“Go ahead and lie. Who will they believe, us or
a bunch of techies?”
FBI
inflated encrypted device figures, misleading public
Contrary to what the FBI told the public, we now
know that instead of 7,775 encrypted smartphones proving
stumbling blocks to FBI criminal investigations, there are no
more than 2,000.
… Wray called
this a "major public safety issue", and used it to push
a "responsible encryption" mantra – in other words,
encryption backdoors.
The FBI denied
ZDNet's request for information on these phones. The
bureau said the information was exempt from disclosure, as the
records "could reasonably be expected to interfere with
enforcement proceedings."
Internally though the FBI knew they miscounted the
devices as of a month ago. The
bureau still doesn't have an accurate count of how many encrypted
phones it has from last year.
I guess we don’t want to “fall behind”
China.
Amazon is
selling police departments a real-time facial recognition system
The
Verge: “Documents obtained
by the ACLU of Northern California have shed new light on
Rekognition, Amazon’s little-known facial recognition project.
Rekognition is currently used by police in Orlando and Oregon’s
Washington County, often using nondisclosure agreements to avoid
public disclosure. The result is a powerful real-time facial
recognition system that can tap into police body cameras and
municipal surveillance systems. According to further
reporting by The Washington Post, the Washington County
Sheriff pays between $6 and
$12 a month for access to Rekognition, which allows the
department to scan mug shot photos against real-time footage. The
most significant concerns are raised by the Orlando project, which is
capable of running real-time facial recognition on a network of
cameras throughout the city. The project was described by
Rekognition project director Ranju Das at
a recent AWS conference in Seoul…”
There are probably many, many “special
circumstances.” No doubt some future AI will deal with them.
Google
Under Fire For Revealing Rape Victims' Names
The company's been accused of displaying the names
of rape victims through its Autocomplete and Related Search functions
– even when the victims have been granted anonymity by the courts.
The problem is that both features use data
gathered from previous searches to predict what information the user
is looking for and make suggestions. If enough people know a
victim's name and use it as one of their search terms, Google's
algorithm will provide a helpful prompt to those that don't.
In the US, there's no legal prohibition on
publishing the names of rape victims, although the media tend to
avoid doing so. In many countries, however, it's against the law.
And the UK's Times
newspaper has uncovered several cases in which Autocomplete and
Related Search have revealed the names of rape victims and others who
have official anonymity.
(Related) Somehow, “send us your private porn
so we can block your private porn” does not seems to be entirely
satisfactory. Imagine the lawsuits if this database leaks!
Facebook
Safety
People shouldn’t be able to share intimate
images to hurt others
By Antigone Davis, Global Head of Safety
It’s demeaning and devastating when someone’s
intimate images are shared without their permission, and we want to
do everything we can to help victims of this abuse. We’re now
partnering with safety organizations on a
way for people to securely submit photos they fear will be shared
without their consent, so
we can block them from being uploaded to Facebook, Instagram and
Messenger. This pilot program, starting in Australia,
Canada, the UK and US, expands on existing tools for people to report
this content to us if it’s already been shared.
No comments:
Post a Comment