Google

Google Secretly Gathers Health Data On Millions Of Americans

Whatever happened to patient privacy and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA) passed by Congress in 1996? Technocrats at Google do what they want in total disregard for the law.

Although Google and other Technocrat Big Tech companies have been busted dozens of times by government bodies at all levels, they patently and routinely ignore all legal, ethical and moral restraints.

Do  you trust Google with 100% of your health records under its control? Do you think that Google would not use such data in other divisions of the company unrelated to health care?  ⁃ TN Editor

Google is engaged with one of the U.S.’s largest health-care systems on a project to collect and crunch the detailed personal-health information of millions of people across 21 states.

The initiative, code-named “Project Nightingale,” appears to be the biggest effort yet by a Silicon Valley giant to gain a toehold in the health-care industry through the handling of patients’ medical data. Amazon.com Inc., Apple and Microsoft Corp. are also aggressively pushing into health care, though they haven’t yet struck deals of this scope.

Google began Project Nightingale in secret last year with St. Louis-based Ascension, a Catholic chain of 2,600 hospitals, doctors’ offices and other facilities, with the data sharing accelerating since summer, according to internal documents.

The data involved in the initiative encompasses lab results, doctor diagnoses and hospitalization records, among other categories, and amounts to a complete health history, including patient names and dates of birth.

Paging Nurse Google

The tech giant is teaming with Ascension on an ambitious project to crunch patient data for treatment and administrative purposes.

Neither patients nor doctors have been notified. At least 150 Google employees already have access to much of the data on tens of millions of patients, according to a person familiar with the matter and the documents.

In a news release issued after The Wall Street Journal reported on Project Nightingale on Monday, the companies said the initiative is compliant with federal health law and includes robust protections for patient data.

Some Ascension employees have raised questions about the way the data is being collected and shared, both from a technological and ethical perspective, according to the people familiar with the project. But privacy experts said it appeared to be permissible under federal law. That law, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, generally allows hospitals to share data with business partners without telling patients, as long as the information is used “only to help the covered entity carry out its health care functions.”

Google in this case is using the data in part to design new software, underpinned by advanced artificial intelligence and machine learning, that zeroes in on individual patients to suggest changes to their care. Staffers across Alphabet Inc., Google’s parent, have access to the patient information, internal documents show, including some employees of Google Brain, a research science division credited with some of the company’s biggest breakthroughs.

Google Cloud President Tariq Shaukat said the company’s goal for health care is centered on “ultimately improving outcomes, reducing costs, and saving lives.”

Read full story here…




public shaming

Jaywalk Shaming: China Puts Your Face And Name On E-Billboard

China’s ubiquitous surveillance and identification system watches everything, everywhere for rule-breakers and shames them in real-time by displaying pictures with names on electronic billboards. 

Since the entire population has already been catalogued into a national database, identifying a single person takes only seconds. This is symptomatic of a Technocracy at work.  ⁃ TN Editor

 

It’s something that many people do without giving it a second thought, but if you jaywalk in China , you could be publicly shamed.

Facial recognition technology is being used in several Chinese cities, including Shanghai and Shenzhen, which can spot people jaywalking, and post their photo and ID to a huge billboard.

Writer Matthew Brennan tweeted a shocking video of the strange system, although it remains unclear where it was filmed.

He wrote: “Chinese facial recognition system to discourage minor traffic violations. Cross the road when you shouldn’t and a picture of you with your name, ID card number pop up on the big screen for everyone to see.”

His tweeted has garnered over 3,000 retweets and almost 5,000 likes (at time of writing), with many people replying to express their shock at the system.

However, while it may be shocking to us, it’s pretty common place for locals, who have had to endure the system since 2018.

Speaking to Channel News Asia , Janine Wong, a news researcher in Shanghai explained: “It doesn’t matter if you’re walking or riding a bicycle.

“(Your picture) will be captured, and your face will show up on a screen nearby so everyone can see your face.

“Once they identify your face, all your information (like mobile phone number) is linked.”

Facial recognition is widely used across China, including in several airports.

Read full story here…




Revealed: U.S. Military’s Massive Biometric Data System

The U.S. Military is heavy-laden with Technocrats bent on collecting data for the sake of social engineering. Their rapidly growing global dragnet now contains images, fingerprints and DNA data on 7.4 million people. ⁃ TN Editor
 

Over the last 15 years, the United States military has developed a new addition to its arsenal. The weapon is deployed around the world, largely invisible, and grows more powerful by the day.

That weapon is a vast database, packed with millions of images of faces, irises, fingerprints, and DNA data — a biometric dragnet of anyone who has come in contact with the U.S. military abroad. The 7.4 million identities in the database range from suspected terrorists in active military zones to allied soldiers training with U.S. forces.

“Denying our adversaries anonymity allows us to focus our lethality. It’s like ripping the camouflage netting off the enemy ammunition dump,” wrote Glenn Krizay, director of the Defense Forensics and Biometrics Agency, in notes obtained by OneZero. The Defense Forensics and Biometrics Agency (DFBA) is tasked with overseeing the database, known officially as the Automated Biometric Information System (ABIS).

DFBA and its ABIS database have received little scrutiny or press given the central role they play in U.S. military’s intelligence operations. But a newly obtained presentation and notes written by the DFBA’s director, Krizay, reveals how the organization functions and how biometric identification has been used to identify non-U.S. citizens on the battlefield thousands of times in the first half of 2019 alone. ABIS also allows military branches to flag individuals of interest, putting them on a so-called “Biometrically Enabled Watch List” (BEWL). Once flagged, these individuals can be identified through surveillance systems on battlefields, near borders around the world, and on military bases.

The documents, which are embedded in full below, were obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request. These documents were presented earlier this year at a closed-door defense biometrics conference known as the Identity Management Symposium.

ABIS is the result of a massive investment into biometrics by the U.S. military. According to federal procurement records analyzed by OneZero, the U.S. military has invested more than $345 million in biometric database technology in the last 10 years. Leidos, a defense contractor that primarily focuses on information technology, currently manages the database in question. Ideal Innovations Incorporated operates a subsection of the database designed to manage activity in Afghanistan, according to documents obtained by OneZero through a separate FOIA request.

These contracts, combined with revelations surrounding the military’s massive biometric database initiatives, paint an alarming picture: A large and quickly growing network of surveillance systems operated by the U.S. military and present anywhere the U.S. has deployed troops, vacuuming up biometric data on millions of unsuspecting individuals.

The military’s biometrics program, launched in 2004, initially focused on the collection and analysis of fingerprints. “In a war without borders, uniforms, or defined lines of battle, knowing who is an enemy is essential,” John D. Woodward, Jr., head of the DoD’s biometrics department, wrote in a 2004 brief.

That year, the Department of Defense contracted Lockheed Martin to start building a biometrics database for an initial fee of $5 million. Progress was slow: by 2009, the DoD Inspector General reported that the biometrics system was still deeply flawed. The department indicated that it was only able to successfully retrieve five positive matches from 150 biometric searches. A later contract with defense industry giant Northrop resulted in similarly disappointing results with reports of “system instability, inconsistent processing times, system congestion, transaction errors, and a 48-hour outage.”

By 2016, the DoD had begun to make serious investments in biometric data collection. That year, the Defense Department deputy secretary Robert O. Work designated biometric identification as a critical capability for nearly everything the department does: fighting, intelligence gathering, law enforcement, security, business, and counter-terrorism. Military leaders began to speak of biometric technology as a “game changer,” and directives from the DoD not only encouraged the use of the technology by analysts, but also by soldiers on the ground. Troops were instructed to collect biometric data whenever possible.

The same year, a defense company named Leidos, which had acquired a large portion of Lockheed’s government IT business, secured a $150 million contract to build and deploy what is now known as the DoD ABIS system.

Read full story here…




Ring doorbell camera

Amazon Co-opting Homeowner’s Ring Cameras To Police

Several weeks ago it was reported that over 400 law enforcement agencies had partnered with Amazon’s Ring Camera. Ring distributes a free app called the Neighbors App that Ring owners use to store video images in the cloud. Amazon has now bonded its Neighbor’s app with police agencies to effectively turn private homeowners into snitches for the police. 

While Ring cameras have been used to catch some criminals that come to your door, there are huge privacy concerns because the administrators/ controllers have direct access to all cameras in the system. Currently, police are not given full access to homeowner’s installed cameras, and homeowners must volunteer to upload videos to their local police department. 

Why would anyone think that Amazon would somehow be benevolent with the data its collects? With a demonstrated history of listening in on its Alexa speakers, who would not expect them to do the same with Ring? Furthermore, who would expect Amazon to offer a ‘free’ app to both homeowners and police without having an ulterior motive to monetize and/or weaponize the data? And, keep in mind that Amazon is creating and selling the most sophisticated facial recognition software in the world… to the same law enforcement agencies.

Amazon is creating the ultimate surveillance grid for law enforcement that will include millions of homeowners in thousands of cities across America. 

A Technocracy News reader in San Bernardino, California forwarded to me an email received from the local Sheriff’s office:

The San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department is excited to announce our partnership with Ring and the Neighbors App. Detectives and station personnel from across the county completed their training today and our stations are now live. Station staff are able to receive information and interact with residents through the app. Customers with a Ring camera will be able to share videos with their local Sheriff’s station. The Neighbors App connects communities with the goal of creating safer and stronger neighborhoods and one of the benefits is you do not need to own a Ring device to use the app.

I could find no public notice of the training that is mentioned above, but it clearly was nationwide and it clearly took place. The result is that the system has gone live.

The following article provides more details about how it all works.

Police partnerships with doorbell-camera company raise privacy questions

Dyana Bagby via Reporter Newspapers

In February, the Dunwoody Police Department sent out an upbeat press release announcing it was the first in Georgia to team up with doorbell-camera company Ring to access the company’s Neighbors app. The partnership, the department boasted, could help the department crack down on package thieves, stop burglaries and keep neighborhoods safe.

“Leveraging today’s technology to help keep our citizens safe is a key focus of our department,” Dunwoody Police Chief Billy Grogan said in the release. “Our partnership with Ring and use of the Neighbors app will definitely help in our crime fighting efforts.”

The Brookhaven Police Department followed up a month later with its own press release announcing its alliance with Ring.

“Partnering with Ring using the Neighbors app will give officers a technological advantage when investigating crimes,” Brookhaven Police Chief Gary Yandura said in the release.

Dunwoody and Brookhaven are just two of 10 law enforcement agencies in Georgia to team up with Ring, owned by corporate giant Amazon. Across the nation, more than 400 law enforcement agencies have signed on with Ring to gain free access to surveillance video shared by customers to Ring’s public social network, named “Neighbors.” Through the partnership, law enforcement agencies gain access to the Neighborhood Portal which includes a map of where Ring cameras are located.

Other Georgia law enforcement agencies partnering with Ring including police departments and sheriff’s offices in Chamblee, Cobb County, Duluth, Forsyth County, Garden City, Gwinnett County, Sandy Springs and the Savannah Police Department.

“This partnership is another way for us to engage the community and share information in a timely manner,” Sandy Springs Deputy Chief of Police Keith Zgonc said in an email. The department teamed up with Ring in April.

For some, the rising number of police partnering with Ring is chilling. They say Ring is creating a nationwide surveillance network that raises serious concerns about privacy and the blurring of police departments with corporations.

“Constant surveillance may sound safe for people who have nothing to fear from a biased criminal justice system, but making the decision to extend Amazon and police surveillance to your home is a potential hazard for people who live and work in your community,” said Matthew Gauriglia, policy analyst for the Electronic Frontier Foundation. EFF is an international nonprofit organization “defending civil liberties in the digital world,” according to its website.

Ring says its partnerships with law enforcement are just another way to keep communities safer by allowing police and residents to share crime and safety information through the Neighbors app.

“We are proud to work with law enforcement agencies across the country and have taken care to design these programs in a way that keeps users in control,” a spokesperson said in a written statement.

The partnerships claim to ensure anonymity to Ring users by requiring police to make a request to the company for footage they saw on the Neighbors app they want for an investigation. Ring then contacts the homeowner to make the actual request.

“With each request, customers decide whether to share all relevant videos, review and select certain videos to share, take no action (decline), or opt out of all future requests,” Ring says in a FAQ on its website.

Grogan also discounted privacy concerns, saying police are only looking for surveillance footage someone has voluntarily posted to the Neighbors app.

“I understand to some degree some concerns about ‘Big Brother,’ but you also have to understand that none of us have the resources or time to really look at video just randomly just see what people are doing,” Grogan said.

“We have specific purposes, to investigate crimes … other than that we are not looking at video,” he said. “We have no direct access to anything. It’s all voluntary. Nobody has to share anything with us.”

EFF says it’s not as black-and-white as Ring says when it comes to giving their customers the choice to not share video footage with police. Ring acknowledged in a story in Government Technology that if a resident does not want to share their footage, the company will still turn it over if a law enforcement agency has a “valid and binding legal demand.”

Yandura did not say his department has made demands for Ring footage, but said when customers post to the Neighbors app, it essentially becomes part of the public domain.

“Once someone publishes to the app, it’s out there,” Yandura said.

How Ring and the Neighbors app work

Residents can download the free Neighbors app and use it to monitor neighborhood activity, share crime and safety-related videos, photos and text-based posts; and receive real-time safety alerts from their neighbors, local law enforcement and the Ring team, according to a Ring press release.

Ring users are alerted when their doorbell-cameras detect motion from as far away as 30 feet; when someone presses the video-doorbell button; or when the user turns on a “Live View” option through the Ring app.

Those events begin recording a video file that is streamed from the Ring device to the cloud on Amazon Web Services servers, according to the company’s privacy notice.

Those who subscribe for $3 a month to Ring Protect Plans can have their videos stored on the cloud for 60 days to watch them later. Those without a plan will have their videos automatically deleted, according to Ring’s privacy notice.

Ring’s terms of service says the company and its licensees have permanent and wide-ranging rights to keep and use the footage from the cameras, including: “an unlimited, irrevocable, fully paid and royalty-free, perpetual, worldwide right to re-use, distribute, store, delete, translate, copy, modify, display, sell, create derivative works from and otherwise exploit such shared content for any purpose and in any media formats in any media channels without compensation.”

This kind of corporate control of homeowner’s video surveillance contributes to what EFF calls a “perfect storm of privacy threats.”

“Having a Ring camera may seem like a harmless way to protect your packages, but it is helping to create a large surveillance network within your own community that does more than just thwart the work of criminals,” Gauriglia said.

When Ring customers continually post footage to the Neighbors app resulting in constant alerts sent to users, fear is generated in communities, EFF says. That leads to more sales of Ring doorbell-cameras and other security devices, adding to an already massive surveillance network, according to EFF.

“With every update, Ring turns the delivery person or census-taker innocently standing on at the door into a potential criminal,” Gauriglia reported in an Aug. 8 EFF story. “Neighborhood watch apps only increase the paranoia.”

Yandura said there is nothing threatening about the Ring cameras, saying they are like having a “cop on every corner in the city” 24 hours a day.
Grogan said Ring and the Neighbors app are simply keeping communities informed on what is happening in their neighborhoods.

“People know their neighborhoods better than anybody,” he said. “They live there and know what is unusual. … The people that participate are choosing to do that and making the decision to work with police to try to help keep their communities safe.”

How many Ring doorbell-camera users live in Dunwoody and Brookhaven is not known by the police departments, according to the chiefs, and Ring declined to comment on this question.

Yandura did say a Ring representative told him earlier this year that Brookhaven’s 30319 ZIP code had the highest concentration of Ring devices in the state.

Both cities have also invested heavily in surveillance cameras and license plate readers, or LPRs.

Earlier this year, Dunwoody spent about $189,000 to buy 16 LPRs from Georgia Power to post throughout Perimeter Center where most of the city’s crime occurs.

In 2017, Brookhaven entered into a $700,000, three-year lease agreement with Georgia Power to place 44 LPRs throughout the city. The LPRs average 4 million “reads” a month of people driving in and out of the city, Yandura said, and are used to get hits on stolen cars and wanted fugitives.

What’s included in the partnership

Grogan said the department reached out to Ring last year after reading about the company partnering with law enforcement through the Neighbors app.

Yandura said he learned about Ring and the Neighbors app at a conference for the International Association of Chiefs of Police.

After the chiefs agreed their departments would team up with Ring, they were required by the company to sign memorandums of understanding, non-binding agreements that outlined roles and responsibilities. Both cities MOUs stated Ring would provide mutually agreed-upon press releases announcing the partnerships.

The agreements included Ring providing the departments a few free Ring doorbell cameras to give out to residents at community events or homeowners’ association meetings.

ast month, the Dunwoody Police Department hosted a “pizza with police” event at City Hall that included free Ring doorbell camera giveaways.
Yandura said Brookhaven Police have also handed out four free Ring cameras at community events and HOA meetings.

Emails obtained through the open records request show that Dunwoody Police Department employees were given a special promotion code, “nbdunwoody,” after the MOU was signed in February. The code gave them $50 off any purchase of the Ring Classic, Ring Pro, Ring Video Doorbell 2, Floodlight Cam, Spotlight Cam and Ring Protect.

Ring also provided a free webinar to Dunwoody officers to train them on how to use the Neighbors app portal, according to emails.

Those requested by Ring to attend online training included the public information officer, the social media coordinator, an investigative coordinator and a community relations coordinator who “oversees the team that interfaces with the community at events, HOAs, Neighborhood Watch meetings, etc.”

These kinds of agreements can weaken a police department’s standing in a community where they are supposed to be neutral, Gauriglia said

“Ring-police partnerships also undermine our trust in local police departments,” he said. “We know from reporting that almost everything police put out about Ring, from press releases to the answers to potential questions citizens may have, are scripted and approved by Amazon.”

Grogan denied Amazon or Ring had control over what his department says, including the initial press release announcing the partnership.

“We modified it and removed language we felt sounded too much like an endorsement of the Ring camera,” he said. “Other than that, they have provided no input into any other communication related to the Neighbors by Ring app.”

Yandura also denied the arrangement meant Brookhaven officers were now representing Amazon and Ring.

“No, we are not salesmen and no money is exchanged by the parties,” Yandura said. “We are not promoting one [security company] over another.”

Ring did include in its Dunwoody MOU that it would donate Ring cameras to the Dunwoody Police Department based on the number of Neighbors app downloads that result from their partnership with the city.

“Each qualifying download will count as $10 toward these free Ring cameras,” according to the Dunwoody MOU.
Grogan said his department is not obligated to Ring or Amazon.

“We don’t actively promote one system over another,” he said. “If any other camera company wants to provide free security cameras for us to give out, we will give them out as well.”

Read full story here…




California Bans Law Enforcement From Using Facial Recognition Software For 3 Years

With all the craziness happening in California politics, it is hard to determine the real reason why the State Legislature banned facial recognition software for the next 3 years. Nevertheless, Californians will enjoy a greater measure of privacy than in other states. ⁃ TN Editor

California lawmakers today passed a bill placing a three-year state-wide moratorium on the use of facial recognition technology by law enforcement agencies.

AB 1215, The Body Camera Accountability Act, was introduced earlier this year by assemblymember Phil Tang, a Democrat. Both San Francisco and Oakland previously passed similar bills preventing the use of facial recognition by law enforcement agencies, now the ban‘s gone state-wide.

The bill goes into effect on 1 January, 2020, and will be reviewed under a “sunset provision” in 2023.

Tang, according to an ACLU statement, says the bill will protect Californians:

Without my bill, facial recognition technology essentially turns body cameras into a 24-hour surveillance tool, giving law enforcement the ability to track our every movement. Let’s not become a police state and keep body cameras as they were originally intended – to provide police accountability and transparency.

US citizens have the right to privacy and the reasonable expectation that public surveillance systems are in place to protect us in the event that a crime is committed.

But AI-powered facial recognition systems aren’t designed to monitor public spaces for crimes. As we’ve seen in leaked Palantir documents, these systems are meant to connect to a database wherein police officers have access to the private details of any citizen. Here’s a graphic showing what kind of information law enforcement officers have available to them with the Palantir app.

In essence, these tools give police officers the kind of data and information that a detective 20 years ago couldn’t have gleaned with a search warrant and six months to investigate – today there’s literally an app for that.

Read full story here…




surveillance

Fed’s Mass Surveillance Tech On Border Will Be Turned On Americans

When Technocracy declared in 1938 that its endgame was the “Science of Social Engineering”, its mandated requirement was total and continual surveillance of every moving part of society, including people. 

But not limited to people. All processes, all movement of resources and finished goods, all construction, all animals, etc., Technocrats see the world as a factory to be run as efficiently as possible, which would not be possible without monitoring. ⁃ TN Editor

 

Border Patrol’s electronic eyes will spot you long before you spot them.

If you walk along the United States border in remote stretches of New Mexico desert, or in the grasslands between North Dakota and Canada, you might not hear the buzz of what could be flying above you: A Predator drone — the same vehicle that has been outfitted to drop bombs over Afghanistan and Iraq. From five miles away, the drone’s cameras can see so well they can tell if you’re wearing a backpack.

If you’re in the Florida Keys, you may be spotted by an altogether different set of eyes in the sky. Up 10,000 feet in the air, a football field-sized zeppelin floats with an array of cameras, sensors, and radar systems so sophisticated that it can track every car, aircraft, and boat within a 200-mile range.

And if you’re near the deserts of southern Arizona, it won’t be hard to notice the 160-foot towers that rise up from the sandy landscape, equipped with advanced thermal imaging that can sense your exact movements from over seven miles away.

Because large portions of the border are so remote, and because U.S. citizens seem more willing to endorse surveillance programs that specifically target non-citizens, American borderlands have become a testing ground for cutting-edge surveillance tech.

To call this technology “Orwellian” would be anachronistic. Even George Orwell, for all his dreary imagining, never conceived of an infrared camera that could detect a person’s faintest movements.

Even as privacy hawks on the left and the right warn about the government’s embrace of surveillance tech, it’s been impossible to stop the fast-accelerating development of new infrastructure. President Donald Trump and Democrats in Congress might clash over the need for a border wall, but there’s a growing consensus in Washington that the country needs a “virtual wall.” The terms for this concept vary: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi calls it a “technological wall”; other members of Congress have adopted Silicon Valley lingo and refer to it as a “smart wall.”

Jeffrey Tucker, the editorial director at the libertarian think-tank American Institute for Economic Research, says that people who would otherwise have a knee jerk reaction against federal overreach suddenly acquiesce when the government develops enormous power in the name of border security.

“Look what you’re giving up: All your basic constitutional rights that you would normally fight for get confused when it comes to the immigration issue,” Tucker says.

Part of the project’s political momentum comes lobbying efforts by the tech industry. A surveillance surge on the border means yet another gold rush in Silicon Valley. Tech firms have openly salivated at the prospect of a phalanx of surveillance on the southern border.

When the idea of a smart wall began gaining traction in 2017, three higher-ups from Palantir — the secretive data tech giant that has long been behind some of the government’s largest surveillance projects — left to co-found Anduril, a company dedicated to creating cutting-edge tech for border security. Business has been booming ever since.

“Companies see that there’s a long-term source of stable income with government contracts,” says Jacinta González, a senior campaign organizer with Mijente, a pro-immigrant organization that has studied relationships between Silicon Valley and federal immigration authorities. “Companies like Palantir and Anduril have created a business model where they look like they’re going to the market to get new clients.” In reality, González says, tech companies are convincing government agencies they need to create new technologies — not the other way around.

“Decisions made by law enforcement are being driven by vendor. Vendors are wining and dining officials, where they make these miraculous promises about what their tech can accomplish,” says Dave Maass, a senior investigative researcher at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a civil liberties organization. “Governments are so eager to be at the cutting edge, they eat it all up.”

Today, that cutting edge of surveillance tech is freakily futuristic: Customs and Border Protection (CBP), already blowing through hundreds of millions of dollars a year on tech contacts, has now begun looking for artificial intelligence capabilities that could fly patrol drones autonomously. The dream is of a fleet of surveillance robots, constantly in the air, thinking for themselves, searching out human bodies.

Read full story here…




911 Dispatchers To Monitor Millions Of CCTV In Real Time

The video below says it all: DHS/government surveillance will incorporate private security cameras, public-private partnerships and artificial intelligence for real-time tracking of everything that moves. New Orleans is a perfect example. ⁃ TN Editor

911 dispatchers are about to join the ranks of District Attorneys (DA) using CCTV cameras to monitor the public.

“The district attorney for Pennsylvania’s second-most-populous county, Stephen Zappala Jr. has assembled a network of advanced surveillance cameras in and around Pittsburgh and has enlisted colleagues in four surrounding counties to extend its reach into their jurisdictions.”

Last week, CentralSquare Technologies announced that they are working with Genetec, Inc. to turn 911 dispatchers into an arm of the surveillance state by giving them real-time access to more than 30 million CCTV cameras.

“There are more than 30 million cameras across the United States that generate 4 billion hours of footage a week. Unfortunately, the footage from these cameras and other sensors such as gunshot detection systems is captured by various systems and is often unavailable to first responders who can use that real-time data and video to save lives.”
How can these two companies allow Big Brother to monitor more citizens? By letting them surveil citizens in real-time of course.

“This new partnership between CentralSquare and Genetec delivers proven technology for police officers and emergency responders so that they can make effective decisions, based on real-time data, when and where it is most needed.”

Genetec is infamous for turning New Orleans into “America’s largest spying network.

“Assume that you are being filmed wherever you are and whatever you’re doing,” said Jeff Sallet, the newly appointed head of the FBI’s local office. “We have located and mapped every single camera in and around any part of the French Quarter, the parade routes and any other critical infrastructure,” he said. Genetec has managed to turn 911 dispatchers into an arm of Homeland Security. In New Orleans, 911 dispatchers work out of Homeland Security’s Real-Time Crime Centers (RTCC), which use CCTV cameras to monitor the public.

According to The San Diego Union-Tribune, the San Diego sheriff’s department is rolling out a pilot Genetec CCTV camera surveillance program to see how the public responds.

The San Diego County Sheriff’s Department has chosen Lemon Grove for a video surveillance program called “SafeSanDiego – Lemon Grove.

“After doing more public outreach about the plan, Lemon Grove Sheriff Lt. Mike Rand said the department plans to go high-tech by the start of 2020 via security equipment purchased from Genetec.”

The article goes on to explain that they are waiting to see how the public responds to Genetec’s real-time surveillance program before they roll out more surveillance cameras in other parts of the county!
“We’re taking baby steps to see how the community responds to it,” Rand said.

CentralSquare’s CEO reveals the real reason they want to give 911 dispatchers access to more than 30 million CCTV cameras.

“By seamlessly integrating CentralSquare’s world-class Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) software with Genetec’s ground-breaking, real-time crime center technologies, we are enabling thousands of public safety agencies to speed-up dispatch center operations, shorten emergency response time, and reduce the number of victims of crimes and disasters across North America,” CentralSquare CEO Simon Angove said.

Genetec’s plan to turn every police department and 911 dispatcher into an arm of Homeland Security makes perfect sense when you consider that CentralSquare serves “more than 7,650 public safety organizations, from the largest metropolitan city to counties and towns of every size across North America.”

Genetec doesn’t even hide the fact that their mission is to help DHS turn every police department and 911 dispatcher into a Homeland Security operative. (Click here to see how Genetec helps police department’s create secret hotlists.)

“Together, we are delivering a powerful solution that will better equip our country’s police officers and first responders and ultimately make our cities safer, smarter, and more livable.”

Genetec and CentralSquare got one thing right, they are “delivering a powerful solution” that will help Homeland Security create a national CCTV camera surveillance program.

Read full story here…




Terminal 1: JFK Airport Launches Facial Recognition Boarding

The Intelligence community went rogue years ago and is racing to slam the trap of digital slavery on America. There is zero pushback or effective safeguards on facial recognition technology. ⁃ TN Editor

A biometric self-boarding gate has officially been launched at John F. Kennedy International Airport’s Terminal 1, officials said Tuesday.

Lufthansa has deployed the paperless, high-tech boarding process – which uses facial recognition technology to verify travelers with a photo capture — at its largest US gateway at the Queens airport.

Air France, Japan Airlines and Norwegian Airlines are expected to follow suit at the terminal, officials said.

“It’s become crucial for airports and airlines to adopt biometric capabilities along the processes which require interaction with the traveler, therefore enhancing and scaling operational capacity for growing quicker within their existing footprint,” said Miguel Leitmann, the CEO and founder of Vision-Box, which brought the new boarding method to Terminal 1 through a partnership with US Customs and Border Protection and Terminal One Group Association.

The digital boarding process validates the eligibility of a traveler without having to present a passport or boarding pass.

When a passenger approaches a self-boarding gate, a biometric-enabled camera integrated in the gate captures the passenger’s facial image.

That image is then securely sent to US Customs’ Traveler Verification Service, which “conducts a matching process with the stored digital facial token captured at the initial immigration process or from the US passport,” according to Vision-Box.

“Within seconds the system reconciles the passenger identity and his eligibility to enter the flight. The positive match of both verification’s triggers to open the eGate doors and the passenger can board the airplane.”

Read full story here…




Big Bro: No Internet Surfing In China Without First Scanning Face

China has applied the “no person left behind” mentality to its all-controlling Social Engineering: It will now be illegal to get access to the Internet without having your face scanned into the national database. ⁃ TN Editor

The Chinese regime announced a new rule which requires residents to pass a facial recognition test in order to apply for an internet connection via smartphone or computer.

The rule will be implemented from Dec. 1, 2019. In addition, no cell phone or landline number can be transferred to another person privately.

This is an upgraded restriction after the Chinese Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) required all applicants to present a valid ID and personal information to register for a cell phone or a landline number since January 2015.

New Rule

MIIT published the new rule on its official website and distributed it to all telecom carriers on Sept. 27, which includes three main requests.

First, all telecom carriers must use facial recognition to test whether an applicant who applies for internet connection is the owner of the ID that they use since Dec. 1. At the same time, the carriers must test that the ID is genuine and valid.

Second, all telecom carriers must upgrade their service’s terms and conditions and notify all their customers that they are not allowed to transfer or resell their cell phone SIM card to another person by the end of November 2019.

Third, telecom carriers should help their customers to check whether there are cell phone or landline numbers that don’t belong to them but registered under their names since Dec. 1. For unidentified numbers, the telecom carries must investigate and close the lines immediately.

MIIT said in the notice that it will arrange for supervisors to check each telecom carrier’s performance, and will arrange inspections to make sure all carriers will follow the rule strictly.

Purpose

“The reason why the Chinese regime asks people to register their real identities to surf the internet is because it wants to control people’s speech,” U.S.-based commentator Tang Jingyuan told The Epoch Times on Sept. 27.

Authorities arrested hundreds of Chinese people in recent years because they posted a topic that the regime deemed sensitive, including the most recent Hong Kong protests.

“MIIT’s new rule on using facial recognition to identify an internet user means the government can easily track their online activities, including their social media posts and websites they visit,” Tang said.“Then these people become scared of sharing their real opinions online because their comments could anger the authorities and they could get arrested for it.”

Tang concluded: “I think MIIT’s new rule takes away freedom of speech from Chinese people completely.”

Facial Recognition in China

The Chinese regime has used facial recognition systems to monitor people for several years now.

In cities and public spaces such as train stations, airports, government buildings, and entrances of museums, police use smart glasses to check each passerby’s identity and whether they have a criminal record.

On the streets, millions of surveillance cameras capture and track people’s movements.

Read full story here…




Federal Privacy Board Eyes TSA Biometrics

Other than lull the public into thinking someone is ‘protecting’ them, the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board has done little, if anything, to stem the rise in facial recognition systems around the nation. ⁃ TN Editor
 

A government bipartisan privacy oversight board recently toured Transportation Security Administration’s facial recognition pilot program in Las Vegas’ McCarran International Airport as part of a comprehensive review of the Homeland Security Department’s expanding biometrics projects.

The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, which grew out of a recommendation from the 9/11 Commission, initiated a deep-dive project on facial recognition in aviation security earlier this year, when insiders recognized how TSA and Customs and Border Protection were ramping up the introduction of biometric and facial recognition technology at various points throughout passengers’ airport experiences. On top of the pilot at McCarran, the board is also looking into other facial recognition deployments across TSA and CBP, including the biometric entry and exit programs running at various airports for international departures.

Every project the agency is looking into is part of the Homeland Security Department’s effort to eventually use biometrics to verify nearly all departing commercial air travelers over the course of the next few years.

“Each deployment raises different issues, different operational considerations, different potential privacy concerns,” Adam Klein, the board’s chairman, told Nextgov. “It’s hard to tell at this point what is the most consequential aspect of this, because these technologies are so new and because the agencies are feeling their ways through this as well.”

The board’s ultimate mission is to help the government balance preventing terrorism with protecting public privacy. At its inception, it was set up to serve as a counterbalance to the other recommendations the 9/11 Commission suggested following the 2001 terrorist attacks, including creating the director of national intelligence, the national counterterrorism center, and increased information sharing among intelligence agencies and between intelligence and law enforcement.

“[They] thought that increased power calls for increased oversight,” Klein said.

In 2007, Congress reestablished the board as a bipartisan, statutory agency within the executive branch. To date, its five members must be appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. As the present board works to develop a detailed review over the course of the next year, Klein said it ultimately aims to assess how biometric technology is being leveraged across America to verify passengers’ identities through each phase of their air travel journeys.

“Facial recognition is popping up, so to speak, throughout the aviation process at different airports around the country, but there’s also increasing public awareness and a lot of momentum within [Homeland Security] to move in this direction,” Klein said. “And given the important questions surrounding it, and given also the importance of aviation security as a mission, we thought this would be an appropriate place for us to get involved and take a look at it.”

The entire report is set to be published in 2020. In it, Klein said the board will evaluate things like how each use of the technology compares, whether systems used and data stored are secure, what’s planned with each project and what unplanned uses may pop up, whether mitigation features are necessary to put in place. Officials also plan to determine the ultimate best-case and worst-case implications of the evolving technology. He said it’s critical to ensure that the implementations all fully accord with public expectations, relevant statutes and Homeland Security’s own statements about how it will leverage biometrics going forward and as technology evolves.

“As this develops, its nature will change—and that’s what we’ll want to be tracking,” Klein said.

The board will also engage with experts and stakeholders from nongovernmental organizations, academia, advocacy groups and the private sector that have also looked into these issues and either supported or raised concerns around the tech’s usage.

“So there’s a range of possibilities we try to think through before forming a judgment about things and before making recommendations,” he said.

The project that the board observed at McCarran Airport was conducted in the TSA PreCheck lane in Terminal 3. The pilot ran for about a month and concluded last week, shortly after the board’s trip. During the on-site visit to McCarran, PCLOB participated in a confidential briefing where TSA officials answered their direct questions about the specific pilot, observed how passengers were interacting with the technology and could also take part in the program itself. In this particular test, TSA did not store photos of passengers but instead compared their physical travel documents to a photo taken of travelers’ faces.

Klein went through the McCarran pilot process himself. He said he presented his license at a TSA checkpoint where he’d usually do so with a human officer, but instead, a machine scanned the ID, checked for the presence or absence of various features, then compared the image of his face on the ID to the image of his face that was photographed.

“So essentially, it is doing the exact same thing that the eyes and brain of a human TSA officer would do, but using a facial recognition algorithm instead of our innate human pattern recognition and comparison capabilities,” Klein said. “And it did successfully match my face to my ID, although that’s obviously a very low sample size—so we shouldn’t draw any conclusions from that.”

He was only at the airport for several hours, so he couldn’t offer much detail into the public’s overall reception. However, Klein did share TSA’s perception of people’s reactions.

“They said that there was a fair amount of enthusiasm but that many people are too busy and innately suspicious of anything that will distract them from their travel,” he said.

TSA Spokeswoman Lorie Dankers, who also saw the pilot in Vegas firsthand, told Nextgov Wednesday that it’s important to note that travelers had to opt-in to participate—as opposed to opting out, which is often the case.

“TSA had hoped to get 150 travelers per day to opt-in for purposes of data collection and that was usually achieved by late morning daily due to the curiosity and interest of the traveling public,” Dankers said.

Read full story here…