Tag: data collection

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton Sues General Motors for Illegally Harvesting and Selling Drivers’ Private Data to Corporate Giants, Including Insurance Companies

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed a lawsuit against General Motors (GM), alleging that the automotive giant engaged in deceptive and unlawful business practices by collecting and selling private driving data from over 1.5 million Texans without their knowledge or consent.

This lawsuit follows Paxton’s announcement in June 2024 that he had launched an investigation into several car manufacturers suspected of improperly harvesting vast amounts of data directly from vehicles.

The findings have been alarming, revealing a disturbing trend among companies leveraging invasive technologies to exploit unsuspecting consumers.

“Our investigation revealed that General Motors has engaged in egregious business practices that violated Texans’ privacy and broke the law. We will hold them accountable,” said Attorney General Paxton. “Companies are using invasive technology to violate the rights of our citizens in unthinkable ways.”

The crux of the lawsuit centers around GM’s use of technology installed in most vehicles manufactured since 2015. This technology allegedly collects, records, analyzes, and transmits detailed driving data every time a driver uses their vehicle, according to the press release.

Shockingly, GM sold this sensitive information to various third parties, including insurance companies, who used it to generate “Driving Scores” aimed at influencing insurance premiums.

“A customer’s Driving Score was based on a series of “factors” developed by General Motors that were supposedly indicative of “bad” driving behavior and included behavior such as (1) unique identifiers of a trip; (2) trip mileage; (3) hard braking and acceleration events; (4) speed events over 80 miles per hour; and (5) other behavior tracked by OnStar Vehicle Diagnostics (“OVD”). Under the Verisk Agreement, GM provided Verisk with the Driving Data necessary to determine whether a customer exhibited any “bad” driving behaviors,” according to the lawsuit.

This sensitive information includes location tracking, driving habits, personal communications within the vehicle’s system, customer ID, name, and home address.

Keep reading

US government tanked the economy with covid lockdowns to gain control over the population through data collection and enforcement

The covid lockdowns amounted to the world’s largest and most elaborate economic head-fake in human history.

It left the entire world less free and less prosperous, and with drained hopes that restoring normality can happen anytime soon. To add injury to the insult, most official institutions are manufacturing fake data to cover it all up.

In the following, Jeffrey Tucker explains the economic impact on the USA of the lockdown in March 2020 and its aftermath. He highlights that the labour market has not fully recovered, stimulus was eroded by inflation, retail sales and factory orders have not significantly increased, and output has not seen a substantial rise. Additionally, it questions the accuracy of inflation data and the sustainability of the economic recovery.

Why did they shut economies down? A major ambition of the covid response was the creation of a universal vaccine passport, he writes. “All these efforts were reversed but the plan itself revealed the larger agenda: control through data collection and enforcement.  The ambition is not gone and will likely come back but a better and more comprehensive path is the Central Bank Digital Currency.”

Keep reading

Oxford Nanopore: The Internet of Living Things is closer than you think

The Internet of Living Things (“IoLT”) is a concept that connects living organisms, such as humans, animals and plants, to the Internet, enabling the exchange of data and information. This concept is an extension of the Internet of Things (“IoT”), which focuses on connecting devices and objects.

In short, the IoLT enables real-time monitoring of biological functions, such as vital signs, genetic data and environmental factors.  The collected data is analysed to provide insights into the biological state of the organism, enabling early detection of diseases and personalised healthcare. The data is transmitted to the cloud, where it can be accessed and analysed by healthcare professionals, researchers and other people. The biological state of an organism becomes an extension of the internet, enabling the creation of new intelligence about natural systems.

Examples of how the IoLT will collect data are:

  • Wearable sensors, such as fitness trackers, which can monitor vital signs and transmit data to the cloud for analysis.
  • Smart contact lenses, contact lenses with embedded sensors that can monitor glucose levels and transmit data to the cloud for diabetes management.
  • Portable genomic sequencers, portable devices that can sequence DNA and transmit data to the cloud for genetic analysis.
  • Internet-enabled biocyber interfaces, biocyber interfaces which can connect living insects to the internet, enabling control of their behaviour and communication with the environment.

The topic of this article is portable genomic sequencers; in particular Oxford Nanopore Technology devices.

In 2015, 9 years ago, when Clive Brown, Chief Technology Officer of Oxford Nanopore Technology was asked what the likelihood was of portable DNA sequencers becoming reality, he answered: “It is already a reality. The technology is now in the optimisation phase and will only get better. If you are asking how long before it reaches a clinic – then I think that is a different question, but it will be in many other non-clinical environments first.”

The DNA sequencer he was referring to was Oxford Nanopore’s MinION.  Any living thing, or system of living things, can be connected to the internet via the MinION or by any similar real-time DNA sensing devices, Brown said.

“Healthcare is just one application [ ]; equally, water sources, food supplies, hospital air and many other systems can be frequently sampled and sequenced – also allowing their state to be trended, tracked and predicted,” Brown said.

A few years later, in 2019, an article published by International Defence, Security and Technology (“IDST”) described MinION as small as a USB stick and easy to use. “Oxford Nanopore has designed an intelligent cloud lab, Metrichor, to be used for genomics data storage in conjunction with smartphone apps that interpret the meaning of DNA sequences. Researchers around the world now use pocket-size genomic sequencers to rapidly detect resistant pathogenic strains in hospitals, and diagnose infectious agents in food supply and aboard spaceships,” IDST wrote.

In early 2020, Oxford Nanopore’s technology was put to use in the surveillance of the coronavirus outbreak. 

Keep reading

CIA Targeting Smartphone App Data

Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Avril Haines, who oversees 18 separate agencies comprising the wider “intelligence community” – including the CIA, FBI, and NSA – has released a “policy framework for commercially available information.” It is not only the very first public confirmation by a US government official that Stateside spying entities acquire extensive data on private citizens from third party brokers, but admission this yield is deeply sensitive. While purportedly setting limits on the use of this information by spooks, the details are vague or non-existent.

“Commercially available information” (CAI) refers to data collected on individuals, typically by their smartphones, and the apps they use, sold by third parties. Via various sleights of hand and ruthless exploitation of regulatory loopholes, US intelligence obtained information not accessible by average citizens, which would typically require a court-approved search warrant to access. Yet, by purchasing this data from private brokers, spying agencies can still claim this snooping is “open source”, based on “publicly available” records.

A particularly rich source of CAI is data hoovered from digital advertising. In-app and website adspace is sold on real-time bidding (RTB) exchanges, and location and other user data is often included as a bonus, to ensure optimal ad targeting. Many data brokers pose as advertisers in order to “scrape” the listings for user information, before selling it on for profit. The value of this data, and the malign purposes to which it can be put, are vast.

Keep reading

Visa Rolls Out Tech To Share More Data on Customers’ Shopping History With Retailers

Visa, one of the world’s two largest payment card services, is launching new, proprietary technology that will allow it to give retailers even more data collected from its customers.

The move is seen as Visa working hard to keep up competing with the other giant – Mastercard – but also, fintech firms like Plaid.

The latter’s business, in terms of Visa considering it a rival, is revealing: it’s to power fintech and associated products with a data transfer network – specifically, a platform that “enables applications to connect with [a] user’s bank account.”

Visa’s “fear of missing out” on another lucrative personal data and customer behavior-based money grab is taking the form of “tokens” which allow banks and merchants to communicate so that banks can share customer data that offers insight into their preferences based on past transactions.

Reports say that this requires customers’ consent – but then also quote Visa Chief Executive Officer Ryan McInerney as saying, “It’s almost entirely blind to almost all consumers. They just know their payments work better.”

McInerney came up with a brand new way to phrase “opt-out” – he said the tokens come with consent “as the foundational premise.” The visa exec brazenly referred to this as “putting [the] customer in control”:

“Consumers will have the option, through their bank app, to revoke access to their information.”

Keep reading

Here’s How the CIA Plans To Use Your Ad Tracking Data

For years, the U.S. government has bought information on private citizens from commercial data brokers. Now, for the first time ever, American spymasters are admitting that this data is sensitive—but they’re leaving it up to the spy agencies on how to use it.

Last week, Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Avril Haines released a “Policy Framework for Commercially Available Information.” Her office oversees 18 agencies in the “intelligence community,” including the CIA, the FBI, the National Security Agency (NSA), and all military intelligence branches.

In the 2018 case Carpenter v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that police need a warrant to obtain mobile phone location data from phone companies. (During the case, the Reason Foundation filed an amicus brief against warrantless snooping.) As a workaround, the feds instead started buying data from third-party brokers.

Haines’ new framework claims that “additional clarity” on the government’s policies will help protect Americans’ privacy. Yet the document is vague about the specific limits. It orders the agencies themselves to come up with “safeguards that are tailored to the sensitivity of the information” and write an annual report on how they use this data.

As national security journalist Spencer Ackerman points out in his Forever Wars newsletter, the framework doesn’t require the feds to delete old purchased data. Earlier this year, Sen. Ron Wyden (D–Ore.) called on the NSA to purge all data that it bought without a warrant and without following the Federal Trade Commission’s privacy policies.

“The framework’s absence of clear rules about what commercially available information can and cannot be purchased by the intelligence community reinforces the need for Congress to pass legislation protecting the rights of Americans,” Wyden tells Reason. “The DNI’s framework is nonetheless an important step forward in starting to bring the intelligence community under a set of principles and policies, and in documenting all the various programs so that they can be overseen.”

Keep reading

SEC Plan to Track Americans’ Stock Investments Sparks Legal Fight

All stock trades conducted on U.S. exchanges will soon be surveilled by the government, according to a newly implemented plan by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

The SEC’s “Consolidated Audit Trail” (CAT) mandate would “allow regulators to efficiently and accurately track all activity throughout the U.S. markets,” the SEC stated.

In announcing the launch of this plan, SEC Chairman Gary Gensler stated in September 2023 that “prior to CAT’s creation, regulators lacked a consolidated view of the material information of all orders in [exchange-traded] securities.”

The CAT plan was originally proposed under the Obama administration in 2012 but remained dormant under the Trump administration. It is currently being resurrected under the Biden administration.

This plan ran into some resistance last week, however, from a group of lawyers and retired judges who see it as a historic violation of Americans’ civil rights.

A complaint filed on April 16 by the New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA), as a prelude to a lawsuit, called the CAT mandate “an unprecedented scheme by an administrative agency … to unilaterally set in motion one of the greatest government-mandated mass collections of personal financial data in United States history.”

Keep reading

Biden Opposes Bill That Would Keep Cops and Feds From Buying Your Data

A bipartisan group of lawmakers is once again trying to keep the government from performing an end run around the Fourth Amendment by buying people’s personal data. This week, President Joe Biden indicated that he opposed the bill.

H.R. 4639, known as the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act, “expands prohibited disclosures of stored electronic communications” to include purchases of data by law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

First introduced in 2021 by Sens. Ron Wyden (D–Ore.), Rand Paul (R–Ky.), Patrick Leahy (D–Vt.), and Mike Lee (R–Utah), the bill has been reintroduced in subsequent sessions. The current version was introduced in the House by Rep. Warren Davidson (R–Ohio) and in the Senate by Wyden and Paul.

On Wednesday, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D–N.Y.), ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee and one of the House bill’s cosponsors, affirmed his support on the House floor. “That anyone should have Americans’ private information is highly troubling to me,” Nadler said. “But that our federal government can obtain it without a warrant should be troubling to all of us.”

On Tuesday, the White House announced that the Biden administration “strongly opposes” the bill. According to a Statement of Administration Policy, the bill “generally would prohibit the Intelligence Community and law enforcement from obtaining certain commercially available information—subject only to narrow, unworkable exceptions.”

The Stored Communications Act forbids technology companies from disclosing certain subscriber information, including to the government. But certain types of data—including search histories, credit reports, employment records, and cellphone geolocation data—is “commercially available” and can be sold by third parties called data brokers. Often this data is purchased by private companies in order to better tailor their ad spending.

Governments typically need a warrant to access any of that type of information—as recently as 2018, the Supreme Court affirmed in Carpenter v. United States that the government cannot access a person’s cellphone location data without a warrant. “Although such records are generated for commercial purposes,” wrote Chief Justice John Roberts, that alone did not “negate” the plaintiff’s expectation of privacy. “We decline to grant the state unrestricted access to a wireless carrier’s database of physical location information.”

Put simply: Come back with a warrant.

But instead of honoring that decision, law enforcement and intelligence agencies just started buying the information from data brokers instead: The National Security Agency (NSA) buys people’s internet metadata, and agencies within the Department of Homeland Security—including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP)—purchase cellphone location data.

Keep reading

Are The Feds Buying Gun Data On Private Citizens Without A Warrant? 

The Biden Administration has shown time and time again how they weaponize federal law enforcement agencies against gun owners.

A recent report by the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security highlighted how several DHS component agencies, including the Secret Service, bought Americans’ phone location data without a court order.

Several other agencies, including the IRS, FBI, and the Defense Intelligence Agency, also admitted to using data brokers to sidestep American’s Fourth Amendment rights.

Under normal circumstances, a Judge would need to issue a warrant to collect this kind of data, but in this case, private companies act as a middleman between your data and the government by scraping anywhere that personal data is publicly available. Government lawyers have decided that the Fourth Amendment does not apply to Americans’ personal data — if the government buys it from data brokers.

Using the same quasi-legal methods used to obtain phone location data, federal law enforcement agencies may have already targeted gun owners by purchasing email lists and data sets that contain location, name, and other personal information from data brokers.

Several sites promote their extensive list of “Shooting Fanatics,” “Concealed carry licensed gun owners,” and even “New York City Gun Owners”! These lists are perfect targets for an administration focused on attacking the individual right to keep and bear arms.

With these lists, the Biden Administration’s law enforcement agencies could purchase and misuse the personal information of millions of gun owners without a single warrant or court order.

Keep reading

NSA secretly buying Americans’ data without a warrant

The National Security Agency has secretly been buying Americans’ internet records and using them for spying purposes without obtaining a warrant, a senior senator revealed Thursday.

Sen. Ron Wyden, Oregon Democrat, said the practice had been a “legal gray area,” with data brokers quietly obtaining and reselling the internet “metadata” without the users’ consent. He said the NSA has been trying to keep the whole thing under wraps.

In a letter to Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, the senator said the government needs a “wake-up call,” and he called for new rules limiting purchases only to data that Americans have consented to be sold.

He also asked for Ms. Haines to take an inventory of what the government already has and toss out any information that doesn’t meet the standard of consent.

“The U.S. government should not be funding and legitimizing a shady industry whose flagrant violations of Americans’ privacy are not just unethical, but illegal,” he said.

He released a letter from Army General Paul M. Nakasone, director of the NSA, detailing and justifying the agency’s actions.

Gen. Nakasone said it acquires what it calls “commercially available information” but said the acquisitions are limited. They don’t include location data from phones “known to be used in the United States,” and they don’t buy or use location data from automobiles in the U.S.

They do buy “non-content” data “where one side of the communication is a U.S. Internet Protocol address and the other is located abroad.”

The general said that information was critical for “the U.S. Defense Industrial Base.”

“NSA understands and greatly values the congressional and public trust it has been granted to carry out its critical foreign intelligence and cybersecurity missions on behalf of the American people,” Gen. Nakasone wrote.

In a separate letter, Under Secretary of Defense Ronald S. Moultrie defended the legality.

“I am not aware of any requirement in U.S. law or judicial opinion … that DoD obtain a court order in order to acquire, access or use information, such as CAI, that is equally available for purchase to foreign adversaries, U.S. companies and private persons as it is to the U.S. government,” he wrote.

Mr. Wyden, though, says the legal landscape may have just changed.

Keep reading