In the area around San Francisco used monitoring equipment, which is known under the name “Stingray”, at least three police districts, according to official documents obtained by the TV station CBS.
Police authorities in Alameda, just east of San Francisco, said that they use the equipment to ensure peace and order, including by identifying and pursuing suspected criminals or by localizing kidnapping victims.
– It is important to remember that this technology can not be used without a court order, writes a representative of the local district attorney office in Alameda.
So called IMSI catchere, surveillance equipment that Aftenposten has found the signals from the Parliament, Prime Minister’s Office and several other places in Oslo, has long been a part of the toolbox police in the United States uses in the fight against criminals.
And it is not always the obtains a straight order.
In Florida police used the city Tallahassee equipment at least 200 times in connection with a overgrepssak – without asking permission, according to court documents vigilante organization ACLU has obtained.
Claims that police monitored individuals in demonstrations
Many messages about police use of surveillance equipment can not be verified. Among other things, police in Chicago recently accused to monitor individuals in a demonstration held in protest against the policemen who killed Eric Garner this summer will not be prosecuted.
In an audio recording published by the activist group Anonymous hears one two people mention bugging of a female protester leader. Admission is not verified, but several protesters responded that they lost mobile signal if they came too close to a specific, black lacquered police.
– The police use the information they collect to investigate and aim people without having obtained the right permission. It is unconstitutional. And it happens all over the country, says Kirk Wiebe, a former intelligence officer, to the site Infowars.
Stingray equipment manufactured by the Florida-based company Harris, and is in use worldwide. IMSI catch forwards Aftenposten located in Oslo could have been placed there by foreign powers, says security expert Richard Forno Aftenposten.
– why not inconceivable that the United States also can behind monitoring in Norway, he said.
Forno is deputy director of cyber security center at University of Maryland in Baltimore and is considered one of the nation’s foremost experts on internet safety.
Think Norwegian safety authorities knew about the monitoring
The professor, who also runs the website infowarrior.org, has followed the news on mobile surveillance in Oslo and considers it likely that it is a state actor behind.
– These boxes are so expensive that we can exclude amateurs. Meanwhile they are not very sophisticated. Several countries make use of equipment that will not let themselves track down a group of local journalists as simple as we have seen in this case, says Forno.
– Would not the United States adopted more sophisticated tool?
– United States uses mostly this type boxes for counterintelligence. But it may well be that they – or whoever it is that has placed these boxes in Oslo – has chosen this simple solution to give the impression that it is less advanced players behind, says Forno.
He adds that he takes it for granted that Norwegian security authorities were aware that so-called IMSI catchere existed in Norway but that they probably did not consider it a significant safety risk.
– But now that it has been a big issue in Norway they have gotten a wake. I envision that they are going to implement many new measures now to ensure politicians and others who have been monitored, says Forno.
How revealed Aftenposten monitoring:
Detective illegal use of eavesdropping equipment in the US
Also in The US has the cheap and flexible IMSI catch forwards created concern that criminal groups and foreign operators to use the equipment on US soil.
In July sent Congresswoman Alan Grayson a letter to the state communications Authority (FCC) where he asked what is being done to ensure Americans’ privacy.
FCC chief Tom Wheeler responded in a letter in August that he takes issue seriously and that the Authority creates a separate group to identify the illegal use of such monitoring devices.
It is not enough, says Stephanie K. Pell, a renowned security expert associated Stamford University Center for Internet and Security, to The Washington Post.
– I think we can assume that Chinese authorities and criminal groups do not care whether IMSI catchere is illegal. If we want to go to the root of the problem, we must relate to the vulnerability of mobile networks, she said.
Published:
No comments:
Post a Comment