And the fight begins.
There is a script available to knock Google Glasses off your local network and a device called Cyborg Unplug that can knock selected devices off your network... or apparently (shhhh) any network.
As wearable devices and audio/video recording becomes miniaturized and widespread many questions are raised regarding the legality and propriety of using such devices. Laws vary widely from state to state and country to country. What do you think?
When this
Looks like this
 |
| Photo: Joe Ravi |
In an ACLU case in Florida, in order to prevent access to records and in violation of both Florida law and the courts, the US Marshals Service swept into a Florida police station and seized records pertaining to the use of Stingray.
In other cases the federal government has invoked the Homeland Security Act to prevent the release of records, despite the fact that the use of Stingray had nothing to do with homeland security.
Wired
Stingray
Stingrays “emulate a cellphone tower” and “force” cell phones to register their location and identifying information with the stingray instead of with real cell towers in the area.
Stingrays can track cell phones whenever the phones are turned on, not just when they are making or receiving calls.
Police State
From cellphones to landlines, Google to Facebook, Twitter to email, the NSA to the US Marshals Service, each perhaps taken alone seemingly innocent and reasonable, you need to ask yourself one question...
When do all of these small individual acts become " a long train of abuses and usurpations, each pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under Absolute Despotism"?
Justice, Integrity, and Service my Ass!
 |
| applysense |
Sorry, I couldn't resist that pun
Recent disclosures have illustrated the vastness of the surveillance network of the UKUSA agreement, a joint comprehensive electronic intelligence agreement, amid the fallout from Edward Snowden's revelations. How does an attorney maintain attorney-client privilege amidst the writhing tentacles of the all-knowing Oz? (I know, another bad pun).
Many of you in comments here, have expressed acceptance of surveillance in the pursuit of that holy grail; Counter-terrorism. The question now is where do you draw the line? Is blanket surveillance acceptable in the pursuit of trade negotiations? Criminal proceedings? More importantly, can you have one without the other?
I must reaffirm Ben Franklin's sentiment that "They who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." How about you, how far are you willing to go?
