Dec 03
2016

Is Big Brother Coming to China?

As with just about everything else reported on here, it will likely come to be because, good honest people have nothing to fear.

It would be far nicer if the focus was only the positive, getting plus points for community involvement, never committing a violent crime, being employed in recent years…

How long before having too few friends on Facebook singles you out as a credit risk?

More than three dozen local governments across China are beginning to compile digital records of social and financial behavior to rate creditworthiness. A person can incur black marks for infractions such as fare cheating, jaywalking and violating family-planning rules. The effort echoes the dang’an, a system of dossiers the Communist party keeps on urban workers’ behavior.

In time, Beijing expects to draw on bigger, combined data pools, including a person’s internet activity, according to interviews with some architects of the system and a review of government documents. Algorithms would use a range of data to calculate a citizen’s rating, which would then be used to determine all manner of activities, such as who gets loans, or faster treatment at government offices or access to luxury hotels.

Source: Wall Street Journal

Posted in Government Surveillance | Leave a comment
May 18
2016

Passport Acquires Verizon

Company from the future Passport has announced that they will be buying Verizon in a cash and stock deal. This means that a company that has made its name monitoring and tracking drones and other vehicles, will now be in control of a telecommunications business.

Expect that soon enough they will launch a product that has privacy advocates up in arms.

Could this be a corporate Big Brother in the making?

Posted in Corporate Surveillance | Leave a comment
May 11
2016

Sweden: First Cashless Society?

swish

When a former member of ABBA says a cashless society will have less crime, people listen. Already Sweden has laws restricting cash deposits in banks, as well as 80% of transactions being non-cash (USA is 50%). Read the full story at Wired.

Yes, less banks and bus drivers will be robbed, that is for sure. Muggings will keep occurring, it will just be for Apple Watches instead of cash. Criminals are unlikely to change their profession, but rather just adapt.

I foresee two major problems with losing cash:

Privacy – the very reason why cashless means less monetary crime is that anonymous transactions disappear. This also means that no transactions will be private. Proponents will use the If You Have Nothing to Hide mantra, which will convince most people. And rightly so, for the only people who could really lose out are those on the margins of society, those who have activities in grey areas, that aren’t illegal but still attract unwarranted and undesired attention.

Replacing cash for criminals will be alternate digital systems, like Bitcoin. Money laundering will still happen, it will just be digital.

Redundancy – as someone who has worked it the fields of tech and survivalism, the clear problem with a cashless society is that lack of a backup system. Where’s Plan B? What if electricity is cut? What if hackers destroy the computerised system and the computerised back-up system?

Cashless is going to happen anyway. The important thing is those who need non-criminal transaction privacy are protected, and that a backup system remains in place for a very long time, until cash is completely forgotten.

 

Posted in Government Surveillance | Leave a comment
Dec 07
2015

DarkMarket / OpenBazaar

Open Bazaar (previously known as DarkMarket) has a major advantage over the now closed Silk Road – it is peer to peer. That means no central website that the authorities can take down.

DarkMarket works in a fundamentally different way to Silk Road or any other online marketplace. Instead of being hosted off a server like a normal website, it runs in a decentralized manner: Users download a piece of software onto their device, which allows them to access the DarkMarket site. The really clever part is how the system incorporates data with the blockchain, the part of Bitcoin that everybody can see. Rather than just carrying the currency from buyer to seller, data such as usernames are added to the blockchain by including them in very small transactions, meaning it’s impossible to impersonate someone else because their pseudonymous identity is preserved in the ledger.
Vice.com

Posted in Dark Web | Leave a comment
Sep 06
2015

How Legal is Stingray?

Judge Kendra Ausby ruled last week that the police should not have used a stingray to track Andrews without a search warrant, and she said prosecutors could not use any of the evidence found at the time of his arrest.

Baltimore police used a stingray to locate Kerron Andrews after he was charged with attempted murder in 2014. Prosecutors did not reveal that surveillance until a year later, and a judge ruled that using the phone tracker was an unconstitutional search. Some states require officers to get a search warrant, in part because the technology is so invasive. The Justice Department is considering whether to impose a similar rule on its agents.

While no clear decision has been made on Stingray technology, the USA Today article makes it clear that police are careful not to disclose the are using it. In other words, they want to get away with it for as long as they can.

Posted in Government Surveillance | Leave a comment
Sep 02
2015

Laser Drone Destroyer

Given the potential for unaccountable, untraceable attacks with drones, it isn’t surprising that science is developing ways of blowing them out of the sky.

The HEL MD’s laser weapon is accurate enough to target specific sections of an unmanned aerial vehicle, disabling or destroying it depending on where it fires its beam. Because the beam travels at the speed of light, it effectively reaches its target instantaneously—there’s no outmaneuvering it.

Despite such precision, the weapon is compact enough to be carried in four suitcases by two soldiers. [Source: Daily Dot]

So it sounds like it doesn’t blow up the drone (that would take substantially more energy) but rather targets a critical part. Like shooting the gas tank of a car, I guess. The video at Boeing’s site gives slightly more info.

Won’t the response from drone makers be to hide/disguise/shield the critical parts? Or just put them on the one side of the drone? That would give them a 50/50 chance of survival.

Posted in Weapons | Leave a comment
Aug 29
2015

Legal in the USA: Drones That Can Attack You

police-drones

Either this will get reversed in due course, or it is a sign of a future we need to get used to. In North Dakota it is now legal for the authorities to fly unmanned vehicles that can use non-lethal weaponry.

The bill’s stated intent was to require police to obtain a search warrant from a judge in order to use a drone to search for criminal evidence. In fact, the original draft of Representative Rick Becker’s bill would have banned all weapons on police drones.

Then Bruce Burkett of the North Dakota Peace Officer’s Association was allowed by the state house committee to amend HB 1328 and limit the prohibition only to lethal weapons. “Less than lethal” weapons like rubber bullets, pepper spray, tear gas, sound cannons, and Tasers are therefore permitted on police drones. [The Daily Beast].

And as we know, even with supposedly expert human users, Tasers are regularly lethal. Imagine how bad it could be when a drone Tasers someone…

Shoot them down people.

Posted in Government Surveillance, Spy Equipment, Weapons | Leave a comment
Jun 24
2015

Google Listening – Without Permission

Google’s Chronium is supposedly open source and open to scrutiny. However Google added some code without telling anybody:

About Voice Search
Without consent, Google’s code had downloaded a black box of code that – according to itself – had turned on the microphone and was actively listening to your room. Source

So it isn’t surprising that they didn’t tell anyone! Google needs this functionality so it can listen out for the few people who want to say “OK Google”.

In the near future expect computers / tablets / smartphones to have a physical off-switch for microphones and cameras. Because while it is easy to put some sticky tape over a camera lens, microphones aren’t as easy to block.

 

 

 

Posted in Avoiding Detection, Corporate Surveillance, Internet | Leave a comment
May 09
2015

RFID-Blocking Clothing

Before long most of us will be carrying RFID products, or something that has similar abilities – to wirelessly communicate your credentials over short distances. This will be for financial transactions, clocking on at work, entry to members-only situations and so on. Persuasive pressure will be applied to get people to adopt – get our new card for 10% discounts – and the trade-off will be business intel. How often did you enter a particular store and not purchase, as one example.

Cloakers will have two options – to simply not adopt such technology, or to block transmissions when it suits, using a form of on/off shielding.

For items like cards, the answer is easy – place them in a wallet or pocket that blocks transmissions. Removing a card from your wallet and presenting it is something we are all used to, and will suit most cloakers for now. For extra protection (because transmitted data can be stolen, and testing the effectiveness of the blocking arduous) try having a protected wallet inside protected clothing.

Betabrand have launched jeans and blazers that do just that.

RFID-Ready-Jeans-M-PANTS-SPEC

No details of the fabric used, but they do have the cross-promotional support of Norton Security.

Posted in Avoiding Detection, Identification and Personal Data | Leave a comment
Mar 03
2015

They Are Listening – To Your Lounge Room Convos

Once again a tech company (Samsung) covering their arses in the T&C has led to speculation of nefarious plans:

“To provide you the Voice Recognition feature, some voice commands may be transmitted (along with information about your device, including device identifiers) to a third-party service that converts speech to text or to the extent necessary to provide the Voice Recognition features to you.” Source: The Register

Yep, they are listening to your conversations.

Obviously there is no interest in ordinary, individual conversations – although aggregated information from these could be highly useful. But what happens when said TV has you logged in, and authorities could spy on you specifically?

Many of us already place tape over laptops cameras, but blocking microphones isn’t as easy. Also, good luck in 10 year’s time finding appliances that don’t have cameras and microphones and internet connections built in.

Posted in Corporate Surveillance, Spy Equipment | Leave a comment