Privacy International

https://privacyinternational.org

  • Alexa, stop being creepy ! Our letter to Jeff Bezos
    https://privacyinternational.org/feature/2820/alexa-stop-being-creepy-our-letter-jeff-bezos

    Last week, an investigation by Bloomberg revealed that thousands of Amazon employees around the world are listening in on Amazon Echo users. As we have been explaining across media, we believe that by using default settings and vague privacy policies which allow Amazon employees to listen in on the recordings of users’ interactions with their devices, Amazon risks deliberately deceiving its customers. Amazon has so far been dismissive, arguing that people had the options to opt out from (...)

    #Amazon #Alexa #domotique #écoutes #profiling #BigData #famille #surveillance #PrivacyInternational

  • Du panneau #publicitaire au crime #humanitaire en passant par les #smartcities de nos maires :

    Au départ je voulais juste vous transmettre cette petite action #antipub sympatoche :
    Résistance à l’Agression Publicitaire
    [1 CLIC QUI RÉSISTE] « On a installé une page spéciale sur notre serveur. Cliquer sur le lien pour supprimer une adresse MAC aléatoire des nouveaux capteurs d’audience de la RATP et SNCF (et rafraîchir la page pour en supprimer d’autres) :-D »
    –-> https://antipub.org/retency.html

    Cette action fait suite à l’expérimentation lancée gare Saint Lazare en vue d’utiliser les panneaux publicitaires sous forme d’écrans à des fins de comptage des passants via des capteurs détectant les adresses MAC de leurs smartphones.
    Article ici : http://maisouvaleweb.fr/face-aux-panneaux-publicitaires-numeriques-devons-affirmer-dimension-c

    Dans un commentaire une personne souligne, qu’une adresse MAC n’est pas « juste » un simple numéro. Elle peut donner accès à énormément de données personnelles. La réponse qui lui est faite développe un aspect que je ne connaissais pas : la (non) position de la CNIL sur le sujet :

    L’analyse juridique proposée dans la première partie de l’article est incomplète et pourrait conduire à une conclusion erronée, comme quoi la collecte d’adresse MAC sans consentement serait conforme au droit dès lors que cette adresse serait anonymisée à court délai et que les personnes concernées pourraient s’opposer à cette collecte.

    Cette erreur de l’auteur semble s’expliquer du fait qu’il a pris pour argent comptant les interprétations du droit données par la CNIL dans ses décisions, comme si la CNIL était neutre et seule bouche de la loi.

    Or, la CNIL n’est pas du tout neutre, et notamment pas sur cette question où elle a une position singulière, critiquable d’un point de vue tant politique que juridique.

    Le traitement d’adresses MAC est encadré juridiquement par le RGPD mais aussi, depuis plus longue date, par la directive 2002/58 (liens en bas de commentaire). Or, cette directive n’a été que très mal transposée en France, comme un peu partout ailleurs dans l’UE. Du coup, la CNIL est depuis très mal à l’aise à l’idée d’appliquer cette directive, car elle ne sait pas jusqu’où elle peut l’interpréter pour se donner davantage de pouvoir. Or, de façon classique, la CNIL étant terrorisée à l’idée d’être sanctionnée par le Conseil d’Etat si elle abuse de ses pouvoirs, elle préfère ne rien faire, lâchement.

    La suite du commentaire et ses réponses sont tout aussi intéressantes : http://maisouvaleweb.fr/face-aux-panneaux-publicitaires-numeriques-devons-affirmer-dimension-collective-donnees-personnelles/#comment-55246

    Résistance à l’agression Publicitaire avait fait un dossier inquiet en 2014 : « Les caméras publicitaires, pur fantasme ?  »
    https://antipub.org/dossier-les-cameras-publicitaires-pur-fantasme

    Reporterre a aussi fait un article sur le sujet des panneaux publicitaires : https://reporterre.net/Les-panneaux-publicitaires-numeriques-envahissent-l-espace-public-et-nos

    Il se trouve que c’est justement par ce biais, de la récupération des données en toute « politesse » (je te ponctionne un peu d’identité contre un peu de réseau) que sont actuellement conçues les villes du futur, les #smartcities et que des décideurs politiques font des choix sans anticiper le moins du monde (ou parfois si, à des fins policière) ce que cela induit pour les populations qui seront concernées...

    Horreur. Le temps d’aller vérifier une donnée, je tombe sur cette info relevée par Olivier Tesquet sur twitter :

    L’entreprise israélienne Cellebrite, spécialisée dans l’extraction de données (ils auraient aidé Apple à déverrouiller l’iPhone de l’auteur de l’attentat de San Bernardino en 2016) a identifié un nouveau marché porteur : les demandeurs d’asile.
    Selon un slide de Cellebrite présenté au Maroc, 77% des réfugiés arrivent à destination sans papiers d’identité... mais 43% d’entre eux possèdent un smartphone. Pourquoi la police aux frontières n’aurait-elle pas toute latitude pour fouiller dedans ?

    Source : https://privacyinternational.org/feature/2776/surveillance-company-cellebrite-finds-new-exploit-spying-asylu
    Suite du thread : https://twitter.com/oliviertesquet/status/1113816301435224064

    #publicité #data #données_personnelles #big_brother #traçabilité #identité #numérique

  • New report exposes global reach of powerful governments who equip, finance and train other countries to spy on their populations

    Privacy International has today released a report that looks at how powerful governments are financing, training and equipping countries — including authoritarian regimes — with surveillance capabilities. The report warns that rather than increasing security, this is entrenching authoritarianism.

    Countries with powerful security agencies are spending literally billions to equip, finance, and train security and surveillance agencies around the world — including authoritarian regimes. This is resulting in entrenched authoritarianism, further facilitation of abuse against people, and diversion of resources from long-term development programmes.

    The report, titled ‘Teach ’em to Phish: State Sponsors of Surveillance’ is available to download here.

    Examples from the report include:

    In 2001, the US spent $5.7 billion in security aid. In 2017 it spent over $20 billion [1]. In 2015, military and non-military security assistance in the US amounted to an estimated 35% of its entire foreign aid expenditure [2]. The report provides examples of how US Departments of State, Defense, and Justice all facilitate foreign countries’ surveillance capabilities, as well as an overview of how large arms companies have embedded themselves into such programmes, including at surveillance training bases in the US. Examples provided include how these agencies have provided communications intercept and other surveillance technology, how they fund wiretapping programmes, and how they train foreign spy agencies in surveillance techniques around the world.

    The EU and individual European countries are sponsoring surveillance globally. The EU is already spending billions developing border control and surveillance capabilities in foreign countries to deter migration to Europe. For example, the EU is supporting Sudan’s leader with tens of millions of Euros aimed at capacity building for border management. The EU is now looking to massively increase its expenditure aimed at building border control and surveillance capabilities globally under the forthcoming Multiannual Financial Framework, which will determine its budget for 2021–2027. Other EU projects include developing the surveillance capabilities of security agencies in Tunisia, Burkina Faso, Somalia, Iraq and elsewhere. European countries such as France, Germany, and the UK are sponsoring surveillance worldwide, for example, providing training and equipment to “Cyber Police Officers” in Ukraine, as well as to agencies in Saudi Arabia, and across Africa.

    Surveillance capabilities are also being supported by China’s government under the ‘Belt and Road Initiative’ and other efforts to expand into international markets. Chinese companies have reportedly supplied surveillance capabilities to Bolivia, Venezuela, and Ecuador [3]. In Ecuador, China Electronics Corporation supplied a network of cameras — including some fitted with facial recognition capabilities — to the country’s 24 provinces, as well as a system to locate and identify mobile phones.

    Edin Omanovic, Privacy International’s Surveillance Programme Lead, said

    “The global rush to make sure that surveillance is as universal and pervasive as possible is as astonishing as it is disturbing. The breadth of institutions, countries, agencies, and arms companies that are involved shows how there is no real long-term policy or strategic thinking driving any of this. It’s a free-for-all, where capabilities developed by some of the world’s most powerful spy agencies are being thrown at anyone willing to serve their interests, including dictators and killers whose only goal is to cling to power.

    “If these ‘benefactor’ countries truly want to assist other countries to be secure and stable, they should build schools, hospitals, and other infrastructure, and promote democracy and human rights. This is what communities need for safety, security, and prosperity. What we don’t need is powerful and wealthy countries giving money to arms companies to build border control and surveillance infrastructure. This only serves the interests of those powerful, wealthy countries. As our report shows, instead of putting resources into long-term development solutions, such programmes further entrench authoritarianism and spur abuses around the world — the very things which cause insecurity in the first place.”

    https://privacyinternational.org/press-release/2161/press-release-new-report-exposes-global-reach-powerful-governm

    #surveillance #surveillance_de_masse #rapport

    Pour télécharger le rapport “Teach ’em to Phish: State Sponsors of Surveillance”:
    https://privacyinternational.org/sites/default/files/2018-07/Teach-em-to-Phish-report.pdf

    ping @fil

    • China Uses DNA to Track Its People, With the Help of American Expertise

      The Chinese authorities turned to a Massachusetts company and a prominent Yale researcher as they built an enormous system of surveillance and control.

      The authorities called it a free health check. Tahir Imin had his doubts.

      They drew blood from the 38-year-old Muslim, scanned his face, recorded his voice and took his fingerprints. They didn’t bother to check his heart or kidneys, and they rebuffed his request to see the results.

      “They said, ‘You don’t have the right to ask about this,’” Mr. Imin said. “‘If you want to ask more,’ they said, ‘you can go to the police.’”

      Mr. Imin was one of millions of people caught up in a vast Chinese campaign of surveillance and oppression. To give it teeth, the Chinese authorities are collecting DNA — and they got unlikely corporate and academic help from the United States to do it.

      China wants to make the country’s Uighurs, a predominantly Muslim ethnic group, more subservient to the Communist Party. It has detained up to a million people in what China calls “re-education” camps, drawing condemnation from human rights groups and a threat of sanctions from the Trump administration.

      Collecting genetic material is a key part of China’s campaign, according to human rights groups and Uighur activists. They say a comprehensive DNA database could be used to chase down any Uighurs who resist conforming to the campaign.

      Police forces in the United States and elsewhere use genetic material from family members to find suspects and solve crimes. Chinese officials, who are building a broad nationwide database of DNA samples, have cited the crime-fighting benefits of China’s own genetic studies.

      To bolster their DNA capabilities, scientists affiliated with China’s police used equipment made by Thermo Fisher, a Massachusetts company. For comparison with Uighur DNA, they also relied on genetic material from people around the world that was provided by #Kenneth_Kidd, a prominent #Yale_University geneticist.

      On Wednesday, #Thermo_Fisher said it would no longer sell its equipment in Xinjiang, the part of China where the campaign to track Uighurs is mostly taking place. The company said separately in an earlier statement to The New York Times that it was working with American officials to figure out how its technology was being used.

      Dr. Kidd said he had been unaware of how his material and know-how were being used. He said he believed Chinese scientists were acting within scientific norms that require informed consent by DNA donors.

      China’s campaign poses a direct challenge to the scientific community and the way it makes cutting-edge knowledge publicly available. The campaign relies in part on public DNA databases and commercial technology, much of it made or managed in the United States. In turn, Chinese scientists have contributed Uighur DNA samples to a global database, potentially violating scientific norms of consent.

      Cooperation from the global scientific community “legitimizes this type of genetic surveillance,” said Mark Munsterhjelm, an assistant professor at the University of Windsor in Ontario who has closely tracked the use of American technology in Xinjiang.

      Swabbing Millions

      In Xinjiang, in northwestern China, the program was known as “#Physicals_for_All.”

      From 2016 to 2017, nearly 36 million people took part in it, according to Xinhua, China’s official news agency. The authorities collected DNA samples, images of irises and other personal data, according to Uighurs and human rights groups. It is unclear whether some residents participated more than once — Xinjiang has a population of about 24.5 million.

      In a statement, the Xinjiang government denied that it collects DNA samples as part of the free medical checkups. It said the DNA machines that were bought by the Xinjiang authorities were for “internal use.”

      China has for decades maintained an iron grip in Xinjiang. In recent years, it has blamed Uighurs for a series of terrorist attacks in Xinjiang and elsewhere in China, including a 2013 incident in which a driver struck two people in Tiananmen Square in Beijing.

      In late 2016, the Communist Party embarked on a campaign to turn the Uighurs and other largely Muslim minority groups into loyal supporters. The government locked up hundreds of thousands of them in what it called job training camps, touted as a way to escape poverty, backwardness and radical Islam. It also began to take DNA samples.

      In at least some of the cases, people didn’t give up their genetic material voluntarily. To mobilize Uighurs for the free medical checkups, police and local cadres called or sent them text messages, telling them the checkups were required, according to Uighurs interviewed by The Times.

      “There was a pretty strong coercive element to it,” said Darren Byler, an anthropologist at the University of Washington who studies the plight of the Uighurs. “They had no choice.”

      Calling Dr. Kidd

      Kenneth Kidd first visited China in 1981 and remained curious about the country. So when he received an invitation in 2010 for an expenses-paid trip to visit Beijing, he said yes.

      Dr. Kidd is a major figure in the genetics field. The 77-year-old Yale professor has helped to make DNA evidence more acceptable in American courts.

      His Chinese hosts had their own background in law enforcement. They were scientists from the Ministry of Public Security — essentially, China’s police.

      During that trip, Dr. Kidd met Li Caixia, the chief forensic physician of the ministry’s Institute of Forensic Science. The relationship deepened. In December 2014, Dr. Li arrived at Dr. Kidd’s lab for an 11-month stint. She took some DNA samples back to China.

      “I had thought we were sharing samples for collaborative research,” said Dr. Kidd.

      Dr. Kidd is not the only prominent foreign geneticist to have worked with the Chinese authorities. Bruce Budowle, a professor at the University of North Texas, says in his online biography that he “has served or is serving” as a member of an academic committee at the ministry’s Institute of Forensic Science.

      Jeff Carlton, a university spokesman, said in a statement that Professor Budowle’s role with the ministry was “only symbolic in nature” and that he had “done no work on its behalf.”

      “Dr. Budowle and his team abhor the use of DNA technology to persecute ethnic or religious groups,” Mr. Carlton said in the statement. “Their work focuses on criminal investigations and combating human trafficking to serve humanity.”

      Dr. Kidd’s data became part of China’s DNA drive.

      In 2014, ministry researchers published a paper describing a way for scientists to tell one ethnic group from another. It cited, as an example, the ability to distinguish Uighurs from Indians. The authors said they used 40 DNA samples taken from Uighurs in China and samples from other ethnic groups from Dr. Kidd’s Yale lab.

      In patent applications filed in China in 2013 and 2017, ministry researchers described ways to sort people by ethnicity by screening their genetic makeup. They took genetic material from Uighurs and compared it with DNA from other ethnic groups. In the 2017 filing, researchers explained that their system would help in “inferring the geographical origin from the DNA of suspects at crime scenes.”

      For outside comparisons, they used DNA samples provided by Dr. Kidd’s lab, the 2017 filing said. They also used samples from the 1000 Genomes Project, a public catalog of genes from around the world.

      Paul Flicek, member of the steering committee of the 1000 Genomes Project, said that its data was unrestricted and that “there is no obvious problem” if it was being used as a way to determine where a DNA sample came from.

      The data flow also went the other way.

      Chinese government researchers contributed the data of 2,143 Uighurs to the Allele Frequency Database, an online search platform run by Dr. Kidd that was partly funded by the United States Department of Justice until last year. The database, known as Alfred, contains DNA data from more than 700 populations around the world.

      This sharing of data could violate scientific norms of informed consent because it is not clear whether the Uighurs volunteered their DNA samples to the Chinese authorities, said Arthur Caplan, the founding head of the division of medical ethics at New York University’s School of Medicine. He said that “no one should be in a database without express consent.”

      “Honestly, there’s been a kind of naïveté on the part of American scientists presuming that other people will follow the same rules and standards wherever they come from,” Dr. Caplan said.

      Dr. Kidd said he was “not particularly happy” that the ministry had cited him in its patents, saying his data shouldn’t be used in ways that could allow people or institutions to potentially profit from it. If the Chinese authorities used data they got from their earlier collaborations with him, he added, there is little he can do to stop them.

      He said he was unaware of the filings until he was contacted by The Times.

      Dr. Kidd also said he considered his collaboration with the ministry to be no different from his work with police and forensics labs elsewhere. He said governments should have access to data about minorities, not just the dominant ethnic group, in order to have an accurate picture of the whole population.

      As for the consent issue, he said the burden of meeting that standard lay with the Chinese researchers, though he said reports about what Uighurs are subjected to in China raised some difficult questions.

      “I would assume they had appropriate informed consent on the samples,” he said, “though I must say what I’ve been hearing in the news recently about the treatment of the Uighurs raises concerns.”
      Machine Learning

      In 2015, Dr. Kidd and Dr. Budowle spoke at a genomics conference in the Chinese city of Xi’an. It was underwritten in part by Thermo Fisher, a company that has come under intense criticism for its equipment sales in China, and Illumina, a San Diego company that makes gene sequencing instruments. Illumina did not respond to requests for comment.

      China is ramping up spending on health care and research. The Chinese market for gene-sequencing equipment and other technologies was worth $1 billion in 2017 and could more than double in five years, according to CCID Consulting, a research firm. But the Chinese market is loosely regulated, and it isn’t always clear where the equipment goes or to what uses it is put.

      Thermo Fisher sells everything from lab instruments to forensic DNA testing kits to DNA mapping machines, which help scientists decipher a person’s ethnicity and identify diseases to which he or she is particularly vulnerable. China accounted for 10 percent of Thermo Fisher’s $20.9 billion in revenue, according to the company’s 2017 annual report, and it employs nearly 5,000 people there.

      “Our greatest success story in emerging markets continues to be China,” it said in the report.

      China used Thermo Fisher’s equipment to map the genes of its people, according to five Ministry of Public Security patent filings.

      The company has also sold equipment directly to the authorities in Xinjiang, where the campaign to control the Uighurs has been most intense. At least some of the equipment was intended for use by the police, according to procurement documents. The authorities there said in the documents that the machines were important for DNA inspections in criminal cases and had “no substitutes in China.”

      In February 2013, six ministry researchers credited Thermo Fisher’s Applied Biosystems brand, as well as other companies, with helping to analyze the DNA samples of Han, Uighur and Tibetan people in China, according to a patent filing. The researchers said understanding how to differentiate between such DNA samples was necessary for fighting terrorism “because these cases were becoming more difficult to crack.”

      The researchers said they had obtained 95 Uighur DNA samples, some of which were given to them by the police. Other samples were provided by Uighurs voluntarily, they said.

      Thermo Fisher was criticized by Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, and others who asked the Commerce Department to prohibit American companies from selling technology to China that could be used for purposes of surveillance and tracking.

      On Wednesday, Thermo Fisher said it would stop selling its equipment in Xinjiang, a decision it said was “consistent with Thermo Fisher’s values, ethics code and policies.”

      “As the world leader in serving science, we recognize the importance of considering how our products and services are used — or may be used — by our customers,” it said.

      Human rights groups praised Thermo Fisher’s move. Still, they said, equipment and information flows into China should be better monitored, to make sure the authorities elsewhere don’t send them to Xinjiang.

      “It’s an important step, and one hopes that they apply the language in their own statement to commercial activity across China, and that other companies are assessing their sales and operations, especially in Xinjiang,” said Sophie Richardson, the China director of Human Rights Watch.

      American lawmakers and officials are taking a hard look at the situation in Xinjiang. The Trump administration is considering sanctions against Chinese officials and companies over China’s treatment of the Uighurs.

      China’s tracking campaign unnerved people like Tahir Hamut. In May 2017, the police in the city of Urumqi in Xinjiang drew the 49-year-old Uighur’s blood, took his fingerprints, recorded his voice and took a scan of his face. He was called back a month later for what he was told was a free health check at a local clinic.

      Mr. Hamut, a filmmaker who is now living in Virginia, said he saw between 20 to 40 Uighurs in line. He said it was absurd to think that such frightened people had consented to submit their DNA.

      “No one in this situation, not under this much pressure and facing such personal danger, would agree to give their blood samples for research,” Mr. Hamut said. “It’s just inconceivable.”

      https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/21/business/china-xinjiang-uighur-dna-thermo-fisher.html?action=click&module=MoreInSect
      #USA #Etats-Unis #ADN #DNA #Ouïghours #université #science #génétique #base_de_données

  • Software spia, le nuove armi africane

    Ufficialmente introdotti contro il terrorismo, sono usati anche per controllare dissidenti politici.

    Almeno dal 2009 l’Egitto è tra i principali acquirenti di strumentazioni per la sorveglianza di massa. #Software intrusivi che si possono agganciare ai telefonini oppure alle mail e tracciare così i comportamenti di chiunque. Specialmente se considerato un nemico politico dal regime. Al Cairo, dopo la primavera araba, si è abbattuto un rigido inverno dei diritti: oppositori politici, sindacalisti, persino ricercatori universitari come Giulio Regeni sono stati fatti sparire, ammazzati o torturati. Per fare tutto questo, le agenzia di sicurezza hanno spiato i loro bersagli attraverso sistemi informatici. Tra le aziende, chi ha fatturato vendendo gli strumenti per spiare i nemici politici, c’è l’italiana #Hacking_Team, le cui mail sono state rese pubbliche da una maxi fuga di notizie nel luglio 2015.

    L’Egitto non è l’unico paese africano a fare uso di questo tipo di tecnologie. In particolare in Africa, questo genere di strumenti per tenere sotto controllo la popolazione stanno diventando una costante. Sono l’ultima frontiera del mercato delle armi. Nemico ufficiale contro cui utilizzarle: il terrorismo, che si chiami Al Shabaab, Boko Haram, Isis. In pratica, da semplici persone “sospette” a dissidenti politici.

    Una stima di Markets and Markets del 2014 prevede che per il 2019 il mercato delle “intercettazioni” varrà 1,3 miliardi di dollari. E accanto a questo corre un mercato nero dalle dimensioni inimmaginabili, dove ogni transazione avviene nel deep web, il doppio fondo del contenitore di internet. Senza bisogno di autorizzazioni, né di sistemi di licenze, come invece previsto dalle normative di tutto il mondo. I paesi africani sono tra i nuovi agguerriti compratori di queste armi 2.0, di fabbricazione per lo più israeliana ed europea.

    La mappa degli spioni

    L’utilizzo e la vendita di questi sistemi – proprio come per le armi – in diversi paesi è schermato dal segreto militare, nonostante il “duplice uso” (civile e militare) che possono avere questi strumenti. Detti, appunto, dual-use. L’inchiesta Security for Sale (https://irpi.eu/sicurezza-vendesi), condotta in febbraio da 22 giornalisti europei, ha individuato i principali importatori di tecnologie intrusive in Africa. La lista è lunga: oltre il Kenya, di cui Osservatorio Diritti ha già parlato, e l’Egitto, l’esempio più famoso, ci sono Libia (ancora sotto Gheddafi, ndr), Etiopia, Nigeria, Sudan, Sudafrica, Mauritania e Uganda.
    #Kenya #Libye #Ethiopie #Nigeria #Soudan

    In Mauritania è in carcere da due anni il cittadino italiano #Cristian_Provvisionato per una vendita di sistemi di intercettazione finita male. Provvisionato, una guardia giurata che non sarebbe mai stata in grado di vendere sistemi di questo genere, avrebbe dovuto presentare ai mauritani un sistema di intercettazione per Whatsapp, che la sua azienda – Vigilar – avrebbe a sua volta acquistato attraverso la società indiano-tedesca Wolf Intelligence. Bersaglio del sistema sarebbero dovuti essere terroristi attivi al confine mauritano, per quanto diverse organizzazioni internazionali abbiano sollevato riserve rispetto al possibile utilizzo di sistemi del genere in un paese che viola i diritti umani.
    #Mauritanie

    L’accusa nei confronti di Cristian Provvisionato, cioè truffa, non regge perché il cittadino italiano era all’oscuro, come è stato comprovato da più ricostruzioni giornalistiche, di ciò che stava presentando in Mauritania. Aveva accettato il lavoro perché gli era stato promesso che sarebbe stato veloce, pulito e con un buon guadagno. Invece si trova ancora dietro le sbarre. Per il caso Provvisionato la magistratura milanese ha aperto un’inchiesta che coinvolge anche #Vigilar e #Wolf_Intelligence. Il partner israeliano dei due è una delle aziende da sempre competitor di Hacking Team.

    La stessa Hacking Team ha venduto ad altri regimi autoritari africani (scarica la ricerca del centro studi CitizenLab – università di Toronto). Il caso più clamoroso è quello dei servizi segreti del Sudan, che nel 2012, prima che entrasse in vigore qualunque embargo, hanno acquistato merce per 960 mila euro. Anche le Nazioni Unite, nel 2014, quando è entrato in vigore l’embargo con il Sudan, hanno fatto domande ad Hacking Team in merito alle relazioni commerciali con le forze d’intelligence militare del Paese.
    #Soudan #services_secrets

    Nello stesso 2012 una compagnia britannica aveva iniziato a vendere software intrusivi alle forze militari dell’Uganda. Era l’inizio di un’operazione di spionaggio di alcuni leader politici dell’opposizione che arrivava, denunciavano media locali nel 2015, fino al ricatto di alcuni di loro. Paese di fabbricazione del software spia, come spesso accade, Israele.
    #Ouganda

    Il Sudafrica è un caso a sé: da un lato importatore, dall’altro esportatore di tecnologie-spia. Il primo fornitore di questo genere di software per il Sudafrica è la Gran Bretagna, mentre il mercato di riferimento a cui vendere è quello africano. Il Paese ha anche una propria azienda leader nel settore. Si chiama #VASTech e il suo prodotto di punta è #Zebra, un dispositivo in grado di intercettare chiamate vocali, sms e mms.
    #Afrique_du_sud

    Nel 2013 Privacy International, un’organizzazione internazionale con base in Gran Bretagna che si occupa di privacy e sorveglianza di massa, ha scoperto una fornitura di questo software alla Libia di Gheddafi, nel 2011, nel periodo in cui è stato registrato il picco di attività di spionaggio (dato confermato da Wikileaks). Eppure, dal 2009 al 2013 solo 48 potenziale contravvenzioni sono finite sotto indagine del Ncac, l’ente governativo preposto a questo genere di controlli.

    Il settore, però, nello stesso lasso di tempo ha avuto un boom incredibile, arrivando nel solo 2012 a 4.407 licenze di esportazione per 94 paesi in totale. Il mercato vale circa 8 miliardi di euro. In Sudafrica sono in corso proteste per chiedere le dimissioni del presidente Jacob Zuma, coinvolto in diversi casi di corruzione e ormai considerato impresentabile. È lecito pensare che anche questa volta chi manifesta sia tenuto sotto osservazione da sistemi di sorveglianza.


    https://www.osservatoriodiritti.it/2017/05/08/software-spia-le-nuove-armi-africane
    #Afrique #surveillance #interception #surveillance_de_masse #Egypte #business

    ping @fil

    • Security for sale

      The European Union has deep pockets when it comes to security. Major defense contractors and tech giants compete for generous subsidies, to better protect us from crime and terrorism. At least that’s the idea. But who really benefits? The public or the security industry itself?

      Over the past year, we’ve worked with more than twenty journalists in eleven European countries to investigate this burgeoning sector. We quickly discovered that the European security industry is primarily taking good care of itself – often at the expense of the public.

      In this crash course Security for Sale, we bring you up to speed on EU policy makers and industry big shots who’ve asserted themselves as “managers of unease,” on the lobbies representing major defense companies, on the billions spent on security research, and on the many ethical issues surrounding the European security industry.

      “Security for sale” is a journalistic project coordinated by Dutch newspaper De Correspondent and IRPI collaborated for the Italian context. The webportal of “Security for Sale” collects all articles produced within the project in several languages.

      https://irpi.eu/en/security-for-sale

    • Lawful Interception Market worth $1,342.4 Million by 2019

      The report “Lawful Interception Market by Network Technologies and Devices ( VOIP, LTE, WLAN, WIMAX, DSL, PSTN, ISDN, CDMA, GSM, GPRS, Mediation Devices, Routers, Management Servers); Communication Content; End Users - Global Advancement, Worldwide Forecast & Analysis (2014-2019)” defines and segments the LI market on the basis of devices, network technologies, communication content, and services with in-depth analysis and forecasting of revenues. It also identifies drivers and restraints for this market with insights on trends, opportunities, and challenges.

      Browse 80 market tables and 23 figures spread through 177 pages and in-depth TOC on “Lawful Interception Market by Network Technologies and Devices ( VOIP, LTE, WLAN, WIMAX, DSL, PSTN, ISDN, CDMA, GSM, GPRS, Mediation Devices, Routers, Management Servers); Communication Content; End Users - Global Advancement, Worldwide Forecast & Analysis (2014-2019)”
      https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Market-Reports/lawful-interception-market-1264.html
      Early buyers will receive 10% customization on reports.

      Lawful Interception (LI) has been proven to be very helpful for the security agencies or Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs) for combating terrorism and criminal activities. Across the world, countries have adopted such legislative regulations and made it compulsory for the operators to make LI-enabled communication network. Since the advancement of communication channels and network technologies over the period of time, the interception techniques have also enhanced for variety of communications such as Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP), web-traffic, Electronic Mail (Email), and more. Now, the interception is possible for all networks that deliver voice, data, and Internet services.

      Sophisticated communication channels and advanced network technologies are the major driving factors for the LI market. Nowadays, communication can be done in various forms such as voice, text, video, and many more. To transfer these types of data, network technologies need to constantly upgrade. The different types of network technologies that can be intercepted are VoIP, LTE, WLAN, WiMax, DSL, PSTN, ISDN, CDMA, GSM, and GPRS, are discussed in this report.

      MarketsandMarkets has broadly segmented the LI market by devices such as management servers, mediation devices, Intercept Access Points (IAP), switches, routers, gateways, and Handover Interfaces (HIs). The LI market is also segmented on the basis of communication contents and networking technology. By regions: North America (NA), Europe (EU), Asia Pacific (APAC), Middle East and Africa (MEA), and Latin America (LA).

      The LI market is expected to grow at a rapid pace in the regional markets of APAC and MEA. The investments in security in APAC and MEA are attracting the players operating in the LI market. These regions would also be the highest revenue generating markets in the years to come. Considerable growth is expected in the NA and European LI markets. New wireless network and network technologies like LTE, WiMax, NGN, and many more are expected to be the emerging technological trends in the LI market.

      MarketsandMarkets forecasts the Lawful Interception market to grow from $251.5 million in 2014 to $1,342.4 million by 2019. In terms of regions, North America and Europe are expected to be the biggest markets in terms of revenue contribution, while Asia-Pacific, Middle East and Africa, and Latin America are expected to experience increased market traction, during the forecast period.

      About MarketsandMarkets

      MarketsandMarkets is a global market research and consulting company based in the U.S. We publish strategically analyzed market research reports and serve as a business intelligence partner to Fortune 500 companies across the world.

      MarketsandMarkets also provides multi-client reports, company profiles, databases, and custom research services. M&M covers thirteen industry verticals, including advanced materials, automotives and transportation, banking and financial services, biotechnology, chemicals, consumer goods, energy and power, food and beverages, industrial automation, medical devices, pharmaceuticals, semiconductor and electronics, and telecommunications and IT.

      We at MarketsandMarkets are inspired to help our clients grow by providing apt business insight with our huge market intelligence repository.

      https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/PressReleases/lawful-interception.asp

    • Antiterrorismo con licenza d’uccidere

      Kenya osservato speciale: le ong parlano di vittime, sparizioni e intercettazioni diffuse.

      Da gennaio a ottobre 2016 in Kenya sono state uccise dalle forze dell’ordine 177 persone. Lo scrive nel suo rapporto annuale 2016/2017 la ong Amnesty international. Uccisioni stragiudiziali per mano delle cosiddette Kenyan Death Squads, gli squadroni della morte in azione contro presunti terroristi. A risalire la catena di comando, si arriva fino ai piani alti del governo, come aveva raccontato Al Jazeera in un’inchiesta del 2015.

      Il Kenya ha conosciuto il terrorismo di matrice jihadista alla fine del 1998, all’epoca della prima bomba all’ambasciata americana di Nairobi: un attentato che ha lanciato nel mondo il marchio Al Qaeda. Il Paese è passato attraverso centinaia di attentati e oggi il terrorismo si chiama Al-Shabaab (leggi “Al-Shabaab avanza in Somalia”). Ma i presunti terroristi sono solo una parte delle vittime degli squadroni della morte: anche avvocati, attivisti e oppositori politici sono finiti sulla lista dei torturati e uccisi. Fare leva sulla paura dei cittadini, in Kenya, è facile.

      Dal 2010 al 2015 si ha notizia di almeno 500 persone fatte sparire da questi nuclei interni di alcuni corpi speciali delle forze dell’ordine del Kenya. Operazioni supervisionate dal Nis, i servizi segreti, svolte poi da agenti della Criminal investigation division (Cid), oppure dall’unità Recce o ancora dalle Kenyan Defence Forces. «Si potrebbero chiamare “morti accettabili”», dice un ufficiale dei servizi segreti kenyoti intervistato sulla vicenda da un ricercatore della ong Privacy International.

      INTERCETTAZIONI DIFFUSE

      E l’argomento “terrorismo” è sufficiente a giustificare un sistema d’intercettazioni persistente, dove non esiste comunicazione che non sia tracciata, né supporti informatici che le forze dell’ordine non possano acquisire. Tutto il meccanismo per rintracciare “i nemici” passerebbe dalle comunicazioni telefoniche, ignorando qualunque norma costituzionale kenyota. «Gli ufficiali che abbiamo intervistato hanno ammesso che spesso si finisce sotto intercettazione per motivi politici e non solo per presunte attività di terrorismo», continua il ricercatore di Privacy International che ha curato il report “Traccia, cattura, uccidi” (per motivi di sicurezza, non è possibile rivelare il suo nome).

      Le forze speciali del Kenya avrebbero una presenza stabile all’interno delle compagnie telefoniche del paese. «Agenti Nis sono informalmente presenti nelle strutture per le telecomunicazioni, apparentemente sotto copertura», si legge nel rapporto. Elementi che sarebbero stati confermati da dipendenti di compagnie telefoniche e agenti. «I dipendenti hanno paura che negare l’accesso possa avere delle ripercussioni», aggiunge il ricercatore.

      Safaricom è la più importante compagnia telefonica del paese: controlla oltre il 60% del mercato della telefonia kenyota. Azionista di maggioranza è Vodafone e secondo il rapporto al suo interno ci sarebbero dieci agenti della Cid. Attraverso un’interfaccia, avrebbero libero accesso al database interno in cui sono registrate telefonate, proprietari, transazioni monetarie attraverso la rete mobile. Un universo.

      Questo è quello che raccontano le fonti interne scovate da Privacy International. Mentre Safaricom, ufficialmente, nega questo flusso di informazioni. L’amministratore delegato di Safaricom, Bob Collymore, tra gli uomini più ricchi del Kenya, ha risposto alla ong sostenendo che la sua azienda «non ha relazioni con Nis riferite alla sorveglianza delle comunicazioni in Kenya e non ci sono ufficiali Nis impiegati nell’azienda, ufficialmente o sotto copertura».

      Il Kenya acquista all’estero le strumentazioni di cui è dotato il sistema di intercettazioni in funzione nel paese. «Le fonti a cui abbiamo avuto accesso nominavano aziende inglesi ed israeliane, ma non sanno come funziona l’acquisto degli strumenti per intercettazioni», aggiunge il ricercatore di Privacy International. Gli strumenti più diffusi sono i famosi IMSI Catcher. All’apparenza, delle semplice valigette con un involucro nero all’estero, rinforzato. In realtà sono delle antenne attraverso cui è possibile intercettare telefonate effettuate nel raggio di circa 300 metri.

      Ci sono poi anche software intrusivi, che agganciano il telefono una volta che l’utente apre uno specifico messaggio via Sms o WhatsApp. Nel 2015 le rivelazioni su Hacking Team, l’azienda milanese che vendeva in mezzo mondo dei software spia, avevano permesso di scoprire anche trattative in corso con forze speciali del Kenya. Gli obiettivi dello spionaggio sarebbero stati uomini legati all’opposizione.

      https://www.osservatoriodiritti.it/2017/04/12/antiterrorismo-con-licenza-di-uccidere
      #anti-terrorisme #opposition #opposants_au_régime #persécution

  • Press release: UK intelligence agency admits unlawfully spying on Privacy International | Privacy International
    http://privacyinternational.org/press-release/2283/press-release-uk-intelligence-agency-admits-unlawfully-spying-

    The UK’s domestic-facing intelligence agency, MI5, today admitted that it captured and read Privacy International’s private data as part of its Bulk Communications Data (BCD) and Bulk Personal Datasets (BPD) programmes, which hoover up massive amounts of the public’s data. In further startling legal disclosures, all three of the UK’s primary intelligence agencies - GCHQ, MI5, and MI6 - also admitted that they unlawfully gathered data about Privacy International or its staff.

  • Press release: UK intelligence agency admits unlawfully spying on Privacy International | Privacy International
    https://privacyinternational.org/press-release/2283/press-release-uk-intelligence-agency-admits-unlawfully-spying-
    http://privacyinternational.org

    Thames House, Offices of MI5. Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons

    MI5 collected Privacy International’s private data and examined it
    GCHQ, MI5, and MI6 unlawfully collected data relating to UK charity Privacy International
    Privacy International has written to the UK’s Home Secretary demanding action against spy agencies
    Disclosures come less than a fortnight after UK laws on mass surveillance ruled unlawful at European Court of Human Rights

    The UK’s domestic-facing intelligence agency, MI5, today admitted that it captured and read Privacy International’s private data as part of its Bulk Communications Data (BCD) and Bulk Personal Datasets (BPD) programmes, which hoover up massive amounts of the public’s data. In further startling legal disclosures, all three of the UK’s primary intelligence agencies - GCHQ, MI5, and MI6 - also admitted that they unlawfully gathered data about Privacy International or its staff.

    The intelligence agencies have repeatedly denied that their BPD and BCD programmes are tantamount to mass surveillance of people not suspected of any wrongdoing. Documents published today demonstrate that Privacy International, an international NGO, has been caught up in MI5’s investigations because its data was part of the UK intelligence agencies vast databases.

    These revelations came during the course of Privacy International’s challenge to the BPD and BCD powers, which is currently pending before the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT), a court which is set up to hear claims against the UK intelligence services. The IPT is required to inquire into any unlawful activity by the UK intelligence agencies, and to provide a summary of such activity to any claimant that comes before it.

  • 10 Human Rights Organisations v. United Kingdom
    https://privacyinternational.org/legal-action/10-human-rights-organisations-v-united-kingdom

    In March 2015, Privacy International, together with nine other NGOs, filed an application to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), challenging two aspects of the United Kingdom’s surveillance regime revealed by the Snowden disclosures : (1) UK bulk interception of internet traffic transiting undersea fibre optic cables landing in the UK and (2) UK access to the information gathered by the US through its various bulk surveillance programs. Our co-applicants are the American Civil (...)

    #GCHQ #algorithme #spyware #écoutes #web #surveillance #DRIP #ACLU #PrivacyInternational

    /sites/default/files/fav/apple-icon-180x180.png

  • How do data companies get our data ?
    https://privacyinternational.org/feature/2048/how-do-data-companies-get-our-data

    Open a Russian Matryoshka doll and you will find a smaller doll inside. Ask a large data company such as Acxiom and Oracle where they get their data from, and the answer will be from smaller data companies. Data companies – a catch all term for data brokers, advertisers, marketers, web trackers, and more – facilitate a hidden data ecosystem that collects, generates and supplies data to wide variety of beneficiaries. The beneficiaries of the ecosystem can include other advertisers, social (...)

    #Acxiom #Experian #Oracle #algorithme #données #BigData #data-mining #marketing #profiling #PrivacyInternational #Quantcast #cookies #Facebook #Twitter #tracker #publicité #AddThis #ZiffDavis #ReadGroup #smartphone #Android (...)

    ##publicité ##[fr]Règlement_Général_sur_la_Protection_des_Données__RGPD_[en]General_Data_Protection_Regulation__GDPR_[nl]General_Data_Protection_Regulation__GDPR_ ##WiFi ##carte ##MasterCard ##Epsilon ##Shopper'sVoice
    /sites/default/files/fav/apple-icon-180x180.png

  • Secret Global Surveillance Networks : Intelligence Sharing Between Governments and the Need for Safeguards
    https://privacyinternational.org/report/1741/secret-global-surveillance-networks-intelligence-sharing-betwe

    ‘Secret Global Surveillance Networks’ is a major PI report, based on an unprecedented international collaborative investigation carried out by 40 NGOs in 42 countries. Our research shows that, globally, the sharing of intelligence is alarmingly under-regulated, opening the door to human rights abuses. Intelligence sharing has evolved dramatically with the rise of new surveillance technologies, enabling governments to collect, store, and share vast troves of personal information, including (...)

    #contrôle #surveillance #PrivacyInternational

  • The Global Surveillance Industry
    (July 2016)

    https://privacyinternational.org/sites/default/files/global_surveillance.pdf

    This report is about electronic surveillance technologies used to identify, track, and monitor individuals and their communications for intelligence gathering and law enforcement purposes.

    [...]

    This report aims to map modern electronic surveillance technologies, their trade, the companies which manufacture and export them, and the regulation governing their trade. By doing so, it aims to increase understanding about the surveillance industry in order to foster accountability as well as the development of comprehensive safeguards and effective policy.

    #surveillance
    #Privacy_International

  • Big Brother is about to be joined by his Crazy Cousin. The time for trust is over.
    https://privacyinternational.org/node/1004

    Whatever happens over the next few years, if there is to be a storm, then it is best to prepare. It is essential that western liberal democratic societies are resilient enough to uphold their fundamental values. One of the UK’s biggest security assets is one of its biggest security threats. The UK’s spies have access to and are allowed to exercise some of the most sophisticated electronic surveillance techniques in the world. It has underwritten its Special Relationship with the US, (...)

    #GCHQ #écoutes #surveillance #web

  • You need two to tango : The responsibility of companies to respect privacy and free expression in the digital age
    https://privacyinternational.org/node/879

    "State capacity to conduct surveillance may depend on the extent to which business enterprises cooperate with or resist such surveillance” notes the Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression in his report on the role of the private sector to respect human rights in the digital age. The Special Rapporteur will present its findings and recommendations to the Human Rights Council on Thursday. It is no longer sufficient for companies to simply point the finger at intelligence and security (...)

    #surveillance #Privacy_International #écoutes #surveillance #journalisme #GAFA

  • The Right to Inconvenience
    https://privacyinternational.org/node/880

    A recent Washington Post article discussed at length changes coming to Apple’s new operating systems. Described as user-friendly and integrated, Apple’s latest operating system will, among other things, bring Siri voice commands to the desktop, organise photos using facial recognition, suggest relevant emojis in text conversations, and generally underpin the user experience with artificial intelligence. Sold as a seamless and integrated solution to “app fatigue”, Apple aims to give consumers (...)

    #Apple #Siri #reconnaissance_faciale #Privacy_International #solutionnisme_technologique

  • I’m Your Private Spy-er, a Spy-er for Money
    https://privacyinternational.org/node/866

    Last month, the UK Information Commissioner’s Office announced a “private investigator crackdown”, citing concerns that private investigators were using hacking techniques to gain access to personal information. The use of dodgy private investigators and illegal hacking by private investigators in the UK has attracted significant media attention in the wake of the phone hacking scandals, which involved the use of such private investigators by major (...)

    #EDF_ #hacking #Privacy_International #Black_Cube #surveillance #FBI

  • Panama Papers law firm founder says massive offshore company leak is ‘campaign against privacy’. We disagree. | Privacy International
    https://privacyinternational.org/node/824

    We do agree with Ramon Fonseca about one thing: that “Each person has a right to privacy, whether they are a king or a beggar.” But that’s where our commonality with co-founder of disgraced Panama law firm Mossack Fonseca ends. — Permalink

    #fiscalité #vieprivée

    • Au Figaro : pas mieux.

      Le directeur du Figaro compare « Panama Papers » et sida, avant de s’excuser
      http://www.20minutes.fr/societe/1820019-20160405-directeur-figaro-compare-panama-papers-sida-avant-excuser

      « Cette société de la délation m’exaspère. », a-t-il lancé, alors qu’une centaine de journaux du monde entier ont mis au jour un vaste système d’évasion fiscale impliquant des hauts responsables politiques, des sportifs ou des milliardaires.

      L’éditorialiste a qualifié ces informations « de moraline médiatique où l’on jette des noms en pâture sans avoir même enquêté, qui ont évidemment été donnés par des services de renseignement américain », avant de poursuivre : « Demain, on va faire quoi ? Le listing des gens qui ont le sida ? »

  • La semaine commence très bien. La société italienne #Hacking_Team, spécialisée dans la réalisation et la vente d’armes numériques (piratage des ordinateurs des dissidents, espionnage) a été... piratée. Le pirate a mis en ligne 400 Go d’archives internes de la boîte.

    http://www.numerama.com/magazine/33624-la-firme-d-espionnage-hacking-team-piratee-400-go-de-donnees-diffuse http://korben.info/hacking-team-pirate-400-gb-de-donnees-dans-la-nature.html

    Le torrent (sans garanties...) https://mega.co.nz/#!Xx1lhChT!rbB-LQQyRypxd5bcQnqu-IMZN20ygW_lWfdHdqpKH3E

    La situation légale en France, sur les armes numériques http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006070719&idArticle=LEGIART

    #sécurité_informatique

  • Did GCHQ illegally spy on you? | Privacy International
    https://privacyinternational.org/illegalspying

    Because of our recent victory against the UK intelligence agency in court, now anyone in the world — yes, ANYONE, including you — can find out if GCHQ illegally received information about you from the #NSA.

    Join our campaign by entering your details below to find out if GCHQ illegally spied on you, and confirm via the email we send you. We’ll then go to court demanding that they finally come clean on unlawful #surveillance.

    j’ai signé (via @sonntag)