The internet (and subsequently, Social Media) have been touted as tools that promote democracy, openness and a civil society.

More and more, these tools are being used by Governments, Corporations and mobs for censorship, social control and opression.

A MOB attacked Alexander Aan even before an Indonesian court in June jailed him for two and a half years for “inciting religious hatred”. His crime was to write “God does not exist” on a Facebook group he had founded for atheists in Minang, a province of the world’s most populous Muslim nation. Like most non-believers in Islamic regions, he was brought up as a Muslim. And like many who profess godlessness openly, he has been punished.

In a handful of majority-Muslim countries atheists can live safely, if quietly; Turkey is one example, Lebanon another. None makes atheism a specific crime. But none gives atheists legal protection or recognition. Indonesia, for example, demands that people declare themselves as one of six religions; atheism and agnosticism do not count. Egypt’s draft constitution makes room for only three faiths: Christianity, Judaism and Islam.

via Atheists and Islam: No God, not even Allah | The Economist.

Your email has LESS protections than postal mails, or even postcards.

Cops can search your emails without notifying you.

The feds have a large body of tools, and legal maneuvers (prosecutorial subpeonas, not judge-approved search warrants) that make acquiring emails and cell-phone logs a point-and-click affair.

We also learn that the former head of the CIA used immature communication subterfuge tactics (storing emails as drafts, not hitting send on a shared account).   Teenagers today use better avoidance-detection methods…

If former CIA Director David Petraeus had secretly stashed love letters he exchanged with his paramour at home under his mattress, he might have actually done a better job of protecting his privacy.

Blame federal law for this counterintuitive result. Because it’s so easy to dash off an e-mail — or edit a Gmail draft — you might think electronic correspondence should receive far greater legal protections and be more difficult for the FBI to read.

Not quite. Because of the way a key federal privacy law was worded in 1986, back in the pre-Internet days of analog modems, floppy disks, and the 2.8 MHz Apple IIgs, e-mail stored in the cloud receives less legal protection than it would if printed out.

For love letters stashed under a mattress, FBI agents would have had to secure a search warrant from a judge to enter Petraeus’ bedroom. Perhaps just as important, he would likely have known that his house had been raided. Front doors bashed in with a “Hydra Ram” forcible entry tool tend to make that obvious. So does Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

But for love letters stored in draft format on Gmail, something that Petraeus and biographer Paula Broadwell reportedly did, the Justice Department claims that police have the right to access those without a search warrant. It says only a subpoena, signed by a prosecutor without a judge’s prior approval and without demonstrating probable cause related to a crime, is necessary.

In a legal brief (PDF) filed with a federal appeals court in a previous case, the Justice Department argues that draft e-mail messages aren’t in “electronic storage” and therefore “do not” require the FBI to obtain search warrants to peruse them.

Another oversight in the 1986 law, called the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), is that you won’t even know if police are poking through your e-mail accounts. (Contrast this with the notification requirements for searching bank records.)

Courts have not required police to notify account holders of e-mail searches. In a 2009 ruling (PDF), a federal district judge in Oregon ruled that notifying the Internet or Web e-mail provider was sufficient under both ECPA and the Fourth Amendment. The court’s conclusion: the “notice requirement is satisfied when a valid warrant is obtained and served on the holder of the property to be seized, the ISP.”

via Petraeus e-mail affair highlights U.S. privacy law loopholes | Politics and Law – CNET News.

Whenever a woman crosses the borders, her male guardian (father, husband or son) is automatically texted.

Saudi camels have more freedom of movement and more civil rights…just so you know how poorly the kingdom values their women.

Denied the right to travel without consent from their male guardians and banned from driving, women in Saudi Arabia are now monitored by an electronic system that tracks any cross-border movements.

Since last week, Saudi women’s male guardians began receiving text messages on their phones informing them when women under their custody leave the country, even if they are travelling together.

Manal al-Sherif, who became the symbol of a campaign launched last year urging Saudi women to defy a driving ban, began spreading the information on Twitter, after she was alerted by a couple.

The husband, who was travelling with his wife, received a text message from the immigration authorities informing him that his wife had left the international airport in Riyadh.

“The authorities are using technology to monitor women,” said columnist Badriya al-Bishr, who criticised the “state of slavery under which women are held” in the ultra-conservative kingdom.

via Saudi Arabia implements electronic tracking system for women | The Raw Story.

Extra-judicial 1st, 4th & 5th amendment violations…all in the name of “security”.

From Nov 27, 2012 NY Times:

When a cellphone is reported stolen in New York, the Police Department routinely subpoenas the phone’s call records, from the day of the theft onward. The logic is simple: If a thief uses the phone, a list of incoming and outgoing calls could lead to the suspect.

But in the process, the Police Department has quietly amassed a trove of telephone logs, all obtained without a court order, that could conceivably be used for any investigative purpose.The call records from the stolen cellphones are integrated into a database known as the Enterprise Case Management System, according to Police Department documents from the detective bureau.

via New York City Police Amassing a Trove of Cellphone Logs – NYTimes.com.

Hurray for stupid criminals…

Request to terrorists, rapists, murderers, thieves – PLEASE post your thoughts & pictures on facebook…

Four Los Angeles area men learned the hard way that if you use Facebook to plan your terrorist training and murderous plots, federal authorities will find you and shut you down in a hurry.

Federal officials arrested the four men who officials allege were on their way to Afghanistan to train with the Taliban and join al-Qaeda, after which they planned on killing American soldiers and bombing government installations, according to a joint statement issued yesterday by the FBI and the U.S. Attorney in Los Angeles.

via FBI Arrest 4 Men After Learning Their Terrorist Plans on Facebook.

Somedays, 1984 reads like a happy comedy.  Real life exceeds Room 101.

Sattar Beheshti, a blogger, was arrested on October 30 for anti-government views expressed on his personal blog and Facebook page. The following week he was pronounced dead by the authorities, and a probe into his death was launched after allegations that he died under torture by the cyber police created a public outrage in the media.

In recent months, several people have been arrested in Iran for their activities on Facebook.

via Another Facebook arrest carried out in Iran.

Kids will do stupid things.

Illegal things too.

Social Media will ensure it haunts them forever…

University of Wisconsin-La Crosse student Adam Bauer was ticketed for underage drinking in November 2009 after accepting a friend request from a seemingly good-looking girl on Facebook. The request was actually a ruse from La Crosse police, who had set up a sting to catch underage drinkers. Bauer had posted photos of himself holding a beer, an act that ultimately led to his $227 fine. Bauer was at least one of eight people who said they had been cited for photos posted on social-networking sites.

via A tall glass of entrapment – Most notorious Facebook arrests.

Welcome to the Balkanization of the internet.

While I’m no fan of Facebook, laws like these will hamper freedom & civil rights.

I’ve always said that with Social Media, you need to worry about your friends – even if you do everything right, and your friends make a mistake or break the law, you may be found guilty by association.

This law turns that premise into reality.  If you ‘like’ a friend’s post, and that friend is found guilty of ["cybersex," identity theft, hacking, spamming, or pornography], then you are automatically guilty of the same.

From CBSnews.com

With more than 25 million Filipinos on Facebook and close to 10 million on Twitter, Filipinos rank among the top 10 users of both sites in the world.

But if you’re one of those who seldom think twice about “liking” a friend’s post on Facebook or re-tweeting someone else’s tweet, think again. Doing so in the Philippines may land you in jail.

On Sept. 12, President Benigno Aquino III signed into law the Cybercrime Prevention Act, which defines several new acts of crimes committed online, including, among others, “cybersex,” identity theft, hacking, spamming, and pornography.But while all that’s good, certain provisions of the law have millions of Filipinos up in arms – foremost of which is online libel.

“If you click ‘like,’ you can be sued, and if you share, you can also be sued,” said Sen. Teofisto Guingona III, one of the lawmakers who voted against the passage of the law.

“Even Mark Zuckerberg can be charged with cyber-libel,” the senator said.

via Facebook’s “like” may land Filipinos in jail – CBS News.

In the 1990′s we spent $ 2.5 BILLION to sequence the human genome.

Thanks to Moore’s law (computing power doubles every 18 months) and revolutionary breakthroughs in DNA sequencing, pretty soon, DNA sequencing will cost less than $ 1,000 per sample.

And several companies, including easyDNA are marketing their services to employers, spouses and lawyers.

So, who’s been tracking YOUR DNA? No one knows.

What rights do you have to data about your DNA?  None.

They’re called discreet DNA samples, and the Elk Grove, California, genetic-testing company easyDNA says it can handle many kinds, from toothpicks to tampons.Blood stains from bandages and tampons? Ship them in a paper envelope for paternity, ancestry or health testing. EasyDNA also welcomes cigarette butts two to four, dental floss “do not touch the floss with your fingers”, razor clippings, gum, toothpicks, licked stamps and used tissues if the more standard cheek swab or tube of saliva isn’t obtainable.If the availability of such services seems like an invitation to mischief or worse – imagine a discarded tissue from a prospective employee being tested to determine whether she’s at risk for an expensive disease, for instance – the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues agrees.

via Citing privacy concerns, U.S. panel urges end to secret DNA testing | Reuters.

Hospital Implements New Minimum Necessary Polices for Telephone Messages

Covered Entity: General Hospital

Issue: Minimum Necessary; Confidential Communications

A hospital employee did not observe minimum necessary requirements when she left a telephone message with the daughter of a patient that detailed both her medical condition and treatment plan. An OCR investigation also indicated that the confidential communications requirements were not followed, as the employee left the message at the patient’s home telephone number, despite the patient’s instructions to contact her through her work number. To resolve the issues in this case, the hospital developed and implemented several new procedures. One addressed the issue of minimum necessary information in telephone message content. Employees were trained to provide only the minimum necessary information in messages, and were given specific direction as to what information could be left in a message. Employees also were trained to review registration information for patient contact directives regarding leaving messages. The new procedures were incorporated into the standard staff privacy training, both as part of a refresher series and mandatory yearly compliance training.

via All Case Examples.