercept text messages and voice calls of law enforcement, corporate CEOs, or elected officials” (U.S. Committee, 2016, P: 33).

pen-register-2014

Conclusion:

“In circumstances involving dramatic technological change, the best solution to privacy concerns may be legislative. A legislative body is well situated to gauge changing public attitudes, to draw detailed lines, and to balance privacy and public safety in a comprehensive way” (U.S. Committee, 2016, P: 35)

With this in mind, the reality is that sometimes the U.S. Police Officers and Security Agencies are following innocent civilians in the hunt of criminals. These methods are also done without warrants and therefore done on free-will of the security agencies, which by all means are a violations of privacy of civilians, where the courts haven’t even been noted on the arrangement and the investigations that been done.

This should be scrutinized and should not be put under the rug, as this are common thread and done by government security organization without permission or where they didn’t follow instruction per request of the courts. Therefore the validation of their intelligence could be put under question as they we’re also taking in civilians who wasn’t doing any ill-intent.

Peace.

Reference:

U.S. Committee Staff Report – ‘Law Enforcement Use of Cell-Site Simulation Technologies:

Privacy Concerns and Recommendations’ (19.12.2016) written by Hon. Jason Chaffetz & Hon. Elijah E. Cummings.

Advertisements

Sudan: UN Rights Experts condemn Charges of Death Penalty Crimes for Human Rights Activists

Tracks

A group of United Nations human rights experts today called on the Sudanese authorities to drop charges carrying the death sentence brought against six people linked to a prominent Khartoum-based organisation, Training and Human Development (TRACKS).

GENEVA, Switzerland, August 31, 2016 -A group of United Nations human rights experts today called on the Sudanese authorities to drop charges carrying the death sentence brought against six people linked to a prominent Khartoum-based organisation, Training and Human Development (TRACKS).
The six*, who were detained some three months ago but are yet to face trial, have been charged with criminal conspiracy, undermining the constitutional system, waging war against the State, espionage, and terrorism by the Sudanese State Security Prosecution Office. All these charges carry the death penalty.

“The death penalty is an extreme form of punishment. lf used at all, it should only be imposed after a fair trial that respects the most stringent due process guarantees as stipulated in international human rights law,” said UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions Agnes Callamard. “I am seriously concerned that any trial of these six people would not uphold such principles.”

The six individuals have faced constant targeting by agents from the National Intelligence and Security Service (NISS) over the past two years. Their offices have been raided twice, and their documents, equipment and passports confiscated. In addition, they say they have been summoned, detained and tortured several times at the NISS office, where they were questioned about the organisation’s activities.

“The charges brought against them appear to be directly linked to their work in the defence of human rights, while exercising their rights to freedom of expression and freedom of association,” said the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, Maina Kiai.

“Sudan ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, a binding instrument, which enshrines the rights to freedom of expression and freedom of association and this sentence is likely to have a chilling effect among activists and human rights defenders in Sudan,” he added.

The human rights experts have already jointly raised their concern to the Sudanese authorities about the ongoing harassment of TRACKS members and, more broadly, about the increasing targeting and prosecution of human rights defenders, including women human rights defenders, in Sudan for undertaking their peaceful and legitimate human rights activities.

“This action is part of an increasing trend to threaten, harass, or intimidate key members of Sudanese civil society, and to curb freedoms of expression and association, which are guaranteed in the Bill of Rights of the Interim National Constitution of the Sudan,” said Aristide Nononsi, the Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in the Sudan, who visited the country in April 2016. Mr Nononsi had already expressed concern about this case to the relevant Sudanese authorities. ”Human rights defenders play an important role in the country, and there is an urgent need for the Government of the Sudan to allow them to carry out their activities in an open, safe and secure environment,” he stressed.

*The six facing charges are Mr. Khalafalla Mukhtar, Director of TRACKS; Ms. Arwa Elrabie, Mr. Midhat Hamadan, and Mr. Alhassan Kheiri, TRACKS’ employees; and Mr. Mustafa Adam and Ms. Raye Imany Leyla who are affiliated to the organisation.

The experts’ appeal to the Sudanese Government has been endorsed by the Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression, Mr. David Kaye, and the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, Mr. Michel Forst.

My letter to the Minister for Ethics and Integrity Hon. Rev. Simon Lokodo on his current affairs

simon-lodoko-1470679953

Oslo, 17th August 2016

Dear Honourable Simon Lokodo, the right reverend father and now Minister for Ethics and Integrity. I write because of your intent of making the country with cleanliness and righteous in religious, sexually and all of personal matters. I am sure the ones eating snot in Parliament will soon get fine or have to wash themselves in holy-water after preliminary hearings at the humble halls you are now one part of.

Your actions and your decrees have been in the public spotlight ever since Dr. Stella Nyanzi undressed herself as an action of getting her stuff and position back after a political firing of her; because of faith in the Forum for Democratic Change and their Presidential Candidate Dr. Kizza Besigye. The advisory to your current boss, whom you are underling to President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni; I think you already knew that, but some who read might not know that.

Simon, Simon, Simon; hear ye, hear ye! Eh! The ways of getting machinery to stop nudeness and sexual explicit content or might revealing behaviour on Television and Online sounds more like KGB, MI6 or CIA; even the FinFisher Software of the Special Investigation Unit in Kireka should be sufficient if somebody watch or subscribe to naughtiness somewhere on the dark-side of the internet. The spider-webs and the extent of content as it is legal anywhere else, not anywhere, but there aren’t State Organizations under Ethics Boards that follows all citizens to make sure of their behaviour. That the ‘Ministerium für Staatssicherheit’ or hte Ministry for State Security (MfS) of the Soviet Republic of East German followed all their citizens and had spies anywhere to make sure of no dissidents or actions against the communist state. Is that what you are seeking Reverend Lodoko?

Simon, Simon, Simon; hear ye, hear ye! You are going after the LGBTQ community in Uganda sending the police after them after a planned Pride Event at a Club in Kampala during the early of August 2016. Not that I am giant fan of their ways, the LGBTQ, I still am democratic in the sense they can do what they please as long as it doesn’t hurt anybody or they go do their thing everywhere. Just like I prefer not going downtown and seeing teenagers screwing each at the mall or like the knowledge of students screwing their sugar-daddies at the offices; supposed to write on the offices and do business instead laying pipe. That should be more worrying that students do that to get the funds for the student-fees, than the LGBTQ having a Pride event at a Club. But that is just me, check the Campus Bee page Mr. Minister and you might not need the expensive machine to see the madness. You should also talk with Honourable Janet Museveni to fix the funding of these Student-fees and such so the scholarship makes these female student doesn’t need to hook to read books. That should worry the Ministry of Ethics more than explicit content online or the Gay’s doing their thing.

Hear Ye! Hear Ye! Honourable Minister Reverend Simon Lokodo, you are not making this easy as you attack and undermine anybody who is not you. You might think that is wise, but in the end nobody can do anything in the Republic without begging for mercy by one of the Civil Servants in their area. Than everything can become questionable and will by the time the government look into it; have an ability to create malicious and destructive for the moral manner of society. So NTV Uganda, UBC and kind of radio station will be seen to broadcasting or distributing ethical and moral content that can be set under question. Therefore any kind of writing with certain content will also be disarmed and banned as the sensitization of society happens, but also moral tyranny where the certain elite and such paternalistically describes to their citizens as children with no moral backbone. Is that you Hon. Lokodo?

Spying Ug

Are you the paternalistically on society and wants to shield from everything, than soon the citizens cannot do anything. The censorship of media houses and citizens will be staggering as the state has to have more than a monitoring machine as the spies and the whistle-blowers will be hurried to give intelligence to the Commissions who follow these acts of fellow citizens. Do you want a snitching society like the East Germany of 1960s? Is that your final goal Hon. Lodoko as the guilty in your mind are anybody with a working libido and anybody who shows or explicitly explain sexuality in text. Isn’t that true Mr. Simon?

Should you be nicknamed Honourable Reverend Simon “Uwe” Lokodo? Or am I wrong.

Best regards from the Writer of this humble blog.

Post Navigation

%d bloggers like this: