Tag: mass surveillance

Seeds of Surveillance: The Track and Trace Playbook

QR codes are usually associated with convenience. In the Seed Act 2026, they become something else entirely: extending traceability to what is grown before it enters the supply chain, changing who has control over our food.

The Seed Act 2026 is presented by the Union Government of India as a necessary modernisation measure to curb the circulation of fake or substandard seeds.

The stated aim is the rollout of a new nationwide traceability system that mandates QR codes on all seed packets, compulsory registration for all commercial seed entities and significantly heightened penalties—up to ₹30 lakh (€27,000+ euros) and three years’ imprisonment—for seed fraud.

The government has consistently maintained that the Seed Act 2026 is designed to regulate only the commercial seed trade and will not interfere with the long-standing rights of farmers to save, sow, exchange or share seeds within their communities.

Officials emphasise that these traditional, non-branded and community-based practices remain a vital part of India’s agricultural heritage and are explicitly exempt from the registration and digital traceability requirements imposed on commercial entities.

While the government maintains that the Act will rebuild farmer trust, streamline quality control and strictly protect the traditional rights of farmers to save, share and exchange seeds, critics like the Samyukt Kisan Morcha (an umbrella coalition of 400+ farmers’ unions) view these reforms as a well-worn corporate strategy of enclosure that eradicates seed and food sovereignty.

Critics argue that these government assurances are insufficient and potentially misleading. They contend that by failing to explicitly define and protect community seed systems as a distinct sector, the Act leaves them vulnerable to administrative overreach.

Farmer organisations worry that without clear, ironclad legal safeguards, the pressure to comply with registration and branding requirements—especially for small-scale seed producers who may use simple packaging—will effectively force them to adopt the same burdensome and costly standards as large corporations, gradually pushing decentralised, village-level systems towards extinction.

Even with an informal exemption, the pressure to meet the ‘certified’ market standard could make traditional seed sharing increasingly risky. Critics argue that the rigid requirements for ‘certified, stable and uniform’ seeds will effectively criminalise or marginalise indigenous, locally adapted varieties, creating a dependency loop that forces farmers to rely on high-cost, proprietary inputs from large agribusinesses.

This would, in effect, mirror the pattern of corporate capture and loss of food sovereignty observed in other countries across the world.

Keep reading

New EU proposal aims to stop drivers from speeding using satellites

According to the proposal, every new car would be equipped with a device that can limit the engine’s power for drivers who are speeding. This would be done remotely, based on their speed and location.

The system would use a combination of GPS technology, satellite data, and cameras to identify speed limits and monitor vehicle speed.

How would this work? First, satellites pinpoint the car’s location and determine its speed. Next, the car’s onboard cameras spot traffic signs that indicate the maximum speed. If a driver is speeding, the car’s built-in computer forces it to slow down to the maximum speed limit.

Safety campaigners believe the technology will significantly reduce casualties by 20%.

If approved, the system could be mandatory for all new vehicles in the EU by 2030.

The United Kingdom would be exempted because of Brexit. However, experts expect that car manufacturers will introduce the proposed technology in the UK as well, as it would be too expensive to build cars just for the UK market.

Shadow Transport Secretary Richard Holden has raised concerns about the technology’s reliability, fears of hacking, and doubts about drivers’ privacy.

Keep reading

Your Car Was Never the Target

For years, governments assured the public that license plate readers were simply tools to catch stolen vehicles, fugitives, and dangerous criminals. That was always the sales pitch. Now the mask is coming off. According to reports, a new surveillance platform called SignalTrace is being marketed to law enforcement and government agencies that goes far beyond reading license plates. The system can collect identifiers from smartphones, smartwatches, Bluetooth devices, vehicle infotainment systems, Wi-Fi hotspots, tire pressure sensors, RFID devices, AirTags, and even pet microchips. They are no longer interested in tracking your car. They are interested in tracking you.

The frightening part is how openly this is being discussed. The stated goal of the technology is to “bridge the gap between vehicle and occupant.” In other words, the authorities no longer want to know where a vehicle traveled. They want to know who was inside, where they went, who they met, and how often they traveled together. The system creates a unique electronic fingerprint based on the collection of devices surrounding a person. Your phone, your watch, your headphones, your car, and even your dog’s microchip become pieces of a digital identity that can be followed everywhere you go.

This is exactly how governments always expand surveillance. They begin with a limited purpose that sounds reasonable. Then the technology advances and suddenly the scope becomes limitless. License plate readers were sold as crime-fighting tools. Then they became databases of vehicle movements. Now they are evolving into systems that can reconstruct an individual’s entire pattern of life. Privacy advocates have warned that these systems can reveal where people work, where they worship, where they seek medical treatment, and who they associate with. Once that information exists in a searchable database, every government agency will want access.

What is unfolding is part of a much broader trend. Governments around the world are building digital identification systems, expanding financial surveillance, monitoring communications, and centralizing personal data. At the same time, law enforcement agencies are seeking nationwide access to license plate reader networks that provide near real-time tracking capabilities across the United States. The infrastructure is being assembled piece by piece. Most people only see each individual step. They fail to recognize the larger picture until the system is fully operational.

Keep reading

A Surveillance State On Wheels

Renting a car used to come with an element of fun. For a day or two you could be the pretend owner of a new car. It could be the sports car you have always secretly wanted, maybe in bright red. It could be a mighty utility vehicle you need instead of your 4-door sedan.

In any case, it’s just interesting to experience a new and different car over a limited period, if only to mix things up a bit.

I’ve always enjoyed this, until now.

I innocently rented a new model SUV and hopped in not thinking much more about it. It had a control panel on two big screens with very few physical knobs, which means essentially learning to operate software. Should have pulled over and examined the thing carefully, maybe even read the user manual but traditionally cars explained themselves. Everything was obvious.

Not any more.

The radio was stuck on a guy yammering about sports scores so I thought I would change the station. I’m trying to drive at the same time and looking at the screen with peripheral vision. That’s when the car caught me: it sensed distraction.

Up popped a notification alongside 5 extremely annoying alarm beeps, with a blaring warning: “Consider taking a break” with a coffee cup emoji. That’s strange. I’m not tired. I just started. Why should I take a break?

My car was correcting me. Not only that, it was diagnosing my biology. I was drifting and so clearly did not have enough caffeine in my system and needed more. So said my car.

Thus was my introduction to the new smart car, more monitor than helper, more surveillance than service, more sensate than safe.

I grabbed a tissue while searching for the off switch to the radio and up popped the same warning again. This was only a few minutes later. I wondered how long this would go on. I had two and a half hours to drive. This could be miserable.

It was in fact. My car monitored, hectored, and lectured me for my entire trip. It more closely tracked my venial sins than a Puritan preacher in 17th-century Plymouth Colony. At least in that world, privacy was possible. It is not possible in this new car. You are under the gun, tasked with impossible feats of digital management at which you are destined to fail.

The ever-pious, self satisfied, and immaculately conceived robo-scold seems gleeful to call out every infraction, even when a gust of wind causes a two-inch draft. FAIL!

This car is rooting against its driver, like a horse not entirely broken in and trying to buck you off. But it’s more threatening than that. It’s watching you constantly but you don’t know where its eyes are or why precisely it is making the judgments it is making.

While still fussing with the radio, a big message appeared on the screen, which I tried to read while driving. Another sin. As best I could make out, it said not to attempt this while driving because it is unsafe. And if I have read this message and understand the risk, and accept the terms of the software app, I should click approve, which I did, while driving.

Like clockwork, up appeared the demand that I stop and drink another cup of coffee. If I had complied with the doctor/car physician’s demands, I would have had a gallon of coffee and been taken to the hospital for a caffeine overdose.

The roadside signs all say not to text and drive or otherwise look at your smartphone. But this entire car is far more distracting than my phone would otherwise be. I’m only mentioning a few of these notifications so far.

Keep reading

Empire At 250: Can The Principles Of 1776 Survive The American Police State?

“The people are the only legitimate fountain of power.”

– James Madison

This is a year of strange anniversaries.

Two hundred and fifty years ago, a band of revolutionaries declared their independence from a king.

America’s founders rejected concentrated power. They denounced standing armies. They distrusted government secrecy. They risked their lives to escape a ruler who could tax without consent, wage war without accountability, and govern without meaningful restraint.

Twenty-five years ago, after the attacks of September 11, 2001, America embarked on a very different journey.

The federal government claimed extraordinary emergency powers. Surveillance expanded. Wars multiplied. Executive authority grew. Constitutional safeguards were weakened in the name of security.

One anniversary marked a revolt against empire. The other marked the normalization of it.

Now, as America prepares to celebrate 250 years of independence, we are confronted with a bitter irony: the republic born in rebellion against empire has become an empire in everything but name.

Worse, the U.S. government is violating the very principles that justified the American Revolution.

Graft, grift and corruption. Endless wars. Profiteering. Trillions squandered abroad while the nation sinks deeper into debt at home.

A government that governs increasingly by executive order and emergency decree. A government that wastes taxpayer money with impunity, rewards political loyalty over constitutional fidelity, installs loyalists in positions meant to serve the public, dismantles safeguards against corruption, shields insiders from scrutiny, and treats accountability as an inconvenience.

National states of emergency that never seem to end. Efforts to nullify constitutional guarantees such as birthright citizenship. Expanded death penalty powers. A growing willingness to bypass Congress, sidestep constitutional restraints and rule by fiat.

Surveillance programs that track where we go, what we buy, who we know, what we say and what we believe. Fusion centers, facial recognition, license plate readers, AI-assisted monitoring, financial tracking, intelligence-sharing agreements and a sprawling security apparatus that treats privacy as a loophole and dissent as a threat.

Keep reading

They Told You Your Dishwasher Could Spy on You

Back in 2012, Wired published an article titled “CIA Chief: We’ll Spy on You Through Your Dishwasher.” That was not some wild theory. That was based on remarks from then-CIA Director David Petraeus, who was speaking about the so-called Internet of Things at an In-Q-Tel summit, the CIA’s own venture capital arm. Petraeus called these technologies “transformational,” especially for their effect on “clandestine tradecraft.” In plain English, the intelligence world saw your home appliances, television, car navigation system, light switches, phone apps, and connected devices as the next great surveillance frontier.

Petraeus said that “items of interest will be located, identified, monitored, and remotely controlled” through RFID, sensor networks, embedded servers, and internet-connected devices. That is the quote everyone should remember. They were not hiding it. They were telling you directly that the smart home would become the spy home. Once upon a time, they had to bug your chandelier. Now they simply wait for you to buy the device, install the app, connect it to Wi-Fi, and sign away your privacy in some user agreement nobody reads.

Wired correctly noted that these devices would produce tagged, geolocated data that could be intercepted in real-time. The dishwasher quote was not really about dishwashers alone. It was about the entire home becoming a listening post and tracking station. Your television, thermostat, lighting system, refrigerator, phone, PlayStation, car, smartwatch, and now even your pet’s microchip become pieces of a surveillance net. This is precisely how tyranny advances, not with a knock at the door, but with convenience, entertainment, and a monthly subscription.

Keep reading

New Map Tool Helps Drivers Dodge Atlanta-Based Flock Safety License Plate Cameras And Bluetooth Trackers

A free open-source website called DeFlock now lets drivers route around automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras as a surveillance company prepares to add Bluetooth device-tracking to the same roadside hardware.

DeFlock, built by developer Will Freeman and backed by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), crowdsources ALPR camera locations nationwide and maps roughly half of Flock Safety’s roughly 100,000-camera network.

Users enter a start and destination, select an avoidance buffer between 50 and 500 feet, and receive a privacy-optimized route.

A companion tool called “Have I Been Flocked,” available through StopFlock, lets users check whether their plate has appeared in Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)-obtained Flock query logs.

Flock Safety sent DeFlock a cease-and-desist order over alleged trademark dilution. Freeman declined to comply, with the EFF providing legal backing.

DeFlock’s growth coincides with plans by ELSAG, a subsidiary of Italian defense company Leonardo, to add device-tracking sensors to existing ALPR hardware.

The system, called SignalTrace, scans passing vehicles for Bluetooth and wireless signals from phones, smartwatches, earbuds, and fitness trackers, then correlates devices that travel together to a specific plate and timestamp. ELSAG describes the method as “non-intrusive intelligence gathering.” 404 Media reported the SignalTrace system on June 8, 2026.

An EFF analysis published in May 2026 found agencies had used Flock data for school residency checks, background searches, and noise complaints. More than 50 agencies ran hundreds of protest-related Flock searches over a 10-month period.

Washington State’s Driver Privacy Act, signed by Gov. Bob Ferguson on March 30, 2026, bans ALPR collection near health-care facilities, schools, and places of worship, and sets a 21-day default data retention limit. NPR reported in February 2026 that several cities terminated Flock contracts over concerns about federal immigration agencies accessing locally collected plate data.

Keep reading

How To Push Back Against The ‘Advancing Beast’ System

The big-picture lesson from the Covid era should have been obvious. It should have screamed loud and clear to every freedom-loving American: The power elites who run things at the local, state and federal levels want to tag and track our movement, but not just our movement. They want to track our diet, our healthcare, our purchasing habits, our use of energy, our online comment history, our very thoughts.

They want all of it. And if they get their way, you will own nothing. Literally nothing. Even if you technically own an asset, you will not control it, so do you really own it?

Your bank account will be theirs, programmed to be switched on or off at their pleasure, based on your compliance with the dictates of the surveillance state. Your car will be theirs, able to monitor your eye movements, your posture and who knows what else in real time, and be remotely disabled at their pleasure, thanks to Joe Biden’s remote vehicle kill switch law. Your ability to eat healthy food will be gone, thanks to Donald Trump’s granting of legal immunity to Bayer/Monsanto, protecting it from lawsuits based on the harmful effects of bioengineered food laced with chemicals. Same for your healthcare. Your online speech. Even your thoughts. They will own it all if they succeed in bringing in the long-planned AI-powered digital control grid that is currently under construction in the form of 6G wireless networks along with thousands of AI data centers, Flock cameras and other devices.

Flock Safety, the online security company based in Atlanta, has more than 89,000 vertically integrated and fully internet-connected cameras stationed in more than 5,000 communities nationwide and growing. The invasiveness of their cameras is also growing, with the ability to not only see but to hear everything going on for miles through its Raven Audio Detection Program. Flock is also now selling mobile cameras to law-enforcement agencies that will serve as “first responders” based on suspicious activity picked up under the company’s Falcon Drone Program.

Keep reading

UNPRECEDENTED: EU Parliament President Roberta Metsola Pushing Controversial Scanning of Online Content, Ignoring That EMPs Have Already Rejected the Idea Multiple Times

Another EU tyrant on the move.

Leave it to the EU to have a dizzying number of ‘chiefs’, signaling a bloated bureaucracy that has become more of a problem than a solution for the issues that European nations face.

Fasten up for the list: the European Commissioner (currently Ursula von der Leyen/VDL): a ‘member of the European Commission’s College responsible for overseeing one specific policy area (portfolio), such as trade, climate, or digital affairs.’

The President of the European Council (currently Antonio Costa): ‘Chairs summits of EU heads of state and government, drives consensus on the EU’s overall political direction and priorities, and ensures the EU’s external representation at that level’.

High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (currently Kaja Kallas): ‘Leads and coordinates the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), chairs the Foreign Affairs Council, represents the EU on the world stage as its chief diplomat, and serves as a Vice-President of the European Commission’.

Hold on, that’s not all. President of the European Parliament (currently Roberta Metsola): ‘Chairs plenary sessions and key internal bodies, oversees the Parliament’s work and rules, signs adopted legislation, and represents the Parliament to other EU institutions and externally’.

Keep reading

The KIDS Act: A Bipartisan Mass Surveillance Megabill

Just weeks after Americans criticized the United Kingdom for imposing intrusive and heavy-handed social media rules, Congress is now advancing legislation that raises strikingly similar concerns about government overreach, privacy erosion, and the expansion of online surveillance.

A bipartisan agreement on children’s online safety legislation unveiled by House Energy and Commerce Committee leaders would impose new obligations on social media platforms, while creating powerful incentives for companies to end online anonymity.

The proposal is part of the Kids Internet and Digital Safety Act (KIDS Act), an omnibus package that bundles together multiple bills, including the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), the SCREEN Act, the SAFE BOTs Act, COPPA 2.0, the SPY Kids Act, and more, as well as data broker provisions and research and education initiatives.

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.

Committee Chairman Brett Guthrie and ranking Democrat Frank Pallone announced Monday that they had reached agreement on the legislation, which would require social media companies to provide additional safeguards and parental tools for minors. The lawmakers said it would “hold Big Tech accountable.”

“We worked across the aisle for many months and have now found common ground on policies to significantly improve the digital environment for kids,” Guthrie and Pallone said in a joint statement.

As always, under that framing lies a familiar and deeply controversial approach: imposing broad obligations on platforms that hinge on whether companies know a user is a minor, without clearly defining how that knowledge is supposed to be obtained.

Congress has tried for years to set national rules for social media and youth safety. Those efforts have repeatedly stalled, in part because of unresolved tensions between child protection goals and fundamental privacy rights. In the absence of federal action, states have moved ahead with their own laws, often pushing even more aggressive requirements.

One of the main disputes appears to have been resolved in favor of House Republicans. According to a committee spokesperson, the agreement does not include a “duty of care” provision, a requirement backed by many child-safety advocates and several Senate lawmakers.

The bill text states that nothing in it may be construed to “impose a duty of care on a provider of a covered platform.”

Keep reading