<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>WantToKnow.info: Privacy News</title>
<item>
<title>Who's in Big Brother's Database?</title>
<Publication><i>New York Review of Books</i></Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-11-05</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.nybooks.com/articles/23231</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;On a remote edge of Utah's dry and arid high desert ... hard-hatted construction workers with top-secret clearances are preparing to build [a] mammoth $2 billion structure. It's being built by the ultra-secret National Security Agency ... to house trillions of phone calls, e-mail messages, and [electronic data trails of all kinds]. The NSA is also completing work on another data archive, this one in San Antonio, Texas, which will be nearly the size of the Alamodome. Just how much information will be stored in these windowless cybertemples? A  recent report prepared by the MITRE Corporation, a Pentagon think tank, [states] &quot;Sensor data volume could potentially increase to the level of Yottabytes [10-to-the-24th-power bytes] by 2015.&quot; &lt;strong&gt;Once vacuumed up and stored in these near-infinite &quot;libraries,&quot; the data are then analyzed by powerful infoweapons, supercomputers running complex algorithmic programs, to determine who among us may be — or may one day become — a terrorist&lt;/strong&gt;. Emerging [after 9/11] as the most powerful chief the spy world has ever known was the director of the NSA. He is in charge of an organization three times the size of the CIA and empowered in 2008 by Congress to spy on Americans to an unprecedented degree.  These new centers in Utah, Texas, and possibly elsewhere will likely become the centralized repositories for the data intercepted by the NSA in America's version of the &quot;big brother database.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; James Bamford, the author of this review of a &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.amazon.com/Secret-Sentry-History-National-Security/dp/1596915153/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1257614202&amp;sr=1-1&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;new book&lt;/a&gt; on the history of the NSA, has himself written &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_0_12?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&amp;field-keywords=james+bamford&amp;sprefix=james+bamfor&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;three important books&lt;/a&gt; on the agency. For many revealing reports from reliable sources on the developing capacity by government and corporate surveillance to construct a &quot;Big Brother&quot; states, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/bigbrothernewsarticles&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; </description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Justice Dept. Asked For News Site's Visitor Lists</title>
<Publication>CBS News</Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-11-10</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/11/09/taking_liberties/entry5595506.shtml</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;In a case that raises questions about online journalism and privacy rights, the U.S. Department of Justice sent a formal request to an independent news site ordering it to provide details of all reader visits on a certain day. The grand jury subpoena also required the Philadelphia-based &lt;a href=&quot;http://indymedia.us/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;Indymedia.us&lt;/a&gt; Web site &quot;not to disclose the existence of this request&quot; unless authorized by the Justice Department, a gag order that presents an unusual quandary for any news organization. Kristina Clair, a 34-year old Linux administrator living in Philadelphia who provides free server space for Indymedia.us, said she was shocked to receive the Justice Department's subpoena. The subpoena ... demanded &quot;all IP traffic to and from www.indymedia.us&quot; on June 25, 2008. &lt;strong&gt;It instructed Clair to &quot;include IP addresses, times, and any other identifying information,&quot; including e-mail addresses, physical addresses, registered accounts, and Indymedia readers' Social Security Numbers, bank account numbers, [and] credit card numbers&lt;/strong&gt;. Clair [called] the Electronic Frontier Foundation in San Francisco, which represented her at no cost. Making this investigation more mysterious is that Indymedia.us is an aggregation site, meaning articles that appear on it were published somewhere else first, and there's no hint about what sparked the criminal probe. Clair, the system administrator, says that no IP (Internet Protocol) addresses are recorded for Indymedia.us, and non-IP address logs are kept for a few weeks and then discarded. &quot;This is the first time we've seen them try to get the IP address of everyone who visited a particular site,&quot; [EFF's Kevin] Bankston said. &quot;That it was a news organization was an additional troubling fact that implicates First Amendment rights.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For many  reports from major media sources of growing government threats to civil liberties, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/civillibertiesnewsarticles&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>U.S. readies plan to ID departing visitors</title>
<Publication><i>Washingon Post</i></Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-11-08</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/07/AR2009110703115.html</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;The Department of Homeland Security is finalizing a proposal to collect fingerprints or eye scans from all foreign travelers at U.S. airports as they leave the country, officials said, a costly screening program that airlines have opposed. The plan ... would collect fingerprints at airport security checkpoints, departure gates or terminal kiosks, allowing the government to track when roughly 35 million foreign visitors a year. In a concession to industry, DHS said it probably will drop plans to require airlines to pay for the bulk of the program and is looking to cut &lt;strong&gt;costs, which could reach $1 billion to $2 billion over a decade, largely to be paid by taxpayers or foreign travelers.&lt;/strong&gt; In addition, the program would not operate for now at land borders, where 80 percent of noncitizens enter and leave the country, because fingerprinting travelers there could cost billions more and significantly delay commerce. Congress focused on inbound travelers after the [September 11, 2001 attacks,]  appropriating $3 billion since 2003 on the US-VISIT tracking program. The program collects biological identifiers, such as fingerprints and digital photographs, from all arriving foreigners except Canadians and Mexicans with special border-crossing cards. By the time Bush administration officials unveiled a $3.5 billion program in April 2008, however, political impetus for changes had weakened.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For many  reports from major media sources of growing government threats to civil liberties, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/civillibertiesnewsarticles&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; </description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Loosening of F.B.I. Rules Stirs Privacy Concerns</title>
<Publication><i>New York Times</i></Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-10-29</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/29/us/29manual.html</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;After a Somali-American teenager from Minneapolis committed a suicide bombing in Africa in October 2008, the Federal Bureau of Investigation began investigating whether a Somali Islamist group had recruited him on United States soil. Instead of collecting information only on people about whom they had a tip or links to the teenager, agents fanned out to scrutinize Somali communities. The operation unfolded as the Bush administration was relaxing some domestic intelligence-gathering rules. The F.B.I.’s interpretation of those rules was recently made public when it released, in response to a Freedom of Information lawsuit, its “Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide.” The disclosure of the manual has opened the widest window yet onto how agents have been given greater power in the post-Sept. 11 era. But the manual’s details have alarmed privacy advocates. &lt;strong&gt;“It raises fundamental questions about whether a domestic intelligence agency can protect civil liberties if they feel they have a right to collect broad personal information about people they don’t even suspect of wrongdoing,” &lt;/strong&gt;said Mike German, a former F.B.I. agent who now works for the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aclu.org&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;American Civil Liberties Union&lt;/a&gt;.
The manual authorizes agents to open an “assessment” to “proactively” seek information about whether people or organizations are involved in national security threats. Assessments permit agents to use potentially intrusive techniques, like sending confidential informants to infiltrate organizations and following and photographing targets in public. When selecting targets, agents are permitted to consider political speech or religion as one criterion.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; To read the FBI's recently-released and redacted new &quot;Domestic Investigations and Operation Guide&quot;, described by the &lt;em&gt;New York Times&lt;/em&gt; as giving &quot;F.B.I. agents the most power in national security matters that they have had since the post-Watergate era,&quot; &lt;a href=&quot;http://documents.nytimes.com/the-new-operations-manual-from-the-f-b-i#p=1&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;    </description>
</item>
<item>
<title>VeriChip shares jump after H1N1 patent license win</title>
<Publication>Reuters</Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-09-21</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.reuters.com/article/hotStocksNews/idUSTRE58K4BZ20090921</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Shares of VeriChip Corp tripled after the company said it had been granted an exclusive license to two patents, which will help it to develop implantable virus detection systems in humans. The patents, held by VeriChip partner Receptors LLC, relate to biosensors that can detect the H1N1 and other viruses.&lt;/strong&gt; The technology will combine with VeriChip's implantable radio frequency identification devices to develop virus triage detection systems. The triage system will provide multiple levels of identification -- the first will identify the agent as virus or non-virus, the second level will classify the virus and alert the user to the presence of pandemic threat viruses and the third level will identify the precise pathogen, VeriChip said in a white paper published May 7, 2009. Shares of VeriChip were up 186 percent.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; Beware of efforts to scare you into getting microchipped for your own safety. &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/totalcontrol#microchips&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;Click here&lt;/a&gt; for more on this. For more on pharmaceutical corporation profiteering from swine flu vaccines, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/avianflubirdnewsarticles&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;     </description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Arrest Puts Focus on Protesters’ Texting</title>
<Publication><i>New York Times</i></Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-10-05</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/05/nyregion/05txt.html</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;As demonstrations have evolved with the help of text messages and online social networks, so too has the response of law enforcement. On Thursday, F.B.I. agents descended on a house in Jackson Heights, Queens [NY], and spent 16 hours searching it. The most likely reason for the raid: a man who lived there had helped coordinate communications among protesters at the Group of 20 summit in Pittsburgh. The man, Elliot Madison, 41, a social worker who has described himself as an anarchist, had been arrested in Pittsburgh on Sept. 24 and charged with hindering apprehension or prosecution, criminal use of a communication facility and possession of instruments of crime. &lt;strong&gt;The Pennsylvania State Police said he was found in a hotel room with computers and police scanners while using the social-networking site Twitter to spread information about police movements.&lt;/strong&gt; He has denied wrongdoing. American protesters first made widespread use of mass text messages in New York, during the 2004 Republican National Convention. Messages, sent as events unfolded, allowed demonstrators and others to react quickly to word of arrests, police mobilizations and roving rallies. Mass texting has since become a valued tool among protesters, particularly at large-scale demonstrations. Mr. Madison [may be] the first to be charged criminally while sending information electronically to protesters about the police. “He and a friend were part of a communications network among people protesting the G-20,” Mr. Madison’s lawyer, Martin Stolar, said on Saturday. “There’s absolutely nothing that he’s done that should subject him to any criminal liability.”&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For many reports from reliable sources on increasing government erosion of civil liberties, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/civillibertiesnewsarticles&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; </description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Electronic border control</title>
<Publication><i>San Francisco Chronicle</i> (San Francisco's leading newspaper)</Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-10-02</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/10/02/EDDQ19VF7L.DTL</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;Suppose you're returning home from a vacation in Cancun. A customs agent asks you to open your suitcase so he can check its contents. So far, so good. Now, &lt;strong&gt;the agent asks you to log on to your laptop so he can read your e-mails and personal files and examine which Web sites you've visited. He makes a copy of your hard drive so the government can comb through its contents. You've done nothing to give the agent any cause for suspicion. That can't be legal - can it?&lt;/strong&gt; Until recently, it would not have been allowed. Long-standing customs directives prohibited agents from reading travelers' personal documents unless they reasonably suspected them to be merchandise or evidence of illegal activity. Then the Bush administration changed the rules, allowing agents to &quot;review and analyze&quot; the contents of electronic devices, including laptops, cell phones and BlackBerrys &quot;absent individualized suspicion.&quot; Agents also could make copies of the devices' contents and share them with other government agencies. In a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in May, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano promised to review the policy.
Homeland Security has now released a new policy - and it is the same as the Bush policy in almost every relevant respect. The government may still search electronic devices without reasonable suspicion, retain copies indefinitely to complete its search and share information with other agencies. Both administrations have cited national security to justify suspicionless searches. There's no evidence, however, that a suspicionless search has ever turned up a security threat.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; The author of this op-ed, Elizabeth Goitein, is the director of the Liberty and National Security Project at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law. For lots more on how politicians use &amp;quot;national security&amp;quot; as a means to protect their own manipulations at the expense of the public good, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.insightcourse.net/lessons/08a_power_elite&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;. &lt;/p&gt;    </description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Patriot Act Provisions Get Obama Support</title>
<Publication>ABC News</Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-09-15</PublicationDate>
<link>http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obama-supports-extending-patriot-act/story?id=8582891</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;The Justice Department has indicated that the Obama administration is in support of renewing [three] controversial sections of the USA Patriot Act that expire later this year. The provisions that will expire in December include Section 206, that allows &quot;roving&quot; wiretaps so FBI agents can tap multiple phones or computers (with court authorization) that a specific person (target) may use. Another expiring provision, Section 215, is the so-called &quot;library provision,&quot; which allows investigators to obtain [library, medical, business, banking and other] records with approval from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. And the final provision which was nicknamed the &quot;Lone Wolf&quot; authorization, allows intelligence gathering of people not suspected of being part of a foreign government or known terrorist organization. &lt;strong&gt;Critics of the Patriot Act protested loudly that the FBI could obtain individuals' library records under the legislation. [But] section 215 is much more expansive than reviewing a suspected terrorist's summer reading list. [It] allows the FBI to obtain any business record, &quot;any tangible things,&quot; like credit card and bank statements and also allows access to medical and mental health records&lt;/strong&gt;. The provision has been used to obtain communication and subscriber information to help set up surveillance and monitoring of computers and telephones.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; The American Library Association, the national organization of professional librarians, was the first and strongest defender of civil liberties after the passage of the PATRIOT Act. For a discussion of the concerns of professional librarians over this decision by the Obama administration, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6697401.html&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Boston launches flu shot tracking</title>
<Publication><i>Boston Globe</i></Publication>
<PublicationDate>2008-11-21</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2008/11/21/boston_launches_flu_shot_tracking/</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;Using technology originally developed for mass disasters, Boston disease trackers are embarking on a novel experiment - one of the first in the country - aimed at eventually creating a citywide registry of everyone who has had a flu vaccination. The resulting vaccination map would allow swift intervention in neighborhoods left vulnerable to the fast-moving respiratory illness. The trial starts this afternoon, when several hundred people are expected to queue up for immunizations at the headquarters of the Boston Public Health Commission. Each of them will get a bracelet printed with a unique identifier code. Information about the vaccine's recipients, and the shot, will be entered into handheld devices similar to those used by delivery truck drivers. Infectious disease specialists in Boston and elsewhere predicted that the registry approach could prove even more useful if something more sinister strikes: a bioterrorism attack or the long-feared arrival of a global flu epidemic. &lt;strong&gt;In such crises, the registry could be used to track who received a special vaccine or antidote to a deadly germ. &quot;Anything you can do to better pinpoint who's vaccinated and who's not, that's absolutely vital,&quot;&lt;/strong&gt; said Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research &amp; Policy at the University of Minnesota. &quot;I wish more cities were doing this kind of thing.&quot; When people arrive for their shots, they will get an ID bracelet with a barcode. Next, basic information - name, age, gender, address - will be entered into the patient tracking database. There will be electronic records, too, of who gave the vaccine and whether it was injected into the right arm or the left, and time-stamped for that day.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For more on the serious risks and dangers posed by vaccines, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/vaccinesnewsarticles&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.examiner.com/x-6495-US-Intelligence-Examiner~topic168408-swine-flu&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Bush's Search Policy For Travelers Is Kept</title>
<Publication><i>Washington Post</i></Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-08-28</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/27/AR2009082704065.html</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;The Obama administration will largely preserve Bush-era procedures allowing the government to search -- without suspicion of wrongdoing -- the contents of a traveler's laptop computer, cellphone or other electronic device. The policy, disclosed ... in a pair of Department of Homeland Security directives, describes more fully than did the Bush administration the procedures by which travelers' laptops, iPods, cameras and other digital devices can be searched and seized when they cross a U.S. border. And it sets time limits for completing searches. Representatives of civil liberties and travelers groups say they see little substantive difference between the Bush-era policy, which prompted controversy, and this one. &quot;It's a disappointing ratification of the suspicionless search policy put in place by the Bush administration,&quot; said Catherine Crump, staff attorney for the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aclu.org&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;American Civil Liberties Union&lt;/a&gt;. &quot;It doesn't deal with the fundamental problem, which is that under the policy, government officials are free to search people's laptops and cellphones for any reason whatsoever.&quot; &lt;strong&gt;&quot;Under the policy begun by Bush and now continued by Obama, the government can open your laptop and read your medical records, financial records, e-mails, work product and personal correspondence -- all without any suspicion of illegal activity,&quot;&lt;/strong&gt; said Elizabeth Goitein, who leads the liberty and national security project at the nonprofit &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.brennancenter.org/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;Brennan Center for Justice&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For important revelations of government threats to civil liberties, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/civillibertiesnewsarticles&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; </description>
</item>
<item>
<title>President Obama in 'snooping' row over US car scrappage scheme</title>
<Publication><i>Times of London</i> (One of the U.K.'s leading newspapers)</Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-08-07</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6742322.ece</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;President Obama's effort to revive the American car industry with a &quot;cash-for-clunkers&quot; scheme has become embroiled in a row over government snooping. The problems arose after the Department of Transportation claimed that when dealers logged on to the clunkers website their computers â€” and everything on them â€” become the property of the US Government. â€śThis application provides access to the Department of Transportation (DoT) CARS system,â€ť the warning message read. &lt;strong&gt;â€śWhen logged on to the CARS system, your computer is considered a Federal computer system and is the property of the United States Government. Any or all uses of this system and all files on this system may be intercepted, monitored, recorded, copied, audited, inspected, and disclosed to authorised CARS, DoT, and law enforcement personnel&lt;/strong&gt;, as well as authorised officials of other agencies, both domestic and foreign.&quot; By the time the disclaimer had been circulated widely on blogs, posted on YouTube and become the subject of a ferocious on-air editorial by the conservative Fox News host Glenn Beck, the Department of Transportation had issued a statement saying that â€śwe are working to revise the languageâ€ť. No explanation was given as to why the original disclaimer was worded so aggressively. Members of the general public do not need to log on to the website so were not asked to agree to the same conditions as dealers. Mr Obamaâ€™s ... critics argue that the controversy is another example of the intrusiveness that will accompany the Presidentâ€™s plans to expand the role of government in the lives of Americans.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; Watch a revealing Fox news video report of this unbelievable development at &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqfuZ7hiap0&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;this link&lt;/a&gt;. Big Brother at work.&lt;/p&gt; </description>
</item>
<item>
<title>As government tags passports, licenses, critics fear privacy is 'chipped' away</title>
<Publication><i>Los Angeles Times</i></Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-07-11</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.latimes.com/business/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-us-chipping-america-iv,0,6091908.story</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;Climbing into his Volvo, outfitted with a Matrics antenna and a Motorola reader he'd bought on eBay for $190, Chris Paget cruised the streets of San Francisco with this objective: To read the identity cards of strangers, wirelessly, without ever leaving his car. It took him 20 minutes to strike hacker's gold. Zipping past Fisherman's Wharf, his scanner detected, then downloaded to his laptop, the unique serial numbers of two pedestrians' electronic U.S. passport cards embedded with radio frequency identification, or RFID, tags. Within an hour, he'd &quot;skimmed&quot; the identifiers of four more of the new, microchipped PASS cards from a distance of 20 feet. Paget's February experiment demonstrated something privacy advocates had feared for years: That RFID, coupled with other technologies, could make people trackable without their knowledge or consent. He filmed his drive-by heist, and soon his video went viral on the Web, intensifying a debate over a push by government, federal and state, to put tracking technologies in identity documents and over their potential to erode privacy. &lt;strong&gt;With advances in tracking technologies coming at an ever-faster rate, critics say, it won't be long before governments could be able to identify and track anyone in real time, 24-7, from a cafe in Paris to the shores of California. The key to getting such a system to work, these opponents say, is making sure everyone carries an RFID tag linked to a biometric data file.&lt;/strong&gt; On June 1, it became mandatory for Americans entering the United States by land or sea from Canada, Mexico, Bermuda and the Caribbean to present identity documents embedded with RFID tags, though conventional passports remain valid until they expire.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For lots more on corporate and government surveillance, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/privacynewsarticles&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Cybersecurity Plan to Involve NSA, Telecoms</title>
<Publication><i>Washington Post</i></Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-07-03</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/02/AR2009070202771.html</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Obama administration will proceed with a Bush-era plan to use National Security Agency assistance in screening government computer traffic on private-sector networks&lt;/strong&gt;, with AT&amp;T as the likely test site, according to three current and former government officials. President Obama said in May that government efforts to protect computer systems from attack would not involve &quot;monitoring private-sector networks or Internet traffic,&quot; and Department of Homeland Security officials say the new program will scrutinize only data going to or from government systems. But the program has provoked debate within DHS, the officials said, because of uncertainty about whether private data can be shielded from unauthorized scrutiny, how much of a role NSA should play and whether the agency's involvement in warrantless wiretapping during George W. Bush's presidency would draw controversy. &lt;strong&gt;Each time a private citizen visited a &quot;dot-gov&quot; Web site or sent an e-mail to a civilian government employee, that action would be screened for potential harm to the network&lt;/strong&gt;. Under a classified pilot program approved during the Bush administration, NSA data and hardware would be used to protect the networks of some civilian government agencies. Part of an initiative known as Einstein 3, the plan called for telecommunications companies to route the Internet traffic of civilian agencies through a monitoring box that would search for and block computer codes designed to penetrate or otherwise compromise networks. AT&amp;T, the world's largest telecommunications firm, was the Bush administration's choice to participate in the test. AT&amp;T officials declined to comment. The prospect of NSA involvement in cybersecurity ... fuels concerns about unwarranted government snooping into private communication.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For lots more on government and corporate threats to privacy, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/privacynewsarticles&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; and &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/bigbrothernewsarticles&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>E-Mail Surveillance Renews Concerns in Congress</title>
<Publication><i>New York Times</i></Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-06-17</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/17/us/17nsa.html</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;The National Security Agency is facing renewed scrutiny over the extent of its domestic surveillance program, with critics in Congress saying its recent intercepts of the private telephone calls and e-mail messages of Americans are broader than previously acknowledged, current and former officials said. Since April, when it was disclosed that the intercepts of some private communications of Americans went beyond legal limits in late 2008 and early 2009, several Congressional committees have been investigating. Those inquiries have led to concerns in Congress about the agency’s ability to collect and read domestic e-mail messages of Americans on a widespread basis, officials said. Supporting that conclusion is the account of &lt;strong&gt;a former N.S.A. analyst who, in a series of interviews, described being trained in 2005 for a program in which the agency routinely examined large volumes of Americans’ e-mail messages without court warrants. Two intelligence officials confirmed that the program was still in operation.&lt;/strong&gt; Both the former analyst’s account and the rising concern among some members of Congress about the N.S.A.’s recent operation are raising fresh questions about the spy agency. Representative Rush Holt, Democrat of New Jersey and chairman of the House Select Intelligence Oversight Panel, has been investigating the incidents and said he had become increasingly troubled by the agency’s handling of domestic communications. In an interview, Mr. Holt disputed assertions by Justice Department and national security officials that the overcollection was inadvertent. “Some actions are so flagrant that they can’t be accidental,” Mr. Holt said. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For lots more from major media sources on the ever-increasing government and coroporate threats to privacy, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/privacynewsarticles&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Tapping your cell phone</title>
<Publication>WTHR-TV (Indianapolis NBC affiliate)</Publication>
<PublicationDate>2008-11-13</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.wthr.com/global/story.asp?s=9346833</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;Imagine someone watching your every move, hearing everything you say and knowing where you are at every moment. If you have a cell phone, it could happen to you. After four months of harassing phone calls, Courtney Kuykendall was afraid to answer her cell phone. The Tacoma, Washington, teenager was receiving graphic, violent threats at all hours.
And when she and her family changed their cell phone numbers and got new phones, the calls continued. Using deep scratchy voices, anonymous stalkers literally took control of the Kuykendall's cell phones, repeatedly threatened Courtney with murder and rape, and began following the family's every move. &quot;They're listening to us and recording us,&quot; Courtney's mother, Heather Kuykendall, told NBC's Today Show. &quot;We know that because they will record us and play it back as a voicemail.&quot;
How is something like this possible? Just take a look on the internet. That's where you'll find the latest spy technology for cell phones. Spyware marketers claim you can tap into someone's calls, read their text messages and track their movements &quot;anywhere, anytime.&quot; Security experts say it's no internet hoax.&quot;It's real, and it is pretty creepy,&quot; said Rick Mislan, a former military intelligence officer who now teaches cyber forensics at Purdue University's Department of Computer and Information Technology. &lt;strong&gt;Mislan has examined thousands of cell phones inside Purdue's Cyber Forensics Lab, and he says spy software can now make even the most high-tech cell phone vulnerable. &quot;I think a lot of people think their cell phone calls are very secure but our privacy isn't always what we think it is.&quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For lots more on increasing corporate and governmental threats to privacy, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/privacynewsarticles&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Pentagon Plans New Arm to Wage Cyberspace Wars</title>
<Publication><i>New York Times</i></Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-05-29</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/29/us/politics/29cyber.html</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;The Pentagon plans to create a new military command for cyberspace ... stepping up preparations by the armed forces to conduct both offensive and defensive computer warfare. White House officials say Mr. Obama has not yet been formally presented with the Pentagon plan. But he is expected to sign a classified order in coming weeks that will create the military cybercommand, officials said. It is a recognition that &lt;strong&gt;the United States already has a growing number of computer weapons in its arsenal and must prepare strategies for their use — as a deterrent or alongside conventional weapons — in a wide variety of possible future conflicts.&lt;/strong&gt; [A] main dispute has been over whether the Pentagon or the National Security Agency should take the lead in preparing for and fighting cyberbattles. Under one proposal still being debated, parts of the N.S.A. would be integrated into the military command so they could operate jointly. A classified set of presidential directives is expected to lay out the military’s new responsibilities and how it coordinates its mission with that of the N.S.A., where most of the expertise on digital warfare resides today. The decision to create a cybercommand is a major step beyond the actions taken by the Bush administration, which authorized several computer-based attacks but never resolved the question of how the government would prepare for a new era of warfare fought over digital networks. Officials declined to describe potential offensive operations, but said they now viewed cyberspace as comparable to more traditional battlefields.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; Combine this with the &lt;a href=&quot;http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4655196.stm&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;BBC's revealing article&lt;/a&gt; on US   plans to fight the Internet, and there is  reason for concern. For lots  more on new developments in modern war planning, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/warnewsarticles&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Officials Say U.S. Wiretaps Exceeded Law</title>
<Publication><i>New York Times</i></Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-04-16</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/16/us/16nsa.html?partner=rss&amp;emc=rss&amp;pagewanted=all</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;The National Security Agency intercepted private e-mail messages and phone calls of Americans in recent months on a scale that went beyond the broad legal limits established by Congress last year, government officials said in recent interviews. &lt;strong&gt;Several intelligence officials, as well as lawyers briefed about the matter, said the N.S.A. had been engaged in “overcollection” of domestic communications of Americans. They described the practice as significant and systemic.&lt;/strong&gt; The legal and operational problems surrounding the N.S.A.’s surveillance activities have come under scrutiny from the Obama administration, Congressional intelligence committees and a secret national security court. Congressional investigators say they hope to determine if any violations of Americans’ privacy occurred. It is not clear to what extent the agency may have actively listened in on conversations or read e-mail messages of Americans without proper court authority, rather than simply obtained access to them. While the N.S.A.’s operations in recent months have come under examination, new details are also emerging about earlier domestic-surveillance activities, including the agency’s attempt to wiretap a member of Congress, without court approval, on an overseas trip. After a contentious three-year debate that was set off by the disclosure in 2005 of the program of wiretapping without warrants that President George W. Bush approved after the Sept. 11 attacks, Congress gave the N.S.A. broad new authority to collect, without court-approved warrants, vast streams of international phone and e-mail traffic as it passed through American telecommunications gateways.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For further disturbing reports from reliable sources on government efforts to establish total surveillance systems, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/bigbrothernewsarticles&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Control of Cybersecurity Becomes Divisive Issue</title>
<Publication><i>New York Times</i></Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-04-17</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/17/us/politics/17cyber.html?partner=rss&amp;emc=rss&amp;pagewanted=all</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;The National Security Agency has been campaigning to lead the government’s rapidly growing cybersecurity programs, raising privacy and civil liberties concerns among some officials who fear that the move could give the spy agency too much control over government computer networks. The security agency’s interest in taking over the dominant role has met resistance, including the resignation of the Homeland Security Department official who was until last month in charge of coordinating cybersecurity efforts throughout the government. Rod Beckstrom, who resigned in March as director of the National Cyber Security Center at the Homeland Security Department, said ... that &lt;strong&gt;he feared that the N.S.A.’s push for a greater role in guarding the government’s computer systems could give it the power to collect and analyze every e-mail message, text message and Google search conducted by every employee in every federal agency&lt;/strong&gt;. Mr. Beckstrom said he believed that an intelligence service that is supposed to focus on foreign targets should not be given so much control over the flow of information within the United States government. To detect threats against the computer infrastructure — including hackers, viruses and intrusions by foreign agents and terrorists — cybersecurity guardians must have virtually unlimited access to networks. Mr. Beckstrom argues that those responsibilities should be divided among agencies. “I have very serious concerns about the concentration of too much power in one agency,” he said. “Power over information is so important, and it is so difficult to monitor, that we need to have checks and balances.”&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For further disturbing reports from reliable sources on government efforts to establish total surveillance systems, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/bigbrothernewsarticles&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Judge rejects bid to derail wiretap challenge</title>
<Publication><i>San Francisco Chronicle</i> (San Francisco's leading newspaper)</Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-04-18</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/04/17/MN6O174O7E.DTL</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;A San Francisco federal judge rejected on Friday the Obama administration's attempt to derail a challenge to former President George W. Bush's electronic surveillance program by withholding a critical wiretap document.&lt;/strong&gt; President Obama's Justice Department had appeared to defy a previous order by Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker to allow lawyers for an Islamic organization to see the classified document, which reportedly showed that the group had been wiretapped. The document, which the government accidentally sent to the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, could establish its right to sue over the legality of the program. Justice Department lawyers told Walker in February that he had no power to enforce his order, and indicated they would remove the document from his files if he planned to disclose it to Al-Haramain's lawyers. But after a federal appeals court denied the department's request to intervene, Walker told the government Friday to cooperate. &quot;The United States should now comply with the court's orders,&quot; the judge said. He told lawyers for the administration and Al-Haramain to work out a protective order by May 8 that would maintain the document's secrecy after it had been shown to the Islamic group's lawyers. If the two sides can't agree, Walker said, he will issue his own protective order &quot;under which this case may resume forward progress.&quot; The case is one of two before Walker challenging the constitutionality of the program that Bush secretly authorized in 2001 to intercept phone calls and e-mails between Americans and suspected foreign terrorists without seeking a court warrant, as required by a 1978 law.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For more reports on government secrecy from reliable sources, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/secrecynewsarticles&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Obama administration defending Bush secrets</title>
<Publication>MSNBC/Associated Press</Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-02-16</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29225492/</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;Despite President Barack Obama's vow to open government more than ever, the Justice Department is defending Bush administration decisions to keep secret many documents about domestic wiretapping, data collection on travelers and U.S. citizens, and interrogation of suspected terrorists. &quot;The signs in the last few days are not ... encouraging,&quot; said Jameel Jaffer, an attorney for the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aclu.org&quot;&gt;American Civil Liberties Union&lt;/a&gt;, which filed several lawsuits seeking the Bush administration's legal rationales for warrantless domestic wiretapping and for its treatment of terrorism detainees.&lt;strong&gt; The documents sought in these lawsuits &quot;are in many cases the documents that the public most needs to see,&quot; Jaffer said. &quot;It makes no sense to say that these documents are somehow exempt from President Obama's directives.&quot;&lt;/strong&gt; Groups that advocate open government, civil liberties and privacy were overjoyed that Obama on his first day in office reversed the FOIA policy imposed by Bush's first attorney general, John Ashcroft. Obama pledged &quot;an unprecedented level of openness in government&quot; and ordered new FOIA guidelines written with a &quot;presumption in favor of disclosure.&quot; But Justice's actions in courts since then have cast doubt on how far the new administration will go. &quot;This is not change,&quot; said ACLU executive director Anthony Romero. &quot;President Obama's Justice Department has disappointingly reneged&quot; on his promise to end &quot;abuse of state secrets.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For lots more on state secrecy from reliable, verifiable sources, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/secrecynewsarticles&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Warning over 'surveillance state'</title>
<Publication>BBC News</Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-02-06</PublicationDate>
<link>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7872425.stm</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;  Electronic surveillance and collection of personal data are &quot;pervasive&quot; in British society and threaten to undermine democracy, peers [in the House of Lords] have warned. CCTV cameras and the DNA database were two examples of threats to privacy, the Lords constitution committee said. It called for compensation for people subject to illegal surveillance. Civil liberties campaigners have warned about the risks of a &quot;surveillance society&quot; in which the state acquires ever-greater powers to track people's movements and retain personal data. In its report, the Lords constitution committee said &lt;strong&gt;growth in surveillance by both the state and the private sector risked threatening people's right to privacy, which it said was &quot;an essential pre-requisite to the exercise of individual freedom&quot;. People were often unaware of the scale of personal information held and exchanged by public bodies&lt;/strong&gt;, it said. &quot;There can be no justification for this gradual but incessant creep towards every detail about us being recorded and pored over by the state,&quot; committee chairman and Tory peer Lord Goodlad said. &quot;The huge rise in surveillance and data collection by the state and other organisations risks undermining the long-standing tradition of privacy and individual freedom which are vital for democracy,&quot; Lord Goodlad added. Human rights campaigners &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/&quot;&gt;Liberty&lt;/a&gt; welcomed the report.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For key reports from major media sources on growing threats to privacy from governments and corporations, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/privacynewsarticles&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Intelligence Agencies' Databases Set to Be Linked</title>
<Publication><i>Wall Street Journal</i></Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-01-22</PublicationDate>
<link>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123258232280204323.html</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;U.S. spy agencies' sensitive data should soon be linked by Google-like search systems.
Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell has launched a sweeping technology program to knit together the thousands of databases across all 16 spy agencies. After years of bureaucratic snafus, intelligence analysts will be able to search through secret intelligence files the same way they can search public data on the Internet. &lt;strong&gt;Linking up the 16 agencies is the challenge at the heart of the job of director of national intelligence, created after 9/11. The new information program also is designed to include Facebook-like social-networking programs and classified news feeds.&lt;/strong&gt; It includes enhanced security measures to ensure that only appropriately cleared people can access the network. The price tag is expected to be in the billions of dollars. The impact for analysts, Mr. McConnell says, &quot;will be staggering.&quot; Not only will analysts have vastly more data to examine, potentially inaccurate intelligence will stand out more clearly, he said. Today, an analyst's query might scan only 5% of the total intelligence data in the U.S. government, said a senior intelligence official. Even when analysts find documents, they sometimes can't read them without protracted negotiations to gain access. Under the new system, an analyst would likely search about 95% of the data, the official said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For key reports from reliable sources on the hidden realities of the War on Terror, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/terrorismnewsarticles&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Whistleblower exposes spying on Americans</title>
<Publication>MSNBC Countdown With Keith Olberman</Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-01-22</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28794766/</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;OLBERMANN:  It has taken less than 24 hours after the Bush presidency ended for a former analyst at the National Security Agency to come forward to reveal new allegations about how this nation was spied on by its own government. Russell Tice [reveals] that under the collar of fighting terrorism, the Bush administration was also targeting specific groups of Americans for surveillance. TICE:  &lt;strong&gt;The National Security Agency had access to all Americans‘ communications, faxes, phone calls, and their computer communications. They monitored all communications.&lt;/strong&gt; What was done was a sort of an ability to look at the meta data, the signaling data for communications, and ferret that information to determine what communications would ultimately be collected.  Basically, filtering out sort of like sweeping everything with that meta data, and then cutting down ultimately what you are going to look at and what is going to be collected, and in the long run have an analyst look at, you know, needles in a haystack for what might be of interest.  OLBERMANN:  I mention that you say specific groups were targeted. What group or groups can you tell us about?  TICE: [Some of the groups they]  collected on were U.S. news organizations and reporters and journalists. The collection ... was 24/7, and you know, 365 days a year, and it made no sense. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; To watch this revealing clip on video, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677#28781200&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;. For many reports on government surveillance and invasions of privacy, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/privacynewsarticles&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Let's face it, soon Big Brother will have no trouble recognising you</title>
<Publication><i>Times of London</i></Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-01-13</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article5504534.ece</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;This is the year when automated face-recognition finally goes mainstream, and it's about time we considered its social and political implications. Researchers are developing sharply accurate scanners that monitor faces in 3D and software that analyses skin texture to turn tiny wrinkles, blemishes and spots into a numerical formula. The strongest face-recognition algorithms are now considered more accurate than most humans - and already the Home Office and the Association of Chief Police Officers have held discussions about the possibility of linking such systems with automatic car-numberplate recognition and public-transport databases. Join everything together via the internet, and voilŕ - the nation's population, down to the individual Times reader, can be conveniently and automatically monitored in real time. So let's understand this: &lt;strong&gt;governments and police are planning to implement increasingly accurate surveillance technologies that are unnoticeable, cheap, pervasive, ubiquitous, and searchable in real time. And private businesses, from bars to workplaces, will also operate such systems, whose data trail may well be sold on or leaked to third parties&lt;/strong&gt; - let's say, insurance companies that have an interest in knowing about your unhealthy lifestyle, or your ex-spouse who wants evidence that you can afford higher maintenance payments.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For disturbing reports on threats to privacy from major media sources, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/privacynewsarticles&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>More Groups Than Thought Monitored in Police Spying</title>
<Publication><i>Washington Post</i></Publication>
<PublicationDate>2009-01-04</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/03/AR2009010301993.html</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;The Maryland State Police surveillance of advocacy groups was far more extensive than previously acknowledged, with records showing that troopers monitored -- and labeled as terrorists -- activists devoted to such wide-ranging causes as promoting human rights and establishing bike lanes.&lt;/strong&gt; Intelligence officers created a voluminous file on Norfolk-based People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, calling the group a &quot;security threat&quot; because of concerns that members would disrupt the circus. Angry consumers fighting a 72 percent electricity rate increase in 2006 were targeted. The DC Anti-War Network, which opposes the Iraq war, was designated a white supremacist group, without explanation. One of the possible &quot;crimes&quot; in the file police opened on Amnesty International, a world-renowned human rights group: &quot;civil rights.&quot; The [surveillance] ... confirmed the fears of civil liberties groups that have warned about domestic spying since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. &quot;No one was thinking this was al-Qaeda,&quot; said Stephen H. Sachs, a former U.S. attorney and state attorney general appointed by Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) to review the case. &quot;But 9/11 created an atmosphere where cutting corners was easier.&quot; Maryland has not been alone. The FBI and police departments in several cities, including Denver in 2002 and New York before the 2004 Republican National Convention, also responded to  [dissent] by spying on activists.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For wide coverage from reliable sources of disturbing threats to civil liberties, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/civillibertiesnewsarticles&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Government black boxes will 'collect every email'</title>
<Publication><i>The Independent</i> (One of the U.K.'s leading newspapers)</Publication>
<PublicationDate>2008-11-05</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/government-black-boxes-will-collect-every-email-992268.html</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;Internet &quot;black boxes&quot; will be used to collect every email and web visit in the UK under the Government's plans for a giant &quot;big brother&quot; database, The Independent has learnt.
Home Office officials have told senior figures from the internet and telecommunications industries that the &quot;black box&quot; technology could automatically retain and store raw data from the web before transferring it to a giant central database controlled by the Government. &lt;strong&gt;Plans to create a database holding information about every phone call, email and internet visit made in the UK have provoked a huge public outcry. Richard Thomas, the Information Commissioner, described it as &quot;step too far&quot; and the Government's own terrorism watchdog said that as a &quot;raw idea&quot; it was &quot;awful&quot;. &lt;/strong&gt;News that the Government is already preparing the ground by trying to allay the concerns of the internet industry is bound to raise suspicions about ministers' true intentions. Further details of the database emerged on Monday at a meeting of internet service providers (ISPs) in London where representatives from BT, AOL Europe, O2 and BSkyB were given a PowerPoint presentation of the issues and the technology surrounding the Government's Interception Modernisation Programme (IMP), the name given by the Home Office to the database proposal. &quot;It was clear the 'back box' is the technology the Government will use to hold all the data. But what isn't clear is what the Home Secretary, GCHQ and the security services intend to do with all this information in the future,&quot; said a source close to the meeting.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For lots more on threats to privacy from reliable sources, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/privacynewsarticles&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Interpol wants facial recognition database to catch suspects</title>
<Publication><i>The Guardian</i> (One of the U.K.'s leading newspapers)</Publication>
<PublicationDate>2008-10-20</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/oct/20/interpol-facial-recognition</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;Interpol is planning to expand its role into the mass screening of passengers moving around the world by creating a face recognition database. Every year more than 800 million international travellers fail to undergo &quot;the most basic scrutiny&quot; to check whether their identity documents have been stolen, the global policing cooperation body has warned. Senior figures want a system that lets immigration officials capture digital images of passengers and immediately cross-check them against a database of pictures of [alleged] terror suspects, international criminals and fugitives. The UK's first automated face recognition gates -- matching passengers to their digital image in the latest generation of passports -- began operating at Manchester airport in August. Mark Branchflower, head of Interpol's fingerprint unit, will this week unveil proposals in London for the creation of biometric identification systems that could be linked to such immigration checks. The civil liberties group &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.no2id.net/&quot;&gt;No2ID&lt;/a&gt;, which campaigns against identity cards, expressed alarm at the plans.&lt;strong&gt; &quot;This is a move away from seeking specific persons to GCHQ-style bulk interception of information,&quot; warned spokesman Michael Parker. &quot;This is the next step. Law enforcement agencies want the most efficient systems but there has to be a balance between security and privacy.&quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For many disturbing reports on increasing threats to privacy, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/privacynewsarticles&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Passports will be needed to buy mobile phones</title>
<Publication><i>Times of London</i></Publication>
<PublicationDate>2008-10-19</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article4969312.ece</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Everyone who buys a mobile telephone will be forced to register their identity on a national database under government plans to extend massively the powers of state surveillance. Phone buyers would have to present a passport or other official form of identification at the point of purchase&lt;/strong&gt;. Privacy campaigners fear it marks the latest government move to create a surveillance society. A compulsory national register for the owners of all 72m mobile phones in Britain would be part of a much bigger database. Whitehall officials have raised the idea of a register containing the names and addresses of everyone who buys a phone in recent talks with Vodafone and other telephone companies, insiders say. The move is targeted at monitoring the owners of Britain’s estimated 40m prepaid mobile phones. They can be purchased with cash by customers who do not wish to give their names, addresses or credit card details. The pay-as-you-go phones are popular with criminals ... because their anonymity shields their activities from the authorities. But they are also used by thousands of law-abiding citizens who wish to communicate in private. The move aims to close a loophole in plans being drawn up by GCHQ, the government’s eavesdropping centre in Cheltenham, to create a huge database to monitor and store the internet browsing habits, e-mail and telephone records of everyone in Britain. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For many disturbing reports on increasing threats to privacy, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/privacynewsarticles&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Wiretap lawsuit defense challenged in court</title>
<Publication><i>San Francisco Chronicle</i> (San Francisco's leading newspaper</Publication>
<PublicationDate>2008-10-18</PublicationDate>
<link>http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/10/18/BATN13JVOG.DTL</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;Civil liberties groups started a legal challenge ... to the new federal law designed to dismiss their wiretapping suits against telecommunications companies, saying the statute violates phone customers' constitutional rights and tramples on judicial authority. The law ... granted retroactive protection to AT&amp;T, Verizon and other companies against lawsuits accusing them of illegally sharing their telephone and e-mail networks and millions of customer records with the National Security Agency. Almost 40 such suits from around the nation are pending before Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker in San Francisco. The law requires him to dismiss the cases if the Justice Department tells him the companies had cooperated in a surveillance program authorized by President Bush. Details of the department's filing and the judge's dismissal order are to be kept secret. The &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.aclu.org&quot;&gt;American Civil Liberties Union&lt;/a&gt; and the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.eff.org/&quot;&gt;Electronic Frontier Foundation&lt;/a&gt; attacked the secrecy requirements and argued that Congress and President Bush lack authority to order courts to whitewash constitutional violations. &lt;strong&gt;&quot;If Congress can give the executive the power to exclude the judiciary from considering the constitutional claims of millions of Americans ... then the judiciary will no longer be functioning as a coequal branch of government,&quot;&lt;/strong&gt; Cindy Cohn, the foundation's legal director, said in court papers. She said the law's secrecy makes the proceedings one-sided. &quot;Due process requires more than the chance to shadow-box with the government,&quot; Cohn wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For many reports from reliable, verifiable sources on threats to civil liberties, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/civillibertiesnewsarticles&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
<item>
<title>Exclusive: Inside Account of U.S. Eavesdropping on Americans</title>
<Publication>ABC News</Publication>
<PublicationDate>2008-10-09</PublicationDate>
<link>http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Story?id=5987804&amp;page=1</link>
<description>&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;Hundreds of US citizens overseas have been eavesdropped on as they called friends and family back home, according to two former military intercept operators who worked at the giant National Security Agency (NSA) center in Fort Gordon, Georgia. &quot;These were just really everyday, average, ordinary Americans who happened to be in the Middle East, in our area of intercept and happened to be making these phone calls on satellite phones,&quot; said Adrienne Kinne, a 31-year old US Army Reserves Arab linguist assigned to a special military program at the NSA's Back Hall at Fort Gordon from November 2001 to 2003. She said US military officers, American journalists and American aid workers were routinely intercepted and &quot;collected on&quot; as they called their offices or homes in the United States. Another intercept operator, former Navy Arab linguist, David Murfee Faulk, 39, said he and his fellow intercept operators listened into hundreds of Americans picked up using phones in Baghdad's Green Zone from late 2003 to November 2007. Both former intercept operators came forward at first to speak with investigative journalist [James] Bamford for a book on the NSA, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.amazon.com/Shadow-Factory-Ultra-Secret-Eavesdropping-America/dp/0385521324/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1224080974&amp;sr=8-1&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;The Shadow Factory&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, to be published next week. &quot;It's extremely rare,&quot; said Bamford, who has written two previous books on the NSA, including the landmark &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.amazon.com/Puzzle-Palace-National-Intelligence-Organization/dp/0140067485/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1224081022&amp;sr=8-1&quot;&gt;&lt;em&gt;Puzzle Palace&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt; which first revealed the existence of the super secret spy agency. &lt;strong&gt;&quot;Both of them felt that what they were doing was illegal and improper, and immoral, and it shouldn't be done, and that's what forces whistleblowers.&quot;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p style='text-align:justify;font-family:Arial;font-size:10.0pt'&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note:&lt;/strong&gt; For many reports from major media sources of disturbing threats to privacy, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wanttoknow.info/privacynewsarticles&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
