Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - administrator

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 712
1

      

By Aaron Kesel


Activist Post has previously reported how the Pentagon wants to police social media for fake stories and deep fakes. Now, the Army’s Criminal Investigation Command wants to get involved in policing social media for “threats,” according to Nextgov.


According to a service job offer published by the Army, CID aims to acquire access to “social media exploitation” services.


“The solution shall be web-based with subscription to support the organizations’ ability to quickly unlock the value of social media and big data to assess risk, respond to threats and discover actionable intelligence,” officials wrote.


For those who don’t know, CID is the Army’s primary investigative organization used for looking into all serious felony related crimes relevant to the branch. Nextgov writes, “insiders engage in information collection for sensitive and serious violations of the law, the analysis and dissemination of criminal intelligence, protective service operations, forensic laboratory support, records maintenance, logistics security, force protection and beyond.”


         



      

CID seeks to acquire 62 separate subscriptions, 57 of which that are basic and five that are advanced for software licenses that will provide “secure and legal social media threat detection and risk mitigation.” The agency listed its requirements for a software service or services that provide “interactive datamining capabilities.” They also want the service to cover for at least 250 queries per day, and cover at least 70 web-based international platforms including — Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, VK, LinkedIn, Discord, Gab, Telegram, SoundCloud, Myspace, Google+ — and others.


Last year, DARPA announced it would deploy online cyber forces to watch for “large-scale, automated disinformation attacks,” using specialized software to detect deep fakes of photos, videos and audio clips, as Activist Post reported.


Here’s a friendly reminder for the reader that the blurred line between the CIA and Pentagon, which houses the umbrella of all armed services, exists from what was formulated during the Obama administration. Although, in the more distant past, the CIA has run clear disinformation operations on the American public during Operation Mockingbird.


Besides the CIA, other agencies in the U.S. government are allowed with impunity to run Press Packages (paid government releases), i.e., propaganda.


In fact, then-U.S. President George W. Bush himself exposed what are known as “Government press packages” in the early 2000s when Ken Harman of Cox News Service questioned him on the use of government-produced pieces aired on television stations across the United States.



As Harman pointed out, “there is no disclaimer that these stories sent to  air on television stations around the U.S are provided by the government  raising several ethical questions.” Essentially, these are pieces of propaganda, something the American public was supposed to be protected from under the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948, which barred the federal government from producing sensationalized content to manipulate the public, but was amended in 2012.






That wasn’t the first time that journalists were paid to produce fake stories, now commonly deemed “fake news.” During the Church Committee in 1975, a congressional panel found the CIA paid journalists to produce fake stories during the Cold War era 1950s through 1970s. They also funded  student and cultural organizations and magazines as front organizations. This CIA operation became known as Operation Mockingbird and was mentioned in the infamous CIA family jewels’ collection.


Suspected murdered journalist Michael Hastings also exposed propaganda operations in Afghanistan in an article entitled. “The Afghanistan Report the Pentagon Doesn’t Want You to Read.”


The article was surrounding a leaked unclassified Pentagon report.  The report took the shroud off of the U.S. military’s psyops operation command MISOC, which stands for “Military Information Support Operations Command.”


The article revealed several techniques the group uses in psychological warfare to manipulate the public, including but not limited to fake intelligence information, lack of information and social media manipulation, according to Lt. Colonel Daniel Davis. Hastings also accused MISOC of deploying psychological operations on U.S. senators in another report and on video with Democracy Now! before his coincidental death. Smith-Mundt was repealed under the Obama administration as an initiative within the NDAA 2012 bill. As Hastings said, “Smith-Mundt had been passed to protect U.S. audiences from our own government’s misinformation campaigns.”


Now just imagine if those operations were allowed to flourish unimpeded due to the military policing information shared online?


It’s one thing to have some obscure site like Snopes accuse information of being disinformation or misinformation; it’s a whole other story to have the military do so.




Avoiding The Eye - Ships Free Today!




The other blaring issue is that the U.S. military already deploys its own disinformation agents online as paid trolls (JTRIG). We know this definitively from Edward Snowden, and before the NSA contractor decided to blow the whistle from an old report by the Guardian discussing military social media operations two years before in 2011, which stated that the military had ‘sock puppet’ software to creates fake online identities in order to spread pro-American propaganda.


Combined efforts between the CIA, FBI (who has also been caught running disinformation operations posing as journalists), or any other agency with the Pentagon, could be a match made in hell and a living nightmare. Beyond that, allowing the U.S. Army the ability to detect what social media posts are “threats” is even more reckless.


“Threats” isn’t defined clearly enough, and we won’t get information on this due to the secret nature of the military. All of a sudden a person sharing their opinion or information could be labeled a “threat” and have their doors kicked in for using their First Amendment online. The Secret Service already investigates all threats against the President and Congress, so remind me again why do we need the Army playing social media police assessing potential threats? Further, if someone were to post a serious threat, they are very likely to be anonymous using a VPN, proxies, a burner phone # connected to the account and the whole shebang! So they wouldn’t be traced anyway. This seems like a piss poor attempt at scaring social media users and taking away individual citizens’ rights to free speech and freedom of expression using social networks.



**By [@An0nkn0wledge](https://steemit.com/@an0nkn0wledge)**


Aaron Kesel writes for Activist Post. Support us at Patreon. Follow us on Minds, Steemit, SoMee, BitChute, Facebook and Twitter.


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

2

      

By Corbett Report Extras


Today James’ identical twin brother Statist Jim talks to Larken and Amanda Rose about Candles In The Dark, the two-day workshop they’ll be running at Anarchapulco 2020 to help voluntaryists become more effective communicators of anarchist ideas.



         



      

SHOW NOTES:


Candles In The Dark at Anarchapulco


Candles In The Dark online


Information on The Mirror


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

3

      

By MassPrivateI


A recent Appeals Court ruling in Tennessee reveals a disturbing window into how police use concerts, music festivals and sporting events to trample our Fourth Amendment rights.


When Brian Wiley purchased tickets to the Bonnaaroo Music Festival in 2016 he never thought that police would be allowed to search his car without probable cause.


Yet that is exactly what happened.


The Bonnaroo Music Festival is a four-day music festival that provides overnight camping to concertgoers with the added bonus of being searched free of charge.


         



      

According to Coffee County Sheriff’s investigator James Sherrill, Mr. Wiley should have known that concertgoers and campers would be searched the moment they stepped foot onto the festivals grounds.


The police argued that Mr. Wiley’s music festival ticket gives police permission to search everyone, including their vehicles.


The terms of admission printed on the back of the ticket in fine print are,


This ticket is a revocable license for the time listed on the front hereof. Management reserves the right, without refund of any portion of the ticket purchase price, to refuse admission or eject any person who fails to comply with the rules of the venue, local, state, or federal law, or whose conduct is deemed illegal, disorderly, or offensive by management. Persons entering the  facility are subject to search for contraband, alcohol, controlled substances, weapons, firearms,fireworks, cameras, video equipment or recording devices, which are expressly forbidden and subject to confiscation.


One would think that refusing to allow police to search their person or vehicle would lead to immediate ejection right?


I mean after all that is what it says:


Management reserves the right, without refund of any portion of the ticket purchase price, to refuse admission or eject any person who fails to comply with the rules of the venue, local, state, or federal law.


But, alas, all is not what is seems in the land of the free.


Even though Mr. Wiley purchased a separate car camping pass for $59.75 that allowed him to park overnight away from the music festival, he was still expected to forgo his rights and let the police search his vehicle.


But you say, he’s probably a drug dealer and the end justifies the means, right? Well how do police justify this?


She (his sister) relayed that the officers informed them of the information they had received from Mr. Watson (the accuser) and that the officers made a lot of threatening remarks about removing [their] wristbands and kicking [them] out of the Festival.


Police threatened to kick them out of the music festival but instead they took Mr. Wiley’s car keys without his permission.


Police allowed to take your keys and search your car without a warrant




Declare Your Independence!
Profit outside the rigged system! Protect yourself from tyranny and economic collapse. Learn to live free and spread peace!
Counter Markets Newsletter - Trends & Strategies for Maximum Freedom




   #mc_embed_signup {clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; text-align: center; padding-bottom: 15px; }
         .cmhead{color: rgb(255,199,27); text-shadow: 1px 1px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.5); text-align: center; font-size: 250%; font-family: sans-serif; font-weight: 700;}
         .cmsubhead{color: rgb(255,255,255); text-align: center; font-size: 150%; font-family: sans-serif;}
         .cmformhead{color: rgb(30, 29, 29); font-size: 160%; font-family: sans-serif; margin-bottom: 10px;}
         #mc_embed_signup form { display: inline-block; background-color: #FFF; background-color: #FFF; margin-top: 20px; border-color: rgb(31, 31, 31);
    outline: none;
    background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);
    opacity: 1;
    border-width: 3px;
    border-style: solid;
    border-radius: 5px;
    width:70%;
}
#mc_embed_signup input.email  {width: 90%; }
#mc_embed_signup input.button { width: 93%; background-color: rgb(246, 137, 34); border-bottom: 3px solid rgba(0,0,0,0.2); font-size: 160%;}
#mc_embed_signup .button:hover {background-color: #e67409;}
   /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block.
      We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */



   
         
Claim Your FREE Issue Today!
   
   


   





According to the police officers own testimony, they took Mr. Wiley’s keys and searched his car without a warrant.


The Defendant’s vehicle was locked. When asked how he acquired the keys to the Defendant’s automobile, Investigator Sherrill responded, If I’m not mistaken, I got them off the table that was inside the tent area. Sherrill indicated that the key to the Defendant’s car was in the Defendant’s hand when Sherrill arrived at the campsite, but  Sherrill could not recall any officer’s taking the key out of the Defendant’s hand.


Investigator Sherrill could not remember taking the keys from Mr. Wiley but he remembered everything else? I’m not buying it and neither should you.


In what era is it OK for a cop to take someone’s keys out of their hands to justify an illegal search? Especially when the police admitted they did not see either of them commit any crimes?


At 9:35 p.m., Investigator Sherrill encountered the Defendant at his campsite. Neither the Defendant nor any of the other campers present at the campsite were doing anything illegal at that time.


Do we give up all of our rights simply because cops suspect someone of committing a crime?


The Appeals Court ruling allows law enforcement to search and seize anyone’s vehicle simply because they purchased a ticket to a music festival or sporting event.


The Court of Appeals determined that the search of the Defendant’s automobile fell within the automobile exception to the warrant requirement. The officer may seize the automobile and obtain a search warrant or instead may search the automobile immediately.




Avoiding The Eye - Ships Free Today!




The Appeals Court also ruled music festival/sportsgoers have no right to privacy.


The Defendant clearly had no expectation of privacy upon entering the Festival. The terms of admittance to the Festival as set forth on his ticket make clear that he is subject to search for controlled substances. The Defendant purchased a license to camp, which did not afford him rights equivalent to that of a homeowner, lessee or occupant of a hotel room.


Rulings like these threaten everyone’s rights.


What if music festivals, concerts and sporting events included on the back of tickets being subjected to body-cavity searches, electronic device searches like your cellphone, tablet, laptop, vehicle’s infotainment center, your E-ZPass records and your vehicle’s black box data ? Would Americans be OK with that?


No one should expect that their rights can be taken away just because they purchased an event ticket.


Article source: MassPrivateI Blog


Top image credit: Hudson Valley 360


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

4

      

By Eoin Higgins


The U.S. military dropped a record-breaking number of bombs on Afghanistan in 2019, the Air Force announced Tuesday, drawing criticism from observers who wondered what purpose the continued barrage of the war-torn country after over 18 years of war could serve.


“Isn’t this an admission of colossal failure?” tweeted CounterPunch editor Jeffrey St. Clair. “Who are we bombing? Why? What will it yield but more war?”




 


The munitions data (pdf) was published Monday by U.S. Air Forces Central Command. Air Force jets dropped 7,423 bombs on Afghanistan in 2019, the highest number since records began in 2006—beating out 2018.


Stars and Stripes explained how the bombing affects the Afghan people:



The AFCENT figures include bomb and missile strikes, 105 mm shells fired by AC-130 gunships and strafing fire from 20 mm cannons and up.


Airstrikes, predominantly conducted by U.S. forces, caused 579 of the 1,149 civilian war fatalities attributed to pro-government forces in Afghanistan during the first nine months of 2019, according to the most recent United Nations data.



As the war in Afghanistan continues, so too does a lack of accountability with the American people from President Donald Trump’s administration.


Two members of the president’s Cabinet, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Acting Secretary of Defense Mark Esper, refused to attend a Congressional hearing on the war Tuesday morning, drawing criticism from Subcommittee on National Security chairman Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.).


Lynch said in his remarks that the president’s strategy in the region is at best incoherent.


“Despite repeated invitations, the Department of State and the Department of Defense refused to make witnesses available to testify today,” said Lynch. “That’s very disappointing, because I’m concerned that rather than implementing a coherent Afghanistan strategy, U.S. policy in the region is instead being driven by the latest impulse of the commander-in-chief.”


U.S. airstrikes killed 15 civilians earlier in January, Stars and Stripes reported last week.


Afghanistan’s Independent Human Rights Commission, which reported the strike in a report, said the attack was “a clear violation of human rights.”



By Eoin Higgins | CommonDreams.org | Creative Commons


Article source: The Mind Unleashed


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

5

      

By Tyler Durden


Will this Harvard Chemistry Department Head be remembered as the Aldrich Ames of the modern-day ‘Cold War’?


In a shocking revelation made Tuesday afternoon – a revelation that will almost certainly rattle the US-China relationship at an already fragile time – a federal court unsealed indictments against Harvard professor and Chemistry Department Head Charles Lieber, along with two Chinese nationals. One is a Boston University researcher who was once a lieutenant in the People’s Liberation Army, according to prosecutors, and the second was a cancer researcher who tried to smuggle 21 vials of biological materials in his sock – allegedly. Lieber has been arrested, though it’s not clear if he’s still in custody.


Though the official charge was lying to investigators, Lieber’s actions look like an unvarnished attempt at espionage, complete with an extremely seductive monetary reward.


         



      

Lieber was reportedly paid $50,000 a month by Wuhan University of Technology for participating in its “Thousand Talents” program, and was given more than $1.5 million to establish a lab and do research at Wuhan University of Technology, according to federal prosecutors in Boston, according to WSJ.


According to prosecutors, Lieber deliberately lied to defense department officials about his “foreign research collaborations.”



When Defense Department investigators asked Mr. Lieber in 2018 about his foreign research collaborations, he told them he had never been asked to participate in the Thousand Talents Program, the complaint said. But Mr. Lieber had signed such a talent contract with Wuhan University in 2012, the complaint said.






NIH also asked Harvard about Mr. Lieber’s affiliation with Wuhan that same year, the complaint said. After interviewing Mr. Lieber, Harvard told NIH in January 2019 that Mr. Lieber had no formal affiliation with Wuhan after 2012 and that he had never participated in the Thousand Talents Program, even though Mr. Lieber had a formal relationship with the university through 2017, the complaint said.


In conjunction with the program, Mr. Lieber became a “strategic scientist” at Wuhan University of Technology, according to the complaint. For “significant periods” from 2012 to 2017, his contract called for a $50,000 a month salary on top of $150,000 in living expenses paid by WUT, it said. He was also awarded more than $1.5 million by WUT and the Chinese government to set up a research lab, it said.


“The charges brought by the U.S. government against Professor Lieber are extremely serious,” a Harvard spokesman said Tuesday. “Harvard is cooperating with federal authorities, including the National Institutes of Health, and is initiating its own review of the alleged misconduct. Professor Lieber has been placed on indefinite administrative leave.”



The Trump Administration has made cracking down on Chinese academic and corporate espionage a priority, and has made several arrests of Chinese nationals working in critical roles funneling info back to China. But this is probably the most high-profile case to date, since one of the suspects is a pioneering American scientist.Interestingly enough, not long after news of the arrests hit the press, another report surfaced claiming China had rejected President Trump’s offer of assistance to contain the coronavirus – even as Wuhan is in desperate need of supplies.


American Natural Superfood - Free Sample




Is that just a coincidence?



Article source: Zerohedge.com


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

6

      

By Daisy Luther


Despite a massive and peaceful turnout on the Lobby Day rally on January 20th, the Virginia State Congress remained totally unfazed by what the people wanted and proceeded to advance numerous unconstitutional gun laws over the following week.


While everyone has been focused on the Wuhan coronavirus, state lawmakers have been quietly eroding gun rights.


         



      
“Red Flag” gun law passed

Proving they don’t care at all about the opinions of the people of Virginia, the state’s Senate passed a “red flag” gun law only two days later. Here’s the summary of SB240.



Creates a procedure by which any attorney for the Commonwealth or any law-enforcement officer may apply to a general district court, circuit court, or juvenile and domestic relations district court judge or magistrate for an emergency substantial risk order to prohibit a person who poses a substantial risk of injury to himself or others from purchasing, possessing, or transporting a firearm. If an emergency substantial risk order is issued, a judge or magistrate may issue a search warrant to remove firearms from such person.


An emergency substantial risk order shall expire on the fourteenth day following issuance of the order. The bill requires a court hearing in the circuit court for the jurisdiction where the order was issued within 14 days from issuance of an emergency substantial risk order to determine whether a substantial risk order should be issued.


Seized firearms shall be retained by a law-enforcement agency for the duration of an emergency substantial risk order or a substantial risk order or, for a substantial risk order and with court approval, may be transferred to a third party 21 years of age or older chosen by the person from whom they were seized. The bill allows the complainant of the original warrant to file a motion for a hearing to extend the substantial risk order prior to its expiration. The court may extend the substantial risk order for a period not longer than 180 days.


The bill provides that persons who are subject to a substantial risk order, until such order has been dissolved by a court, are guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor for purchasing, possessing, or transporting a firearm; are disqualified from having a concealed handgun permit; and may not be employed by a licensed firearms dealer. The bill also provides that a person who transfers a firearm to a person he knows has been served with a warrant or who is the subject of a substantial risk order is guilty of a Class 4 felony. The bill creates a computerized substantial risk order registry for the entry of orders issued pursuant to provisions in the bill. (source)



Of course, we all know the dangers of red flag gun laws. Anyone can swear out a complaint against a gun owner – including an abuser who doesn’t want his victim to be able to protect herself or himself. Add to that, numerous law-abiding citizens have been killed when police burst in to serve the warrant and seize the gun owner’s firearms.


But that’s not all that Virginia has in store for gun owners.

Also two days after the rally of gun owners, the Senate Judiciary Committee advanced a proposed new law that would make it more difficult for Virginians to get a concealed carry permit in the form of SB263.


Concealed handgun permits; demonstration of competence. Removes the option for concealed handgun permit applicants to demonstrate competence with a handgun by completing an electronic, video, or online course conducted by a state-certified or National Rifle Association-certified firearms instructor. The bill does not affect any in-person means of satisfying the requirement to demonstrate competence with a handgun under current law. (source)


Obviously, this makes it more difficult for rural residents to take the required training and it makes it more expensive for poverty-stricken gun owners.


On Friday the House advanced the following bills to the Senate for further approval.



HB2 would criminalize the private transfer of firearms in the Commonwealth. Unlike SB70, which was passed by the Senate, HB2 would criminalize almost all firearm transfers – not just sales. Under this extreme legislation, even lending a brother your rifle for a deer hunt or letting your daughter borrow a handgun for self-defense could land otherwise law-abiding Virginians with a felony conviction and up to 5 years in jail. Additionally, the recipient could face up to a full year of incarceration.


HB674 would create a “red flag” gun confiscation procedure that is similar to that created by SB240. Just like the senate bill, HB674 would empower the government to strip an individual’s constitutional right to keep and bear arms and seize their firearms pursuant to an ex parte order. However, whereas SB240 would require a commonwealth’s attorney or two law enforcement officer to petition the court, HB674 provides even less safeguards – allowing a single law enforcement officer to petition for a confiscation order.


HB812 would ration the right to keep and bear arms by limiting Virginians to one handgun purchase per 30-day period. Unlike SB35, which has passed the full Senate, HB812 does not provide an exemption to this restriction for CHP holders.




Declare Your Independence!
Profit outside the rigged system! Protect yourself from tyranny and economic collapse. Learn to live free and spread peace!
Counter Markets Newsletter - Trends & Strategies for Maximum Freedom




   #mc_embed_signup {clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; text-align: center; padding-bottom: 15px; }
         .cmhead{color: rgb(255,199,27); text-shadow: 1px 1px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.5); text-align: center; font-size: 250%; font-family: sans-serif; font-weight: 700;}
         .cmsubhead{color: rgb(255,255,255); text-align: center; font-size: 150%; font-family: sans-serif;}
         .cmformhead{color: rgb(30, 29, 29); font-size: 160%; font-family: sans-serif; margin-bottom: 10px;}
         #mc_embed_signup form { display: inline-block; background-color: #FFF; background-color: #FFF; margin-top: 20px; border-color: rgb(31, 31, 31);
    outline: none;
    background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);
    opacity: 1;
    border-width: 3px;
    border-style: solid;
    border-radius: 5px;
    width:70%;
}
#mc_embed_signup input.email  {width: 90%; }
#mc_embed_signup input.button { width: 93%; background-color: rgb(246, 137, 34); border-bottom: 3px solid rgba(0,0,0,0.2); font-size: 160%;}
#mc_embed_signup .button:hover {background-color: #e67409;}
   /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block.
      We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */



   
         
Claim Your FREE Issue Today!
   
   


   





From 1993 to 2012, Virginia had a “one-handgun-a-month” law that rationed the number of handguns law-abiding gun owners could purchase to one a month. In 1993, Gov. L. Douglas Wilder and other gun control advocates sold the handgun rationing measure as a way to curb gun trafficking from Virginia to more restrictive Northeast states, particularly New York. HB812 comes along after New York City billionaire and gun control financier Michael Bloomberg spent an exorbitant sum in the 2019 election cycle. According to ATF Trace data, there were fewer firearms traced to Virginia in the three years after the law was repealed than in the three years prior to repeal.


HB9 would re-victimize burglary and robbery victims by penalizing a crime victim who fails to report the theft of a firearm to law enforcement within 24 hours of discovering the theft. These victims would be fined up to $250.


In the aftermath of a burglary, victims are occupied with a host of concerns. The first and foremost concern is the physical safety and well-being of themselves and their loved ones. To place an additional burden on crime victims in their moment of despair is the ruthless act of a callous state that exhibits no regard for the hardship victims face as they put their lives back together.


HB412 would eliminate Virginia’s state firearms preemption law. Current law ensures that those living and traveling throughout Virginia are subject to the same predictable state statutes wherever they are in the Commonwealth. With this regimen, law-abiding gun owners can move about the state without fear of being ensnared by a confusing patchwork of disparate local ordinances. Unable to predict or comprehend the contours of the various ordinances in Virginia’s 95 counties and 38 independent cities, CHP holders would be forced to forego their Right-to-Carry for fear of running afoul of an obscure or complicated local law.


HB1004 would prohibit those subject to a §19.2-152.10 protective order from possessing firearms. Those subject to a §19.2-152.10 protective order are already prohibited from purchasing or transporting firearms while the order is in effect. Unlike other protective orders that trigger a firearm possession prohibition, a petitioner for a §19.2-152.10 protective order does not need to bear any relation to the respondent.


The absence of a relationship requirement opens the §19.2-152.10 protective order procedure up to abuse. Verbal altercations between co-workers, neighbors, or less formal acquaintances where one party perceived, or claimed to perceive, the other as making a “threat” could result in the extinguishment of a person’s Second Amendment rights and the forfeiture of their firearms.


HB1083 severely restricts parental decisions about firearms in the home by making it a Class 6 felony to leave an unlocked and loaded gun in the home with a child or teenager under the age of 18. Current law only applies this restriction to children under the age of 14 and provides that the punishment for such conduct is a Class 3 misdemeanor. This law is unnecessary as Virginia already has a child abuse and neglect statute that provides felony penalties for parents who engage in dangerous conduct. (source)





Avoiding The Eye - Ships Free Today!




Is it any wonder that parts of Virginia are considering secession from the state?


The protest meant nothing in the eyes of Virginia lawmakers.

The advancement of these gun laws is a slap in the face to every gun owner who has protested in person, written or emailed his or her members of Congress, and attended local meetings.


It shows that the people currently in office don’t care what Virginians have to say about the laws they pass. It underlines their blithe dismissal of the Sanctuary municipalities and of the massive peaceful protest that even saw protesters cleaning up the area before they left.


The protest may have meant nothing to lawmakers, but to gun owners, it meant everything. It means that people in Virginia will stand up for their rights. It means they will not back down. It means they’re willing to put themselves on the line to protect the 2nd Amendment in a state that still has a flag that says “Sic Semper Tyrannis.”


But as for the state government? You know, the one purchased by presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg?


This is not a government that represents the people of Virginia.



Daisy Luther is a coffee-swigging, globe-trotting blogger who writes about current events, preparedness, frugality, voluntaryism, and the pursuit of liberty on her website, The Organic Prepper, where this article first appeared. She is widely republished across alternative media and she curates all the most important news links on her aggregate site, PreppersDailyNews.com. Daisy is the best-selling author of 4 books and runs a small digital publishing company. You can find her on Facebook, Pinterest, and Twitter.


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

7

      

By Joseph Cox, Vice


Data is the new oil of the 21st century and Technocrats are the new roughnecks. In this case, the software is free but your data is priceless and wantonly harvested without your consent or knowledge. ⁃ TN Editor



8
Huffington Post General Discussion / Why Palladium Is On A Tear
« on: January 28, 2020, 06:27:29 PM »

      

By Clint Siegner


Physical palladium and rhodium markets are buzzing. Reported prices for both metals leapt higher in recent days.


The story behind palladium’s move is that a physical shortage has developed in London. Traders sold metal they didn’t physically possess. Now they are being asked to deliver the bars and they are scrambling to secure the metal needed, bidding prices higher.


         



      


1 Oz Valcambi Platinum Bars

Because platinum is dramatically undervalued vs. palladium, investors are buying platinum bars.



It looks like bullion bankers selling paper metal are finally getting called for selling way more than they can actually deliver!



People have complained about this practice in precious metals markets for decades.


More and more contracts have been sold, but inventories of actual physical metal have not kept pace. Price discovery is broken when the paper price of metal is detached from physical supply-and-demand fundamentals.


Today, there are hundreds of paper ounces floating around for every ounce of physical metal eligible for actual delivery.


As soon as a few contract holders lose confidence in their ability to redeem the paper for actual metal, the jig is up. The rush for physical bars will drain exchange vaults quickly and anyone still holding paper when the music stops will be out of luck.


That may be happening now in the market for palladium.


Sellers with an obligation to deliver physical metal can lease bars, rather than purchase them. But that is now a very expensive proposition. Lease rates spiked to near 30% last week in London. Lessees must promise to return the quantity leased plus 30% in additional palladium ounces.


New Cautions on Rhodium

Rhodium prices have surged along with palladium. Price discovery in rhodium works differently than for other precious metals, so investors need to be especially careful.



Rhodium 2 Year Chart

Rhodium 2-Year Chart



The “spot” price for rhodium surged to $9,985 last week. However, that price does not come from a market where regular trading produces live, real-time prices.






Rather, the rhodium ask price is simply declared by major refiners. Johnson Matthey is one of the firms which publishes a price.



The price is generally updated twice per day during the trading week.


Lately the published ask prices jumped dramatically higher. Bid prices, on the other hand, have not kept up.


The bid/ask spread in the thinly traded rhodium market has always been wider than in other precious metals, but it’s wider now than ever. Current bids are roughly $2,000 below the published ask price.


If there really are industrial users paying the refiners’ $10,000 ask price for physical rhodium, it is quite an opportunity for arbitrage. Traders could theoretically purchase bars at the bid price and sell them at a very healthy profit to anyone paying the ask price.


That isn’t happening, at least as far as we can determine. Someone may have published a $10,000 ask price, but we can’t locate anyone actually paying that sum for rhodium bars.




American Natural Superfood - Free Sample




Despite what the surging “spot” price for rhodium may imply, the bid for physical rhodium remains weak.


Money Metals has taken dozens of calls per day from sellers trying to cash in on spot prices near $10,000/oz. Many are disappointed to find actual prices are far lower which is a result of wholesalers dropping their bids. We believe one major rhodium buyer will cease further buying soon.


The rhodium market is tiny and illiquid. Price discrepancies like the one we are seeing are common. Our advice to clients would be not to put much credence in the “spot” price they see published until the spread is much tighter than it currently is.


The true price of rhodium, like all assets, is based on what real buyers are actually paying. That is currently closer to $8,000/oz, not $10,000/oz.



Clint Siegner is a Director at Money Metals Exchange, a precious metals dealer recently named “Best in the USA” by an independent global ratings group. A graduate of Linfield College in Oregon, Siegner puts his experience in business management along with his passion for personal liberty, limited government, and honest money into the development of Money Metals’ brand and reach. This includes writing extensively on the bullion markets and their intersection with policy and world affairs.


Top image: BizNews


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

9

      

By Jon Rappoport


To keep up with my new articles on the so-called “epidemic,” it really helps to read my earlier pieces (archive here). I don’t recapitulate all the relevant facts every time I sit down to write. If I did, I’d be posting books instead of articles.


So…as I write this one, about 40 million Chinese citizens are on lockdown and quarantine in their cities. This is truly extraordinary. One US vaccine-funding official was heard to say China was a “silver lining” in the coronavirus epidemic—because that government is able to exert so much control over its people and, therefore, help contain the epidemic.


You could almost hear him thinking, “I wish we could do that in America.”


America, UK, Canada, France, Germany, etc.


         



      

You can bet your bottom dollar public health officials all over the world are gathering data on how well “the Chinese experiment” is going. They want to learn lessons. They want to know more about containment, mass quarantines, and lockdowns.


Could, for instance, an American president suddenly declare an emergency in the US and issue orders for travel restrictions on a broad scale?


Could he confine citizens to their cities? Could he bring troops into a city and have them assemble in large public places and wave wands at people to look for body temperature elevation and cart them away to hospitals and other holding areas?


Could federal and state officials cancel sporting and concert events? Could crowds of any kind be forbidden? Could a national election be postponed?


China becomes an example for the rest of the world, you see. “This is what has to be done in dire times, to stop the spread of an epidemic. Look to China. They’re accomplishing the right thing. If the killer virus comes here and spreads, we may to have to follow suit.”


CHINA IS THE PSYCHOLOGICAL ICE-BREAKER FOR THE REST OF THE PLANET. “Well, they did it there, so it can be done…”


“Thank you, China. You’ve showed us what efficiency and necessity look like.”


The biggest potential contagion here has nothing to do with the virus. It has to do with other countries deciding to follow China’s example.


And now we come to THE VACCINE against the virus. This is where some very bad rubber meets a very bad road. Several of the novel vaccines being rushed toward approval and production are completely experimental. They have never been openly used on the public. So the stage is set for a grand planet-wide guinea-pig test. In a recent piece, I explained the admitted danger of one of these vaccine varieties—RNA vaccines. They can cause autoimmune reactions. The body goes to war against itself.


What are the chances that one of these new vaccines will be mandated in the US and other countries? Mandated. Ordered. Commanded. “In order to preserve public safety.”


I would say there is a chance, given, again, the example of China, the ice-breaker.


And, as I’ve pointed out many times, these so-called epidemics have been used, for decades, to tune up the population to the need for ALL vaccines for all diseases. It’s called operant conditioning.






“You have no choice. You can’t opt out. The situation is too dangerous.”


Officials say that about one vaccine in an “epidemic” situation; they can then say that about all vaccines.


Realistically, any US president’s advisors would tell him that mandating an emergency coronavirus vaccine for the whole country would present a logistical nightmare. So they’d suggest, “We can try a mandate, only we don’t enforce it everywhere. We use certain examples of harsh control in, say, the most dangerous area, where the virus has spread. A town, a city, maybe even a state. And make sure everyone in that area gets the vaccine. Let’s try that for starters. Let’s see how the enforcement end looks. How hard are we going to come down on people if they refuse? Meanwhile, outlawing big public gatherings is an essential step. You can do that. No crowds permitted in certain cases. We work with state and local authorities, to make it look like ‘the people’ are represented. Go for the ‘share and care’ stuff. We love all our people and want to protect them…”


Such a strategy could be stretched out for months. It would be allowed to peter out…but certain features would stay in place. For instance, stepped up police and military presence in cities. Not to enforce vaccination, but to extend basic control over the population.


Meanwhile, state legislatures would feel more confident, despite pushback, in enacting mandatory vaccination laws for all diseases. Using terms like “outbreaks” and “spread” and “protection” more frequently than they’re used now, states would “do their duty” to keep citizens safe.


Freedom? Free choice? Those ideas would be channeled more quickly into drainpipes of the past. Safety, protection, and security would vault even higher on the political scoreboard.


If you’re beginning to see this is as a CONTROL op, you’re right. It always was. Setting aside the obvious workable medical solutions to specific problems, such as repair of the body in emergency crisis situations, the highest echelon of the medical cartel is all about control. And its use of demonstrably toxic drugs and vaccines are the forward edge of covert warfare.


China is showing the world how to force the war on millions of people at once.




Brave - The Browser Built for Privacy




In doing so, it’s borrowing strategies from the West: how to pump up an unproven epidemic through medical disinformation.


That’s a potent marriage: massive top-down force, and medical propaganda.


Freedom to dissent and opt out, along many lines, is more important than ever.



(To join Jon’s email list, click here.)


(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Exit From The Matrix, click here.)


The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.


Image: Spiro Skouras


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

10

      

By Tyler Durden


Up until last week, Julian Assange had been held in unofficial solitary confinement inside of the Belmarsh prison healthcare unit – a loophole which the UK government began using in May, according to 21st Century Wire‘s Nina Cross.


Thanks to outcry by fellow inmates and Assange’s legal team, Assange was moved out of the Belmarsh healthcare unit – which has been “weaponized to arbitrarily isolate and punish a prisoner.”




         



      

Of note, more than 100 Yellow Vest protesters traveled from France on Saturday to join a demonstration outside of Belmarsh in support of Assange.



Up until now, UK authorities had denied Assange has been held in solitary confinement – or that it’s even practiced in British prisons at all.



Until now, Assange has been locked in a cell alone for over 22 hours a day and deprived of association with other prisoners for several months.   This is in breach of both the European Prison Rules and the British government’s own prison inspectorate human rights standards …




In an attempt to mitigate growing public outrage, Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) has been sending out letters in response to the influx of complaints it has been receiving regarding the abuse of Assange.  In its response it refuses to address his case and produces a list of standards and laws written for the protection of prisoners as evidence he is in ‘safe hands.’  However, anyone who has followed the continued arbitrary detention of Assange in Belmarsh will know he has been placed effectively outside the reach of laws and standards; even access to his lawyers and legal documents, normally preserved by statutory prisoner rights – has been harshly restricted, all of which has had a crippling effect on preparation for his defence in a case of historical significance. –21st Century Wire




Meanwhile, the Brits are completely dismissing statements by UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, Nils Melzer, when they claim that “prisoners are not detained in solitary confinement.”





Declare Your Independence!
Profit outside the rigged system! Protect yourself from tyranny and economic collapse. Learn to live free and spread peace!
Counter Markets Newsletter - Trends & Strategies for Maximum Freedom




   #mc_embed_signup {clear:left; font:14px Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif; text-align: center; padding-bottom: 15px; }
         .cmhead{color: rgb(255,199,27); text-shadow: 1px 1px 3px rgba(0,0,0,0.5); text-align: center; font-size: 250%; font-family: sans-serif; font-weight: 700;}
         .cmsubhead{color: rgb(255,255,255); text-align: center; font-size: 150%; font-family: sans-serif;}
         .cmformhead{color: rgb(30, 29, 29); font-size: 160%; font-family: sans-serif; margin-bottom: 10px;}
         #mc_embed_signup form { display: inline-block; background-color: #FFF; background-color: #FFF; margin-top: 20px; border-color: rgb(31, 31, 31);
    outline: none;
    background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);
    opacity: 1;
    border-width: 3px;
    border-style: solid;
    border-radius: 5px;
    width:70%;
}
#mc_embed_signup input.email  {width: 90%; }
#mc_embed_signup input.button { width: 93%; background-color: rgb(246, 137, 34); border-bottom: 3px solid rgba(0,0,0,0.2); font-size: 160%;}
#mc_embed_signup .button:hover {background-color: #e67409;}
   /* Add your own MailChimp form style overrides in your site stylesheet or in this style block.
      We recommend moving this block and the preceding CSS link to the HEAD of your HTML file. */



   
         
Claim Your FREE Issue Today!
   
   


   






Moreover, Cross notes that the UK’s laughable statement that they care for all prisoners clearly ignores the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, which says that Assange is being arbitrarily detained in violation of international law.


“What’s more, the British state’s dismissing out of hand any accusations  of ‘solitary confinement’ as a falsehood or public misconception – must surely undermine the work of prison charities and scholarship in law and prison systems which exists to shed light on the consequences of solitary confinement including ill-health and suicide,” writes Cross.


Hence, the HMPPS letter can be viewed as a public relations exercise designed to promote the image of good governance, a facade designed to mask the institution’s deployment of the very same strategy practised by the government when called upon to answer for its abuse of Assange: denial and silence.




Solitary confinement, technically speaking, is described by the prison charity Penal Reform as “… when a prisoner is confined to a cell for 22 hours or more, that constitutes solitary confinement, regardless of the reason for this confinement or its name,” while the prison ombusdman confirms that the definition has nothing to do with where it is.





Avoiding The Eye - Ships Free Today!




Segregated conditions are also sometimes applied outside of segregation units. Prisoners can be kept on the wing, but locked in their cells for the most of the day, and taken to shower and exercise separately from other prisoners on the wing.



So what was Belmarsh doing? While official prisoner segregation is allowed under rule 45, holding Assange in the medical wing allowed them to ignore several associated laws.



45.—(1) Where it appears desirable, for the maintenance of good order or discipline or in his own interests, that a prisoner should not associate with other prisoners, either generally or for particular purposes, the governor may arrange for the prisoner’s removal from association accordingly.


(2) A prisoner shall not be removed under this rule for a period of more than 3 days without the authority of a member of the board of visitors or of the Secretary of State. An authority given under this paragraph shall be for a period not exceeding one month, but may be renewed from month to month



By holding Assange in unofficial segregation, he was excluded from ‘the rules’ and, therefore, may have been worse off than if he had been officially segregated:


The regime for segregated prisoners (under Prison Rule 45 (YOI 49)) should be as full as possible and only those activities that involve associating with mainstream prisoners should be curtailed. – SEG PSO


Read the rest of the report here.



Article source: Zerohedge.com


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

11

      

By Aaron Kesel


According to a new report from the Kansas City Star, the University of Missouri (MU) has started using an app called SpotterEDU to track students to determine attendance in classes.


Individual professors will choose whether or not to use the app. If they choose to use it, students in those classes will be unable to opt-out and, therefore, forced to install the software on their mobile phones.


The unprecedented Orwellian move requires students to install the app with no option to opt-out of the potential privacy-invasive software. “A student will have to participate in this recording of attendance,” Jim Spain, vice provost for undergraduate studies at MU said in a statement to the Kansas City Star.


         



      

SpotterEDU is designed to monitor a user’s attendance by “pinpointing students within a classroom until they leave, providing continuous, reliable and non-invasive attendance,” according to the app’s website. While the app guarantees that students are in the classroom during class times, it claims it does not track the locations of students after hours.


However, the two-star rated app found in the Google Play store that has thus far been reviewed by 35 students, states that the app uses the GPS permission on Android to function with many complaining the app doesn’t even work.


One reviewer, Apple jarjar, wrote the following:


Yeah I haven’t been able to get into this app. I need it for my stupid science class, but it won’t let me get past the turn on location page. My location and Bluetooth is on. The worst app that I haven’t been able to use. There’s a reason it only has 2 stars. Not losing points on attendance because of this bullcrap.


In the Apple Store, SpotterEDU received three and a half stars with many users complaining about the app and its tracking.


An iOS user named peeboo wrote:





Good in Theory


But in practice it needs some work. My phone recently gave me a notification that Spotter tracked my location 88 times in previous 3 days (which was mostly the weekend). Why is it tracking my location when I do not have class? I will change my review once this is fixed. Thanks.









Still, the company claims that it can’t locate students anywhere but in their classrooms.


“We only care if students are in class during class; no GPS tracking means we can’t locate them anywhere else,” the app’s website states.


SpotterEDU works with short-range Bluetooth sensors and campus-wide WiFi networks according to Boston.com. However, if the app is requesting the GPS function on the phone it can be assumed it collects all location data of the phone as a commenter above expressed. This is because the software is not open source and we can’t see the code.


The program automatically notifies professors if a student skips a class or shows up more than a few minutes late. SpotterEDU’s CEO Rick Carter told the Washington Post that professors can look specifically at attendance patterns for “students of color” or “out of state students” for retention purposes.


Sara Baker of the ACLU of Missouri told the Kansas City Star the organization has “deep privacy concerns about the app.”




American Natural Superfood - Free Sample




“Any time you use surveillance technology, the question always is who is watching the watcher,” Baker said, adding that such technology could be used for abusive purposes “like monitoring which students are participating in protests,” for example.


“We’re adults. Do we really need to be tracked?” asked Robby Pfeifer, a sophomore at Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond, which recently began logging the attendance of students connected to the campus’ WiFi network. “Why is this necessary? How does this benefit us? . . . And is it just going to keep progressing until we’re micromanaged every second of the day?”


In a statement to The Washington Post, Carter, who also happens to be a former Mizzou basketball coach, said that his company already works with nearly 40 schools including major schools like—Auburn, Central Florida, Indiana, and Missouri.


The most frightening aspects of the use of SpotterEDU are that students are unable to opt-out—thus giving up their privacy in a time when the right to privacy is being continually assaulted by tech companies, the government, and now schools—and that it is unknown just what happens with the data that the company collects.


By Aaron Kesel | Creative Commons | TheMindUnleashed.com


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

12

      

By B.N. Frank


Opposition to 5G technology is increasing worldwide.  This led to the first Global 5G Protest being held on Saturday, January 25, 2020.  Thanks to Dr. Joel Moskowitz (Electromagnetic Radiation Safety) for posting a summary about it:


5G Global Protest



First 5G Global Protest: News Coverage


“The deployment of 5G around the world is being carried out with the collusion of world governments and major telecommunication companies without guarantees for health and the environment. Scientific and environmental organizations from all over the planet have come together to demand from the UN, the WHO, the European Union, the Council of Europe and the governments of all nations the call that was issued throughout January 25 planet….”  (Google translation)


(Los ecologistas piden que se detenga el despliegue del 5G.” El Illustrador, Jan 27, 2020)



         



      

Links from news coverage have also been provided on this web page and here at The Mind Unleashed.


People and animals have been getting sick where 5G has been turned on (see 1, 2, 3, 4).  Requests from doctors and scientists for 5G moratoriums started in 2017.  Another one was recently submitted to President Trump.


Telecom companies have still provided NO scientific evidence that it’s safe.  Additional 5G warnings have been issued by engineers, security experts, meteorologists, NASA, NOAA, the U.S. Navy and Department of Defense (see also 1, 2, 3, 4).  Lawsuits have also been filed against 5G (see 1, 2, 3, 4).  Some cities and countries have banned it. Regardless, it continues to be installed and operated worldwide.


Of course all sources of cell phone and wireless WiFi radiation – 1G through 4G – are also biologically and environmentally harmful.  Pollution from Electromagnetic Radiation (“Electrosmog”) was also already a big problem before 5G.  The “Race for 5G” will add A LOT more to this including directing it at Earth from space with satellites.  That’s why many are referring to 5G as a global crisis.  Can you blame them?







Activist Post reports regularly about 5G and other sources of unsafe technology.  For more information, visit our archives and the following websites.



5GCrisis
5G Information
The 5G Summit
Whatis5G.Info
Zero5G
Center For Electrosmog Prevention
Electromagnetic Radiation Safety
EMF Safety Network
Environmental Health Trust
My Street, My Choice
Physicians for Safe Technology
Scientists for Wired Tech
TelecomPowerGrab.org
Wireless Information Network

Image: Pixabay


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

13

      

By Bill Budington





Ring isn’t just a product that allows users to surveil their neighbors. The company also uses it to surveil its customers.


An investigation by EFF of the Ring doorbell app for Android found it to be packed with third-party trackers sending out a plethora of customers’ personally identifiable information (PII). Four main analytics and marketing companies were discovered to be receiving information such as the names, private IP addresses, mobile network carriers, persistent identifiers, and sensor data on the devices of paying customers.


The danger in sending even small bits of information is that analytics and tracking companies are able to combine these bits together to form a unique picture of the user’s device. This cohesive whole represents a fingerprint that follows the user as they interact with other apps and use their device, in essence providing trackers the ability to spy on what a user is doing in their digital lives and when they are doing it. All this takes place without meaningful user notification or consent and, in most cases, no way to mitigate the damage done. Even when this information is not misused and employed for precisely its stated purpose (in most cases marketing), this can lead to a whole host of social ills.


         



      

Ring has exhibited a pattern of behavior that attempts to mitigate exposure to criticism and scrutiny while benefiting from the wide array of customer data available to them. It has been able to do so by leveraging an image of the secure home, while profiting from a surveillance network which facilitates police departments’ unprecedented access into the private lives of citizens, as we have previously covered. For consumers, this image has cultivated a sense of trust in Ring that should be shaken by the reality of how the app functions: not only does Ring mismanage consumer data, but it also intentionally hands over that data to trackers and data miners.


Findings


Our testing, using Ring for Android version 3.21.1, revealed PII delivery to branch.io, mixpanel.com, appsflyer.com and facebook.com. Facebook, via its Graph API, is alerted when the app is opened and upon device actions such as app deactivation after screen lock due to inactivity. Information delivered to Facebook (even if you don’t have a Facebook account) includes time zone, device model, language preferences, screen resolution, and a unique identifier (anon_id), which persists even when you reset the OS-level advertiser ID.


Branch, which describes itself as a “deep linking” platform, receives a number of unique identifiers (device_fingerprint_id, hardware_id, identity_id) as well as your device’s local IP address, model, screen resolution, and DPI.


AppsFlyer, a big data company focused on the mobile platform, is given a wide array of information upon app launch as well as certain user actions, such as interacting with the “Neighbors” section of the app. This information includes your mobile carrier, when Ring was installed and first launched, a number of unique identifiers, the app you installed from, and whether AppsFlyer tracking came preinstalled on the device. This last bit of information is presumably to determine whether AppsFlyer tracking was included as bloatware on a low-end Android device. Manufacturers often offset the costs of device production by selling consumer data, a practice that disproportionately affects low-income earners and was the subject of a recent petition to Google initiated by Privacy International and co-signed by EFF.


Activist Post Recommended Book: The Age of Surveillance Capitalism


Most alarmingly, AppsFlyer also receives the sensors installed on your device (on our test device, this included the magnetometer, gyroscope, and accelerometer) and current calibration settings.


Ring gives MixPanel the most information by far. Users’ full names, email addresses, device information such as OS version and model, whether bluetooth is enabled, and app settings such as the number of locations a user has Ring devices installed in, are all collected and reported to MixPanel. MixPanel is briefly mentioned in Ring’s list of third party services, but the extent of their data collection is not. None of the other trackers listed in this post are mentioned at all on this page.


Ring also sends information to the Google-owned crash logging service Crashalytics. The exact extent of data sharing with this service is yet to be determined.






Data delivered to api.branch.io









Data delivered to api.mixpanel.com









Data delivered to graph.facebook.com









Data delivered to t.appsflyer.com





Methodology


All traffic we observed on the app was being sent using encrypted HTTPS. What’s more, the encrypted information was delivered in a way that eludes analysis, making it more difficult (but not impossible) for security researchers to learn of and report these serious privacy breaches.


Our dynamic analysis was performed using mitmproxy running on an access point to intercept and analyze HTTPS flows from an Android test device. To remove noise generated from other apps, we installed the AFWall+ firewall app and only allowed network traffic from Ring. mitmproxy generates a root x509 certificate which is to be installed in the OS-level certificate store in Android, allowing active interception to take place on otherwise secured traffic. This led us to the initial discovery that the root certificate was not being accepted as valid, and that some form of certificate pinning was being employed by the app.


App-level certificate pinning is when an app validates the certificates of a remote server against a record of that certificate stored within the app, rather than validating against the list of root certificates within the OS. This is often used as a security measure, to ensure that misissuance of certificates or mismanagement along the chain of trust in PKI does not compromise the integrity, confidentiality, or authenticity of HTTPS traffic. Unfortunately, it can  also prevent security researchers and users from seeing exactly what information these devices are sending, and to whom. In the case of Ring, we initially observed all intercepted traffic upon launch being rejected, and were not able to observe any communications.






mitmproxy screen displaying results of certificate pinning





It was only through the powerful dynamic analysis framework Frida that we were able to inject code into Ring at runtime, which ensured that the certificate provided by our mitmproxy instance would be accepted as valid. This allowed us to inspect all HTTPS traffic sent through the app.


Conclusion




American Natural Superfood - Free Sample




Ring claims to prioritize the security and privacy of its customers, yet time and again we’ve seen these claims not only fall short, but harm the customers and community members who engage with Ring’s surveillance system. In the past, we’ve illuminated the mismanagement of user information which has led to data breaches, and the attempt to place the blame for such blunders at the customers’ feet.


This goes a step beyond that, by simply delivering sensitive data to third parties not accountable to Ring or bound by the trust placed in the customer-vendor relationship. As we’ve mentioned, this includes information about your device and carrier, unique identifiers that allow these companies to track you across apps, real-time interaction data with the app, and information about your home network. In the case of MixPanel, it even includes your name and email address. This data is given to parties either only mentioned briefly, buried on an internal page users are unlikely to ever see, or not listed at all.


mitmproxy flow files:







Plain text iconmitmproxy-1.flows_.txt
Plain text iconmitmproxy-2.flows_.txt



Article source: EFF.org


Bill is a long time activist, programmer, and cryptography enthusiast. He works on EFF’s Tech Projects team as a security engineer and technologist, and is the lead developer for HTTPS Everywhere and Panopticlick. He has also contributed to projects such as Let’s Encrypt and SecureDrop. Bill can be found talking to crowds of people on soap boxes and stages in far off places, or doing digital security trainings for organizations. He loves hacker spaces and getting together with other techies to tinker, code, share, and build the technological commons. Er spricht auch gern Deutsch!


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

14

      

By John Vibes


Federal prosecutors in the United States have said that Prince Andrew has provided “zero” cooperation with their investigation into the crimes of the Duke’s long-time friend Jeffrey Epstein.


Andrew had initially made a public promise to help investigators in any way possible, but according to Geoffrey Berman, U.S. attorney for the southern district of New York, the Duke has not answered any of the requests that were sent to him by law enforcement about the sex trafficking allegations against Epstein.


Berman spoke to reporters on Monday during a press conference outside of Epstein’s Manhattan mansion and promised that the investigation will be “moving forward” with or without Prince Andrew’s cooperation, according to the Guardian.


         



      

Meanwhile, it appears that police in the U.K. are also making the investigation more difficult for prosecutors by withholding important information that could prove the royal’s guilt. As TMU reported earlier this month, the Scotland Yard is refusing to reveal Prince Andrew’s location on the night that he is accused of being with Virginia Giuffre, one of the many girls trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein, who was underage at the time she claims the Duke raped her.


During his disastrous BBC interview, Prince Andrew claimed that he was at a Pizza Express in Woking on the night Giuffre says the pair visited a club before the then 17 year old was made to have sex with the Duke at the London home of Ghislaine Maxwell. If the Duke is indeed telling the truth his claims could be easily corroborated by whichever guard was on duty at the time. Unfortunately, Scotland Yard has been less than willing to cooperate.


Andrew has already been caught in several lies since his appearance on BBC including a leak of private emails where he mentioned Virginia Giuffre by name despite claiming to have never heard of her during the interview.


Since his appearance on BBC, Prince Andrew has stepped down from his “royal duties”—or, in other words, he has been avoiding the media.


By John Vibes | Creative Commons | TheMindUnleashed.com


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

15

      

By Spiro Skouras


Prior to the coronavirus outbreak, The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security hosted Event 201, a high-level pandemic exercise focused on a coronavirus outbreak — yes they ran a simulation of exactly what we see unfolding right now, before it happened!


The pandemic exercise was conducted in partnership with the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. During Event 201 Johnson & Johnson was asked specifically about a coronavirus vaccine.


When asked, the Johnson & Johnson representative talked about the need for regulatory flexibility for an accelerated vaccine, financing and business. Not once did he mention safety or effectiveness. In today’s news, we see that Johnson & Johnson are currently working on a vaccine and they’re “pretty confident” they can quickly develop one.


         



      


Links


Did Bill Gates & World Economic Forum Predict Coronavirus Outbreak? An Inside Look May Shock You!https://www.activistpost.com/2020/01/did-bill-gates-world-economic-forum-predict-coronavirus-outbreak-an-inside-look-may-shock-you.html


Event 201http://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/


J&J scientific officer ‘pretty confident’ they can create coronavirus vaccine as outbreak widenshttps://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/27/jj-pretty-confident-it-can-create-china-coronavirus-vaccine.html



Follow Spiro on BitChute bitchute.com/channel/spiro/ Follow on Twitter https://twitter.com/o_rips


Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.


Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


   

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 712