Have you created a ShazzleMail account on your smartphone? This is a required first step.

Yes No

Free Encrypted Email

Posts Tagged ‘email’

GettyImages-500527492-1024x685

Security News This Week: Tim Cook Demands That the White House Defend Encryption

January 18, 2016

THIS WEEK, ROSS Ulbricht’s defense team dropped a brief appealing for a new trial, arguing that the court erroneously suppressed information about the corrupt federal agents investigating Silk Road. Using a clue from leaked Hacking Team files, researchers at Kaspersky Lab found a valuable zero-day exploit attacking a vulnerability in Microsoft’s Silverlight software. A researcher found a way for hackers to remotely burn industrial motors. Oh, and Netflix is cracking down on VPNs with the goal of acquiring global content rights for its movies and shows.

But that’s not all. Each Saturday we round up the news stories that we didn’t break or cover in depth at WIRED, but which deserve your attention nonetheless. As always, click on the headlines to read the full story in each link posted. And stay safe out there!

Apple CEO Calls on White House Officials to Defend Unbreakable Encryption
Looks like Tim Cook hasn’t changed his stance on encryption. During the delegation called by the White House to discuss counterterrorism issues with tech leaders, the Apple CEO apparently lashed out at Obama administration officials for not issuing a public statement defending the use of encryption without backdoors, according to two people briefed on the meeting who relayed the information to The Intercept. The meeting was attended by the White House Chief of Staff, Attorney General, and Secretary of Homeland Security, as well as NSA Director Michael Rogers, FBI Director James Comey, and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

Spamhaus Project Accuses Verizon of Routing Millions of IP Addresses for Spammers
A new post by the Spamhaus Project, an international non-profit organization fighting spam and cybercrime, says that Verizon is “currently by far the largest single source of snowshoe spam in operation today,” with more than 4 million spam IP addresses being routed through its network. (Snowshoe spam is a term for a technique used to get around spam filters and regulations, wherein spammers strategically send out their emails from a wide range of IP addresses, so that if one IP address gets caught, others may still get through.) Spamhaus Project claims that spammers are forging authorization documents alleging permission to use large IP blocks, and that Verizon is routing traffic based on those documents, even after being informed that the IP addresses were illegally obtained by spammers.

Homeland Security Asks Hotel Staff to Spy on Guests
The Department of Homeland Security is rolling out a so-called “Safe Action Project,’ in which it is asking hotel and hospitality staff to look at warnings of sex trafficking. The only problem is that the so-called red flags are broad enough to sweep up unsuspecting hotel patrons. Among other things, they include paying for rooms with cash or a rechargeable credit card, refusing maid service for several days, having “suspicious tattoos,” or photography equipment, or “excessive sex paraphernalia”—or too few personal possessions, trash cans with a lot of used condoms, or even the presence of multiple computers and devices.

US Spy Chief Gets Hacked by the Teen Who Hacked the CIA’s Director
Crackas with Attitude is back again—after hacking into CIA director John Brennan’s email account last October, and accessing online tools and portals used by law enforcement agencies, one of the group’s hackers, Cracka, has targeted Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. Cracka told Motherboard he accessed Clapper’s home phone and internet accounts, personal email account, and his wife’s email account. The teenage hacker had calls to Clapper’s home phone number forwarded to the Free Palestine Movement. He also sent Motherboard call logs to Clapper’s home number. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence confirmed the hack.

Librarians at New York University Purge Records to Protect User Privacy
The Graduate Center at the City University of New York has begun purging its older interlibrary loan records to protect the privacy of its patrons, deleting the date before the government can demand it. Although the Graduate Center’s chief librarian Polly Thistlethwaite told the Guardian that there was “nothing burning that prompted” the change, she described being approached by an NYPD officer while she was working at a different library. He was looking for users who’d checked out astrological books while looking for the Zodiac killer. The Graduate Center currently plans to keep all interlibrary loan requests dating back to 2013, but eventually hopes to keep a rolling record of only a year or less.

Dutch and Canadian Police Say They Can Read BlackBerry PGP Encrypted Email
The details are murky, but police in the Netherlands and in Canada have claimed that they can access deleted emails and read encrypted email messages on BlackBerry PGP devices, which are sold by resellers like GhostPGP who customize the devices with PGP encryption. Their technique requires physical access to the device.

Fresno Police Use Proprietary Software that Calculates “Threat Levels” of Addresses and Residents
When responding to 911 calls, police operators in Fresno have been consulting the threat-scoring software Beware, which analyzes people’s potential for violence using a series of data points such as arrest reports, social media posts, commercial databases, and property records. The software generates a color-coded threat level for an address and each resident. Only Beware’s manufacturer, Intrado, knows how threat scores are calculated, since it considers this a trade secret. Critics point out that these tools have little public oversight, have enormous potential for error, are intrusive, and have potential to be misused. After a November Fresno City Council hearing in which residents expressed concern, Fresno’s police chief said he’s working with Intrado to turn off the color-coded rating system.

ISIS Has Its Own Encrypted Messaging App
According to Defense One and the unnamed Ghost Security sources it spoke with, ISIS has its own new Android-based app, Alrawi.apk, for encrypted communication. This is in addition to the previously discovered Amaq Agency app, which GhostSec says is used primarily for distributing propaganda.

Companies, Activists, and Tech Experts Call on Global Leaders to Support Strong Encryption
Activists from 42 countries have signed an open letter demanding an end to global government efforts to coerce software companies to weaken encryption via backdoors. The letter was created by digital rights group Access now, and was posted in 10 different languages to SecuretheInternet.org. 195 experts, civil society groups, and companies, including United Nations special rapporteur for freedom of opinion and expression David Kaye, signed the letter.

Tags: , , , , ,

download

Apple’s Tim Cook pushes White House to take stand on encryption

January 14, 2016

It seems Apple CEO Tim Cook isn’t shy about doling out advice to the Obama administration.

Cook is reportedly unhappy with the White House’s unwillingness to take a stance on encryption, or the scrambling of emails and other messages to keep them private. According to The Intercept, he made his concerns clear to a high-level delegation of officials during a meeting in San Jose, California, last week, asking the administration to issue a statement defending the use of unbreakable encryption.

At the center of the debate is the use of back doors. These intentional openings coded into software let law enforcement officials bypass security measures and get at your data. The FBI and some administration officials argue that the tech industry should put such back doors in place so law enforcement can access communications between terrorists and protect national security. But the industry is fighting back, in part because they’re afraid hackers could exploit those same back doors.

At a meeting to discuss counterterrorism, attended by representatives from companies including Facebook, Twitter, Google, DropBox, Microsoft and LinkedIn, Cook told White House officials they should state publicly “no back doors.”

Apple did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Firms such as Facebook and Google are widely known to comply with legal requests from police and security agencies to help tackle serious crime and terrorism. Over the past few years, they’ve attempted to be more transparent about how many of these requests they receive and comply with. When it comes to encryption though, the tech industry is keen to show that it’s putting users first, and it’s been steadfast in its refusal to introduce vulnerabilities into otherwise impenetrable systems.

As for the White House, its position on encryption is less clear. Attorney General Loretta Lynch reportedly responded to Cook by saying there needed to be “balance” between privacy and national security.

The issue isn’t going away. Last September the White House decided not to seek a legislative fix to deal with the increased use of encryption by the tech industry. A Washington Post report, however, quoted an email from the US intelligence community’s top lawyer as saying the administration should be “keeping our options open.”

Tags: , , ,

pp1

200 Cyber Activists Urge World Leaders to Reject Encryption ‘Back Doors’

January 11, 2016

Nearly 200 Internet and digital rights experts, companies and organizations are collectively calling on the Obama administration and other world leaders to oppose any efforts to create “back doors” to encryption.

“We urge you to protect the security of your citizens, your economy, and your government by supporting the development and use of secure communications tools and technologies, rejecting policies that would prevent or undermine the use of strong encryption, and urging other leaders to do the same,” they said in an open letter made public on Monday.

“Encryption tools, technologies, and services are essential to protect against harm and to shield our digital infrastructure and personal communications from unauthorized access.”

The letter was organized by Access Now, a digital rights group with offices in the U.S. and several other countries. Signees are from more than 40 countries and include: former CIA analyst John Kiriakou; David Kaye, U.N. Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Opinion and Expression; Iceland parliament member Birgitta Jónsdóttir; the American Civil Liberties Union; Amnesty International; and Human Rights Watch.

Nathan White, senior legislative manager at Access Now, said a copy of the letter has been delivered to Obama administration officials. While White House officials have said they are not seeking a “back door” to encrypted communications, they haven’t issued a clear policy supporting strong encryption, White said. That has led other government agencies and foreign governments — the U.K., for instance — to feel free to press ahead with legislation that would weaken encryption, he said.

“The White House needs to clarify what its policy is, because right now the lack of a policy is indicating others are able to take the lead,” White said.

On Friday, top administration security officials met with the leaders of major tech companies including Apple, Google and Facebook to discuss ways to prevent terrorists from using encryption, social media and other technologies to communicate.

“Given the way that technology works these days, there surely are ways that we can disrupt paths to radicalization, to identify recruitment patterns, and to provide metrics that allow us to measure the success of our counter-radicalization efforts,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest said ahead of the meeting

Tags: , , ,

featured image 4

A Secret Catalogue of Government Gear for Spying on Your Cellphone

December 18, 2015

The intercept has obtained a secret, internal U.S. government catalogue of dozens of cellphone surveillance devices used by the military and by intelligence agencies. The document, thick with previously undisclosed information, also offers rare insight into the spying capabilities of federal law enforcement and local police inside the United States.

The catalogue includes details on the Stingray, a well-known brand of surveillance gear, as well as Boeing “dirt boxes” and dozens of more obscure devices that can be mounted on vehicles, drones, and piloted aircraft. Some are designed to be used at static locations, while others can be discreetly carried by an individual. They have names like Cyberhawk, Yellowstone, Blackfin, Maximus, Cyclone, and Spartacus. Within the catalogue, the NSA is listed as the vendor of one device, while another was developed for use by the CIA, and another was developed for a special forces requirement. Nearly a third of the entries focus on equipment that seems to have never been described in public before.

The Intercept obtained the catalogue from a source within the intelligence community concerned about the militarization of domestic law enforcement. (The original is here.)

A few of the devices can house a “target list” of as many as 10,000 unique phone identifiers. Most can be used to geolocate people, but the documents indicate that some have more advanced capabilities, like eavesdropping on calls and spying on SMS messages. Two systems, apparently designed for use on captured phones, are touted as having the ability to extract media files, address books, and notes, and one can retrieve deleted text messages.

Above all, the catalogue represents a trove of details on surveillance devices developed for military and intelligence purposes but increasingly used by law enforcement agencies to spy on people and convict them of crimes. The mass shooting earlier this month in San Bernardino, California, which President Barack Obama has called “an act of terrorism,” prompted calls for state and local police forces to beef up their counterterrorism capabilities, a process that has historically involved adapting military technologies to civilian use. Meanwhile, civil liberties advocates and others are increasingly alarmed about how cellphone surveillance devices are used domestically and have called for a more open and informed debate about the trade-off between security and privacy — despite a virtual blackout by the federal government on any information about the specific capabilities of the gear.

“We’ve seen a trend in the years since 9/11 to bring sophisticated surveillance technologies that were originally designed for military use — like Stingrays or drones or biometrics — back home to the United States,” said Jennifer Lynch, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which has waged a legal battle challenging the use of cellphone surveillance devices domestically. “But using these technologies for domestic law enforcement purposes raises a host of issues that are different from a military context.”

MANY OF THE DEVICES in the catalogue, including the Stingrays and dirt boxes, are cell-site simulators, which operate by mimicking the towers of major telecom companies like Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile. When someone’s phone connects to the spoofed network, it transmits a unique identification code and, through the characteristics of its radio signals when they reach the receiver, information about the phone’s location. There are also indications that cell-site simulators may be able to monitor calls and text messages.

In the catalogue, each device is listed with guidelines about how its use must be approved; the answer is usually via the “Ground Force Commander” or under one of two titles in the U.S. code governing military and intelligence operations, including covert action.

But domestically the devices have been used in a way that violates the constitutional rights of citizens, including the Fourth Amendment prohibition on illegal search and seizure, critics like Lynch say. They have regularly been used without warrants, or with warrants that critics call overly broad. Judges and civil liberties groups alike have complained that the devices are used without full disclosure of how they work, even within court proceedings.

“Every time police drive the streets with a Stingray, these dragnet devices can identify and locate dozens or hundreds of innocent bystanders’ phones,” said Nathan Wessler, a staff attorney with the Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project of the American Civil Liberties Union.

The controversy around cellphone surveillance illustrates the friction that comes with redeploying military combat gear into civilian life. The U.S. government has been using cell-site simulators for at least 20 years, but their use by local law enforcement is a more recent development.

The archetypical cell-site simulator, the Stingray, was trademarked by Harris Corp. in 2003 and initially used by the military, intelligence agencies, and federal law enforcement. Another company, Digital Receiver Technology, now owned by Boeing, developed dirt boxes — more powerful cell-site simulators — which gained favor among the NSA, CIA, and U.S. military as good tools for hunting down suspected terrorists. The devices can reportedly track more than 200 phones over a wider range than the Stingray.

Amid the war on terror, companies selling cell-site simulators to the federal government thrived. In addition to large corporations like Boeing and Harris, which clocked more than $2.6 billion in federal contracts last year, the catalogue obtained by The Intercept includes products from little-known outfits like Nevada-based Ventis, which appears to have been dissolved, and SR Technologies of Davie, Florida, which has a website that warns: “Due to the sensitive nature of this business, we require that all visitors be registered before accessing further information.” (The catalogue obtained by The Intercept is not dated, but includes information about an event that occurred in 2012.)

The U.S. government eventually used cell-site simulators to target people for assassination in drone strikes, The Intercept has reported. But the CIA helped use the technology at home, too. For more than a decade, the agency worked with the U.S. Marshals Service to deploy planes with dirt boxes attached to track mobile phones across the U.S., the Wall Street Journal revealed.

After being used by federal agencies for years, cellular surveillance devices began to make their way into the arsenals of a small number of local police agencies. By 2007, Harris sought a license from the Federal Communications Commission to widely sell its devices to local law enforcement, and police flooded the FCC with letters of support. “The text of every letter was the same. The only difference was the law enforcement logo at the top,” said Chris Soghoian, the principal technologist at the ACLU, who obtained copies of the letters from the FCC through a Freedom of Information Act request.

The lobbying campaign was a success. Today nearly 60 law enforcement agencies in 23 states are known to possess a Stingray or some form of cell-site simulator, though experts believe that number likely underrepresents the real total. In some jurisdictions, police use cell-site simulators regularly. The Baltimore Police Department, for example, has used Stingrays more than 4,300 times since 2007.

Police often cite the war on terror in acquiring such systems. Michigan State Police claimed their Stingrays would “allow the State to track the physical location of a suspected terrorist,” although the ACLU later found that in 128 uses of the devices last year, none were related to terrorism. In Tacoma, Washington, police claimed Stingrays could prevent attacks using improvised explosive devices — the roadside bombs that plagued soldiers in Iraq. “I am not aware of any case in which a police agency has used a cell-site simulator to find a terrorist,” said Lynch. Instead, “law enforcement agencies have been using cell-site simulators to solve even the most minor domestic crimes.”

The Intercept is not publishing information on devices in the catalogue where the disclosure is not relevant to the debate over the extent of domestic surveillance.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence declined to comment for this article. The FBI, NSA, and U.S. military did not offer any comment after acknowledging The Intercept’s written requests. The Department of Justice “uses technology in a manner that is consistent with the requirements and protections of the Constitution, including the Fourth Amendment, and applicable statutory authorities,” said Marc Raimondi, a Justice Department spokesperson who, for six years prior to working for the DOJ, worked for Harris Corp., the manufacturer of the Stingray.

WHILE INTEREST FROM local cops helped fuel the spread of cell-site simulators, funding from the federal government also played a role, incentivizing municipalities to buy more of the technology. In the years since 9/11, the U.S. has expanded its funding to provide military hardware to state and local law enforcement agencies via grants awarded by the Department of Homeland Security and the Justice Department. There’s been a similar pattern with Stingray-like devices.

“The same grant programs that paid for local law enforcement agencies across the country to buy armored personnel carriers and drones have paid for Stingrays,” said Soghoian. “Like drones, license plate readers, and biometric scanners, the Stingrays are yet another surveillance technology created by defense contractors for the military, and after years of use in war zones, it eventually trickles down to local and state agencies, paid for with DOJ and DHS money.”

In 2013, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement reported the purchase of two HEATR long-range surveillance devices as well as $3 million worth of Stingray devices since 2008. In California, Alameda County and police departments in Oakland and Fremont are using $180,000 in Homeland Security grant money to buy Harris’ Hailstorm cell-site simulator and the hand-held Thoracic surveillance device, made by Maryland security and intelligence company Keyw. As part of Project Archangel, which is described in government contract documents as a “border radio intercept program,” the Drug Enforcement Administration has contracted with Digital Receiver Technology for over $1 million in DRT surveillance box equipment. The Department of the Interior contracted with Keyw for more than half a million dollars of “reduced signature cellular precision geolocation.”

Information on such purchases, like so much about cell-site simulators, has trickled out through freedom of information requests and public records. The capabilities of the devices are kept under lock and key — a secrecy that hearkens back to their military origins. When state or local police purchase the cell-site simulators, they are routinely required to sign non-disclosure agreements with the FBI that they may not reveal the “existence of and the capabilities provided by” the surveillance devices, or share “any information” about the equipment with the public.

Indeed, while several of the devices in the military catalogue obtained by The Intercept are actively deployed by federal and local law enforcement agencies, according to public records, judges have struggled to obtain details of how they work. Other products in the secret catalogue have never been publicly acknowledged and any use by state, local, and federal agencies inside the U.S. is, therefore, difficult to challenge.

“It can take decades for the public to learn what our police departments are doing, by which point constitutional violations may be widespread,” Wessler said. “By showing what new surveillance capabilities are coming down the pike, these documents will help lawmakers, judges, and the public know what to look out for as police departments seek ever-more powerful electronic surveillance tools.”

Sometimes it’s not even clear how much police are spending on Stingray-like devices because they are bought with proceeds from assets seized under federal civil forfeiture law, in drug busts and other operations. Illinois, Michigan, and Maryland police forces have all used asset forfeiture funds to pay for Stingray-type equipment.

“The full extent of the secrecy surrounding cell-site simulators is completely unjustified and unlawful,” said EFF’s Lynch. “No police officer or detective should be allowed to withhold information from a court or criminal defendant about how the officer conducted an investigation.”

JUDGES HAVE BEEN among the foremost advocates for ending the secrecy around cell-site simulators, including by pushing back on warrant requests. At times, police have attempted to hide their use of Stingrays in criminal cases, prompting at least one judge to throw out evidence obtained by the device. In 2012, a U.S. magistrate judge in Texas rejected an application by the Drug Enforcement Administration to use a cell-site simulator in an operation, saying that the agency had failed to explain “what the government would do with” the data collected from innocent people.

Law enforcement has responded with some limited forms of transparency. In September, the Justice Department issued new guidelines for the use of Stingrays and similar devices, including that federal law enforcement agencies using them must obtain a warrant based on probable cause and must delete any data intercepted from individuals not under investigation.

Contained within the guidelines, however, is a clause stipulating vague “exceptional circumstances” under which agents could be exempt from the requirement to get a probable cause warrant.

“Cell-site simulator technology has been instrumental in aiding law enforcement in a broad array of investigations, including kidnappings, fugitive investigations, and complicated narcotics cases,” said Deputy Attorney General Sally Quillian Yates.

Meanwhile, parallel guidelines issued by the Department of Homeland Security in October do not require warrants for operations on the U.S. border, nor do the warrant requirements apply to state and local officials who purchased their Stingrays through grants from the federal government, such as those in Wisconsin, Maryland, and Florida.

The ACLU, EFF, and several prominent members of Congress have said the federal government’s exceptions are too broad and leave the door open for abuses.

“Because cell-site simulators can collect so much information from innocent people, a simple warrant for their use is not enough,” said Lynch, the EFF attorney. “Police officers should be required to limit their use of the device to a short and defined period of time. Officers also need to be clear in the probable cause affidavit supporting the warrant about the device’s capabilities.”

In November, a federal judge in Illinois published a legal memorandum about the government’s application to use a cell-tower spoofing technology in a drug-trafficking investigation. In his memo, Judge Iain Johnston sharply criticized the secrecy surrounding Stingrays and other surveillance devices, suggesting that it made weighing the constitutional implications of their use extremely difficult. “A cell-site simulator is simply too powerful of a device to be used and the information captured by it too vast to allow its use without specific authorization from a fully informed court,” he wrote.

He added that Harris Corp. “is extremely protective about information regarding its device. In fact, Harris is so protective that it has been widely reported that prosecutors are negotiating plea deals far below what they could obtain so as to not disclose cell-site simulator information. … So where is one, including a federal judge, able to learn about cell-site simulators? A judge can ask a requesting Assistant United States Attorney or a federal agent, but they are tight-lipped about the device, too.”

The ACLU and EFF believe that the public has a right to review the types of devices being used to encourage an informed debate on the potentially far-reaching implications of the technology. The catalogue obtained by The Intercept, said Wessler, “fills an important gap in our knowledge, but it is incumbent on law enforcement agencies to proactively disclose information about what surveillance equipment they use and what steps they take to protect Fourth Amendment privacy rights.”

Tags: , , , , ,

featured image 2

Game for privacy is gone, mass surveillance is here to stay – Assange on #RT10 panel

December 11, 2015

Humanity has lost its battle for privacy and must now learn to live in a world where mass surveillance is becoming cheaper for governments to implement, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said during a panel dedicated to RT’s 10th anniversary.
Assange addressed the panel on security and surveillance hosted by RT in central Moscow on Thursday via videoconference from the Ecuadorian embassy in London, where he has remained holed up for the last three years in order to avoid extradition to Sweden.
When offered a chance to comment on the session’s topic – “Security or Surveillance: Can the right to privacy and effective anti-terror security coexist in the digital age?” – the whistleblower asked the moderator, and host of The Big Picture Show on RT American, Thom Hartmann: “How long have you got, Tom?” implying he has a lot to say on the issue.
But it was Assange’s only joke during the event, as his reply turned out to be gravely serious and in many respects depressing.
“In thinking about this issue I want to take quite a different position, perhaps, from what you would expect me to have taken… I think that we should understand that the game for privacy is gone. It’s gone. The mass surveillance is here to stay,” he said.
Mass surveillance is already being implemented not only by major world powers, but also by some medium and small-sized countries, he added.
“The Five Eyes intelligence arrangement [of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK and the US]… is so evasive in terms of mass surveillance of domestic and international telecommunications that while some experts can achieve practical privacy for themselves for limited number of operations… it’s gone for the rest of the populations,” the WikiLeaks founder stressed.
International terrorists are among those “experts” capable of making their communications invisible for security agencies, he added.
Privacy “will not be coming back, short of a very regressive economic collapse, which reduces the technological capacity of civilization,” Assange said.
“The reason it will not come back is that the cost of engaging in mass surveillance is decreasing by about 50 per cent every 18 months, because it’s the underlying cost that’s predicated on the cost of telecommunications, moving surveillance intercepts around and computerization and storage – all those costs are decreasing much faster at a geometric rate than the human population is increasing,” he explained.
Mass surveillance and computerization are “winning” the competition with humanity and human values and they’re “going to continue to win at an ever-increasing rate. That’s the reality that we have to deal with,” the WikiLeaks whistleblower added.
The focus should now switch from defending privacy to understanding what kind of society will be built in these new, changed conditions, he said.
The WikiLeaks founder reminded the panel of the historic examples of East Germany and other societies, in which people adapted to living under the scrutiny of the authorities.
“If you look at societal behavior in very conformist, small, isolated societies with reduced social spaces – like Sweden, South Korea, Okinawa in Japan and North Korea – then you’ll see that society adapts. Everyone becomes incredibly timid, they start to use code words; use a lot of subtext to try and sneak out your controversial views,” he said.
According to Assange, the modern world is currently moving “towards that kind of a society.”
Privacy is among values “that simply are unsustainable… in the face of the reality of technological change; the reality of the deep state with a military-industrial complex and the reality of Islamic terrorism, which is legitimizing that sector in a way that it’s behaving,” he stressed.
Assange encouraged those present on the panel as well as the general public to “get on the other side of the debate where it’s going” and stop holding on to privacy.
The panel discussion was part of an RT conference titled ‘Information, messages, politics:The shape-shifting powers of today’s world.’ The meeting brought together politicians, foreign policy experts and media executives from across the globe, among them former director of the US Defense Intelligence Agency Michael Flynn, the Green Party’s Jill Stein and former vice president of the Parliamentary Assembly of the OSCE, Willy Wimmer.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Introducing ShazzleMail Email and How it Works

Privacy is your Fundamental Human Right.

Our Daily Blog
1463600977631262
Google tightens grip on some Android data over privacy fears, report says
August 19, 2019

The search giant ends a program that provided network coverage data to wireless carriers. BY CARR...

Read more
4000
Wikipedia co-founder slams Mark Zuckerberg, Twitter and the ‘appalling’ internet
July 8, 2019

Elizabeth Schulze Wikpedia Co-Founder Larry Sanger said in an interview social media companies ...

Read more
venmo_pub_priv
Why America Needs a Thoughtful Federal Privacy Law
June 26, 2019

More than a dozen privacy bills have been introduced in this Congress. Here’s what it needs to do....

Read more
privacy-coins-and-bitcoin-dominance-guide
9 Important Privacy Settings for Windows 10
June 3, 2019

Matt Powell On Jun 3, 2019 At first glance, the Digital Age may seem like a wonderful thing. And ...

Read more
apple
Apple exec dismisses Google CEO’s criticism over turning privacy into a ‘luxury good’
May 29, 2019

By Jacob Kastrenakes@jake_k May 27, 2019, 12:18pm EDT Apple’s software chief, Craig Federigh...

Read more