Tag: mass surveillance

Medical Surveillance Part 2: Tracking the Unvaccinated

Part 1 of “Medical Surveillance” revealed how contact tracing evolved into databases called real-time AI ecosystems. The data stored in these ecosystems ranges from medical records to genomic sequences that were largely collected using Covid-19 PCR tests. Health privacy laws were revised to enable an alarming amount of data sharing with public and private intelligence agencies for military operations. Using the Covid-19 scamdemic as a front, the military worked with so-called health authorities to weaponize Covid-19 statistics to target non-compliant or undesirable groups with mRNA vaccines, ventilators, and Remdesivir. In other words, it was a military operation that utilized covertly collected private medical and genetic data to deploy bioweapons. Targets were acquired using AI generated predictive behavior models provided by government intelligence agencies like Palantir. If that sounds disturbing to you, keep reading because that was just a warm-up.

The DELAYED REACTION THAT ENABLED THE ILLUSION OF THE PANDEMIC OF THE UNVACCINATED

As contact tracing phased into the background and the genome-collection method known as PCR testing was normalized, one more important piece of data needed to be collected: vaccination status.

The mockingbird media foreshadowed that vaccination status must be made public information because during a public health emergency everyone has a right to know their risk. Soon everyone would need to have a Covid-19 shot to travel, work, go to school, and participate in society. All this would inevitably lead to a vaccine passport. Yet there was no official way to track who was vaccinated in the healthcare industry.

The CDC and Medicare (CMS) announced new codes for tracking vaccination status that would go live on April 1st 2022. The update occurred exactly two years after the Covid-19 diagnosis code went live — on April fools’ Day. This time the emergency update was for the purposes of tracking vaccination status. It just wasn’t an emergency during the most aggressive portion of the vaccine campaign; the part where everyone had to get the shot in order for society to come out of lockdown and “go back to normal”. At any point during 2021, the CDC, CMS, or the AMA could have stopped the presses to do another emergency update to introduce a new code for vaccination status (or for adverse events, for that matter). They did not.

Keep reading

Spies, Secrets, and iCloud: Apple’s Legal Showdown in London

The Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) in London is the one that will consider Apple’s appeal against the UK’s Home Office secret order to include an encryption backdoor in the giant’s iCloud service.

As things stand now, pending the outcome of the legal – and political – wrangling, iCloud users no longer enjoy the security and privacy benefits of the Advanced Data Protection (ADP).

This affects iCloud Backup in the following categories: iCloud Drive, Photos, Notes, Reminders, Safari Bookmarks, Siri Shortcuts, Voice Memos, Wallet Passes, and Freeform.

Meanwhile, the tribunal itself is “secret,” and the date it will consider Apple’s attempt to avoid the permanent breaking of encryption, and of the trust of its users worldwide, has been set for Friday, March 14.

But privacy activists like Privacy International (PI) want these hearings to be public, since the outcome of the UK’s anti-encryption push potentially affects millions, possibly billions of people around the world.

Secret as it may be, the IPT – which is believed to normally deal with national security issues – announced Friday’s closed-door meeting, a move that is described as “unusual.”

Unusual perhaps, but not illogical – Apple’s appeal against the original secret order was also apparently meant to be secret but has in the meantime been “leaked” to the public.

The original order came from Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, who targeted the US company with a “technical compatibility notice.” The end result of compliance was giving UK’s spies and law enforcement access to data, by compromising iCloud encryption.

Keep reading

Ontario school children face compelled medical surveillance or suspension

Ontario school children are currently caught in the middle of an ongoing issue regarding student rights, medical privacy, and the power of public health authorities. Under the Immunization of School Pupils Act (ISPA), students attending Ontario schools are required to be vaccinated against certain diseases unless exempt for medical, religious, or philosophical reasons.

However, the recent push by public health officials to have students disclose their vaccination status and face suspension for non-compliance is raising serious privacy concerns.

The problem lies in the ambiguity between ISPA and the Education Act. ISPA stipulates vaccine requirements, but suspension orders are the responsibility of school principals under the Education Act, not public health authorities. This confusion is leading to violations of students’ fundamental right to a free public education, with some students at risk of being unlawfully suspended for failing to disclose their vaccination status.

The pressure to disclose private medical information is causing significant distress among parents and children alike. There are increasing concerns about the safety of centralized digital health databases, which have been vulnerable to data breaches and unauthorized access. With healthcare data a prime target for cyberattacks, parents are understandably worried about the security of their children’s sensitive medical records—which is big business for hackers.

Parents are resisting this growing pressure, with some viewing the disclosure demands as a violation of the Personal Health Information Protection Act (PHIPA). PHIPA requires informed consent before the collection of medical information and protects against coercion. However, the current approach by threatening suspension or else puts this principle into question.

The Ministry of Education was contacted for clarification, but media representatives Ingrid Anderson and Brook Campbell failed to respond days later. The inquiry focused on the confusion between ISPA and the Education Act, and how these conflicting laws are affecting students’ right to education. Additionally, clarification was sought on how medical privacy is being protected for parents wishing to uphold PHIPA.

Keep reading

Larry Ellison Pushes for AI-Powered National Data Centralization and Mass Surveillance

Oracle co-founder and the company’s executive chairman and chief technology officer Larry Ellison is trying to persuade governments to descend deep into AI-powered surveillance dystopia by centralizing the entirety of their national data in a single place.

And when he says everything should go into this “unified” database, Ellison means everything. That includes health-related data, such as diagnostic and genomic information, electronic health records, DNA, data on agriculture, climate, utility infrastructure…

Once in there, it would be used to train AI models, such as those developed by Oracle – Ellison shared with former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair during a panel at the World Governments Summit in Dubai.

As for why any government would do such a thing – his “sell” is that it would allow AI to be used to provide better services. But this time, he left out how this centralization would also represent an exceptional opportunity to “turbocharge” mass government surveillance, even though there is little doubt that many governments are hearing him loud and clear on that point as well.

Keep reading

The Secret History of American Surveillance

From cellphone spying to facial scanning technology to massive data farms, it’s no secret that the U.S. government is gathering loads of personal information on its citizens.

But few remember the origins of our modern surveillance state. Some argue that it was forged over 115 years ago, half a world away in the Philippine Islands.

The story begins in the mid-1870s, when a technological renaissance catapulted America into its first information revolution. Thomas Edison’s quadruplex telegraph and Philo Remington’s typewriter allowed data to be recorded accurately and transmitted quickly. Inventions such as the electrical tabulating machine and the Dewey Decimal System could count, catalog and retrieve huge amounts of information efficiently. Photography was becoming widely accessible, thanks to George Eastman’s roll film, and biometric criminal identification systems such as fingerprinting were adopted from Europe. Our ability to manage, store and transmit data grew by leaps and bounds.

Keep reading

A New Administration, Same Old Support for FISA

American politicians love to tell the citizenry exactly what they are going to do for them. They claim they will install programs for the poor, increase domestic security, strengthen our international image, and fight tirelessly for their constituencies’ rights. But are these even things people want from their elected leaders?

Democrats and Republicans are typically somewhat on the fence about this question in that they like government intervention and force so long as they are used to further their partisan political ambitions. When it comes to libertarian voters, on the other hand, the answer is likely no. Rather, what most libertarians want is the one thing that a politician will never promise: that they will do absolutely nothing and leave everyone alone!

Even if libertarians are technically in the statistical minority, they have noticed a worrying trend and are using the amplifying power of social media to make it a national debate. More specifically, the internet has now made it almost impossible for the enemies of liberty to hide, and this has led to a growing Massie/Paul-led public referendum against our politicians’ unsavory relationship with warrantless spying. Ideally, this referendum will transcend libertarian circles and will grow so large that it infiltrates the ranks of the Democrats and, more importantly, the Republicans.

To give some context, The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA), which is generally associated with the global War on Terror, was actually around decades before 9/11, even though very few people knew about it. This ambiguity existed, in part, because communications technology before the internet was not nearly as sophisticated or intrusive as it is now. However, after this act became supercharged with the adoption of the Patriot Act in 2001 and then the addition of Section 702 in 2008, its days in the dark were over, and unfortunately, so were our days of assumed privacy.

Even though the internet is waking up to the heinous unconstitutionality of these pieces of legislation, the politicians, on the other hand, don’t seem to be listening, a problem that, ironically, is more prevalent among the self-proclaimed “freedom-loving” MAGA Republicans than it is among the “uni party deep-state” Democrats.

Keep reading

UK Government Secretly Orders Apple to Build Global iCloud Backdoor, Threatening Digital Privacy Worldwide

Imagine waking up one morning to find out your government has demanded the master key to every digital iPhone lock on Earth — without telling anyone. That’s exactly what British security officials have tried to pull off, secretly ordering Apple to build a backdoor into iCloud that would allow them to decrypt any user’s data, anywhere in the world. Yes, not just suspected criminals, not just UK citizens — everyone. And they don’t even want Apple to talk about it.

This breathtakingly authoritarian stunt, first reported by The Washington Post, is one of the most aggressive attempts to dismantle digital privacy ever attempted by a so-called Western democracy. It’s the kind of thing you’d expect from regimes that plaster their leader’s face on every street corner, not from a country that still pretends to believe in civil liberties.

This isn’t about catching a single terrorist or cracking a single case. No, this order — issued in secret last month by Keir Starmer’s Labour government — demands universal decryption capabilities, effectively turning Apple into a surveillance arm of the UK government. Forget warrants, forget oversight, forget even the pretense of targeted investigations. If this order were obeyed, British authorities would have the power to rifle through anyone’s iCloud account at will, no justification required.

The officials pushing for this monstrosity are hiding behind the UK’s Investigatory Powers Act of 2016, a law so Orwellian it’s lovingly referred to as the “Snoopers’ Charter.” This piece of legislative overreach forces tech companies to comply with government spying requests while making it illegal to even disclose that such demands have been made. It’s the surveillance state’s dream—limitless power, zero accountability.

Keep reading

Intelligence Community Directive 406 Expands US Spy Agencies’ Ties with Big Tech

Intelligence Community Directive 406 was signed in the dying days of the Biden Administration – on January 16 – essentially, yet another part in a recent big drive, pushed particularly strongly during the recent WEF meetings in Davos, to promote “public-private” partnerships. The significance of Intelligence Community Directive 406 cannot be overstated.

The directive, as Ken Klippenstein reports signed by the then director of national intelligence, was focused on encouraging US intelligence agencies to “partner” with those privately owned corporations that already have troves of data at their disposal – such as, for example, tech corporations behind social platforms, but also those developing AI. The impact of Intelligence Community Directive 406 on these partnerships is critical.

A new administration has taken over in the US, and as of this time, it remains unclear how or if it intends to implement and use these newly introduced powers.

The order’s key provisions are to facilitate how spy agencies can use both data and expertise that corporations have. The misgivings about this particular policy view have to do with how vast both these categories have become, and how they have fueled financial success of tech companies, and therefore their role.

It could also be read as one last ditch effort to compromise the credibility of Big Tech, and put a question mark over some new trends, involving a number of these corporations openly turning against their “tormentors” of many years, and embracing the new administration.

Keep reading

EU AI Act Effectively Legalizes Biometric Mass Surveillance

On February 2, the EU AI Act, which came into force in August, reached the first compliance deadline. These are provisions that contain rules that allow the bloc to legalize biometric mass surveillance.

This is happening via Article 5, that on the face of it seeks to introduce protections against using AI systems that represent “unacceptable risk.” But, there are also exceptions to this, defined in the act as the “strictly necessary” cases when those same systems are allowed to be used.

It is this that gave rise to the fear that one of the consequences of the AI Act is to in fact legalize some highly contentious deployments of biometric data-fueled mass surveillance.

Article 5 prohibits real-time remote biometric ID systems from being used by law enforcement in public spaces – but only “unless and in so far as such use is strictly necessary.”

The “strictly necessary” instances are described as those when law enforcement is searching for “specific victims” of crimes like abduction, trafficking, and sexual exploitation, but also when they look for missing persons.

The second definition gets less precise in scope as it allows for AI surveillance systems to be used to prevent crime. This includes a threat to life or physical safety of individuals that is deemed to be “specific, substantial, and imminent” – or threat of a terrorist attack that law enforcement decides is “genuine and present” but also – “genuine and foreseeable.”

Lastly, the AI Act treats as “strictly necessary” to exempt from prohibited AI activities the following: “Localization or identification of a person suspected of having committed a criminal offense, for the purpose of conducting a criminal investigation or prosecution or executing a criminal penalty for offenses.”

Keep reading

Digital Hegemony: Sophisticating Monitoring And Propaganda – Love Your Servitude!

Today, we are witnessing a profound transformation. We are increasingly impacted by algorithmic decision-making, artificial intelligence, data proliferation, data harvesting and sophisticated monitoring of how we think and act. This affects how we work, how we access services and how we relate to and interact with others. 

While digital innovations and online platforms offer unparalleled ease, they also raise critical concerns about our independence. The constant connectivity and data-driven decision-making that characterise modern life has major implications. Technological advancements are used to shape preferences and behaviour, and predictably, powerholders use the notion of convenience to manipulate and exert control over populations.

Giant corporations and the state are leveraging what is often termed ‘technological solutionism’ to establish a digital iron cage of control. By monitoring and predicting our thoughts and actions, these intertwined entities impose a tightening noose of automated systems, suffocating personal liberty.

We are increasingly hurtling toward a reality reminiscent of Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, where a dystopian technocracy merges with a plutocracy.

Keep reading