Private Surveillance Is a Lethal Weapon Anybody Can Buy: Is it too late to rein it in?
Sharon Weinberger, The New York Times, July 19, 2019
. . . One thing is clear: The private surveillance industry is growing. A firm that creates a catalog of these technologies, once named the “Little Black Book of Electronic Surveillance,” changed the name in 2016 to the “Big BlackBook.” It had doubled in size in its first three years. The 2017 edition includes 150 vendors.
The genesis of this global spy bazaar can be traced back to the frenetic weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks, when Congress rushed through the Patriot Act, a law that vastly expanded the American government’s wiretapping authorities. In the process, lawmakers inadvertently created a market for companies interested in providing services and technologies to collect and analyze the new trove of data. . . .
Activists, Amnesty International, Azerbaijan, Big Black Book of Electronic Surveillance, Cell Phones, Citizen Lab, Congress, Contractors, Cybersecurity, DarkMatter, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Digital Rights, Drones, Edward Snowden, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Ethiopia, European Union, Exports, Federal, FinSpy, FlexiSPY, Gamma Group, Guardian, Human Rights, Human Rights Watch, Intelligence Agencies, Internet, Journalists, Israel, Law, Law Enforcement, "Lawful Interception", Luta Security, National Security Agency, New York Times, NSO Group, Patriot Act, Prism, Privacy, Privacy International, Saudi Arabia, Security, State Department, Spyware, Surveillance, Surveillance Industry (Private), Surveillance (Private), Surveillance Technology, Syria, Telephones, TeleStrategies, Terrorism, Unit 8200, Uzbekistan, Vans,"Voice Print", Wassenaar Arrangement, Weapons, "Wiretappers Ball", Wiretapping, WiSpear
Law Enforcement Access [to Medical Records]
Electronic Frontier Foundation no date
When exploring medical privacy issues, it's very useful to have an overview of the laws that affect control and privacy of medical information. We encourage you to read our legal overview.
Federal and state laws define some privacy rights for people who want to keep their medical records out of the hands of law enforcement. But law enforcement has many ways to access medical data when investigating crimes, identifying victims, or tracking down a fugitive. Often, the police are able to seek out sensitive medical records without an individual's consent—and sometimes without a judge's authorization.
To understand this, it's useful to compare the federal standards set by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) to the more privacy-protective legal standards in the State of California. We'll be jumping back and forth between the two throughout this discussion. Note: this discussion doesn’t cover access to health records relating to treatment in federally funded substance abuse facilities and programs under 42 U.S.C. § 290dd-2 and its “Part 2” regulations, which has stricter rules.
Disclosures of medical information to law enforcement by covered entities
The HIPAA Privacy Rule broadly defines law enforcement as "any government official at any level of government authorized to either investigate or prosecute a violation of the law."
Under HIPAA, medical information can be disclosed to law enforcement officials without an individual’s permission in a number of ways. Disclosures for law enforcement purposes apply not only to doctors or hospitals, but also to health plans, pharmacies, health care clearinghouses, and medical research labs. That's because under the HITECH Act, as implemented by the HIPAA Omnibus Rule, both a "covered entity" and any business associate (BA) are directly subject to these law enforcement access rules.
California has somewhat stronger privacy rules that require more court involvement, because HIPAA does not preempt more privacy-protective state laws. In California, search warrants for medical records are generally authorized under the Penal Code and require judicial approval based on probable cause. Less stringent court orders based on a showing of good cause can also be used. And in California, even if a mere administrative subpoena is used, the California Penal Code requires an authorizing court order.
By contrast, HIPAA permits1 the police to use an administrative subpoena or other written request with no court involvement, as long as police include a written statement that the information they want is relevant, material, and limited in scope, and that de-identified information is insufficient. . . .
California,Federal, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), Health Records, Law Enforcement, Medical, Medical Records, Notice of Privacy Practices (NPP), Privacy, State
FBI’s Facial Recognition Programs Under Fire Over Privacy, Accuracy Concerns: The bureau has largely ignored the Government Accountability Office’s concerns about its use of facial recognition in criminal investigations.
Nextgov APRIL 18, 2019 04:08 PM ET
The FBI still has not assessed whether its facial recognition systems meet privacy and accuracy standards nearly three years after a congressional watchdog—the Government Accountability Office—raised multiple concerns about the bureau’s use of the tech.
Since 2015, the FBI and other law enforcement agencies have used the Next Generation Identification-Interstate Photo System, which uses facial recognition software to link potential suspects to crimes, pulling from a database of more than 30 million mugshots and other photos. . . .
Amazon, Civil Rights, Department of Justice, Facial Recognition Systems, Federal, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Government Accountability Office, Law Enforcement, Next Generation Identification-Interstate Photo System, Privacy, State, Surveillance
CHICAGO IS TRACKING KIDS WITH GPS MONITORS THAT CAN CALL AND RECORD THEM WITHOUT CONSENT: Cook County has a new contract for juvenile ankle monitors that critics say are an invasion of privacy.
The Appeal Apr 08, 2019
This story was co-published with Citylab.
On March 29, court officials in Chicago strapped an ankle monitor onto Shawn, a 15-year-old awaiting trial on charges of armed robbery. They explained that the device would need to be charged for two hours a day and that it would track his movements using GPS technology. He was told he would have to be given permission to leave his house, even to go to school. But he found out that through his monitor, officers wouldn’t just be able to track his location, as most electronic monitors do. They would also be able to speak—and listen—to him.
“I feel like they are listening to what he’s saying,” said Shawn’s mother. “They can hear everything. We could be here talking about anything.”
Shawn, whose name has been changed to protect his identity, is one of hundreds of children in Chicago whose ankle monitors are now equipped with microphones and speakers. The stated purpose of these devices is to communicate with the children, but they are raising concerns among civil liberties watchers that they are actually a mechanism for surveilling the conversations of these kids and those around them—and potentially for using the recordings in criminal cases. . . .
Ankle Bracelets, Cell Phones, Chicago, Civil Rights, Children, Cook County, Criminal Justice, Electronic Monitoring, GPS, Illinois, Law Enforcement, Privacy, Probation, Sheriff, Surveillance
As Black Activists Protested Police Killings, Homeland Security Worried They Might Join ISIS
Alice Speri, The Intercept_, April 8 2019, 8:23 a.m.
AS NATIONWIDE PROTESTS against police killings of black men began rolling across the country in 2014, federal and local law enforcement who were closely monitoring protesters’ online activities repeatedly expressed a bizarre concern: that the mostly black activists demanding an end to police violence in the U.S. might join with Islamic fundamentalist groups promoting violence abroad.
That concern was unequivocally baseless, and no evidence ever emerged to substantiate it. Still, documents obtained by the government transparency group Property of the People, which were shared exclusively with The Intercept, reveal that officials with the Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence exaggerated the significance of isolated social media activity, mostly by foreign accounts, advocating for a connection between the domestic movement against police brutality and foreign terrorism. . . .
Activists, Al Qaeda, Baltimore, “Black Identity Extremists”, Black Lives Matter, Center for Constitutional Rights, Civil Rights, Conspiracy Theories, Dakota Access Pipeline Protest Movement, Department of Homeland Security, Domestic Terrorism, Ferguson, Fox News, Fusion Centers, Greater Cincinnati Fusion Center, Intelligence Agencies, Intercept, ISIL, ISIS, Islamophobia, Islamic Extremism, Islamic State, Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, Law Enforcement, Maryland, Minneapolis, Minnesota, Missouri, Muslims, NAACP Convention, National Security, Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Palestinians, Private Security Companies, Police, Police Brutality, Property of the People, Riots, Standing Rock Protest Movement, St. Louis, Stereotyping, Terrorism
Activist Post MARCH 14, 2019
Can you imagine a city in the United States secretly creating a Chinese-style public surveillance network that can identify everyone? Can you imagine that same city secretly creating a Chinese-style public watchlisting network?
Well imagine no more because it has already happened. . . .
Department of Homeland Security, Law Enforcement, Police, San Diego, Surveillance, Watchlisting
Metro Wednesday 6 Mar 2019 12:02 am
A shocking report has revealed how undercover police helped big businesses blacklist construction workers. The internal police report has been published today to coincide with 10th anniversary of the scandal, which ruined thousands of workers lives, went public.
The Creedon report details the lengths undercover policemen from the Met went to follow and spy on trade unionists and blacklisted campaigners, all paid for by the taxpayer. . . .
Blacklisting, Law Enforcement, Police, Surveillance, Unions, United Kingdom
Jurist MARCH 1, 2019 04:21:01 PM
A three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit unanimously ruled Thursday that a federal district court improperly limited the scope of a lawsuit alleging that the FBI had illegally targeted mosques and Islamic individuals for surveillance on a basis of religion.
The suit, brought by the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California on behalf of an Imam and two Muslim parishioners, charged that the FBI had illegally and unconstitutionally conducted espionage of their mosque based solely on their religion, violating due process and First Amendment protections. The FBI countered that their activities were protected by state secret privileges and that to defend against the allegations in court would threaten national security by exposing the FBI’s anti-terrorism activities to public scrutiny. The district judge agreed with the FBI’s defense and dismissed the majority of the claims in 2012. . . .
American Civil Liberties Union, Civil Rights, Federal Bureau of Investigation, First Amendment, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, Law Enforcement, Muslims, National Security, State Secret Privileges, Surveillance, Terrorism
OPB Feb. 13, 2019 5 p.m. | Updated: Feb. 14, 2019 6:57 a.m.
Portland is out of the FBI-led Joint Terrorism Task Force again.
The Portland City Council voted 3-2 Wednesday to withdraw the city’s police officers from the JTTF, a partnership between federal agencies and local law enforcement.
Commissioners Jo Ann Hardesty, Amanda Fritz and Chloe Eudaly supported the change. They worry there is not enough civilian oversight to ensure Portland officers abide by civil rights laws and say there isn’t enough evidence to show the task force has made Portland safer. . . .
Civil Rights, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Joint Terrorism Task Force, Law Enforcement, Police, Portland
Department of Justice - Office of Public Affairs Thursday, November 29, 2018
A federal grand jury in St. Louis indicted four St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department (SLMPD) Police Officers for their conduct in connection with the arrest and assault of a fellow SLMPD police officer who was working undercover in downtown St. Louis during last year’s protests following the acquittal of a former SLMPD officer of a first-degree murder charge brought by the State of Missouri relating to the shooting death of a civilian.
The indictment charges Officers Dustin Boone, 35, Bailey Colletta, 25, Randy Hays, 31, and Christopher Myers, 27, with various felony charges, including deprivation of constitutional rights, conspiracy to obstruct justice, destruction of evidence, and obstruction of justice.
18 U.S. Code § 242 Deprivation of rights under color of law,
18 U.S. Code § 371 Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States,
18 U.S. Code §1512 Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant,
18 U.S. Code § 1519 Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations, Department of Justice, Federal, Law, Law Enforcement, Missouri, Police, St. Louis
NEWS and publications
Links to articles in transition. If the title is in red, click title. If the title is only in blue, click the hyperlink with the periodical's name/publication date.
Disclaimer: Targeted America is not a law firm. The information contained in this website is provided for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice on any matter.