Tag Archive: Privacy

Personal Details Of World Leaders Accidentally Revealed By G20 Organisers






” The personal details of world leaders at the last G20 summit were accidentally disclosed by the Australian immigration department, which did not consider it necessary to inform those world leaders of the privacy breach.

  The Guardian can reveal an employee of the agency inadvertently sent the passport numbers, visa details and other personal identifiers of all world leaders attending the summit to the organisers of the Asian Cup football tournament.

  The United States president, Barack Obama, the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, the Chinese president, Xi Jinping, the Indian prime minister, Narendra Modi, the Japanese prime minister, Shinzo Abe, the Indonesian president, Joko Widodo, and the British prime minister, David Cameron, were among those who attended the Brisbane summit in November and whose details were exposed.

  The Australian privacy commissioner was contacted by the director of the visa services division of Australia’s Department of Immigration and Border Protection to inform them of the data breach on 7 November 2014 and seek urgent advice.

  In an email sent to the commissioner’s office, obtained under Australia’s freedom of information laws, the breach is attributed to an employee who mistakenly emailed a member of the local organising committee of the Asian Cup – held in Australia in January – with the personal information.”


But of course we can trust the State with our personal data … read more from The Guardian













Florida School Suspends 11-Year-Old Girl For Video Recording Teacher Threatening To Hurt Other Student






” An 11-year-old Florida girl was suspended from school after she recorded her fifth-grade teacher threatening and bullying other students.

  The evidence Brianna Cooper recorded was enough to get the teacher fired from the elementary school in Fort Pierce.

  But administrators say it was also enough to earn the student a five-day suspension.

  After all, they claim, the teacher, had an expectation of privacy in the classroom.

  But how much privacy can a public school teacher expect in a large class filled with students, most of them carrying smart phones?

  Also, even before the advent of smartphones, students have long tape recorded classroom lectures by simply placing their recorders on their desks, rarely bothering to ask the teacher for permission to record. 

  In this case, the teacher, whose name has not been released, threatened a student by saying, “I will drop you,” in front of several other students, so their argument that this was a private conversation is laughable.

  The incident took in Samuel Gaines Academy, which is part of the St. Lucie Public School District, where officials refused to comment to the media because it is “an ongoing investigation.”

  But considering they already fired the teacher and suspended the student, their ongoing investigation is nothing more than an excuse to shun the media in the hopes it goes away.”


Apparently the school continues to maintain the ex-teacher’s right to privacy because after reviewing a dozen or more articles on this incident we failed to uncover her identity . Read on














Report: Radio Shack To Sell Customers’ Personal Information In Bankruptcy Sale






” When you go shopping, you probably think stores will keep your personal information safe and secure.

  But now, a report says Radio Shack is ready to auction off customer information as part of its bankruptcy sale.

  As CBS2’s Dick Brennan reported, the report says Radio Shack is ready to sell information they have on some 117 million customers, including names, addresses, phone numbers and other details on purchases.

  This despite the Radio Shack privacy policy, which says “We will not sell or rent your personally identifiable information to anyone at any time.” “


Continue reading














Big Brother Fears As NYPD Attaches Microphones To Lampposts To Listen Out For Gunshots… But They Can Also Record Your Conversations








” Technology now in use by the New York Police Department may be picking up stray conversations.

  Three hundred ShotSpotter microphones are being placed in high crime areas of the Bronx and Brooklyn, with the aim of alerting police immediately when they overhear the sound of gunshots.

  However, the devices pick up more that just the bang of shots being fired in potential crimes, and evidence from conversations they’ve listened in on has been used in court.”

We find the raven emblematic of the death of our privacy

” Audio recordings from ShotSpotter have been used to corroborate testimony that led to convictions in a 2011 Massachusetts murder where a voice was heard shouting ‘No Jason, no Jason!’ before shots were fired. 

  NYPD officials and New York Mayor Bill de Blasio announced a pilot program for the microphones earlier this week.

  Sensors in seven districts of the Bronx have already begun working, and the devices will be turned on in ten districts of Brooklyn on Monday, according to the New York Times. “

   ShotSpotter amounts to “Big Brother” listening posts throughout the public streets , and despite assurances to the contrary raise legitimate privacy concerns:

” The restrictions on triggering events have not stopped some privacy advocates from saying that evidence procured by the ShotSpotters may violate the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. 

‘ If [ShotSpotter] is recording voices out in public, it needs to be shut down,’ the ACLU’s Jay Stanley told Take Part.

  He said his organization is ‘always concerned about secondary uses of technology that is sold to us for some unobjectionable purpose and is then used for other purposes.’ “

   One thing that has become readily apparent in recent years is that if there is a way to abuse and/or misuse technological advances , the State will find a way … Read more on the huge potential for civil rights abuses represented by State ears recording on public streets here

   If public eavesdropping becomes socially acceptable , in the name of “public safety” of course , then it follows that the next step , also for “the public good” , will be something along the lines of what the head of Scotland Yard recently proposed … surveillance cameras in our homes .  

Mysterious Spy Cameras Collecting Data At Post Offices In Colorado





” Within an hour of a KDVR reporter discovering a hidden camera, which was positioned to capture and record the license plates and facial features of customers leaving a Denver post office, the device was ripped from the ground and disappeared.

  Investigative reporter Chris Halsne confirmed the hidden camera and recorder is owned and operated by the United States Postal Inspection Service, the law enforcement branch of the U.S. Postal Service.

  The recording device appeared to be tripped by any vehicle leaving the property on Johnson Road, but the lens was not positioned to capture images of the front door, employee entrance, or loading dock areas of the post office.

  A customer first noticed the data collection device, hidden inside a utilities box, around Thanksgiving 2014. It stayed in place, taking photos through the busy Christmas holidays and into mid-January.”



    While the Postal Service tried to maintain that the surveillance was just a “routine security measure” privacy groups see it a bit differently , and rightly so …



” Lee Tien, an attorney for the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation, says more and more federal agencies are getting away with conducting surveillance and collecting personal data of citizens without a warrant signed by a judge.

“ Part of being a responsible, constitutional government is explaining why it is doing surveillance on its citizens,” Lee told Halsne. “The government should not be collecting this kind of sensitive information. And it is sensitive! It`s about your relationships, your associations with other people, which can be friendship or political or religious. The idea that we give up that privacy simply because we use the U.S. mail is, I think, a silly idea.” “



     As if the Postal Service wasn’t endangered enough , now they are actively driving their ever-dwindling customer base further into the arms of private delivery services by spying on them … Read it all and head to your nearest UPs/Fedex office to send your mail .












Put CCTV In Every Home: Householders Should Help Us Trap Burglars, Says Scotland Yard Chief





” Homeowners should consider fitting CCTV to trap burglars, the country’s most senior police officer declared yesterday.

  Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe said police forces needed more crime scene footage to match against their 12million images of suspects and offenders.

  And he called on families and businesses to install cameras at eye level – to exploit advances in facial recognition technology.

  But privacy campaigners condemned the Metropolitan Police Commissioner’s suggestion.

‘ The proposals on increasing the amount of privately owned CCTV cameras are quite frankly Orwellian and risk turning members of the public into an extension of the police,’ said Renate Samson of Big Brother Watch.

‘ Private CCTV is completely unregulated. Recommending greater use of CCTV to gather more images of people’s faces – often innocent people’s faces – undermines the security of each and every one of us.’

  She pointed out that a House of Commons committee had on Saturday released a report on the problems with facial recognition.”

Thus Britain nears the endgame of civilian disarmament and total dependence on the State … Read the rest .

These ‘Privacy Glasses’ Make You Invisible To Facial Recognition




” You’re going out with friends mid-week, and you don’t want the boss/significant other/parole officer to find out. But it’s a birthday celebration, and Facebook’s auto-tagging the pictures your buddies upload like a dirty snitch. The first piece of advice: never “friend” your parole officer. The second? Maybe grab a pair of these “privacy” glasses from software security firm AVG. You, of course, can see my visage above, but AVG claims the technology in the specs means facial recognition software (like that of Facebook) will not.

  How does it work? “


EnGadget explains













BlackPhone Maker Silent Circle Announces $50 Million In Funding






” The BlackPhone, a $600-plus encrypted Android handset designed to keep the prying eyes of criminals and the government out of mobile communications, is now fully owned by Silent Circle thanks to the company raking in investment cash.

  Terms of the buyout deal with Spanish smartphone maker Geeksphone, the phone’s hardware manufacturer, were not disclosed. Silent Circle said Thursday that it has raised $50 million and plans on showing off an encrypted “enterprise privacy ecosystem” at World Mobile Congress next week. A BlackPhone tablet is on the way, too.

” Silent Circle has brought tremendous disruption to the mobile industry and created an integrated suite of secure enterprise communication products that are challenging the status quo,” Mike Janke, cofounder and chairman of the Silent Circle board, said in a statement. “This first stage of growth has enabled us to raise approximately $50M to accelerate our continued rapid expansion and fuel our second stage of growth.”

  The cash infusion and the push for encrypted communications are in part a direct result of National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden’s revelations about massive government surveillance.”


Details at Ars Technica













Fresno Police Scanning Social Media To Assess Threat


Intrado Social Media Monitoring




” Fresno police are at the forefront of a new technology designed to figure out how much danger officers may be getting into as they respond to 911 calls. But the product is drawing comparisons to Big Brother because of the massive amount of personal information it collects.

  At least two cops might be alive today if they had access to the software we got to see. But once it’s put to use by police, you have to watch what you say or risk being labeled a threat.

  Before the assassination of two New York police officers in December, an obvious warning was there for anyone to read. But the message in the killer’s public Instagram post never reached officers Liu and Ramos. Two months later, every call to Fresno police dispatchers could give similar warnings the chance to reach officers through new software known as Beware.

” To the extent that there is information that is in the public domain, regardless of where the input was derived, it could potentially be surfaced through a Beware query,” said Allen Carr, vice president of Intrado, the company producing and marketing Beware to first responders of all types.

  Intrado buys billions of pieces of commercially available personal information — the same stuff credit agencies have. It adds arrest records from police databases and within seconds, gives a quick look at who lives at any address and a profile for every person associated with the address.”














Secrecy Around Police Surveillance Equipment Proves A Case’s Undoing




” The case against Tadrae McKenzie looked like an easy win for prosecutors. He and two buddies robbed a small-time pot dealer of $130 worth of weed using BB guns. Under Florida law, that was robbery with a deadly weapon, with a sentence of at least four years in prison.

  But before trial, his defense team detected investigators’ use of a secret surveillance tool, one that raises significant privacy concerns. In an unprecedented move, a state judge ordered the police to show the device —a cell-tower simulator sometimes called a StingRay — to the attorneys.

  Rather than show the equipment, the state offered McKenzie a plea bargain.

  Today, 20-year-old McKenzie is serving six months’ probation ­after pleading guilty to a second-degree misdemeanor. He got, as one civil liberties advocate said, the deal of the century. (The other two defendants also pleaded guilty and were sentenced to two years’ probation.)

  McKenzie’s case is emblematic of the growing, but hidden, use by local law enforcement of a sophisticated surveillance technology borrowed from the national security world. It shows how a gag order imposed by the FBI — on grounds that discussing the device’s operation would compromise its effectiveness — has left judges, the public and criminal defendants in the dark on how the tool works.”


Washington Post












FBI Digital Search-Warrant Plan A ‘Monumental’ Constitutional Threat, Says Google





” Tech giant Google submitted court documents this week charging that a new FBI plan for obtaining digital search warrants is a “monumental” constitutional threat.

  Richard Salgado, Google’s director for law enforcement and information security, wrote Tuesday that the Justice Department’s plans for remotely accessing computer files “raises a number of monumental and highly complex constitutional, legal, and geopolitical concerns that should be left to Congress to decide.”

  National Journal reported Wednesday that the federal government wants to make changes to a criminal procedure provision known as Rule 41, which would allow judges to approve warrants outside their jurisdictions.

“ The serious and complex constitutional concerns implicated by the proposed amendment are numerous and, because of the nature of Fourth Amendment case law development, are unlikely to be addressed by courts in a timely fashion,” Mr. Salgado wrote.

  Google fears the federal government is using vague language that would permit it to spy on millions of Americans simultaneously.”

More at Washington Times

Our Millionth View

Privacy And Our Millionth View




Coming Soon





  Greetings readers , it is with some measure of both pride and pleasure that we here at YouViewed announce that sometime within the next two weeks or so , assuming viewership rates remain somewhat stable , we will be receiving our one millionth view . 

   That being said , we have a question for our fellow WordPress bloggers . Do any of you know how we could identify who provides us with that notable milestone ? As time draws nearer the editors will be able to narrow the time of the event down to the individual day but is there a way to track individual readers and the timing of their visits ?

   As I write this it dawns on me that the whole concept of tracking individual readers , visiting times and their views is completely antithetical to what we here at YouViewed stand for and gives me pause . Forgive us for considering the notion of tracking our readers . It was an ill-conceived notion . 

   In light of the privacy conundrums that have only now become self-evident to us we would still very much like to be able to share our celebration of our millionth view with the reader responsible for that view , whether publicly or privately . If any readers have any ideas on how or if it is possible to identify the millionth viewer we would greatly appreciate the tip . Thank you , editor 




Update: We reached our millionth view on Wednesday night without a hint of who that viewer was so the privacy issue is moot . What isn’t moot though is this blogger’s desire to find a job so if any of you know of some work available for a blogger with some editing and social media skills please contact us at mail@youviewed.com . Thanks










They’re Tracking You Everywhere You Drive




” Towing companies are a necessary evil when it comes to parking enforcement and property repossession. But in the Google Earth we now inhabit, tow trucks do more than just yank cars out of loading zones. They use license-plate readers (LPRs) to assemble a detailed profile of where your car will be and when. That’s an unnecessary evil.

  Plate readers have long been a tool of law enforcement, and police officers swear by them for tracking stolen cars and apprehending dangerous criminals. But private companies, such as repo crews, also photograph millions of plates a day, with scanners mounted on tow trucks and even on purpose-built camera cars whose sole mission is to drive around and collect plate scans. Each scan is GPS-tagged and stamped with the date and time, feeding a massive data trove to any law-enforcement agency—or government-approved private industry—willing to pay for it.

  You’ve probably been tagged at the office, at a mall, or even in your own driveway. And the companies that sell specialized monitoring software that assembles all these sightings into a reliable profile stand to profit hugely. Brian Hauss, a legal fellow for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), says: “The whole point is so you can figure out somebody’s long-term location. Unless there are limits on how those transactions can be processed, I think it’s just a matter of time until there are significant privacy violations, if they haven’t already occurred.”

  (How Is This Even Legal? License-plate-reader companies don’t have access to DMV registrations, so while they can track your car, they don’t know it’s yours. That information is guarded by the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act of 1994, which keeps your name, address, and driving history from public view. Mostly. There are plenty of exceptions, including for insurance companies and private investigators. LPR companies say only two groups can use its software to find the person behind the plate: law-enforcement agencies and repossession companies. In addition, the encrypted databases keep a log of each plate search and allow the ability to restrict access.)

  The companies that push plate readers enjoy unregulated autonomy in most states. Vigilant Solutions of California and its partner, Texas-based Digital Recognition Network, boast at least 2 billion license-plate scans since starting the country’s largest private license-plate database, the National Vehicle Location Service, in 2009.

  In total, there are at least 3 billion license-plate photos in private databases. Since many are duplicates and never deleted, analytics can paint a vivid picture of any motorist. Predicting where and when someone will drive is relatively easy; software can sort how many times a car is spotted in a certain area and, when fed enough data, can generate a person’s driving history over time.”


Read the rest at Popular Mechanics












Students Forced To Expose Underwear For Inspection






” In Gustine, population 457, what happens at the schoolhouse affects nearly everyone. And something happened Monday that is causing a big controversy in this small town.

“I felt uncomfortable, and I didn’t want to do it,” said 11-year-old Eliza Medina. “I felt like they violated my privacy.”

  She was one of about two dozen elementary students who were rounded up in the small town 90 miles southwest of Fort Worth.

  Eliza’s mother, Maria Medina, said boys were taken to one room, girls to another, and they were ordered “to pull down their pants to check them to see if they could find anything.” “


Read more













Does Your State Protect Your Privacy In The Digital Age?


Privacy Rights In The Digital Age




” New technologies make it possible for state and local law enforcement agencies to engage in surveillance that used to be prohibitively expensive and/or effectively impossible. The ACLU has been working with legislators across the country to put in place rules to ensure that we can take advantage of these new technologies without becoming a surveillance society in which our every movements are tracked, monitored, and scrutinized by the authorities. Much of our work to that end focuses on: law enforcement access to electronic communications content, location tracking,automatic license plate readers, and domestic surveillance drones.

  If we can address these four issue areas, we will go a long way toward protecting privacy in the digital age. This map provides a snapshot of the states that have already provided privacy protections for some or all of them. Of course, the devil is in the details of these laws, and we encourage you to review the bill text or to check out the ACLU’s blog for more information on just how much protection there is in your state.”


Thanks to the ACLU













Facebook Copyright Hoax Goes Viral Again






” A fake Facebook copyright message claiming to protect users’ media has once again been making the rounds on the social network.

  The message claims to put copyright protections on a user’s posts after they share the status update.

  It typically reads:

” In response to the new Facebook guidelines, I hereby declare that my copyright is attached to all of my personal details, illustrations, comics, paintings, professional photos and videos, etc. (as a result of the Berner Convention). For commercial use of the above my written consent is needed at all times!”

  Here’s the thing: Facebook doesn’t own your posts. Under the social network’s privacy policy, they have the right to distribute and share the things a user posts, subject to their privacy and application settings. (Check out Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities here.)

  The hoax doesn’t even have its facts right. A quick Google search will also show that there’s is no such thing as the Berner Convention. (Whoever originated it probably meant to write the Berne convention, which is an international agreement protecting literary and artistic works).

  So breathe a big sigh of relief. Your Facebook profile is fine. If anything, use this as an opportunity to double check your privacy settings by clicking on the lock icon in the upper-right corner of your profile.”


Thanks to ABC News











Sharyl Attkisson Sues Administration Over Computer Hacking





” Former CBS News correspondent Sharyl Attkisson has sued the Justice Department over the hacking of her computers, officially accusing the Obama administration of illegal surveillance while she was reporting on administration scandals. 

  In a series of legal filings that seek $35 million in damages, Attkisson alleges that three separate computer forensic exams showed that hackers used sophisticated methods to surreptitiously monitor her work between 2011 and 2013. 

” I just think it’s important to send a message that people shouldn’t be victimized and throw up their hands and think there’s nothing they can do and they’re powerless,” Attkisson said in an interview. 

  The department has steadfastly denied any involvement in the hacking, saying in a 2013 statement: “To our knowledge, the Justice Department has never compromised Ms. Attkisson’s computers, or otherwise sought any information from or concerning any telephone, computer, or other media device she may own or use.” “


Fox News











License Plate Reader Technology Looks At Faces





” The leading suppler of automated license plate reader technology in the US (ALPR, also known as ANPR in Europe) is expanding its offerings to law enforcement. Vehicle owners have already had their movements tracked by the company Vigilant Solutions, which boasts 2 billion entries in its nationwide database, with 70 million additional license plate photographs being added each month. Now passengers can also be tracked if they hitch a ride with a friend and are photographed by a camera aimed at the front of the car. The Livermore, California-based firm recently announced expanded integration of facial recognition technology into its offerings.”






” ” The new Vigilant Mobile Companion app expands the benefits of license plate recognition and facial recognition technologies to all areas of the agency,” a Vigilant Solutions press release claimed. “Using many of the new analytic tools that Vigilant has released in its Learn product over the last couple of years, the app makes these tools even more easy to use and accessible on a mobile device. The app also features Vigilant’s FaceSearch facial recognition which analyzes over 350 different vectors of the human face.”


Read more











Congress Has Just Overruled Your 1st, 4th And 5th Amendment Rights




” As of today, Bill HR4681 has passed the house and senate, and is currently undergoing arbitration before being sent to the President for his signature in to law. The law says that the intelligence community can collect, retain, and disseminate all electronic communications including voice calls [without any constitutional restrictions] on all US citizens and everyone else in the world.  And they have 5 years before they are supposed to destroy the records.  However, they can keep them indefinitely if they fall into several categories of interest.

  It is all out in the open now.  Your 1st, 4th, and 5th Amendment protections are gone.  This act gives new meaning to ‘land of the free, home of the brave.’  The intelligence community isn’t doing anything in secret any more.  Americans are now living in an environment much like the days of the old Stalinist Soviet Union, where the presumption was that all conversations were monitored and one takes measures to have a ‘private’ conversations. 

  So turn up your radio or turn the water on in the sink and watch what you say on the phone or Facebook, even casual remarks on twitter may come back to haunt you in the future.  Don’t believe me, I have pasted the relevant parts of the bill below this story. Still don’t believe it? Just go to www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/4681/text and read it from the horse’s mouth.

What are you willing to do about it?

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]


[H.R. 4681 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]


One Hundred Thirteenth Congress

of the

United States of America


Subtitle A–General Matters

Sec. 309. Procedures for the retention of incidentally acquired




(a) Definitions.–In this section:

(1) Covered communication.–The term “covered communication”

means any nonpublic telephone or electronic communication acquired

without the consent of a person who is a party to the

communication, including communications in electronic storage.

(2) Head of an element of the intelligence community.–The term

“head of an element of the intelligence community” means, as


(A) the head of an element of the intelligence community;


(B) the head of the department or agency containing such


(3) United states person.–The term “United States person”

has the meaning given that term in section 101 of the Foreign

Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801).

(b) Procedures for Covered Communications.–

(1) Requirement to adopt.–Not later than 2 years after the

date of the enactment of this Act each head of an element of the

intelligence community shall adopt procedures approved by the

Attorney General for such element that ensure compliance with the

requirements of paragraph (3).

(2) Coordination and approval.–The procedures required by

paragraph (1) shall be–

(A) prepared in coordination with the Director of National

Intelligence; and

(B) approved by the Attorney General prior to issuance.

(3) Procedures.–

(A) Application.–The procedures required by paragraph (1)

shall apply to any intelligence collection activity not

otherwise authorized by court order (including an order or

certification issued by a court established under subsection

(a) or (b) of section 103 of the Foreign Intelligence

Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1803)), subpoena, or

similar legal process that is reasonably anticipated to result

in the acquisition of a covered communication to or from a

United States person and shall permit the acquisition,

retention, and dissemination of covered communications subject

to the limitation in subparagraph (B).

(B) Limitation on retention.–A covered communication shall

not be retained in excess of 5 years, unless–

(i) the communication has been affirmatively

determined, in whole or in part, to constitute foreign

intelligence or counterintelligence or is necessary to

understand or assess foreign intelligence or


(ii) the communication is reasonably believed to

constitute evidence of a crime and is retained by a law

enforcement agency;

(iii) the communication is enciphered or reasonably

believed to have a secret meaning;

(iv) all parties to the communication are reasonably

believed to be non-United States persons;

(v) retention is necessary to protect against an

imminent threat to human life, in which case both the

nature of the threat and the information to be retained

shall be reported to the congressional intelligence

committees not later than 30 days after the date such

retention is extended under this clause;

(vi) retention is necessary for technical assurance or

compliance purposes, including a court order or discovery

obligation, in which case access to information retained

for technical assurance or compliance purposes shall be

reported to the congressional intelligence committees on an

annual basis; or

(vii) retention for a period in excess of 5 years is

approved by the head of the element of the intelligence

community responsible for such retention, based on a

determination that retention is necessary to protect the

national security of the United States, in which case the

head of such element shall provide to the congressional

intelligence committees a written certification



(I) the reasons extended retention is necessary to

protect the national security of the United States;

(II) the duration for which the head of the element

is authorizing retention;

(III) the particular information to be retained;


(IV) the measures the element of the intelligence

community is taking to protect the privacy interests of

United States persons or persons located inside the

United States. “






   Many thanks to Universal Free Press for providing this story . Below the reader can see who voted to rob you of your rights and who voted against Statism …






YEA   R   Byrne, Bradley AL 1st
YEA   R   Roby, Martha AL 2nd
YEA   R   Rogers, Mike AL 3rd
YEA   R   Aderholt, Robert AL 4th
NAY   R   Brooks, Mo AL 5th
YEA   R   Bachus, Spencer AL 6th
YEA   D   Sewell, Terri AL 7th
YEA   R   Young, Don AK
YEA   D   Kirkpatrick, Ann AZ 1st
YEA   D   Barber, Ron AZ 2nd
NAY   D   Grijalva, Raúl AZ 3rd
NAY   R   Gosar, Paul AZ 4th
NAY   R   Salmon, Matt AZ 5th
YEA   R   Schweikert, David AZ 6th
YEA   D   Pastor, Ed AZ 7th
YEA   R   Franks, Trent AZ 8th
YEA   D   Sinema, Kyrsten AZ 9th
YEA   R   Crawford, Eric AR 1st
YEA   R   Griffin, Tim AR 2nd
YEA   R   Womack, Steve AR 3rd
YEA   R   Cotton, Tom AR 4th
YEA   R   LaMalfa, Doug CA 1st
NAY   D   Huffman, Jared CA 2nd
NAY   D   Garamendi, John CA 3rd
NAY   R   McClintock, Tom CA 4th
YEA   D   Thompson, Mike CA 5th
NAY   D   Matsui, Doris CA 6th
YEA   D   Bera, Ami CA 7th
YEA   R   Cook, Paul CA 8th
YEA   D   McNerney, Jerry CA 9th
YEA   R   Denham, Jeff CA 10th
YEA   D   Miller, George CA 11th
YEA   D   Pelosi, Nancy CA 12th
NAY   D   Lee, Barbara CA 13th
NAY   D   Speier, Jackie CA 14th
NAY   D   Swalwell, Eric CA 15th
YEA   D   Costa, Jim CA 16th
NAY   D   Honda, Mike CA 17th
NAY   D   Eshoo, Anna CA 18th
NAY   D   Lofgren, Zoe CA 19th
NAY   D   Farr, Sam CA 20th
YEA   R   Valadao, David CA 21st
YEA   R   Nunes, Devin CA 22nd
YEA   R   McCarthy, Kevin CA 23rd
YEA   D   Capps, Lois CA 24th
YEA   R   McKeon, Buck CA 25th
YEA   D   Brownley, Julia CA 26th
NAY   D   Chu, Judy CA 27th
YEA   D   Schiff, Adam CA 28th
YEA   D   Cárdenas, Tony CA 29th
YEA   D   Sherman, Brad CA 30th
NO VOTE   R   Miller, Gary CA 31st
YEA   D   Napolitano, Grace CA 32nd
YEA   D   Waxman, Henry CA 33rd
YEA   D   Becerra, Xavier CA 34th
NO VOTE   D   Negrete McLeod, Gloria CA 35th
YEA   D   Ruiz, Raul CA 36th
NAY   D   Bass, Karen CA 37th
YEA   D   Sánchez, Linda CA 38th
YEA   R   Royce, Ed CA 39th
YEA   D   Roybal-Allard, Lucille CA 40th
NAY   D   Takano, Mark CA 41st
YEA   R   Calvert, Ken CA 42nd
NAY   D   Waters, Maxine CA 43rd
NAY   D   Hahn, Janice CA 44th
NO VOTE   R   Campbell, John CA 45th
YEA   D   Sanchez, Loretta CA 46th
NAY   D   Lowenthal, Alan CA 47th
NAY   R   Rohrabacher, Dana CA 48th
YEA   R   Issa, Darrell CA 49th
YEA   R   Hunter, Duncan CA 50th
YEA   D   Vargas, Juan CA 51st
YEA   D   Peters, Scott CA 52nd
YEA   D   Davis, Susan CA 53rd
YEA   D   DeGette, Diana CO 1st
NAY   D   Polis, Jared CO 2nd
NAY   R   Tipton, Scott CO 3rd
YEA   R   Gardner, Cory CO 4th
YEA   R   Lamborn, Doug CO 5th
YEA   R   Coffman, Mike CO 6th
YEA   D   Perlmutter, Ed CO 7th
YEA   D   Larson, John CT 1st
YEA   D   Courtney, Joe CT 2nd
YEA   D   DeLauro, Rosa CT 3rd
YEA   D   Himes, James CT 4th
YEA   D   Esty, Elizabeth CT 5th
YEA   D   Carney, John DE
NO VOTE   R   Miller, Jeff FL 1st
YEA   R   Southerland, Steve FL 2nd
NAY   R   Yoho, Ted FL 3rd
YEA   R   Crenshaw, Ander FL 4th
YEA   D   Brown, Corrine FL 5th
YEA   R   DeSantis, Ron FL 6th
NAY   R   Mica, John FL 7th
NAY   R   Posey, Bill FL 8th
NAY   D   Grayson, Alan FL 9th
YEA   R   Webster, Daniel FL 10th
NAY   R   Nugent, Richard FL 11th
YEA   R   Bilirakis, Gus FL 12th
YEA   R   Jolly, David FL 13th
YEA   D   Castor, Kathy FL 14th
YEA   R   Ross, Dennis FL 15th
YEA   R   Buchanan, Vern FL 16th
YEA   R   Rooney, Thomas FL 17th
YEA   D   Murphy, Patrick FL 18th
NAY   R   Clawson, Curt FL 19th
NAY   D   Hastings, Alcee FL 20th
YEA   D   Deutch, Theodore FL 21st
YEA   D   Frankel, Lois FL 22nd
YEA   D   Wasserman Schultz, Debbie FL 23rd
YEA   D   Wilson, Frederica FL 24th
YEA   R   Diaz-Balart, Mario FL 25th
NAY   D   Garcia, Joe FL 26th
YEA   R   Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana FL 27th
NAY   R   Kingston, Jack GA 1st
YEA   D   Bishop, Sanford GA 2nd
YEA   R   Westmoreland, Lynn GA 3rd
YEA   D   Johnson, Hank GA 4th
NAY   D   Lewis, John GA 5th
YEA   R   Price, Tom GA 6th
NAY   R   Woodall, Rob GA 7th
NAY   R   Scott, Austin GA 8th
YEA   R   Collins, Doug GA 9th
NAY   R   Broun, Paul GA 10th
YEA   R   Gingrey, Phil GA 11th
YEA   D   Barrow, John GA 12th
YEA   D   Scott, David GA 13th
NAY   R   Graves, Tom GA 14th
NAY   D   Hanabusa, Colleen HI 1st
YEA   D   Gabbard, Tulsi HI 2nd
NAY   R   Labrador, Raúl ID 1st
YEA   R   Simpson, Mike ID 2nd
YEA   D   Rush, Bobby IL 1st
YEA   D   Kelly, Robin IL 2nd
YEA   D   Lipinski, Daniel IL 3rd
NAY   D   Gutiérrez, Luis IL 4th
YEA   D   Quigley, Mike IL 5th
YEA   R   Roskam, Peter IL 6th
YEA   D   Davis, Danny IL 7th
NO VOTE   D   Duckworth, Tammy IL 8th
NAY   D   Schakowsky, Jan IL 9th
YEA   D   Schneider, Bradley IL 10th
YEA   D   Foster, Bill IL 11th
YEA   D   Enyart, William IL 12th
YEA   R   Davis, Rodney IL 13th
YEA   R   Hultgren, Randy IL 14th
YEA   R   Shimkus, John IL 15th
YEA   R   Kinzinger, Adam IL 16th
YEA   D   Bustos, Cheri IL 17th
YEA   R   Schock, Aaron IL 18th
YEA   D   Visclosky, Peter IN 1st
YEA   R   Walorski, Jackie IN 2nd
YEA   R   Stutzman, Marlin IN 3rd
YEA   R   Rokita, Todd IN 4th
YEA   R   Brooks, Susan IN 5th
YEA   R   Messer, Luke IN 6th
YEA   D   Carson, André IN 7th
YEA   R   Bucshon, Larry IN 8th
YEA   R   Young, Todd IN 9th
YEA   D   Braley, Bruce IA 1st
YEA   D   Loebsack, David IA 2nd
YEA   R   Latham, Tom IA 3rd
YEA   R   King, Steve IA 4th
NAY   R   Huelskamp, Tim KS 1st
YEA   R   Jenkins, Lynn KS 2nd
YEA   R   Yoder, Kevin KS 3rd
YEA   R   Pompeo, Mike KS 4th
YEA   R   Whitfield, Ed KY 1st
YEA   R   Guthrie, Brett KY 2nd
NAY   D   Yarmuth, John KY 3rd
NAY   R   Massie, Thomas KY 4th
YEA   R   Rogers, Hal KY 5th
YEA   R   Barr, Andy KY 6th
YEA   R   Scalise, Steve LA 1st
YEA   D   Richmond, Cedric LA 2nd
YEA   R   Boustany, Charles LA 3rd
YEA   R   Fleming, John LA 4th
YEA   R   McAllister, Vance LA 5th
YEA   R   Cassidy, Bill LA 6th
YEA   D   Pingree, Chellie ME 1st
YEA   D   Michaud, Michael ME 2nd
YEA   R   Harris, Andy MD 1st
YEA   D   Ruppersberger, A. Dutch MD 2nd
YEA   D   Sarbanes, John MD 3rd
YEA   D   Edwards, Donna MD 4th
YEA   D   Hoyer, Steny MD 5th
YEA   D   Delaney, John MD 6th
NAY   D   Cummings, Elijah MD 7th
YEA   D   Van Hollen, Chris MD 8th
YEA   D   Neal, Richard MA 1st
NAY   D   McGovern, Jim MA 2nd
YEA   D   Tsongas, Niki MA 3rd
YEA   D   Kennedy, Joseph MA 4th
NAY   D   Clark, Katherine MA 5th
NAY   D   Tierney, John MA 6th
NO VOTE   D   Capuano, Michael MA 7th
YEA   D   Lynch, Stephen MA 8th
YEA   D   Keating, William MA 9th
YEA   R   Benishek, Dan MI 1st
YEA   R   Huizenga, Bill MI 2nd
NAY   R   Amash, Justin MI 3rd
YEA   R   Camp, Dave MI 4th
NAY   D   Kildee, Daniel MI 5th
YEA   R   Upton, Fred MI 6th
YEA   R   Walberg, Tim MI 7th
YEA   R   Rogers, Mike MI 8th
YEA   D   Levin, Sander MI 9th
YEA   R   Miller, Candice MI 10th
NAY   R   Bentivolio, Kerry MI 11th
YEA   D   Dingell, John MI 12th
NAY   D   Conyers, John MI 13th
YEA   D   Peters, Gary MI 14th
YEA   D   Walz, Timothy MN 1st
YEA   R   Kline, John MN 2nd
YEA   R   Paulsen, Erik MN 3rd
NAY   D   McCollum, Betty MN 4th
YEA   D   Ellison, Keith MN 5th
YEA   R   Bachmann, Michele MN 6th
YEA   D   Peterson, Collin MN 7th
YEA   D   Nolan, Richard MN 8th
YEA   R   Nunnelee, Alan MS 1st
YEA   D   Thompson, Bennie MS 2nd
YEA   R   Harper, Gregg MS 3rd
YEA   R   Palazzo, Steven MS 4th
YEA   D   Clay, Lacy MO 1st
YEA   R   Wagner, Ann MO 2nd
YEA   R   Luetkemeyer, Blaine MO 3rd
YEA   R   Hartzler, Vicky MO 4th
YEA   D   Cleaver, Emanuel MO 5th
YEA   R   Graves, Sam MO 6th
YEA   R   Long, Billy MO 7th
YEA   R   Smith, Jason MO 8th
YEA   R   Daines, Steve MT
YEA   R   Fortenberry, Jeff NE 1st
YEA   R   Terry, Lee NE 2nd
YEA   R   Smith, Adrian NE 3rd
YEA   D   Titus, Dina NV 1st
YEA   R   Amodei, Mark NV 2nd
YEA   R   Heck, Joseph NV 3rd
YEA   D   Horsford, Steven NV 4th
New Hampshire
YEA   D   Shea-Porter, Carol NH 1st
YEA   D   Kuster, Ann NH 2nd
New Jersey
YEA   D   Norcross, Donald NJ 1st
YEA   R   LoBiondo, Frank NJ 2nd
YEA   R   Runyan, Jon NJ 3rd
YEA   R   Smith, Chris NJ 4th
NAY   R   Garrett, Scott NJ 5th
NAY   D   Pallone, Frank NJ 6th
YEA   R   Lance, Leonard NJ 7th
YEA   D   Sires, Albio NJ 8th
YEA   D   Pascrell, Bill NJ 9th
YEA   D   Payne, Donald NJ 10th
YEA   R   Frelinghuysen, Rodney NJ 11th
NAY   D   Holt, Rush NJ 12th
New Mexico
YEA   D   Lujan Grisham, Michelle NM 1st
YEA   R   Pearce, Steve NM 2nd
YEA   D   Luján, Ben NM 3rd
New York
YEA   D   Bishop, Timothy NY 1st
YEA   R   King, Pete NY 2nd
YEA   D   Israel, Steve NY 3rd
YEA   D   McCarthy, Carolyn NY 4th
YEA   D   Meeks, Gregory NY 5th
YEA   D   Meng, Grace NY 6th
NAY   D   Velázquez, Nydia NY 7th
YEA   D   Jeffries, Hakeem NY 8th
NAY   D   Clarke, Yvette NY 9th
NAY   D   Nadler, Jerrold NY 10th
YEA   R   Grimm, Michael NY 11th
YEA   D   Maloney, Carolyn NY 12th
NAY   D   Rangel, Charles NY 13th
YEA   D   Crowley, Joseph NY 14th
NAY   D   Serrano, José NY 15th
YEA   D   Engel, Eliot NY 16th
YEA   D   Lowey, Nita NY 17th
YEA   D   Maloney, Sean NY 18th
NAY   R   Gibson, Christopher NY 19th
YEA   D   Tonko, Paul NY 20th
YEA   D   Owens, William NY 21st
YEA   R   Hanna, Richard NY 22nd
YEA   R   Reed, Tom NY 23rd
YEA   D   Maffei, Daniel NY 24th
YEA   D   Slaughter, Louise NY 25th
YEA   D   Higgins, Brian NY 26th
YEA   R   Collins, Chris NY 27th
North Carolina
YEA   D   Butterfield, G.K. NC 1st
YEA   R   Ellmers, Renee NC 2nd
NAY   R   Jones, Walter NC 3rd
YEA   D   Price, David NC 4th
YEA   R   Foxx, Virginia NC 5th
YEA   R   Coble, Howard NC 6th
YEA   D   McIntyre, Mike NC 7th
YEA   R   Hudson, Richard NC 8th
YEA   R   Pittenger, Robert NC 9th
YEA   R   McHenry, Patrick NC 10th
NAY   R   Meadows, Mark NC 11th
YEA   D   Adams, Alma NC 12th
YEA   R   Holding, George NC 13th
North Dakota
YEA   R   Cramer, Kevin ND
YEA   R   Chabot, Steve OH 1st
YEA   R   Wenstrup, Brad OH 2nd
YEA   D   Beatty, Joyce OH 3rd
NAY   R   Jordan, Jim OH 4th
YEA   R   Latta, Robert OH 5th
YEA   R   Johnson, Bill OH 6th
YEA   R   Gibbs, Bob OH 7th
NAY   D   Kaptur, Marcy OH 9th
YEA   R   Turner, Michael OH 10th
YEA   D   Fudge, Marcia OH 11th
YEA   R   Tiberi, Pat OH 12th
YEA   D   Ryan, Tim OH 13th
YEA   R   Joyce, David OH 14th
YEA   R   Stivers, Steve OH 15th
YEA   R   Renacci, James OH 16th
NAY   R   Bridenstine, Jim OK 1st
YEA   R   Mullin, Markwayne OK 2nd
YEA   R   Lucas, Frank OK 3rd
YEA   R   Cole, Tom OK 4th
YEA   R   Lankford, James OK 5th
NAY   D   Bonamici, Suzanne OR 1st
YEA   R   Walden, Greg OR 2nd
NAY   D   Blumenauer, Earl OR 3rd
NAY   D   DeFazio, Peter OR 4th
NO VOTE   D   Schrader, Kurt OR 5th
YEA   D   Brady, Robert PA 1st
YEA   D   Fattah, Chaka PA 2nd
YEA   R   Kelly, Mike PA 3rd
NAY   R   Perry, Scott PA 4th
YEA   R   Thompson, Glenn PA 5th
YEA   R   Gerlach, Jim PA 6th
YEA   R   Meehan, Patrick PA 7th
YEA   R   Fitzpatrick, Michael PA 8th
YEA   R   Shuster, Bill PA 9th
YEA   R   Marino, Tom PA 10th
YEA   R   Barletta, Lou PA 11th
YEA   R   Rothfus, Keith PA 12th
YEA   D   Schwartz, Allyson PA 13th
NAY   D   Doyle, Mike PA 14th
YEA   R   Dent, Charles PA 15th
YEA   R   Pitts, Joseph PA 16th
YEA   D   Cartwright, Matthew PA 17th
YEA   R   Murphy, Tim PA 18th
Rhode Island
YEA   D   Cicilline, David RI 1st
YEA   D   Langevin, Jim RI 2nd
South Carolina
NAY   R   Sanford, Mark SC 1st
YEA   R   Wilson, Joe SC 2nd
NAY   R   Duncan, Jeff SC 3rd
NAY   R   Gowdy, Trey SC 4th
NAY   R   Mulvaney, Mick SC 5th
YEA   D   Clyburn, Jim SC 6th
YEA   R   Rice, Tom SC 7th
South Dakota
YEA   R   Noem, Kristi SD
NAY   R   Roe, Phil TN 1st
NAY   R   Duncan, John TN 2nd
YEA   R   Fleischmann, Chuck TN 3rd
NAY   R   DesJarlais, Scott TN 4th
YEA   D   Cooper, Jim TN 5th
YEA   R   Black, Diane TN 6th
YEA   R   Blackburn, Marsha TN 7th
YEA   R   Fincher, Stephen TN 8th
NAY   D   Cohen, Steve TN 9th
NAY   R   Gohmert, Louie TX 1st
NAY   R   Poe, Ted TX 2nd
YEA   R   Johnson, Sam TX 3rd
NO VOTE   R   Hall, Ralph TX 4th
YEA   R   Hensarling, Jeb TX 5th
YEA   R   Barton, Joe TX 6th
YEA   R   Culberson, John TX 7th
YEA   R   Brady, Kevin TX 8th
YEA   D   Green, Al TX 9th
YEA   R   McCaul, Michael TX 10th
YEA   R   Conaway, Michael TX 11th
YEA   R   Granger, Kay TX 12th
YEA   R   Thornberry, Mac TX 13th
NAY   R   Weber, Randy TX 14th
YEA   D   Hinojosa, Rubén TX 15th
NAY   D   O’Rourke, Beto TX 16th
YEA   R   Flores, Bill TX 17th
NAY   D   Jackson Lee, Sheila TX 18th
YEA   R   Neugebauer, Randy TX 19th
YEA   D   Castro, Joaquin TX 20th
YEA   R   Smith, Lamar TX 21st
YEA   R   Olson, Pete TX 22nd
YEA   D   Gallego, Pete TX 23rd
YEA   R   Marchant, Kenny TX 24th
YEA   R   Williams, Roger TX 25th
NAY   R   Burgess, Michael TX 26th
YEA   R   Farenthold, Blake TX 27th
YEA   D   Cuellar, Henry TX 28th
YEA   D   Green, Gene TX 29th
YEA   D   Johnson, Eddie TX 30th
YEA   R   Carter, John TX 31st
YEA   R   Sessions, Pete TX 32nd
YEA   D   Veasey, Marc TX 33rd
YEA   D   Vela, Filemon TX 34th
NAY   D   Doggett, Lloyd TX 35th
NAY   R   Stockman, Steve TX 36th
YEA   R   Bishop, Rob UT 1st
YEA   R   Stewart, Chris UT 2nd
YEA   R   Chaffetz, Jason UT 3rd
YEA   D   Matheson, Jim UT 4th
NAY   D   Welch, Peter VT
YEA   R   Wittman, Robert VA 1st
YEA   R   Rigell, Scott VA 2nd
YEA   D   Scott, Bobby VA 3rd
YEA   R   Forbes, Randy VA 4th
YEA   R   Hurt, Robert VA 5th
YEA   R   Goodlatte, Bob VA 6th
NAY   R   Brat, Dave VA 7th
YEA   D   Moran, Jim VA 8th
NAY   R   Griffith, Morgan VA 9th
YEA   R   Wolf, Frank VA 10th
YEA   D   Connolly, Gerald VA 11th
NAY   D   DelBene, Suzan WA 1st
YEA   D   Larsen, Rick WA 2nd
YEA   R   Herrera Beutler, Jaime WA 3rd
YEA   R   Hastings, Doc WA 4th
YEA   R   McMorris Rodgers, Cathy WA 5th
YEA   D   Kilmer, Derek WA 6th
NAY   D   McDermott, Jim WA 7th
YEA   R   Reichert, David WA 8th
NO VOTE   D   Smith, Adam WA 9th
NAY   D   Heck, Denny WA 10th
West Virginia
YEA   R   McKinley, David WV 1st
YEA   R   Capito, Shelley WV 2nd
YEA   D   Rahall, Nick WV 3rd
YEA   R   Ryan, Paul WI 1st
NAY   D   Pocan, Mark WI 2nd
YEA   D   Kind, Ron WI 3rd
NAY   D   Moore, Gwen WI 4th
NAY   R   Sensenbrenner, James WI 5th
YEA   R   Petri, Tom WI 6th
YEA   R   Duffy, Sean WI 7th
NAY   R   Ribble, Reid WI 8th
NAY   R   Lummis, Cynthia



   This is a despicable vote and all the Republicans that voted in favor of this bill should hang their heads in shame . 









Brilliant New Device Lets Protestors Block Surveillance And Stingrays


tun angles 2




” Reports about agents using a Stingray on protesters to unconstitutionally monitor their phones are circulating widely, and now protesters have a way to fight back.

  Earlier this week an anonymous leaked recording exposed the agents monitoring the protesters’ movements by tracking their phones. A Stingray mimics a cellular tower, letting agents pry into citizens’ cell phones and gather their data/location without a warrant.

  Stingrays were supposed to be used for “terrorists,” but now they’re being used against us locally — which is unconstitutional.

  And that’s where a new product called Tunnel enters the scene .

  We’ve known that the NSA spies on us ever since Edward Snowden blew the whistle on them.

  But have you ever wondered if it’s possible for somebody to spy back on them?

  The NSA has a special way of protecting itself against such a possibility.  And you’ve probably never heard of it.

  To hide its own privacy, the NSA installs copper  – yes, you read that correctly: copper – around the equipment in its buildings.

  It turns out that copper has a unique conductive property that allows it to block surveillance, letting those who use it hide their activities from would-be spies.

  The main NSA headquarters is described as ”a building covered with one-way dark glass, which is lined with copper shielding in order to prevent espionage by trapping in signals and sounds.”

  The question becomes: if they can protect their own privacy with copper, why can’t we use this same technique to protect our privacy from them?

  Well now we finally can.

  Tunnel is a portable Faraday enclosure that uses a 100% authentic copper shielding system to surround your phone.  When your phone is inside, it forms a topologically near-complete surface to prevent non-ionizing radiation from penetrating its boundaries, letting you avoid surveillance.

  Thankfully, it’s not going to cost thousands of dollars, which has come as great news for protesters and other privacy advocates. “



   Be sure to read the rest at Filming Cops and while you are there grab their coupon code that will give the first 100 purchasers 35% off of the already discounted holiday price . Order yours today , we did and got it for a mere $43 with shipping thanks to the Filming Cops coupon . 











Local Judge Unseals Hundreds Of Highly Secret Cell Tracking Court Records





” A judge in Charlotte, North Carolina, has unsealed a set of 529 court documents in hundreds of criminal cases detailing the use of a stingray, or cell-site simulator, by local police. This move, which took place earlier this week, marks a rare example of a court opening up a vast trove of applications made by police to a judge, who authorized each use of the powerful and potentially invasive device.

  According to the Charlotte Observer, the records seem to suggest that judges likely did not fully understand what they were authorizing. Law enforcement agencies nationwide have taken extraordinary steps to preserve stingray secrecy. As recently as this week, prosecutors in a Baltimore robbery case dropped key evidence that stemmed from stingray use rather than fully disclose how the device was used.

  The newspaper also reported on Friday that the Mecklenburg County District Attorney’s office, which astonishingly had also never previously seen the applications filed by the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department (CMPD), will now review them and determine which records also need to be shared with defense attorneys. Criminals could potentially file new claims challenging their convictions on the grounds that not all evidence was disclosed to them at the time.

  Relatively little is known about precisely how stingrays are used by law enforcement agencies nationwide, although more and more documents have surfaced showing how they’ve been purchased and used in limited instances. Last year, Ars reported on leaked documents showing the existence of a body-worn stingray. In 2010, security researcher Kristin Paget famously demonstrated a homemade device built for just $1,500.

  Worse still, local cops have lied to courts (at the direction of the United States Marshals Service) about the use of such technology. Not only can stingrays be used to determine a phone’s location, but they can also intercept calls and text messages. While they do target specific phones, they also sweep up cell data of innocents nearby who have no idea that such data collection is taking place. “


Ars Technica has more










Mt Martha Woman Snapped Sunbaking In G-String By Real Estate Drone




” A BOARD showing a G-string-clad woman has been removed after she became the accidental attraction in a real estate advertising campaign for a house sale in Mt Martha.

  An ambitious agent enlisted a drone to take an aerial photograph of the property, which includes a sweeping image of the beach.”







” But the picture also captured small business owner Mandy Lingard, a mother of three and grandmother of one, sunbaking topless in the privacy of her back yard.

  The image, which includes Ms Lingard lying face down wearing just a G-string, was on the display advertising board outside her neighbour’s house before being removed today.

“I heard a noise and then I saw this odd thing flying around and thought it was a kid’s toy. It hovered around and luckily I was face down at the time,” Ms Lingard said.”



Read more at Perth Now

AT&T Stops Adding Web Tracking Codes On Cellphones

” AT&T Mobility, the nation’s second-largest cellular provider, said Friday it’s no longer attaching hidden Internet tracking codes to data transmitted from its users’ smartphones. The practice made it nearly impossible to shield its subscribers’ identities online.

  The change by AT&T essentially removes a hidden string of letters and numbers that are passed along to websites that a consumer visits. It can be used to track subscribers across the Internet, a lucrative data-mining opportunity for advertisers that could still reveal users’ identities based on their browsing habits.

  Verizon Wireless, the country’s largest mobile firm, said Friday it still uses this type of tracking, known as “super cookies.” Verizon spokeswoman Debra Lewis said business and government customers don’t have the code inserted. There has been no evidence that Sprint and T-Mobile have used such codes.

” As with any program, we’re constantly evaluating, and this is no different,” Lewis said, adding that consumers can ask that their codes not be used for advertising tracking. But that still passes along the codes to websites, even if subscribers say they don’t want their data being used for marketing purposes.

  The tracking codes are part of the latest plan by the cellular industry to keep tabs on users and their devices. While the codes don’t explicitly contain personal information, they’re unique and nonetheless sent to websites alongside personal details that a user may submit voluntarily — like a name or a phone number.

  That means enough data can transform a large chunk of random digits into a digital fingerprint that’s as identifying as a Social Security number. AT&T said Friday its tracker was part of a testing project that’s been phased off of its network.

” This is more like a license plate for your brain,” said Jacob Hoffman-Andrews, a senior staff technologist with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a civil liberties organization that opposed the practice. “Everything you wonder about, and read, and ask the Internet about gets this header attached to it. And there are ad agencies out there that try to associate that browsing history with anything that identifies you.”

AP News

Hidden Camera Shows What Cleaners Really Get Up To In Your Hotel Room





” Almost every time we stay at a hotel, especially a ‘brand-name’ hotel, we leave our trust in the hands of those that clean our rooms when we’re out.

  It’s just normal for us to believe that these people have respect for our privacy. However, someone recently tested this theory out in a ‘brand-named’ hotel, and what he caught on camera was actually quite eye opening.

  Watch as this cleaner browses through this guy’s luggage, checks out his PS3 games, spends a good few minutes trying to log into his tablet and laptop then finally decides to do a bit of (pretty casual) cleaning.”














Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 7,273 other followers