• L’amour au temps de la censure : Lu Yuyu et Li Tingyu, militants chinois

    Lu Yuyu et Li Tingyu étaient en train de récupérer une plante pour Little Stinker, leur chat, lorsque leur histoire d’amour a brutalement pris fin. La police, qui les surveillait depuis le début de leur relation, trois ans plus tôt, les attendait au point de retrait. « Jane » (Li Tingyu) est entrée pour récupérer le paquet, pendant que je l’attendais dehors. Tout à coup, plusieurs hommes ont surgi », a raconté Lu Yuyu à Amnesty International, à son domicile de la province de Guizhou, dans le sud-ouest de (...)

    #Weibo #QQ #activisme #censure #surveillance #AmnestyInternational

  • Contrôles au faciès : six ONG mettent en demeure le gouvernement

    En plein Beauvau de la sécurité, six ONG lancent une action de groupe pour obliger le gouvernement à interdire la discrimination dans les contrôles d’identité, une pratique dénoncée de longue date. Ils sont à la fois l’effet le plus visible et le plus volatil du racisme institutionnel dans la police : les contrôles au faciès. Cette simple terminologie, douloureusement banale, suffit à irriter jusque dans les rangs des forces de l’ordre, très à cheval sur le vocabulaire. La preuve : lors de son (...)

    #police #racisme #discrimination #surveillance #HumanRightsWatch #AmnestyInternational

  • Turquie, Facebook « risque de devenir un instrument de la censure de l’État »

    Le réseau social, Facebook, a annoncé la désignation d’une personne pour la représenter en Turquie conformément aux dispositions d’une nouvelle loi draconienne relative aux réseaux sociaux. « Au cours des dernières semaines, nous avons vu les entreprises, l’une après l’autre, appliquer une nouvelle loi draconienne qui étouffera la contestation. » a déclaré Milena Buyum, chargée de campagne sur la Turquie à Amnesty International. « À la suite de cette décision, Facebook, Google, Youtube et d’autres (...)

    #Google #Facebook #YouTube #censure #publicité #surveillance #AmnestyInternational


  • Inside NSO, Israel’s billion-dollar spyware giant

    The world’s most notorious surveillance company says it wants to clean up its act. Go on, we’re listening.

    Maâti Monjib speaks slowly, like a man who knows he’s being listened to.

    It’s the day of his 58th birthday when we speak, but there’s little celebration in his voice. “The surveillance is hellish,” Monjib tells me. “It is really difficult. It controls everything I do in my life.”

    A history professor at the University of Mohammed V in Rabat, Morocco, Monjib vividly remembers the day in 2017 when his life changed. Charged with endangering state security by the government he has fiercely and publicly criticized, he was sitting outside a courtroom when his iPhone suddenly lit up with a series of text messages from numbers he didn’t recognize. They contained links to salacious news, petitions, and even Black Friday shopping deals.

    A month later, an article accusing him of treason appeared on a popular national news site with close ties to Morocco’s royal rulers. Monjib was used to attacks, but now it seemed his harassers knew everything about him: another article included information about a pro-democracy event he was set to attend but had told almost no one about. One story even proclaimed that the professor “has no secrets from us.”

    He’d been hacked. The messages had all led to websites that researchers say were set up as lures to infect visitors’ devices with Pegasus, the most notorious spyware in the world.

    Pegasus is the blockbuster product of NSO Group, a secretive billion-dollar Israeli surveillance company. It is sold to law enforcement and intelligence agencies around the world, which use the company’s tools to choose a human target, infect the person’s phone with the spyware, and then take over the device. Once Pegasus is on your phone, it is no longer your phone.

    NSO sells Pegasus with the same pitch arms dealers use to sell conventional weapons, positioning it as a crucial aid in the hunt for terrorists and criminals. In an age of ubiquitous technology and strong encryption, such “lawful hacking” has emerged as a powerful tool for public safety when law enforcement needs access to data. NSO insists that the vast majority of its customers are European democracies, although since it doesn’t release client lists and the countries themselves remain silent, that has never been verified.

    Monjib’s case, however, is one of a long list of incidents in which Pegasus has been used as a tool of oppression. It has been linked to cases including the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, the targeting of scientists and campaigners pushing for political reform in Mexico, and Spanish government surveillance of Catalan separatist politicians. Mexico and Spain have denied using Pegasus to spy on opponents, but accusations that they have done so are backed by substantial technical evidence.

    NSO’s basic argument is that it is the creator of a technology that governments use, but that since it doesn’t attack anyone itself, it can’t be held responsible.

    Some of that evidence is contained in a lawsuit filed last October in California by WhatsApp and its parent company, Facebook, alleging that Pegasus manipulated WhatsApp’s infrastructure to infect more than 1,400 cell phones. Investigators at Facebook found more than 100 human rights defenders, journalists, and public figures among the targets, according to court documents. Each call that was picked up, they discovered, sent malicious code through WhatsApp’s infrastructure and caused the recipient’s phone to download spyware from servers owned by NSO. This, WhatsApp argued, was a violation of American law.

    NSO has long faced such accusations with silence. Claiming that much of its business is an Israeli state secret, it has offered precious little public detail about its operations, customers, or safeguards.

    Now, though, the company suggests things are changing. In 2019, NSO, which was owned by a private equity firm, was sold back to its founders and another private equity firm, Novalpina, for $1 billion. The new owners decided on a fresh strategy: emerge from the shadows. The company hired elite public relations firms, crafted new human rights policies, and developed new self-­governance documents. It even began showing off some of its other products, such as a covid-19 tracking system called Fleming, and Eclipse, which can hack drones deemed a security threat.

    Over several months, I’ve spoken with NSO leadership to understand how the company works and what it says it is doing to prevent human rights abuses carried out using its tools. I have spoken to its critics, who see it as a danger to democratic values; to those who urge more regulation of the hacking business; and to the Israeli regulators responsible for governing it today. The company’s leaders talked about NSO’s future and its policies and procedures for dealing with problems, and it shared documents that detail its relationship with the agencies to which it sells Pegasus and other tools. What I found was a thriving arms dealer—inside the company, employees acknowledge that Pegasus is a genuine weapon—struggling with new levels of scrutiny that threaten the foundations of its entire industry.Retour ligne automatique
    “A difficult task”

    From the first day Shmuel Sunray joined NSO as its general counsel, he faced one international incident after another. Hired just days after WhatsApp’s lawsuit was filed, he found other legal problems waiting on his desk as soon as he arrived. They all centered on the same basic accusation: NSO Group’s hacking tools are sold to, and can be abused by, rich and repressive regimes with little or no accountability.

    Sunray had plenty of experience with secrecy and controversy: his previous job was as vice president of a major weapons manufacturer. Over several conversations, he was friendly as he told me that he’s been instructed by the owners to change NSO’s culture and operations, making it more transparent and trying to prevent human rights abuses from happening. But he was also obviously frustrated by the secrecy that he felt prevented him from responding to critics.

    “It’s a difficult task,” Sunray told me over the phone from the company’s headquarters in Herzliya, north of Tel Aviv. “We understand the power of the tool; we understand the impact of misuse of the tool. We’re trying to do the right thing. We have real challenges dealing with government, intelligence agencies, confidentiality, operational necessities, operational limitations. It’s not a classic case of human rights abuse by a company, because we don’t operate the systems—we’re not involved in actual operations of the systems—but we understand there is a real risk of misuse from the customers. We’re trying to find the right balance.”

    This underpins NSO’s basic argument, one that is common among weapons manufacturers: the company is the creator of a technology that governments use, but it doesn’t attack anyone itself, so it can’t be held responsible.

    Still, according to Sunray, there are several layers of protection in place to try to make sure the wrong people don’t have access.Retour ligne automatique
    Making a sale

    Like most other countries, Israel has export controls that require weapons manufacturers to be licensed and subject to government oversight. In addition, NSO does its own due diligence, says Sunray: its staff examine a country, look at its human rights record, and scrutinize its relationship with Israel. They assess the specific agency’s track record on corruption, safety, finance, and abuse—as well as factoring in how much it needs the tool.

    Sometimes negatives are weighed against positives. Morocco, for example, has a worsening human rights record but a lengthy history of cooperating with Israel and the West on security, as well as a genuine terrorism problem, so a sale was reportedly approved. By contrast, NSO has said that China, Russia, Iran, Cuba, North Korea, Qatar, and Turkey are among 21 nations that will never be customers.

    Finally, before a sale is made, NSO’s governance, risk, and compliance committee has to sign off. The company says the committee, made up of managers and shareholders, can decline sales or add conditions, such as technological restrictions, that are decided case by case. Retour ligne automatique
    Preventing abuse

    Once a sale is agreed to, the company says, technological guardrails prevent certain kinds of abuse. For example, Pegasus does not allow American phone numbers to be infected, NSO says, and infected phones cannot even be physically located in the United States: if one does find itself within American borders, the Pegasus software is supposed to self-destruct.

    NSO says Israeli phone numbers are among others also protected, though who else gets protection and why remains unclear.

    When a report of abuse comes in, an ad hoc team of up to 10 NSO employees is assembled to investigate. They interview the customer about the allegations, and they request Pegasus data logs. These logs don’t contain the content the spyware extracted, like chats or emails—NSO insists it never sees specific intelligence—but do include metadata such as a list of all the phones the spyware tried to infect and their locations at the time.

    According to one recent contract I obtained, customers must “use the system only for the detection, prevention, and investigation of crimes and terrorism and ensure the system will not be used for human rights violations.” They must notify the company of potential misuse. NSO says it has terminated three contracts in the past for infractions including abuse of Pegasus, but it refuses to say which countries or agencies were involved or who the victims were.

    “We’re not naïve”

    Lack of transparency is not the only problem: the safeguards have limits. While the Israeli government can revoke NSO’s license for violations of export law, the regulators do not take it on themselves to look for abuse by potential customers and aren’t involved in the company’s abuse investigations.

    Many of the other procedures are merely reactive as well. NSO has no permanent internal abuse team, unlike almost any other billion-dollar tech firm, and most of its investigations are spun up only when an outside source such as Amnesty International or Citizen Lab claims there has been malfeasance. NSO staff interview the agencies and customers under scrutiny but do not talk to the alleged victims, and while the company often disputes the technical reports offered as evidence, it also claims that both state secrecy and business confidentiality prevent it from sharing more information.

    The Pegasus logs that are crucial to any abuse inquiry also raise plenty of questions. NSO Group’s customers are hackers who work for spy agencies; how hard would it be for them to tamper with the logs? In a statement, the company insisted this isn’t possible but declined to offer details.

    If the logs aren’t disputed, NSO and its customers will decide together whether targets are legitimate, whether genuine crimes have been committed, and whether surveillance was done under due process of law or whether autocratic regimes spied on opponents.

    Sunray, audibly exasperated, says he feels as if secrecy is forcing him to operate with his hands tied behind his back.

    “It’s frustrating,” he told me. “We’re not naïve. There have been misuses. There will be misuses. We sell to many governments. Even the US government—no government is perfect. Misuse can happen, and it should be addressed.”

    But Sunray also returns to the company’s standard response, the argument that underpins its defense in the WhatsApp lawsuit: NSO is a manufacturer, but it’s not the operator of the spyware. We built it but they did the hacking—and they are sovereign nations.

    That’s not enough for many critics. “No company that believes it can be the independent watchdog of their own products ever convinces me,” says Marietje Schaake, a Dutch politician and former member of the European Parliament. “The whole idea that they have their own mechanisms while they have no problem selling commercial spyware to whoever wants to buy it, knowing that it’s used against human rights defenders and journalists—I think it shows the lack of responsibility on the part of this company more than anything.”

    So why the internal push for more transparency now? Because the deluge of technical reports from human rights groups, the WhatsApp lawsuit, and increasing governmental scrutiny threaten NSO’s status quo. And if there is going to be a new debate over how the industry gets regulated, it pays to have a powerful voice. Retour ligne automatique
    Growing scrutiny

    Lawful hacking and cyber-espionage have grown enormously as a business over the past decade, with no signs of retreat. NSO Group’s previous owners bought the company in 2014 for $130 million, less than one-seventh of the valuation it was sold for last year. The rest of the industry is expanding too, profiting from the spread of communications technology and deepening global instability. “There’s no doubt that any state has the right to buy this technology to fight crime and terrorism,” says Amnesty International’s deputy director, Danna Ingleton. “States are rightfully and lawfully able to use these tools. But that needs to be accompanied more with a regulatory system that prevents abuses and provides an accountability mechanism when abuse has happened.” Shining a much brighter light on the hacking industry, she argues, will allow for better regulation and more accountability.

    Earlier this year Amnesty International was in court in Israel arguing that the Ministry of Defense should revoke NSO’s license because of abuses of Pegasus. But just as the case was starting, officials from Amnesty and 29 other petitioners were told to leave the courtroom: a gag order was being placed on the proceedings at the ministry’s urging. Then, in July, a judge rejected the case outright.

    “I do not believe as a matter of principle and as a matter of law that NSO can claim a complete lack of responsibility for the way their tools are being used,” says United Nations special rapporteur Agnès Callamard. “That’s not how it works under international law.”

    Callamard advises the UN on extrajudicial executions and has been vocal about NSO Group and the spyware industry ever since it emerged that Pegasus was being used to spy on friends and associates of Khashoggi shortly before he was murdered. For her, the issue has life-or-death consequences.

    If NSO loses the WhatsApp case, one lawyer says, it calls into question all those companies that make their living by finding flaws in software and exploiting them.

    “We’re not calling for something radically new,” says Callamard. “We are saying that what’s in place at the moment is proving insufficient, and therefore governments or regulatory agencies need to move into a different gear quickly. The industry is expanding, and it should expand on the basis of the proper framework to regulate misuse. It’s important for global peace.”

    There have been calls for a temporary moratorium on sales until stronger regulation is enacted, but it’s not clear what that legal framework would look like. Unlike conventional arms, which are subject to various international laws, cyber weapons are currently not regulated by any worldwide arms control agreement. And while nonproliferation treaties have been suggested, there is little clarity on how they would measure existing capabilities, how monitoring or enforcement would work, or how the rules would keep up with rapid technological developments. Instead, most scrutiny today is happening at the national legal level.

    In the US, both the FBI and Congress are looking into possible hacks of American targets, while an investigation led by Senator Ron Wyden’s office wants to find out whether any Americans are involved in exporting surveillance technology to authoritarian governments. A recent draft US intelligence bill would require a government report on commercial spyware and surveillance technology.

    The WhatsApp lawsuit, meanwhile, has taken aim close to the heart of NSO’s business. The Silicon Valley giant argues that by targeting California residents—that is, WhatsApp and Facebook—NSO has given the court in San Francisco jurisdiction, and that the judge in the case can bar the Israeli company from future attempts to misuse WhatsApp’s and Facebook’s networks. That opens the door to an awful lot of possibilities: Apple, whose iPhone has been a paramount NSO target, could feasibly mount a similar legal attack. Google, too, has spotted NSO targeting Android devices.

    And financial damages are not the only sword hanging over NSO’s head. Such lawsuits also bring with them the threat of courtroom discovery, which has the potential to bring details of NSO’s business deals and customers into the public eye.

    “A lot depends on exactly how the court rules and how broadly it characterizes the violation NSO is alleged to have committed here,” says Alan Rozenshtein, a former Justice Department lawyer now at the University of Minnesota Law School. “At a minimum, if NSO loses this case, it calls into question all of those companies that make their products or make their living by finding flaws in messaging software and providing services exploiting those flaws. This will create enough legal uncertainty that I would imagine these would-be clients would think twice before contracting with them. You don’t know if the company will continue to operate, if they’ll get dragged to court, if your secrets will be exposed.” NSO declined to comment on the alleged WhatsApp hack, since it is still an active case. Retour ligne automatique
    “We are always spied on”

    In Morocco, Maâti Monjib was subjected to at least four more hacking attacks throughout 2019, each more advanced than the one before. At some point, his phone browser was invisibly redirected to a suspicious domain that researchers suspect was used to silently install malware. Instead of something like a text message that can raise the alarm and leaves a visible trace, this one was a much quieter network injection attack, a tactic valued because it’s almost imperceptible except to expert investigators.

    On September 13, 2019, Monjib had lunch at home with his friend Omar Radi, a Moroccan journalist who is one of the regime’s sharpest critics. That very day, an investigation later found, Radi was hit with the same kind of network injection attacks that had snared Monjib. The hacking campaign against Radi lasted at least into January 2020, Amnesty International researchers said. He’s been subject to regular police harassment ever since.

    At least seven more Moroccans received warnings from WhatsApp about Pegasus being used to spy on their phones, including human rights activists, journalists, and politicians. Are these the kinds of legitimate spying targets—the terrorists and criminals—laid out in the contract that Morocco and all NSO customers sign?

    In December, Monjib and the other victims sent a letter to Morocco’s data protection authority asking for an investigation and action. Nothing formally came of it, but one of the men, the pro-democracy economist Fouad Abdelmoumni, says his friends high up at the agency told him the letter was hopeless and urged him to drop the matter. The Moroccan government, meanwhile, has responded by threatening to expel Amnesty International from the country.

    What’s happening in Morocco is emblematic of what’s happening around the world. While it’s clear that democracies are major beneficiaries of lawful hacking, a long and growing list of credible, detailed, technical, and public investigations shows Pegasus being misused by authoritarian regimes with long records of human rights abuse.

    “Morocco is a country under an authoritarian regime who believe people like Monjib and myself have to be destroyed,” says Abdelmoumni. “To destroy us, having access to all information is key. We always consider that we are spied on. All of our information is in the hands of the palace.”

    #Apple #NSO #Facebook #WhatsApp #iPhone #Pegasus #smartphone #spyware #activisme #journalisme #écoutes #hacking #surveillance #Amnesty (...)


  • Human rights organizations respond to NSO : victims’ voices will not be silenced

    Today, January 7, Access Now, along with seven other human rights organizations, filed a reply to NSO Group’s opposition to the coalition’s amicus brief in the case of WhatsApp v. NSO in the U.S. Federal 9th Circuit Court. In their opposition, NSO argued that the court should reject the brief on the grounds that it duplicates other amici briefs and introduces allegedly impermissible facts about NSO and its customers. In reply, Access Now argues that the brief meets the Federal Rules of (...)

    #Microsoft #NSO #WhatsApp #Pegasus #spyware #écoutes #surveillance #AccessNow #Amnesty (...)


  • Facebook Joined by Human Rights Groups to Fight Spyware Maker

    A coalition of human rights and press freedom groups have filed a brief supporting Facebook Inc.’s lawsuit against the Israeli surveillance technology company NSO Group, arguing that the “very core of the principles that America represents” are at stake in the case. Facebook last year initiated the lawsuit against NSO Group, accusing the company of reverse-engineering WhatsApp and using the popular chat service to send spyware to the devices of approximately 1,400 people, including attorneys, (...)

    #Cisco #Google #Microsoft #NSO #Facebook #WhatsApp #Pegasus #hacking #surveillance #écoutes #AccessNow #Amnesty (...)


  • France : mise au point sur notre refus de participer au comité de l’IGPN - Amnesty International France

    La directrice de l’Inspection générale de la police nationale (IGPN) a déclaré vouloir créer un comité d’évaluation de la déontologie policière au sein de l’IGPN. À cette occasion, elle a annoncé que nous pourrions faire partie de ce comité. En réalité, nous avons décidé de ne pas accepter cette proposition.

    Nous sommes extrêmement surpris que l’IGPN ait annoncé publiquement notre possible participation à leur comité d’évaluation de la déontologie policière. Si nous avons effectivement reçu une sollicitation de leur part, nous nous apprêtions à leur communiquer notre refus d’être membre de ce comité. En effet, si la décision de créer un tel comité semble montrer la volonté de l’IGPN de se pencher sur la question essentielle de la déontologie de la police, il ne nous semble pas que toutes les conditions sont réunies pour un travail permettant d’améliorer substantiellement les pratiques de la police et leur conformité avec les droits humains.  

    La présence d’une seule association, au milieu de nombreux représentants des forces de l’ordre, l’opacité quant au choix des membres de ce comité tout comme sur son mandat et ses pouvoirs réels, et l’absence de représentation des associations et collectifs travaillant dans les quartiers populaires (où les pratiques de la police posent régulièrement des questions de déontologie), sont les facteurs principaux nous conduisant à refuser d’être membre de ce comité. 

    Nous demandons depuis longtemps que les associations soient consultées sur ces questions et que le ministère de l’intérieur ouvre la concertation aux acteurs associatifs de terrain et à ceux qui militent pour les droits humains. De manière ponctuelle, nous avons déjà participé à des consultations organisées sous l’égide du ministère de l’intérieur, notamment dans le cadre de la préparation pour le nouveau schéma national du maintien de l’ordre (SNMO). Or ce SNMO démontre que nos préconisations n’ont pas été suivies.   

    Dans ce contexte, nous attendons maintenant des gestes forts du ministère de l’Intérieur montrant que nos recommandations sont prises en compte, à commencer par la suspension de certaines armes et techniques (LBD, plaquage ventral), l’interdiction des grenades de désencerclement, et la mise en place d’un mécanisme d’enquête indépendant et impartial sur les cas de violences ou de discrimination de la part des forces de l’ordre.


    • Non, cette fois-ci Amnesty a refusé l’invitation de la directrice de l’Inspection générale de la police nationale.
      Amnesty International France n’est pas la Cnil. Quoi qu’on en pense, ils sont indépendants.

    • Tu n’es pas obligé de partager mon analyse @vanderling
      Je maintiens que ce gouvernement autoritaire s’essuie sur la CNIL ou Amnesty (et surement d’autres encore) comme sur des paillassons.

      Et dans ce que renverront les médias, personne ne retiendra la grossière entourloupe faite à la CNIL ni la tentative de faire croire qu’Amnesty jouera pour Darmanin. Mais le mensonge de la consultation est inscrite. C’est aussi pour ça que je colle le sinistre de la #propagande.


      le texte a été réécrit après sa consultation pour y introduire sa mesure la plus polémique : le fichage des opinions politiques.

    • Mais oui, CNIL et Amnesty n’ont rien en commun hormis le fait que le #syndrome_consultatif du gvt lui garantit son auto-absolution en utilisant l’une et l’autre comme étendards démocratiques (ou paillassons selon).
      Et nous sommes d’accord que la CNIL a été réduite depuis longtemps à son plus simple appareil « consultatif », mais que même à ce stade de dégradation de son rôle de garde-fou, l’humiliation se poursuit sans vergogne. Pour Amnesty, c’est une tentative échouée à moitié, parce que le Ministère de l’Intérieur ne s’est même pas donné la peine de savoir si l’association était ou non d’accord, comme si seule suffisait l’invocation symbolique.
      La preuve de l’ignominie que je souligne étant là même.

  • UE, Le programme de lutte antiterroriste porte un coup terrible aux droits fondamentaux

    « Le postulat sur lequel repose cette proposition est vicié. Elle avance à tort qu’un renforcement de la surveillance et des restrictions supplémentaires de notre liberté d’expression sont le prix à payer pour notre sécurité, alors qu’en réalité nos droits fondamentaux sont encore plus importants en temps de crise. Le programme de l’UE porte un coup terrible à tous nos droits, en s’en prenant au cryptage et en élargissant la surveillance, notamment au moyen de drones dans les espaces publics » a déclaré (...)

    #algorithme #cryptage #drone #anti-terrorisme #racisme #législation #religion #discrimination #profiling #surveillance (...)


  • Autoriser la fusion de Google et Fitbit serait une catastrophe pour les droits humains

    Dans les jours qui viennent, la Commission européenne semble sur le point de donner le feu vert à l’acquisition de Fitbit par Google. Cet accord est une menace majeure pour les droits humains et doit être stoppé net jusqu’à ce qu’une investigation approfondie et adéquate soit menée sur l’impact de la fusion sur les droits humains. Se contenter de moins reviendrait à faire clairement savoir à la Silicon Valley – et à des milliards d’internautes – qu’en dépit de ses propos musclés [1], l’Union européenne (...)

    #Fitbit #Google #bracelet #biométrie #domination #BigData #santé #Amnesty


  • Stop au commerce des instruments de torture

    Le monde doit agir de toute urgence pour interdire le commerce mondial d’équipements destinés à infliger des douleurs et des souffrances insupportables, ont déclaré Amnesty International et la Fondation de recherche Omega le 11 décembre 2020, en amont d’une réunion de haut niveau à l’ONU sur le « commerce de la torture ». Dans un nouveau rapport intitulé Mettre fin au commerce de la torture. Vers des mesures de contrôle des « instruments de torture » au niveau mondial, les organisations appellent (...)

    #violence #police #Amnesty

  • Viêt-Nam, Des géants de la technologie complices de la répression

    Les géants de la technologie Facebook et YouTube se permettent de devenir les instruments de la censure et du harcèlement exercés par les autorités vietnamiennes contre la population dans le pays, et cela ouvre des perspectives très inquiétantes quant à la façon dont ces entreprises risquent de plus en plus d’agir dans les pays répressifs, révèle Amnesty International dans un nouveau rapport. Ce rapport de 78 pages, intitulé "Let us Breathe !” : Censorship and criminalization of online expression in (...)

    #Google #Facebook #censure #harcèlement #surveillance #Amnesty

  • Espionnage des journalistes mexicains : enquête sur le marché très rentable de la cyber surveillance

    Malgré des scandales à répétition, l’industrie mondiale de la cyber surveillance, aidée par quelques intermédiaires bien connectés, continue de fournir au Mexique des technologies toujours plus invasives. Plusieurs journalistes ont été pris pour cible par ces outils sans qu’aucun responsable mexicain ne soit jamais inquiété. Le Veracruz, État qui dénombre le plus de journalistes assassinés dont Regina Martínez, est allé jusqu’à mettre en place une unité d’espionnage suréquipée qui gardait un œil sur la (...)

    #NSO #HackingTeam #Pegasus #RemoteControlSystem #spyware #criminalité #journalisme #surveillance #corruption #activisme #CitizenLab (...)

    ##criminalité ##Amnesty

  • Facebook and YouTube accused of complicity in Vietnam repression

    Amnesty report accuses sites of openly signalling they will bow to authoritarian regimes Facebook and YouTube are complicit in “censorship and repression on an industrial scale” in Vietnam, according to a report by Amnesty International that accuses the platforms of openly signalling that they are willing to bow to the wishes of authoritarian regimes. Facebook’s executives have repeatedly promoted the platform as a bastion of “free expression”, but in Vietnam, where there is little tolerance (...)

    #Google #Facebook #YouTube #activisme #délation #écoutes #surveillance #Amnesty #SocialNetwork


  • Viet Nam : Tech giants complicit in industrial-scale repression

    Facebook engaging in country-wide censorship of content Viet Nam imprisoning a record number of prisoners of conscience – with 40% behind bars for their social media use State-sponsored harassment rampant on Facebook and YouTube Tech giants Facebook and YouTube are allowing themselves to become tools of the Vietnamese authorities’ censorship and harassment of its population, in an alarming sign of how these companies could increasingly operate in repressive countries, a new report by Amnesty (...)

    #Google #Facebook #YouTube #activisme #manipulation #censure #SocialNetwork #surveillance #écoutes (...)


  • Pour #Amnesty_International, un homme est une femme si bon lui semble

    C’est avec ce slogan, sans doute créé dans un hôpital psychiatrique, qu’Amnesty International hausse d’un cran son combat contre les droits des femmes (cf. leur soutien aux proxénètes) en prenant parti sans réserve pour les hommes qui « s’identifient » à leur guise contre les droits des femmes.
    L’organisation multimilliardaire prend ainsi, contre les femmes, le parti des violeurs qui se disent « femmes » pour être incarcérés avec leurs victimes, des athlètes médiocres qui préfèrent gagner contre des femmes que perdre contre des hommes, des voyeurs qui cherchent à s’imposer dans les salles de douche, les vestiaires et les W.-C. des femmes, des masculinistes qui multiplient des recours pour discrimination contre les refuges de violences conjugales, des politiciens qui accaparent les postes dédiés aux femmes, etc. etc.

  • Apple accuses Facebook of ’disregard for user privacy’

    Criticism made as Apple pushes ahead with transparency feature disliked by advertisers Apple has criticised Facebook for trying to “collect as much data as possible” from users, saying it will push ahead with its planned launch of a new privacy feature despite objections from the advertising industry. The company’s director of global privacy, Jane Horvath, made the criticism in a letter to a coalition of privacy groups, reassuring them that the feature, which will require users to actively (...)

    #Apple #Facebook #algorithme #iPad #iPhone #smartphone #consentement #domination #BigData #marketing #publicité #microtargeting #AccessNow #Amnesty (...)

    ##publicité ##EFF

  • #Covid-19. Les maisons de retraite « abandonnées » en #Belgique selon Amnesty International

    Personnel sous-équipé face au #coronavirus, accès à l’hôpital refusé pour des résidents malades : les #maisons_de_retraite belges ont été « abandonnées » par les pouvoirs publics pendant la pandémie, dénonce lundi 16 novembre 2020 #Amnesty International.

    #non_assistance_à_personne_en_danger #sans_vergogne #crimes #honte

  • Security for All

    An open letter to the leaders of the world’s governments SIGNED by organizations, companies, and individuals : We encourage you to support the safety and security of users, companies, and governments by strengthening the integrity of communications and systems. In doing so, governments should reject laws, policies, or other mandates or practices, including secret agreements with companies, that limit access to or undermine encryption and other secure communications tools and (...)

    #législation #surveillance #AccessNow #Amnesty #EPIC #LaQuadratureduNet #cryptage

  • France, Des mesures inquiétantes prises suite au meurtre de Samuel Paty

    Amnesty International condamne avec fermeté les meurtres odieux de Samuel Paty, un enseignant, et de trois autres personnes à Nice dans une église et demande à ce que les coupables soient traduit en justice le plus rapidement possible. Pour autant, il est inquiétant que parmi les mesures prises par le gouvernement suite à ces attentats, certaines sont en contradiction avec les obligations internationales de la France en matière de respect des droits humains. Le 16 octobre 2020, Samuel Paty, un (...)

    #anti-terrorisme #religion #discrimination #surveillance #Islam #Amnesty #législation

    • Le droit à la liberté d’expression impose aux autorités non seulement de s’abstenir de se livrer à des discours stéréotypés et discriminatoires, mais leur impose également de jouer un rôle actif dans la lutte contre les stéréotypes et les préjugés. Tout en garantissant le droit de chaque personne de critiquer les religions, elles doivent aussi veiller à ce que, après ces meurtres, ni les personnes musulmanes ni les personnes réfugiées ne soient la cible de discours discriminatoires et de violences, et elles doivent garantir le droit de chaque personne d’exprimer sa religion ou ses convictions sans craindre de discrimination et de violence. Cependant, malgré cette obligation, ces 20 dernières années, les autorités françaises ont adopté des lois et des politiques qui restreignent le droit de porter des symboles ou des vêtements religieux ou culturels et qui ont été discriminatoires envers les personnes musulmanes et l’exercice de leurs droits à la liberté de religion et de conviction et à la liberté d’expression


  • Tribune : les droits humains au cœur de la réponse à la terreur

    Depuis plusieurs semaines, la France est confrontée à une série de terribles attaques perpétrées par des extrémistes islamistes. Le 26 septembre 2020, un jeune homme, pensant s’en prendre à Charlie Hebdo, a blessé avec un hachoir deux personnes qui travaillaient pour une agence de presse et une société de production située à proximité des anciens locaux de l’hebdomadaire satirique. Le 16 octobre, Samuel Paty, un enseignant de 47 ans a été sauvagement assassiné près de son collège à (...)

    #anti-terrorisme #législation #discrimination #Islam #surveillance #Amnesty

  • France : après le meurtre de Samuel Paty, des inquiétudes quant au respect des droits humains

    Le 16 octobre 2020, Samuel Paty, un enseignant de 47 ans, a été tué à Conflans-Sainte-Honorine (région parisienne). Un jeune homme de 18 ans bénéficiant du statut de réfugié en France aurait décapité l’enseignant, parce qu’il avait montré des caricatures du prophète Mahomet. Le 29 octobre, trois autres personnes ont été tuées dans une église à Nice. Le principal suspect est un homme de 21 ans, de nationalité tunisienne. Les autorités ont arrêté une autre personne, suspectée de complicité. Nous condamnons avec (...)

    #anti-terrorisme #législation #religion #Islam #surveillance #Amnesty

  • Un pays qui se tient sage

    La coordination Culture d’Amnesty International vous invite à la projection du film « Un pays qui se teint sage » le 8 octobre au cinéma Vendôme à Bruxelles et le 15 octobre au Cinéma Caméo à Namur. Les projections seront suivies d’un échange avec la participation de Philippe Hensmans, directeur de l’organisation. Projection du documentaire de David Dufresne Un pays qui se tient sage (1h26 - France - 2020) Synopsis

    Alors que s’accroissent la colère et le mécontentement devant les injustices sociales, (...)

    #police #violence #Amnesty

  • EU companies selling surveillance tools to China’s human rights abusers

    European tech companies risk fuelling widespread human rights abuses by selling digital surveillance technology to China’s public security agencies, a new Amnesty International investigation reveals. The findings are published ahead of a crucial meeting in Brussels on 22 September where the European Parliament and EU member states will decide whether to strengthen lax surveillance export rules. Amnesty International found that three companies based in France, Sweden and the Netherlands sold (...)

    #Idemia #Morpho #algorithme #CCTV #Skynet #biométrie #émotions #facial #reconnaissance #enseignement #Islam #surveillance #Amnesty #Axis (...)


  • Palantir Contracts Raise Human Rights Concerns before Direct Listing

    In advance of the direct listing of Palantir Technologies, Inc. on the New York Stock Exchange on September 29, Amnesty International released today a new briefing, Failing to Do Right : The Urgent Need for Palantir to Respect Human Rights, where the organization concludes that Palantir is failing to conduct human rights due diligence around its contracts with ICE, and that there is a high risk that Palantir is contributing to human rights violations of asylum-seekers and migrants through (...)

    #Palantir #DHS #ICE #famille #migration #données #bénéfices #enfants #profiling #surveillance (...)


  • Amnesty to halt work in India due to government ’witch-hunt’

    Authorities froze bank accounts after criticism of government’s human rights record Amnesty International has been forced to shut down operations in India and lay off all staff after the Indian government froze its bank accounts. The Indian enforcement directorate, an agency that investigates economic crimes, froze the accounts of Amnesty’s Indian arm this month after the group published two reports highly critical of the government’s human rights record. Amnesty said the move was the (...)

    #activisme #harcèlement #surveillance #Amnesty