Posts

Father Uses “Personal Drone” To Follow His Son to School

A genius dad invented something to make dad life easier: a flying, camera-equipped quadrocopter that could follow his kids to the school bus stop. That’s right, a personal drone for his kids. Genius, I say. Genius!

Paul Wallich, the guy who cooked up the flying drone, used to walk his grade school son 400 meters down a hill to the bus stop. But he was always curious to make a drone with a camera follow his son so he could watch the trip from his computer. So he did it. And it’s a lot easier than you think.

Wallich simply bought a quadrocopter kit and attached a smartphone with a video chatting app enabled. The tricky part was to have the drone follow his kid.

Read more from this story HERE.

What Privacy? Biometrics Technology Now Being Used in Schools, Hospitals

At schools in Pinellas County, Fla., students aren’t paying for lunch with cash or a card, but with a wave of their hand over a palm scanner.

“It’s so quick that a child could be standing in line, call mom and say, ‘I forgot my lunch money today.’ She’s by her computer, runs her card, and by the time the child is at the front of the line, it’s already recorded,” says Art Dunham, director of food services for Pinellas County Schools.

Students take about four seconds to swipe and pay for lunch, Dunham says, and they’re doing it with 99% accuracy.

“We just love it. No one wants to go back,” Dunham says.

Palm-scanning technology is popping up nationwide as a bona fide biometric tracker of identities, and it appears poised to make the jump from schools and hospitals to other sectors of the economy including ATM usage and retail. It also has applications as a secure identifier for cloud computing.

Read more from this story HERE.

Leahy Scuttles His Warrantless E-mail Surveillance Bill

Sen. Patrick Leahy has abandoned his controversial proposal that would grant government agencies more surveillance power — including warrantless access to Americans’ e-mail accounts — than they possess under current law.

The Vermont Democrat said today on Twitter that he would “not support such an exception” for warrantless access. The remarks came a few hours after a CNET article was published this morning that disclosed the existence of the measure.

A vote on the proposal in the Senate Judiciary committee, which Leahy chairs, is scheduled for next Thursday. The amendments were due to be glued onto a substitute (PDF) to H.R. 2471, which the House of Representatives already has approved.

Leahy’s about-face comes in response to a deluge of criticism today, including the American Civil Liberties Union saying that warrants should be required, and the conservative group FreedomWorks launching a petition to Congress — with more than 2,300 messages sent so far — titled: “Tell Congress: Stay Out of My Email!”

A spokesman for the senator did not respond to questions today from CNET asking for clarification of what Leahy would support next week.

Read more from this story HERE.

US Senate to Vote on Outrageous Bill to Allow Fed’s to Read Your Email Without a Warrant

leahyA Senate proposal touted as protecting Americans’ e-mail privacy has been quietly rewritten, giving government agencies more surveillance power than they possess under current law.

CNET has learned that Patrick Leahy, the influential Democratic chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee, has dramatically reshaped his legislation in response to law enforcement concerns. A vote on his bill, which now authorizes warrantless access to Americans’ e-mail, is scheduled for next week.

Leahy’s rewritten bill would allow more than 22 agencies — including the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Federal Communications Commission — to access Americans’ e-mail, Google Docs files, Facebook wall posts, and Twitter direct messages without a search warrant. It also would give the FBI and Homeland Security more authority, in some circumstances, to gain full access to Internet accounts without notifying either the owner or a judge. (CNET obtained the revised draft from a source involved in the negotiations with Leahy.)

It’s an abrupt departure from Leahy’s earlier approach, which required police to obtain a search warrant backed by probable cause before they could read the contents of e-mail or other communications. The Vermont Democrat boasted last year that his bill “provides enhanced privacy protections for American consumers by… requiring that the government obtain a search warrant.”

Leahy had planned a vote on an earlier version of his bill, designed to update a pair of 1980s-vintage surveillance laws, in late September. But after law enforcement groups including the National District Attorneys’ Association and the National Sheriffs’ Association organizations objected to the legislation and asked him to “reconsider acting” on it, Leahy pushed back the vote and reworked the bill as a package of amendments to be offered next Thursday. The package (PDF) is a substitute for H.R. 2471, which the House of Representatives already has approved.

Read more from this story HERE.

Court OKs Warrantless Use of Hidden Surveillance Cameras on Private Property

photo credit: fonstokPolice are allowed in some circumstances to install hidden surveillance cameras on private property without obtaining a search warrant, a federal judge said yesterday.

CNET has learned that U.S. District Judge William Griesbach ruled that it was reasonable for Drug Enforcement Administration agents to enter rural property without permission — and without a warrant — to install multiple “covert digital surveillance cameras” in hopes of uncovering evidence that 30 to 40 marijuana plants were being grown.

This is the latest case to highlight how advances in technology are causing the legal system to rethink how Americans’ privacy rights are protected by law. In January, the Supreme Court rejected warrantless GPS tracking after previously rejecting warrantless thermal imaging, but it has not yet ruled on warrantless cell phone tracking or warrantless use of surveillance cameras placed on private property without permission.

Yesterday Griesbach adopted a recommendation by U.S. Magistrate Judge William Callahan dated October 9. That recommendation said that the DEA’s warrantless surveillance did not violate the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches and requires that warrants describe the place that’s being searched.

“The Supreme Court has upheld the use of technology as a substitute for ordinary police surveillance,” Callahan wrote.

Read more from this story HERE.

Unthinkable Power: CIA Stealing World Leaders’ DNA For Customized Bioweapons?

[C]onsider that since the beginning of this century, rapidly accelerating technology has shown a distinct tendency to turn the impossible into the everyday in no time at all. Last year, IBM’s Watson, an artificial intelligence, understood natural language well enough to whip the human champion Ken Jennings on Jeopardy. As we write this, soldiers with bionic limbs are returning to active duty, and autonomous cars are driving down our streets. Yet most of these advances are small in comparison with the great leap forward currently under way in the biosciences—a leap with consequences we’ve only begun to imagine.

Personalized bioweapons are a subtler and less catastrophic threat than accidental plagues or WMDs. Yet they will likely be unleashed much more readily.
More to the point, consider that the DNA of world leaders is already a subject of intrigue. According to Ronald Kessler, the author of the 2009 book In the President’s Secret Service, Navy stewards gather bedsheets, drinking glasses, and other objects the president has touched—they are later sanitized or destroyed—in an effort to keep would‑be malefactors from obtaining his genetic material. (The Secret Service would neither confirm nor deny this practice, nor would it comment on any other aspect of this article.) And according to a 2010 release of secret cables by WikiLeaks, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton directed our embassies to surreptitiously collect DNA samples from foreign heads of state and senior United Nations officials. Clearly, the U.S. sees strategic advantage in knowing the specific biology of world leaders; it would be surprising if other nations didn’t feel the same.

While no use of an advanced, genetically targeted bio-weapon has been reported, the authors of this piece—including an expert in genetics and microbiology (Andrew Hessel) and one in global security and law enforcement (Marc Goodman)—are convinced we are drawing close to this possibility. Most of the enabling technologies are in place, already serving the needs of academic R&D groups and commercial biotech organizations. And these technologies are becoming exponentially more powerful, particularly those that allow for the easy manipulation of DNA.

The evolution of cancer treatment provides one window into what’s happening. Most cancer drugs kill cells. Today’s chemotherapies are offshoots of chemical-warfare agents: we’ve turned weapons into cancer medicines, albeit crude ones—and as with carpet bombing, collateral damage is a given. But now, thanks to advances in genetics, we know that each cancer is unique, and research is shifting to the development of personalized medicines—designer therapies that can exterminate specific cancerous cells in a specific way, in a specific person; therapies focused like lasers.

To be sure, around the turn of the millennium, significant fanfare surrounded personalized medicine, especially in the field of genetics. A lot of that is now gone. The prevailing wisdom is that the tech has not lived up to the talk, but this isn’t surprising. Gartner, an information-technology research-and-advisory firm, has coined the term hype cycle to describe exactly this sort of phenomenon: a new technology is introduced with enthusiasm, only to be followed by an emotional low when it fails to immediately deliver on its promise. But Gartner also discovered that the cycle doesn’t typically end in what the firm calls “the trough of disillusionment.” Rising from those ashes is a “slope of enlightenment”—meaning that when viewed from a longer-term historical perspective, the majority of these much-hyped groundbreaking developments do, eventually, break plenty of new ground.

Read more from this story HERE.

Video: Growing Protests Against RFID Tracking in Texas School

Last night, NBC Nightly News broadcast a segment on the Texas school that is requiring students to wear RFID tags. RFID receivers are placed throughout the school so that administrators instantly know where every child is at. This also allows the school to know how many students are in class or absent at any one time.

Privacy advocates worry that the use of these chips is a preliminary step to wider application in society. As we have mentioned previously at Restoring Liberty, a major concern for privacy advocates is the “normalizing” effect of such applications.

A parent that was interviewed by NBC also posits a religious objection: that RFID technology represents, or is a precursor to, Revelation’s Mark of the Beast:

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

DHS Now Pursuing Minitiarized Drone Technology for Domestic Surveillance

There was a time when the Department of Homeland Security wasn’t enthusiastic about its drone fleet. Unmanned flying surveillance ‘bots had the potential to freak out the public, top DHS science and technology officials worried. That time has evidently passed — particularly for smaller flying spies.

In the coming months, Fort Sill, Oklahoma will become a proving ground to learn what small surveillance drones can add to “first responder, law enforcement and border security scenarios,” according to a recent solicitation to the country’s various drone manufacturers. Each selected drone will undergo five days’ worth of tests as part of a new program from DHS’ Science and Technology directorate, called Robotic Aircraft for Public Safety or, gloriously, RAPS.

Like many in the military experimenting with drone miniaturization, DHS is thinking small. The drones it wants to bring to Fort Sill will ideally be launched by hand, like the Army and Marines’ Raven. They should weigh under 25 pounds. Assembly should take a matter of minutes, and training for their remote pilots and technician a matter of days. DHS isn’t looking for drones that can loiter over an area for a long time: just 30 minutes to two hours, a hint that the department doesn’t foresee drones becoming a primary surveillance tool. “Law enforcement operations, search and rescue, and fire and hazardous material spill response” are some of the potential drone missions the RAPS program envisions.

Still, it’s something of a turnaround for DHS. Back in January 2011, Ruth Doherty, a DHS science & tech official, expressed skepticism about using drones to patrol for signs of terrorism or to protect big public events like the Super Bowl. “A case has to be made that they’re economically feasible, not intrusive and acceptable to the public,” Doherty told Danger Room at a D.C. conference. In addition to the potential public outcry, drones have been a headache for DHS at times. A DHS ground station in 2010 lost communications with one of the first Predators it used to surveil the southern U.S. border, and the department has had trouble finding enough pilots and technicians to operate its initial drone fleet.

Read more from this story HERE.

Alaskan Files Suit Against Presidential Candidates, Cites Miller & Obama Senate Cases

Photo credit: Mihai Bojin Citing case law in both California and Alaska, Anchorage Resident Thomas A. Lamb has filed suit in the Superior Court of Alaska for access to private records for both President Barack Obama and Republican Nominee Willard “Mitt” Romney.

Lamb believes that precedent created by a 2004 California case instigated by Obama insiders requiring Illinois US Senate candidate Jack Ryan’s divorce records to be made public, and a 2010 Alaska case requiring personnel files for Alaska US Senate Candidate Joe Miller to be released, constitute grounds for further public disclosure of private documents for both major party’s presidential candidates.

Alaska Dispatch columnist Craig Medred appears to share Lamb’s sentiment, stating in correspondence earlier this year that the ruling in the Miller case “set a meaningful legal precedent that hopefully will be uniformly applied to everyone from here on.” It is unclear why the Alaska Dispatch and other media outlets who relentlessly pursued confidential information in the Miller case lack a similar level of intellectual curiosity when it pertains to the President of the United States.

Judge Winston Burbank’s edict in the Fairbanks North Star Borough case that the there is a compelling public interest in the voters “right to know” will be used to test the limits of Alaska’s explicit Constitutional “right to privacy.” Lamb hopes to compel the disclosure of school records, personnel files, medical information, and tax returns.

The suit stems from a request submitted to both candidates for the information in question. To date, there is evidence that both campaigns received the records requests, but neither has been forthcoming with information.

The impetus behind the inquiry? Among other things, Lamb cites suggestions from Democrat US Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid that Romney “manipulated” his tax returns, and the allegation that Barack Obama may have committed fraud by accessing financial assistance, purportedly as a foreign student. Sources for the claim against Obama include US and Indonesian law, the president’s own writings, and sworn affidavits.

If Lamb’s material claims are substantiated, it appears the president may have fraudulently received student aid from the federal government by making false claims about his legal status.

It is unlikely the case will get traction. But if it does, it is sure to draw national attention.

Obama Admin. Arguing It’s Legal To Track Citizens’ Every Movement Without A Warrant

The Obama administration told federal judges in New Orleans yesterday that warrantless tracking of the location of Americans’ mobile devices is perfectly legal.

Federal prosecutors are planning to argue that they should be able to obtain stored records revealing the minute-by-minute movements of mobile users over a 60-day period — in this case, T-Mobile and MetroPCS customers — without having to ask a judge to approve a warrant first.

The case highlights how valuable location data is for police, especially when it’s tied to devices that millions of people carry with them almost all the time. Records kept by wireless carriers can hint at or reveal medical treatments, political associations, religious convictions, and even whether someone is cheating on his or her spouse.

“It’s at a point now where the public awareness about this specific issue is growing,” says Hanni Fakhoury, a staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation who will be arguing the pro-privacy side before the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals this morning.

Today’s oral arguments are remarkably timely: on Sunday, California Gov. Jerry Brown, a Democrat, vetoed (PDF) a bill that would have required law enforcement to obtain location warrants. And last week, Rep. Zoe Lofgren, a Democrat representing Silicon Valley, introduced pro-warrant federal legislation.

Read more from this story HERE.