Posteo.de - News

US: Maine legislature passes data center moratorium

2026-04-16T08:03:00+02:00

More and more power and water-consuming data centers are being built in the United States, driven by the expanded use of AI and cryptocurrencies. The state of Maine is poised to approve a moratorium on new construction.

Other US states are considering similar legislation. (Source: IMAGO / Wirestock)

The Maine state legislature on Tuesday passed a moratorium on the construction of large data centers. The moratorium would be in place until November 2027. According to US media, it is the first such law to pass at the state level.

The state House of Representatives and Senate both passed the bill on Tuesday. Before it becomes law, it must be signed by Maine’s governor, Janet Mills. Mills, a Democrat, has called for an exemption for a smaller-scale data center that is already under development. According to CNN, however, the governor has signaled that she would support the law if it cleared the legislature.

The legislation would impose a moratorium on new large-scale data centers: under the law, no permits would be issued for the construction or operation of data centers with a load of 20 megawatts or more until November 1, 2027. The Wall Street Journal reports that 20 megawatts is enough electricity to power more than 15,000 US households. According to an analysis by the Washington Post, the average load for new data centers being planned in the US is 430 megawatts – enough to power a city with a population of 500,000.

Council to assess environmental impacts

The law creates a new advisory body to assess the potential impacts of data centers on the electrical grid and in other areas. The Maine Data Center Coordination Council would also review potential environmental impacts, including with regard to water use and emissions. The council would offer guidance to municipalities seeking to assess potential impacts and benefits.

Under the legislation, the council would have to submit a final report with recommendations, including for proposed legislation, by February 2027.

The legislation was proposed by Democratic state representative Melanie Sachs. As Sachs told CNN, the moratorium is meant to give energy and environmental regulators enough time to come up with guidelines for the construction of large-scale data centers. Maine could be a model for other US states: according to news reports, eleven other states are currently considering draft legislation to place limits on or temporarily stop the construction of new data centers. These include states governed by Democratic lawmakers, such as New York, as well as Republican-led states like Oklahoma.

AI boom

Last year a coalition of more than 230 organizations, including the environmental groups Food & Water Watch, Greenpeace USA, and Friends of the Earth, called for a moratorium on new data centers in the US.

The groups attributed the rise in data center construction to artificial intelligence (AI) and cryptocurrencies. In calling for a moratorium on new construction, they noted that the rapid expansion of server farms leads to a rise in energy consumption, which in turn leads to an increase in fossil fuel pollution. The burning of fossil fuels releases large quantities of the greenhouse gases that are the chief cause of global warming. According to one estimate, a single ChatGPT query uses up to ten times as much energy as a classic internet search.

According to Food & Water Watch, AI servers could consume as much energy annually as would be necessary to power 28 million American households.

Data centers also need vast quantities of water to cool their servers. According to an analysis by Food & Water Watch, if the number of data centers in the US were to triple, the amount of water the facilities would require would equal the amount used by 18.5 million households.

Rising electricity costs

The groups also pointed out that data centers’ hunger for resources is causing a spike in electricity prices across the country. Democratic state representative Amy Roeder of Maine told CNN that rising electricity costs are already a heavy burden for the state’s residents. “To put a data center that’s going to use up a lot of resources in the middle of this just feels irresponsible,” Roeder said.

Mitch Jones of Food & Water Watch praised the moratorium. Maine, he said, is “at the forefront of a large and swelling national movement to put a halt to the reckless, unchecked explosive growth of hyperscale AI data centers.” He criticized the facilities, which consume “unimaginable amounts of water and electricity” and “wreak havoc” on the residents of nearby communities.

Draft legislation for a nationwide moratorium

In March, US Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez proposed legislation that would impose a nationwide moratorium on the construction of large-scale AI data centers. The moratorium would be in place “until legislation is enacted that safeguards the public from the dangers of artificial intelligence.” The bill would require steps to ensure that any new data centers would not exacerbate the climate crisis or harm the environment. It also calls for provisions to curb the potentially harmful impacts of AI on privacy and civil rights.

Resistance to new data centers in the US has been growing at the local level as well. According to Data Center Watch, as of March 2025, $64 billion in data center projects had been blocked or delayed by such efforts. The nonpartisan research firm cites several concerns driving local opposition – from worries over increased water and energy demand to concerns about noise and the impact on property values.

Jason Beckfield, a sociology professor at Harvard University, told CNN that it can be difficult for local communities to keep up with the pace of new data center development. In many cases the facilities are built on highly accelerated timelines and are surrounded by a “culture of secrecy.” Projects often feel “like they fall out of the sky.” But, Beckfield said, growing local opposition is a “serious force to be reckoned with.” (js)

Mounting criticism of Meta's plans for facial recognition-equipped smart glasses

2026-04-15T08:02:00+02:00

US civil liberties groups warn of the impact on privacy if Meta equips its smart glasses with facial recognition. They urge the company not to introduce the feature.

The organizations fear that abuse would be “inevitable.” (Source: IMAGO / snowfieldphotography)

A broad coalition of 75 organizations is criticizing Meta’s reported plans to integrate facial recognition technology into its so-called “smart glasses.” Such a move would be a “red line society must not cross.”

In an open letter to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, the groups urge the company to abandon its plans. The coalition is led by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and includes civil liberties and digital rights organizations like Access Now, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), and the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC). They are joined as well by groups representing victims of domestic violence, workers rights, and consumer interests.

The letter references a February article in the New York Times which reported that Meta could potentially add a facial recognition feature to its smart glasses as early as this year. Meta began selling the glasses, which it produces in collaboration with Ray Ban’s parent company EssilorLuxottica, in 2021. The glasses are now equipped with so-called artificial intelligence (AI). Last year the company sold more than seven million pairs.

Threat to privacy

The organizations warn that equipping the glasses with a facial recognition feature would pose a threat to the privacy and civil rights of every member of society. Anyone wearing the glasses could surveil every person they encounter, without their knowledge. This is a “dystopian” thought.

The technology would make it impossible for people to remain anonymous in public. Abuse would be “inevitable,” the groups write in the letter. The glasses would enable wearers to track the movements and activities of elected officials, activists, and others. Having to contend with the possibility of constant surveillance endangers people’s right to participate in society.

“Powerful weapon”

Marginalized and vulnerable groups face the gravest risks, the groups argue. Giving stalkers the tools to identify and track women and girls, for example, would create a “terrifying” situation. The organizations warn: “The last thing Meta should do is hand abusers and stalkers a powerful weapon they can use to cause harm.”

The letter also warns of a danger to the LGBTQ+ community – and to abortion providers. Opponents of abortion could, for instance, use smart glasses to identify people visiting reproductive health clinics.

The organizations argue further that the technology is “primed to be coopted for police surveillance.” They cite reports that agents working for US Customs and Border Protection have been seen wearing Meta glasses while conducting immigration raids. If the glasses are equipped with facial recognition, federal agents “could use them to automate the targeting of Latino, Asian, and Black immigrant populations.” This could lead to the additional risk of false matches, given that facial recognition has been shown to be less accurate at identifying people of color.

Not a hypothetical scenario

Immigration agents equipped with Meta’s technology could also use it to target nonviolent protesters, human rights observers, and government critics, the letter’s signatories warn. This could cause “grave harm to our democracy.”

The examples cited in the letter “are not edge cases or hypothetical harms,” the writers stress. Rather they are the “predictable consequences” of equipping Meta’s smart glasses with an “inherently invasive, unethical, and unreliable technology.”

According to the report in the New York Times, decision makers at Meta consider the present moment to be an opportune time for introducing the feature. An internal company document expresses optimism that given the current political upheaval in the US, “civil society groups that we would expect to attack us” might not have the resources to do so. The letter strongly criticizes Meta’s reported plans to take advantage of “rising authoritarianism” and the current presidential administration’s “disregard for the rule of law.” This is “vile behavior,” the signatories write.

Earlier plans

In 2021, even before the product was first released, there were reports that Meta was considering integrating facial recognition tools into its glasses. The company eventually dropped the plans, likely in part due to ethical considerations. That year the company also deactivated the facial recognition feature on Facebook, citing “growing societal concerns.”

The organizations note that concerns with facial recognition have only grown in the years since then. Meanwhile, “consumers have no reason to trust Meta to manage the complex social and political problems” posed by facial recognition. This is evident from the billions of dollars in penalties the company has had to pay in recent years for privacy violations and misuse of customer data.

Given these considerations, the groups call on Meta to commit to protecting the public – and to not introducing a facial recognition feature in either its glasses or any other product.

The organizations also urge the company to publicly disclose any known cases of Meta smart glasses being abused. Additionally, the company should disclose any past or ongoing discussions with law enforcement about the use of devices like Meta’s glasses by government agents. This transparency should also extend to the sharing of data from Meta’s wearables with government agencies.

Cody Venzke of the ACLU said in a statement: “The principle here is quite simple: Your glasses should not know my name.”

Growing criticism

With their open letter to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, the organizations join a growing chorus of criticism of the company’s reported facial recognition plans. Earlier this month more than 60 organizations led by the Consumer Federation of America condemned the plans and warned that they pose a danger to the “entire public.”

Last month US senators Edward Markey, Jeffrey Merkley, and Ron Wyden wrote to Zuckerberg and warned of the dangers of the technology.

And in February, shortly after the Times report appeared, the Electronic Privacy Information Center called on the US Federal Trade Commission to put a stop to Meta’s facial recognition plans.

Secretly filmed

In January the BBC reported on two cases involving women who were filmed without their consent by men wearing smart glasses. The videos were later posted online.

One of the women was filmed after sunbathing at the beach. The video drew hundreds of comments online, many of them derogatory or sexually explicit. The woman told the BBC: “It really freaked me out – it made me feel afraid to go out in public.” (js)

Google's AI-generated headlines draw criticism

2026-04-14T08:57:00+02:00

Google is testing a feature that changes the headlines of news articles in its search results. The feature has drawn criticism.

The AI summaries displayed in Google search results have long drawn criticism. (Source: IMAGO / Bihlmayerfotografie)

Google is currently testing an AI feature that rewrites the headlines of some news articles. Experts warn that the company is “playing with fire.”

As the US tech magazine the Verge reports, starting a few months ago, Google began modifying the headlines of news articles displayed in its search results. In the past months, staffers at the magazine have seen numerous articles listed under different headlines. Other publications have also been affected.

In response to a query from the Verge, Google confirmed that it is modifying headlines. Spokespersons for the company described what they call an “experiment” in which headlines are being rewritten by so-called “artificial intelligence” (AI). The company told the Verge that the new headlines are meant to provide “a useful and relevant title to a users’ [sic] query.” It’s unclear if the current test is limited to the US – Google would not answer the Verge’s queries about the full extent of the experiment.

No indication

The Verge criticized the Google-generated headlines, noting that they don’t follow the magazine’s editorial style – and that Google gives no indication that they were automatically generated.

In some cases, the new headlines distort the meaning of the original: one headline was abbreviated in such a way that, according to the Verge, it could give the impression that the magazine was endorsing a product – even though the corresponding article actually criticizes the product. Speaking to PCMag, Google even admitted that the automatically generated headlines are not always correct.

Credibility at stake

The Verge warns that while Google may call the new practice an “experiment,” its use of AI headlines could soon be expanded for more large-scale use. The company already did something similar with its personalized news feed Google Discover: in December, the Verge reported that Google Discover was changing its articles’ headlines. The magazine described the Google-generated alternative headlines as “nonsense” and “misleading.”

While Google initially told the Verge that it was conducting an “experiment,” a month later the company said that the automated headlines were a new “feature.” Some of the headlines seen by the Verve make claims that are completely at odds with the corresponding articles. As the magazine notes: “This is like a bookstore ripping the covers off the books it puts on display and changing their titles.”

The Verge adds: “Changing headlines, and their meaning, makes journalism less trustworthy at a time when powerful institutions are trying to discredit it, and when many news organizations are struggling just to keep the lights on.”

Radically transforming journalists’ words

Reporters without Borders (RSF) has also voiced criticism. The organization calls on Google to stop experimenting with AI-generated headlines. “Google has crossed a new line,” RSF writes.

Vincent Berthier of RSF said in a statement: “Caught up in a frantic race to develop AI, the world’s largest tech companies are becoming increasingly confident that they can do journalists’ writing for them, even though their systems don’t have the rigor, the ethics, or the social responsibility of a professional journalist.”

Berthier added: “This new Google experiment is not a matter of cosmetic adjustments – it radically transforms journalists’ words. Rewriting an article headline without the consent of its newsroom amounts to claiming a right that Google does not have. It is also a direct and blatant attack on the editorial freedom of news outlets.”

Speaking to RSF, Google claimed it was conducting a “small” test and argued that it has been modifying webpage titles in its search results since 2021. But as Sean Hollister of the Verge told RSF, the changes Google had made previously were “very simple,” and mostly involved abbreviating a headline’s length. “But that’s very, very different from what they’re doing now,” said Hollister. Hollister warned that if readers notice misleading or false headlines, they could lose faith in the publications whose articles are displayed in Google’s search results – even though the publications themselves are not at fault.

Apple also generated false headlines

This is not the first time that AI-modified headlines have drawn criticism. In December 2024, the BBC complained to Apple after its Apple Intelligence feature misleadingly abbreviated a BBC headline. The headline was truncated in such a way that it claimed a suspect in a US murder case had shot himself – which was not true. Apple temporarily paused the feature in response.

A BBC spokesperson said at the time: “It is essential to us that our audiences can trust any information or journalism published in our name.”

Criticism of Google’s AI summaries

Google’s AI Overview feature has also drawn criticism. In response to certain queries, the site now displays an automatically generated summary of the queried topic at the top of the list of search results. A January investigation by the Guardian revealed that the summaries had displayed false and misleading information on health-related topics.

As the New York Times reported last week, a recent analysis showed that on average, roughly 10 percent of Google’s AI summaries are inaccurate. According to the Times, Google processes more than five trillion searches a year, meaning that every minute, hundreds of thousands of inaccurate responses are generated. The analysis also found that more than half of the accurate responses were “ungrounded”: the websites they linked to did not fully support the information they provided. “This makes it challenging to check AI Overviews’ accuracy,” the Times wrote. (js)

Organizations warn of smart glasses-enabled surveillance

2026-04-13T11:25:00+02:00

A coalition of US civil society organizations has urged Meta not to add a facial recognition tool to its smart glasses.

The groups fear an escalation of surveillance. (Source: IMAGO / snowfieldphotography)

A coalition of 64 US civil society groups has criticized Meta’s reported plans to integrate facial recognition technology into its so-called “smart glasses.” The groups warn that such a move would pose a danger to everyone.

Meta first introduced its smart glasses, which it manufactures in collaboration with Ray Ban’s parent company EssilorLuxottica, in 2021. The glasses are now equipped with so-called artificial intelligence (AI), enabling them, for example, to provide wearers with information about their surroundings. Last year more than seven million pairs were sold, and last month the company announced two new models.

In February the New York Times reported that Facebook was planning to equip the glasses with recognition technology.

Last month the 64 organizations published an open letter addressed to Meta and EssorLuxottica as well as the White House, the US Federal Trade Commission, the Justice Department, several state attorneys general, and key congressional leaders. In the letter, the groups express their vehement opposition to the integration of facial recognition in Meta’s glasses.

Leading the opposition to Meta’s plan are the Consumer Federation of America, a coalition of nearly 250 consumer organizations, and the feminist organization UltraViolet Action. Other signatories to the letter include the American Federation of Teachers, digital rights organizations like the Electronic Privacy Information Center and the Center for Democracy and Technology, and several state-level organizations.

“Dangerous and reckless plan”

The organizations criticize what they call a “dangerous and reckless plan” to equip Meta glasses with facial recognition. They argue that the move endangers everyone, especially given that “scammers, blackmailers, stalkers, child abusers, and authoritarian regimes” could also potentially utilize the technology.

In 2021, even before the product hit the market, there were reports that Meta was considering integrating facial recognition tools into its glasses. The company eventually dropped the plans, likely in part due to ethical considerations. That year the company also deactivated the facial recognition feature on Facebook, citing “growing societal concerns.”

But as the New York Times reported in February, Meta is again planning to add facial recognition to its smart glasses – the “Name Tag” feature could be introduced as early as this year.

According to the Times’s reporting, decision makers at Meta consider this an opportune moment for introducing the feature. An internal company document expresses optimism that given the current political upheaval in the US, “civil society groups that we would expect to attack us” might not have the resources to do so.

The 64 signatories to the letter write that they are committed to opposing this “creepy and unacceptable escalation of surveillance.”

Glasses enable surveillance

The groups write that even without facial recognition, smart glasses create a world where people can be secretly filmed or photographed. The company has sought to address these concerns by pointing out that a small LED light on the glasses’ frame indicates when the wearer is using the camera. But the groups dismiss this feature as “barely noticeable.” The LED is also reportedly easy to conceal and even deactivate.

A recent media investigation also revealed that footage taken by the glasses is in some cases reviewed by human workers. In the letter, the signatories point out that these recordings are at risk of being shared, sold, or otherwise misused. “Add facial recognition to the mix, and the threat of weaponization increases exponentially.”

The organizations argue that Meta is fully aware of the problematic aspects of its product, and point to the millions of dollars that the company spends to oppose AI regulation. They call on the company to change course. If the company does bring the feature on the market, the groups are resolved to “use every lever possible” to oppose it.

Criticism from US senators

Last month, US senators Edward Markey, Jeffrey Merkley, and Ron Wyden wrote to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and asked for information on the company’s reported facial recognition plans. They warned that a facial recognition tool in smart glasses was “one of the most dangerous possible settings” for the technology.

Smart glasses are “often indistinguishable from regular glasses,” the senators noted, and are thus designed to be worn all day. An average user could encounter hundreds or even thousands of people in public spaces. These people’s faces would all be captured by the glasses – though some might not even be aware that their faces had been scanned.

The senators warn that smart glasses equipped with facial recognition would “effectively [eliminate] public anonymity.” The glasses could also contribute to a normalization of mass surveillance.

In February the Electronic Privacy Information Center urged the Federal Trade Commission to put a stop to Meta’s facial recognition plans. The organization warned that these plans would have dire consequences, putting everyone “at risk of stalking, harassment, doxxing, and worse.”

Women covertly filmed

In January the BBC reported on two cases involving women who were filmed without their consent by men wearing smart glasses. The videos were later posted online.

Hearing about such cases inspired a professor at the Osnabrück University of Applied Sciences to create a smartphone app, Nearby Glasses, that alerts users when someone nearby is wearing smart glasses. In describing the project, the professor called the devices an “intolerable intrusion,” a “consent neglecting, horrible piece of tech.” (js)

Brazil: Reporters without Borders sues over illegal surveillance

2026-04-09T07:51:00+02:00

Reporters without Borders has filed a lawsuit challenging the Brazilian government’s illegal surveillance of journalists. The suit aims to secure institutional acknowledgement of grave violations of press freedom.

Ex-president Jair Bolsonaro was sentenced last year to 27 years in prison. (Source: IMAGO / Anadolu Agency)

Reporters without Borders (RSF) is suing the Brazilian government, alleging that when former president Jair Bolsonaro was in office, the Brazilian Intelligence Agency (ABIN) carried out illegal surveillance of journalists. RSF was one of several organizations and individuals who were reportedly spied on.

RSF is joined in the suit by the National Federation of Journalists (Fenaj), the Brazilian Association of Investigative Journalism, (Abraji), the Union of Professional Journalists of the State of São Paulo, and the international human rights organization Article 19.

The aim of the lawsuit, which the plaintiff organizations filed on Tuesday, is to secure the “immediate implementation of measures” by the current Brazilian government to “prohibit all forms of illegal surveillance against journalists,” and to ensure that surveillance activities like wiretapping or cell phone location monitoring are carried out only with judicial authorization.

Calling for better protections

The groups are also seeking “institutional reforms to prevent further violations.” These reforms would include stronger oversight of Brazil’s intelligence agency. Training programs for intelligence agents and public employees would also have to include information on press freedom and protecting journalistic sources.

Artur Romeu, Director of RSF Latin America, explained that the lawsuit is not about securing individual compensation. Rather RSF and its co-plaintiffs are seeking “recognition of the gravity of these violations” as well as “structural improvements.” The groups hope to set a legal precedent.

“Parallel” intelligence agency

The far-right Bolsonaro was president of Brazil from 2019 to January 1, 2023. The Brazilian Federal Police accuses him of setting up an illegal spying network within Brazil’s intelligence agency during his time in office. The intelligence agency, ABIM, reports directly to the president.

The head of ABIN during Bolsonaro’s term, Alexandre Ramagem, is alleged to have led the spy network, which investigators describe as a “criminal organization.” Both Bolsonaro and Ramagem have denied wrongdoing.

According to the investigation, the spy network carried out illegal surveillance on numerous targets, including supreme court ministers and rival politicians. At least one respected official for the environmental agency IBAMA was also reportedly spied on – the official was a strong advocate for protecting the Amazon. Bolsonaro presided over an increase in environmental destruction in the Amazon during his time in office.

Members of the press and civil society organizations were also allegedly spied on. According to news reports, the “parallel” spy network used technology available to the official intelligence agency – including tools that allowed it to track cell phone locations.

Targeted in response to communications campaign

In June 2025, Brazil’s Supreme Court declassified parts of a report by the Federal Police relating to the “parallel ABIN.” According to the report, RSF was one of the organizations targeted for surveillance.

As the organization reported last year, members of the spy network discussed an RSF communications campaign in support of press freedom under Bolsonaro and called for gathering information on the organization. The exact extent of the surveillance is not yet known.

RSF has filed a request with the Supreme Court to determine what information was gathered – but according to the organization, the Brazilian authorities have yet to respond.

RSF Latin America Director Romeu said in a statement: “When state intelligence structures are diverted to spy on journalists, we are facing a direct attack on press freedom and democracy.”

State of press freedom

During Bolsonaro’s time in power, the state of press freedom in Brazil worsened. The former president was hostile to the press “up to his final day in office,” RSF notes. Bolsonaro repeatedly leveled verbal attacks at the media and accused major outlets of publishing fake news.

In 2020 alone, RSF documented 581 primarily verbal attacks on journalists, media outlets, and press institutions. Many of these came from Bolsonaro himself, and even more came from his sons. The organization noted at the time that press freedom in the country had not faced a greater threat since the end of the military dictatorship in 1985.

In 2022, the last year of President Bolsonaro’s term, Brazil was ranked 110th of 180 countries on RSF’s World Press Freedom Index. On the latest index the country is ranked 63rd. RSF reports that the relationship between journalists in the government has stabilized under Brazil’s new president, Luis Inácio Lula da Silva. Nevertheless, the organization warns that there are still major challenges to press freedom in the country – including structural violence against members of the press.

In September of last year, Jair Bolsonaro was sentenced to 27 years in prison for his role in plotting a coup in connection with the 2022 presidential election – he is currently serving the sentence under house arrest. His son Flávio is a candidate in this year’s presidential election. (js)

52 countries imposed internet shutdowns last year

2026-04-08T07:59:00+02:00

Last year 52 countries imposed partial or total internet shutdowns. The blackouts were often imposed amidst armed conflict.

Conflicts, protests, elections: millions of people were affected by internet shutdowns last year. (Source: IMAGO / Zoonar)

In 2025, the governments of 52 states imposed at least 313 internet shutdowns. Many occurred in connection with armed conflicts, wars, protests, or elections. The shutdowns are documented in an annual report published last week by Access Now.

According to the report, last year saw the highest number of internet shutdowns since record-keeping began in 2016.

Felicia Anthonio of Access Now said in a statement: “Year after year, authorities seek the power to influence elections, silence and isolate people, and attack our rights with impunity behind the digital armor of deliberate internet shutdowns. Not one of the 365 days of 2025 passed without perpetrators wielding shutdowns to lock entire populations out of communication, education, information, democratic participation, and emergency services.”

Myanmar and India the most frequent offenders

For the second year in a row, Myanmar recorded the most internet shutdowns – there were at least 95 in the country. Since seizing power in a 2021 coup, the ruling military junta has often resorted to this tactic. The restrictions have far-reaching consequences, including hampering rescue operations after the devastating earthquake in March 2025.

The junta frequently cuts access to the internet in places where it is involved in clashes with resistance groups. Access Now cites the account of a worker for an aid organization active in Myanmar: “We […] keep our eyes on our mobile phone connections – the moment the signal drops, we immediately take cover in underground shelters. We’ve come to understand that a loss of communication signals an impending airstrike.”

In India, there were 65 shutdowns last year, and in Pakistan 20, according to the report. Access Now criticizes what it calls an increasing normalization of the measure in connection with protests, political tensions, and religious holidays in the two countries.

Access Now also documented 19 shutdowns imposed by Russian authorities, three of which impacted Ukraine. The organization is currently investigating many more reports of incidents in Russia in which mobile internet networks were blocked in individual regions of the country. Many platforms, including Facebook and WhatsApp, are blocked throughout Russia.

In Iran there were at least 11 internet shutdowns last year, according to Access Now – these were mainly intended to control the flow of information in the country.

Seven countries imposed internet shutdowns for the first time in 2025, including Albania, Angola, Cambodia, and Panama.

War and armed conflict

For the third year in a row, Access Now identified war and armed conflict as the most common trigger for internet shutdowns: warring parties in 14 countries cut access to communications 125 times. The countries included Ethiopia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, India, Iran, Israel, Myanmar, and Sudan.

Access Now regards this as an alarming development. Parties in conflicts are systematically blocking access to the internet “as part of the means and methods of warfare,” Access Now warns. Cutting communications involves a diverse array of tactics, with perpetrators destroying telecommunications and power infrastructure, deploying jamming devices, or using cyberattacks to take services offline.

In some cases these measures are used to mask grave human rights abuses. When the M23 rebel group seized control of the city of Goma in the Democratic Republic of Congo, the authorities cut access to the internet in the city. Hundreds of people died in the fighting, and many more were displaced. Amidst demonstrations in Nepal, security forces killed more than 70 people and injured more than two thousand – for several days, the government had blocked numerous messaging and social media platforms.

Access Now documented 64 shutdowns in 19 countries in connection with protests. Angola, India, Indonesia, Iran, Kenya, and Tanzania were among the countries that resorted to the measure. In only a third of cases did the authorities even admit to having imposed an internet shutdown – with the exception of India, where there is a legal requirement to publish shutdown orders. When the authorities did acknowledge cutting access, they frequently claimed the shutdowns were intended to protect national security or public safety – “even though,” as Access Now writes, “the majority of these shutdowns were tied to anti-government protests or protests by opposition parties.”

There were a total of 12 shutdowns in eight countries during elections last year. Most of these occurred in Africa, in Cameroon, Guinea, Uganda, and Tanzania.

Shutdowns during exams

Some governments resorted to shutdowns to prevent cheating in school or university exams – including in Algeria, Iraq, Jordan, Kenya, Sudan, and Syria. Access Now calls such measures disproportionate, noting that the entire population suffers.

The organization also includes individual platform blocks in its annual tally. According to the report, the number of such blocks reached a new high: there were 94 platform blocks in 40 countries last year – up from 77 blocks in 37 countries in 2024. Such measures force people to make do without important means of communication in times of crisis, Access Now writes.

Targeting platforms and alternatives

Facebook was the most frequent target (it was blocked 31 times in 18 countries), followed by WhatsApp (23 times in 13 countries) and Telegram (23 times in 16 countries). Instagram, X (formerly Twitter), TikTok, and Signal were also targeted. The dating app Grindr was blocked in 13 countries.

According to the report, the number of cross-border internet shutdowns increased. This category of shutdown includes a range of actions, such as the destruction of infrastructure by warring parties. In an effort to combat cybercrime, Thailand ordered that internet and phone service, as well as electricity, be cut off in a border region in Myanmar. “Local communities were significantly impacted,” according to Access Now.

The organization also observed a growing trend of states cracking down on alternative connectivity options like satellite internet providers. Iran banned the sale and import of unauthorized internet tools in June 2025 – violating the ban is potentially punishable by death. Chad shut down Starlink satellite internet access in two refugee camps for three days, blocking the only means of internet access for the people in the camps.

Mounting resistance

Despite these negative trends, the organization notes some positive developments. “There is increasing recognition that internet shutdowns violate human rights and undermine democratic processes,” Access Now reports. To cite one instance: Election observers declared the October elections in Tanzania to be undemocratic after the internet was shut down across the country on the day of the election.

The Economic Community of West African States Court of Justice also ruled that the internet shutdowns imposed in Senegal in 2023 were unlawful. In other countries, civil society groups have challenged such measures in national courts.

Legislation has been proposed in Bangladesh that would ban the disruption or restriction of phone and internet service.

Summing up the trends in 2025, Access Now writes that while the number of internet shutdowns worldwide grew, so did the resistance to these measures.

The organization calls on countries around the world to “refrain from shutting down the internet.” International norms must also be strengthened to prevent such measures. State parties to conflict “should immediately halt any behavior resulting in shutdowns affecting civilian communities.” Measures to protect civilian telecommunications capability should be included in peace negotiations.

Access Now also recommends that aid organizations develop measures to provide emergency connectivity during crises and conflicts. States, international organizations, and other actors should invest in alternative connectivity options like satellite internet. (js)

US: Woman detained for months after facial recognition error

2026-04-01T08:06:00+02:00

A woman in the United States was falsely identified by facial recognition – and kept in jail for months.

Lawyers accuse the police of making no effort to corroborate the facial recognition match. (Source: IMAGO / Panthermedia)

Last year a Tennessee woman had to spend five months in jail after being falsely identified by facial recognition software. The police have since admitted to errors – but have not apologized to the woman.

50-year-old Angela Lipps was arrested on July 14, 2025 in the state of Tennessee in connection with a series of crimes committed in North Dakota. Only after spending three months in jail in Tennessee was she extradited to North Dakota – and finally released, two months after that, on December 24.

As US media report, police in Fargo, North Dakota were investigating several instances of bank fraud involving an as yet unidentified woman who had used a fake military ID to withdraw money from different bank and credit accounts. In order to identify the suspect, detectives in Fargo asked police in neighboring West Fargo, where similar crimes had been committed, for assistance. The West Fargo police used the controversial facial recognition software Clearview AI to search for the suspect. Evidently the police, in running the search, used only the photo that appeared on the fake ID – but not the available surveillance footage. The software suggested Lipps as a possible suspect.

Jailed for months

A Fargo detective reportedly determined, based on the Clearview match, that Lipps was the suspect. It is unclear if the police considered any other evidence. After making the determination, Fargo police obtained a nationwide search warrant for Lipps, who was arrested on July 14. She was held in Tennessee for roughly three months before being transferred to North Dakota – a state she says she had never been to before.

Lipps was only released after the lawyer assigned to her case submitted records showing that at the time the crimes were committed, she was nearly 2,000 kilometers away in Tennessee.

As Lipps told a local television station, the police did not pay for her trip home after her release. Local defense attorneys donated money to pay for her hotel room, and a volunteer drove her to meet her family.

It is unclear why Lipps was held for so long. The police claim that they are not always immediately informed of arrests in other states – but lawyers for Lipps told media that they had seen an email notifying North Dakota police that she had been arrested in Tennessee.

Lipps told local media: “I’m just glad it’s over. I’ll never go back to North Dakota.”

Police admit to “missteps”

Last week the police held a press conference to address the case. Police Chief David Zibolski, who has since retired, admitted that there had been “missteps” leading up to the arrest. “We’re happy to acknowledge when we make errors,” Zibolski said, “and we’ve made a few in this case, for sure.” He did not issue an apology to Lipps, however.

Lipps for her part is planning to sue the police. Her lawyers told media that they were still investigating what went wrong in the case. Jay Greenwood, one of the attorneys, said the case offered a warning against using “AI and facial recognition as the sole tool” for police investigations.

The Clearview facial recognition software used in this case has drawn controversy in the past, in part because it uses billions of photos scraped from the internet. Data protection authorities in several EU states have imposed fines on the company. Hundreds of local police departments in the US reportedly use the software, as do the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI.

The company said in a statement that its software is “designed to function as one tool within the broader investigative process” – it “generates leads” but does not recommend arrests. Use of the tool still requires “independent corroboration by trained law enforcement professionals.”

No attempts to corroborate

Greenwood, Lipps’s attorney, said that the police relied solely on the match generated by Clearview and made no attempt to corroborate the result. The police spoke neither to Lipps nor to anyone who knew her to determine if she was in fact the person they were looking for, Greenwood said. Lipps had been in jail for months before the authorities realized they had the wrong person.

According to news reports, police in Fargo have already instituted new guidelines for the use of facial recognition. In the future, the department will work with state and federal authorities, and all uses of facial recognition will be subject to additional oversight. Fargo police will also no longer make requests or use information provided by West Fargo’s facial recognition system – though West Fargo will continue using Clearview AI.

Wrongful arrests

Angela Lipps’s case is not the first of its kind. There have been numerous instances of wrongful arrests in the US that resulted from the use of automated facial recognition. Similar cases have also been documented in the UK.

The Washington Post reported last year that several police departments in the US have begun relying solely on the technology to identify potential suspects. In some instances, police decline to employ standard investigative methods and ignore their own guidelines on the use of facial recognition.

The Post also reported on a case in New Jersey involving a man who was arrested after police ran a blurry photo through facial recognition software. They ran the search even though investigators had obtained DNA and fingerprint evidence at the scene of the crime that clearly pointed to another suspect. The man who was wrongly arrested was granted a settlement of $300,000 – but the police admitted no wrongdoing. (js)

Internet blackout in Iran enters second month

2026-03-31T08:01:00+02:00

Iranians have not had access to the internet since February 28. Experts warn of harmful consequences for the population.

Human Rights Watch warns of the dangers that internet blackouts pose in times of crisis. (Source: IMAGO / NurPhoto)

The internet in Iran has been blocked for more than a month. This is reportedly the longest uninterrupted internet blackout in the country’s history. UN experts and human rights groups demand an end to the restrictions.

NetBlocks announced on Monday morning that Iran’s “digital blackout” was entering its 31st day. The organization condemned what it called a violation of Iranians’ “right to communicate and stay informed.”

The Iranian authorities imposed the internet blackout on February 28, after the US and Israel launched attacks against the country. According to NetBlocks and other organizations that monitor internet restrictions worldwide, web traffic has sunk drastically since then – affecting the overwhelming majority of the roughly 92 million people who live in the country. Other communications channels are also reportedly cut off.

Government can still use internet

There are exceptions to the restrictions on internet access: a small number of military and government officials can reportedly go online. This was apparent when Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi gave an interview to the US broadcaster CBS news in mid-March. The interview was conducted using the video conference software Zoom. When the moderator asked Araghchi why he, unlike the rest of the Iranian population, had open access to the internet, the foreign minister responded by saying that he was the “voice of Iranians.” The internet had been shut down for “security reasons,” he said. The country was under attack, “and we have to do everything to protect our people.”

Human rights experts dispute this claim and stress that the shutdown subjects the civilian population to additional dangers.

Tomiwa Ilori of Human Rights Watch (HRW) said in a statement: “Shutting down the internet during times of crisis restricts access to lifesaving information, such as where strikes are taking place and how to safely access medical care.” He added: “Internet shutdowns can also contribute to severe psychological harm on people during the conflict as they are unable to contact their loved ones.”

Violation of human rights

Human Rights Watch criticized the restrictions earlier this month, writing that neither the ongoing attacks by the US and Israel, nor Iran’s attacks on several countries in the region, justified a blanket internet shutdown in the country.

The organization condemned what it regards as a violation of human rights. Not only does the blackout hinder access to information, it also promotes the spread of misinformation, HRW said. Furthermore, internet shutdowns can be used to cover up atrocities. The work of journalists and human rights activists is made more difficult – this can also impact the documentation and reporting of potential war crimes.

As the war continues, the shutdown also poses a risk to the civilian population – exacerbating potential harms including injury and death. “The shutdowns prevent people from timely access to information about safety measures, lifesaving services, and sources of food and shelter,” HRW warned. One resident of Tehran told the New York Times earlier this month that most people couldn’t even see the evacuation warnings posted by the US and Israel. The population has no clear understanding of how the war is developing and no sense of what areas are under attack, the person said.

Certain local services reportedly continued to function during the first weeks of the war – but even these have since been disrupted.

Few ways to get around restrictions

NetBlocks noted earlier this month that there were few ways to get around the restrictions. The government is cracking down on users of VPN services, for instance. According to the New York Times, VPN configurations are being advertised on the black market for large sums – but they are easy for the government to block.

Satellite internet providers like Starlink are even more expensive. Their use also carries risks, since they require satellite dishes that are usually installed on rooftops. Starlink was banned last year. Human rights groups report that since the conflict began there have already been arrests of individuals charged with installing Starlink. Security forces have confiscated hardware.

Iranian authorities have imposed internet restrictions on numerous occasions in the past. In January of this year there was a 21-day blackout. The shutdown came amidst anti-government protests, which the authorities suppressed, killing thousands – some organizations believe the death toll was in the tens of thousands. Iran also imposed restrictions on internet access during its twelve-day war with Israel in June 2025 – and during the Woman, Life, Freedom protests in the fall of 2022.

Rights groups demand lifting of restrictions

Human Rights Watch called on the Iranian government to restore access to the internet. The group also called for the international community to support an end to the blackout – and to explore technical solutions for providing internet access to affected populations.

Access Now also calls for an end to the shutdown. The NGO said in a statement: “Protecting and restoring access to open and secure communications networks is a must during armed conflict.”

Earlier this month, Mai Sato, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Iran, likewise called for the immediate restoration of internet access. (js)

United States: Meta and YouTube must pay damages in social media addiction case

2026-03-30T08:02:00+02:00

Meta and YouTube’s products caused mental health problems in a young user, a jury in the US found last week.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg (center) was among those who testified in court. TikTok and Snap had reached settlements with the plaintiff before the trial began. (Source: IMAGO / Anadolu Agency)

Using Instagram and YouTube harmed a young user, a jury in Los Angeles found last week. The companies must now pay damages.

After deliberating for more than a week, the jury reached a verdict stating that the companies had acted negligently, failing to sufficiently inform users of the risks associated with use of their platforms.

As US media report, the jury awarded the plaintiff $3 million in compensatory damages, with Meta responsible for 70 percent of the total amount, and YouTube responsible for the rest. The companies must also pay an additional $3 million in punitive damages, with $2.1 million to be paid by Facebook and $900,000 by YouTube.

The tech companies had been sued by a now 20-year-old plaintiff who was identified in court by her initials, KGM. She had accused the companies of having developed products that were just as addictive as cigarettes or online gambling. The lawsuit was first filed in 2023 – the trial began in the California Superior Court in Los Angeles in late January.

Online at age six

During the trial, KGM testified that she began using YouTube at age six. The video-streaming platform is owned by Google. At nine years old she then started using the Meta photo-sharing site Instagram. At 10 she began suffering from depression and anxiety, which she attributed to her use of the platforms.

KGM told the court that she spent several hours a day on Instagram. She used the beauty filters offered by the platform to mask her insecurities. This led to body dysmorphic disorder, a condition characterized by an unhealthy preoccupation with one’s physical appearance. Using the platforms also impacted her relationships with friends and family. She resorted to self-harm and had thoughts of suicide.

Harmful design

The plaintiff’s attorneys pointed to features like Instagram’s “infinite scroll,” which allows users to continue scrolling in the platform and be shown an endless amount of new content. They also cited the platforms’ algorithmic recommendations and autoplay videos as evidence that the platforms “were designed to entice and hook young users,” as the New York Times reports.

The attorneys presented internal documents from Meta and YouTube as evidence that the companies knew of and discussed the negative effects of their products on children.

Companies deny responsibility

During the trial, the jury heard testimony from whistleblowers and experts on social media and addiction. Top executives at the companies also testified, including Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg.

One of KGM’s lawyers told the Times: “This is the first time in history a jury has heard testimony by [tech company] executives and seen internal documents that we believe prove these companies chose profits over children.”

Meta and YouTube disputed the charges. Meta claimed in court that KGM’s problems were attributable to her family circumstances. YouTube argued that it wasn’t a social media site at all and claimed its platform’s features were not designed to entice children to maximize the time they spend on the site.

The companies have already announced plans to appeal the verdict. YouTube reiterated that it is a “responsibly built streaming platform, not a social media site.”

KGM had also sued TikTok and Snap, the owner of Snapchat. These companies reached a settlement with the plaintiff to avoid going to trial. The details of the settlement have not yet been disclosed.

Bellwether decision

Many similar cases brought by individuals against social media companies are set to go to trial this year – US media report that thousands of such lawsuits have been filed. A set of cases brought by states and school districts are scheduled to go to trial this summer. Observers regard last week’s decision as significant, arguing that it could prove to be a bellwether of the cases to come. The Tech Oversight Project called the ruling an “earthquake for Big Tech”.

Several US media outlets are speculating that the verdict might represent a “Big Tobacco moment” for social media companies, drawing a comparison to the lawsuits brought against tobacco companies like Philip Morris in the 1990s. The companies were accused of having concealed information about the harmful health effects of cigarette smoking. In 1998, Philip Morris, RJ Reynolds and other companies reached a $206 billion settlement with a group of US states. This was followed in the years to come by stricter regulations on smoking in the US.

In an opinion piece for the New York Times, investigative journalist Julia Angwin wrote that compensating users for the harm caused by social media products is “just the silver lining.” The real win, Angwin argued, “would be if the social media giants were finally forced to design less harmful products.”

Some experts warn however that it is still unclear whether last week’s verdict represents a similar turning point – the comparison to the tobacco industry may be premature.

Meta found liable in separate case

A day before the verdict in the California case, a jury in New Mexico found Meta liable for $375 million in damages. The jury determined that the company had misled users about the safety of its platforms. The case was brought by New Mexico’s attorney general, who accused Meta of not sufficiently protecting children from sexual exploitation. Meta has announced that it will appeal.

For years there has been an ongoing debate about the potentially harmful effects of social media sites. In 2021 the whistleblower Frances Haugen revealed that even internal investigations at Meta had confirmed the harmful effects of its products on the mental health of young people. But, Haugen charged, Meta had done too little to counter these effects – and to address other problems like hate speech and disinformation.

Under a law that went into effect in December 2025, children in Australia are barred from using social media until the age of 16. Age limits on social media are currently being discussed in other countries as well, including Germany. (dpa / js)

Mexico: Journalist shot dead

2026-03-26T07:53:00+01:00

In Mexico one journalist was killed, another gravely injured in attacks earlier this month. Reporters without Borders condemns the dangerous situation faced by journalists in the country.

RSF calls on the Mexican government to do more to protect members of the press. (File photo) (Source: IMAGO / Pacific Press Agency)

In the span of two days, two local reporters were shot in Mexico – one of them was killed, Reporters without Borders (RSF) reports. The country is one of the most dangerous for members of the press outside of active war zones, according to the organization.

On March 18, journalist Juan David Gámez was shot and killed. As RSF reports, the killing occurred in García, a city in the northeastern state of Nuevo León. The journalist was reportedly riding his motorcycle near his home when he was attacked by armed assailants and killed.

According to RSF, Juan David Gámez regularly reported on corruption, drug trafficking, road incidents, and police operations in the region. He ran his own news platform and social media channels. Mexican media report that the authorities are investigating death threats the journalist had received – he had written about the threats on social media.

Victim in critical condition

Just two days earlier, on March 16, unknown individuals shot journalist Óscar Merino Ruiz. He survived the attack, but suffered grave injuries and is currently in critical condition, according to RSF. Óscar Merino Ruiz was reportedly walking down the street with his wife in Santiago Pinotepa Nacional, in the southern state of Oaxaca, when the assailants approached on a motorcycle and shot him.

The reporter mainly covered local security issues – according to RSF, there is a likely connection between the shooting and his professional activity. Local media report that the authorities are investigating the case. The governor of Oaxaca, Salomón Jara Cruz, condemned the attack and promised that the investigation would be carried out without delay.

Dangerous work

Maren Pfalzgraf of RSF’s German chapter said in a statement: “The horrifying attacks on Juan David Gámez and Óscar Merino Ruiz within just 48 hours of one another are a stark reminder of how dangerous journalistic work is in Mexico.” Reporters who write about violence, corruption, and organized crime live in acute danger, said Pfalzgraf.

She added: “The authorities must work resolutely to clear up both cases, and must examine whether the victims may have been targeted because of their journalistic work. Under no circumstances can these crimes be allowed to go unpunished.”

Criticism of government

RSF criticized Mexico’s president Claudia Sheinbaum, writing that the attacks on Juan David Gámez and Óscar Merino Ruiz make clear that she is doing too little to ensure the safety of journalists in the country. Sheinbaum has been in power since October 2024. Before taking office she pledged to defend press freedom in the country. This pledge included a commitment to better protect journalists and to work to counter the broad impunity enjoyed by those who commit violence against members of the press.

According to RSF, however, the situation for press freedom in the country has hardly improved since Sheinbaum took office. Mexico continues to be one of the world’s most dangerous countries for journalists, outside of active war zones. Local journalists, especially those who cover security issues, corruption, and organized crime, are particularly vulnerable to violent reprisal.

Last year nine members of the press were murdered in Mexico in connection with their work. In October 2025, local reporter Miguel Ángel Beltrán Martínez was found dead by the side of the road, his body rolled up in a sheet. A message was reportedly left with his body – according to RSF, drug cartels often leave such messages with their victims, as a warning to others. Miguel Ángel Beltrán Martínez reported from the northwestern state of Durango, and had covered the cartels that are active in the state.

Before this month’s killings, at least one journalist had been murdered this year: In January, Carlos Castro was shot by unknown assailants in Poza Rica, Veracruz. The local journalist had reported on security and crime and had earlier been placed in a local protection program after having received threats. The protection measures were later discontinued, however, after the authorities determined that he was no longer at risk.

In February, a wave of violence ensued after the Mexican military killed Nemesios Oseguera Cervantes, known as “El Mencho,” the head of the Jalisco Nueva Generación Cartel. RSF documented attacks on members of the press during the unrest.

State of press freedom

Mexico is currently ranked 124th of 180 countries on RSF’s Index of Press Freedom. The organization criticizes what it describes as “collusion between officials and organized crime.” This collusion “poses a grave threat to journalists’ safety and cripples the judicial system at all levels.” For their own safety, many journalists are forced to flee to other parts of the country or abroad.

According to RSF, more than 150 journalists have been killed in Mexico since 2000. 28 journalists are reported missing.

Earlier this month, RSF called on the UN Human Rights Committee in Geneva to prioritize its examination of four specific cases. José Antonio García Apac, Mauricio Estrada Zamora, María Esther Aguilar Cansimbe, and Ramón Ángeles Zalpa were all disappeared in the state of Michoacán between 2006 and 2010. RSF claims it has proof either that government actors were involved in the disappearances, or that law enforcement were negligent in their investigation – or failed to act at all.

On behalf of the journalists’ families, RSF filed a complaint with the UN Human Rights Committee. The organization argues that Mexico has failed to live up to its human rights obligations due to the substantial lapses in the investigations. RSF also urged the committee to appeal to the Mexican government to clear up the cases. (js)

US senators voice concerns about facial recognition-equipped Meta glasses

2026-03-25T08:08:00+01:00

Meta is reportedly planning to equip its smart glasses with facial recognition. A group of US senators warns of the consequences and has sent a list of questions to the company.

Because the smart glasses are scarcely distinguishable from regular glasses, people may not be able to tell that they are being scanned by a facial recognition system, the senators fear. (Source: MAGO / VWPics)

Three Democratic US senators are asking Meta for answers about the company’s reported plans to incorporate facial recognition technology into its so-called “smart glasses.” The lawmakers warn that this is “one of the most dangerous possible settings” for the technology.

Senators Edward Markey, Jeffrey Merkley, and Ron Wyden sent a letter to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg last week asking for transparency with regard to the company’s plans to integrate facial recognition into its smart glasses product. Meta has been selling the glasses, which it produces in collaboration with an eyewear company, for several years now. They are now equipped with so-called artificial intelligence (AI) and can, for example, provide wearers with information on their surroundings.

In 2021, there were reports that the company was then considering integrating a facial recognition tool into its smart glasses. These plans were dropped, however, likely in part due to ethical considerations. That year the company also shut down the facial recognition feature on Facebook, citing “growing societal concerns.”

Feature could be introduced this year

Last month however the New York Times reported that Meta was again planning to add the technology as a feature of its glasses. The “Name Tag” feature could be introduced as early as this year, the paper reported, citing people familiar with the plan and an internal Meta document.

According to the Times, the people at Meta who are weighing the decision regard the current moment as ripe for introducing the feature, given that the civil society groups the company would expect to draw criticism from might be distracted by the current political upheaval in the US.

Markey, Merkley, and Wyden view this as an indication that Meta is very much aware of the risks of the technology – and that the company believes it can avoid attention because “the world is distracted by the Trump administration’s daily chaos.” The senators characterize the use of facial recognition in smart glasses as “uniquely dangerous.”

Thousands of faces scanned

The lawmakers note that the glasses are “often indistinguishable from regular glasses” and are thus designed to be worn all day. During this time the user could encounter hundreds or even thousands of people in public spaces. These people’s faces would be captured by the glasses – some might not even be aware that their faces had been scanned.

In the letter the senators write that people who are simply entering a café or walking down the street are not consenting to the collection of their biometric data. Facial recognition paired with smart glasses would lead to the covert identification of countless persons without their consent and without the opportunity to opt out. This, the senators warn, would “effectively [eliminate] public anonymity.”

Markey, Merkley, and Wyden write that in some cases glasses equipped with facial recognition could immediately display the names or social media profiles of people they identify. The senators see a risk of the feature being abused for the purpose of stalking, harassment, or doxxing. The risks are even greater for women, LGBTQ+ individuals, and members of other vulnerable groups. The senators write: “In the hands of a bad actor, this technology could be a remarkably powerful and dangerous tool.”

The senators also express concern that smart glasses could contribute to the normalization of mass surveillance. Federal agents in the US are already using facial recognition tools to identify lawful protestors. Such abuse “demonstrates how easily real-time identification technologies can be repurposed to discourage political expression, target vulnerable communities, and chill lawful dissent,” the senators write. Equipping users with facial recognition tools for their wearable electronic devices would expand this surveillance infrastructure. This outcome, warn Markey, Merkley, and Wyden, is “fundamentally incompatible with a democracy.”

Questions for Facebook founder Zuckerberg

In light of these concerns, the three senators have asked Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg to respond to a list of detailed questions by early next month. Among the things the senators want to know is how Meta plans to obtain consent from every individual whose biometric information is captured by the smart glasses. They also ask how long this data will be retained and whether individuals will have the option to request deletion of their data.

What data will the facial images captured by Meta’s smart glasses be matched with, the senators ask – and does Meta plan to store the biometric data its glasses capture in a centralized facial recognition database?

Markey, Merkley, and Wyden also ask whether Meta has evaluated the risks associated with its facial recognition tool and what safety measures, if any, it plans to implement to mitigate against potential harm. Does the company test the reliability of the technology, and does it disclose the results of such testing? Finally, the senators ask, does Meta plan to share biometric data with federal, state, or local law enforcement agencies?

Secretly filmed

Even without facial recognition, the glasses can be used to harass or surveil individuals. The BBC reported in January on two instances in which women were filmed, without their consent, by men wearing smart glasses. The videos were later posted online.

One of the women was filmed after sunbathing on the beach. The video drew hundreds of comments online – many were derogatory or sexually explicit. She told the BBC: “It really freaked me out – it made me feel afraid to go out in public.”

In February the Electronic Privacy Information Center called on the US Federal Trade Commission to put a stop to Meta’s facial recognition plans. The organization warns that installing the feature would have dire consequences, putting everyone “at risk of stalking, harassment, doxxing, and worse.”

Last year two Harvard students connected a commercial facial recognition system to a pair of Meta glasses. According to the students, they wanted to show how easy it could be to identify people in public using the glasses and the relevant software. One of the students told the New York Times: “We want people to learn to protect themselves.” (js)

Ecuador continues to pump oil in the Amazon

2026-03-23T15:48:00+01:00

Ecuador is continuing to extract oil in an area of Yasuní National Park – despite a court order to stop operations.

The results of a 2023 referendum require Ecuador to cease oil production in Block 43. (Source: IMAGO / SuperStock)

The Ecuadorian state oil company Petroecuador continues to extract oil from an area in a national park despite a court order to stop production. Human Rights Watch (HRW) reports that Indigenous communities and the Amazon rainforest have suffered harm.

The Block 43 oil production area is located within Yasuní National Park, which was declared a UNESCO biosphere reserve in 1989. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights ruled in March 2025 that Ecuador must stop oil operations in the block. Its rulings are binding on states that are party to the American Convention on Human Rights.

But as detailed in a report published last week by HRW, the state oil company Petroecuador has continued to pump oil in Block 43 over the past year. Aside from a brief period in which production was paused due to damaged pipeline infrastructure, oil extraction has continued in the area at an average rate of 1.2 million barrels of oil per month.

Immense biodiversity

The national park is located in the Ecuadorian Amazon. As an important carbon pool, the Amazon rainforest plays a crucial role for the global climate. It is considered one of the so-called “tipping elements” that, if lost, could push the world’s climate out of equilibrium. The Amazon region is also one of the world’s most biodiverse places. According to UNESCO, Yasuní National Park in Ecuador is one of the most biologically diverse regions in the world.

The park is also home to Indigenous peoples like the Waorani. Two Waorani communities, the Tagaeri and Taromenane, live in voluntary isolation in the park. Natural resource extraction is prohibited by law in their territory – the Tagaeri Taromenane Intangible Zone is separated from the extractive areas of Block 43 by a 10-kilometer buffer zone.

Indigenous groups face risk of harm, court finds

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights found that Ecuador had violated the rights of the Tagaeri and Taromenane by authorizing oil extraction operations without assessing the risks to the environment and to human rights. Indigenous groups are exposed to serious risks through forced contact with the outside world and pollution, the court ruled. The court found that oil production in Block 43 already pollutes the environment, and that oil spills could contaminate waterways and thus impact Indigenous areas. The construction of roads has led to an increase in illegal logging, fishing, and hunting in the rainforest.

HRW spoke with members of the Waorani Indigenous people who live in Block 43, as well as with academics, journalists, and civil society figures. The Waorani report that the rivers which serve as their main source of drinking water have been polluted.

Isabel Baihua, leader of a Waorani women’s organization, told HRW: “Our rivers are being polluted, the animals are dying, rashes cover our skin after we bathe, we have no drinking water.”

Other sources interviewed by HRW reported that children and elderly people had become ill after bathing or drinking. The availability of food has also been reduced due to fish deaths.

Oil pollution

HRW reports that between 2016 and 2024 there were 29 oil spills in Block 43. Petroecuador claims that the spills “had no environmental impact.” The Ecuadorian Ministry of Environment, Water, and Ecological Transition, however, noted that a June 2024 incident affected a river used by an Indigenous community for fishing.

There are also reports of poor air quality resulting from the gas flaring conducted at extraction sites. According to HRW, gas flaring can also cause acid rain, which harms soil and vegetation.

José Rodríguez Orúe of HRW said in a statement: “Ecuador continues to allow extraction from Block 43, putting oil production above the rights of Indigenous communities.” Orúe added: “Ecuador should take immediate steps to suspend oil extraction in Block 43 and fully comply with the court’s ruling to respect the rights of Indigenous peoples in the national park.”

The Inter-American Court also ordered Ecuador to establish a commission to monitor the movements of communities living in isolation within the protected zone – and if necessary to expand the territory. But the government has also failed to comply with this order, HRW reports – and has not published environmental monitoring reports on the region, as required by law.

Population votes against oil extraction

The court also pointed to the results of a binding referendum held in 2023 in which Ecuadorians voted in favor of stopping oil operations in Block 43. The referendum came after a long debate about oil extraction in the national park. In 2005, a group of leading scientists spoke out against the plans. It wasn’t until 2013 that oil extraction was permitted.

Last year, HRW reported that despite its legal obligations Ecuador had only shut down a “handful” of small wells – while most of the remaining wells continued to be in operation.

Richard Pearshouse, environment and human rights director at HRW, said last year: “The government should respect the will of the Ecuadorian people and immediately end oil extraction in the area protected by the referendum.”

In November of last year the environmental coalition Yasunidos appealed to the Ecuadorian Constitutional Court to enforce the result of the referendum. (js)

Italy: Spyware attack on journalist confirmed

2026-03-12T08:04:00+01:00

Prosecutors in Italy have confirmed that a journalist was targeted with spyware. The attack occurred at the same time as attacks on two activists, the investigation found.

Francesco Cancellato asks Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni about the spying scandal at a press conference in January. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

Italian prosecutors have confirmed that a journalist and two activists were targeted with spyware. The prosecutors believe the attacks may have been linked – but it remains unclear who targeted investigative journalist Francesco Cancellato for surveillance. The investigation is still ongoing.

According to news reports, prosecutors in Rome and Naples analyzed the smartphones of several individuals in Italy who were reportedly attacked with Paragon’s Graphite spyware. The investigators were able to detect traces of activity attributable to the surveillance tool on devices belonging to the activists Luca Casarini and Giuseppi “Beppe” Caccia from the sea rescue NGO Mediterranea Saving Humans. They also found traces on the phone of Francesco Cancellato, editor-in-chief of the news site Fanpage.

The devices were first infected with the spyware in the early morning hours of December 14, 2024, the prosecutors found. In their statement the prosecutors write: “The serial execution of three attacks on the same night suggests that they may have been part of a single infection campaign.”

Paragon use in Italy

The prosecutors’ findings are only the latest revelations in an ongoing spyware scandal that first broke in Italy in January 2025, when WhatsApp announced that 90 users in more than two dozen countries had been targeted by attackers using Graphite, a form of spyware made by Paragon Solutions. The tool is only sold to government agencies. Graphite makes it possible for attackers to take complete control of a device – enabling them to read the device owner’s chat histories, for example. Shortly after WhatsApp made its announcement, Francesco Cancellato came forward to say that he was one of the people targeted.

After the initial revelations, the Italian government admitted to being a Paragon customer – but at first denied responsibility for the attacks. Then, in March 2025, Italy’s Undersecretary of State Alfredo Mantovano admitted that the government was in fact behind the targeting of the two activists.

In June of last year the intelligence oversight committee in parliament (Copasir) confirmed that Italy’s foreign intelligence agency, AISE, was responsible for spying on the activists. The surveillance was legal, the committee found. As for Cancellato, Copasir said only that it had not found evidence that the journalist was targeted – the Italian government denies having used spyware against him.

With the announcement of the investigation’s findings, there is now confirmation from Italian authorities that Cancellato too was hacked. Last year, in an independent inquiry, cybersecurity experts at Citizen Lab in Toronto had found evidence of the attacks on Cancellato and the sea rescue activists.

John-Scott Railton of Citizen Lab told the Guardian that the new findings raise “serious questions about why no confirmation was surfaced in prior official investigations by the Italian authorities.”

Intelligence agency reportedly not responsible

Although prosecutors suspect a possible link between the attacks, it remains unclear who ordered the hacking of the journalist’s phone. According to news reports, the prosecutors were able to search the intelligence agency’s spyware servers – but found no evidence of spying on Francesco Cancellato. The investigation will continue as prosecutors seek to find those responsible.

Cancellato told the Guardian that the prosecutors’ investigation was a “small, important step towards the truth.”

The journalist also wrote in an article on Fanpage that the investigation clears up any doubts that Paragon spyware was used against him – now he would like to know who was behind the hack. Since January 2025, Cancellato wrote, he has been asking the government to provide clarity in this matter, without receiving any answers.

According to the Guardian, at a press conference in January of this year Cancellato again asked Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni about her government’s role in the spying scandal. In response, Meloni said only that her government wanted to help find out the truth.

More people affected

Several more people in Italy were targeted with spyware, including Fanpage editor Ciro Pellegrino – the attack against Pellegrino was also confirmed by cybersecurity experts at Citizen Lab. A priest and another activist were reportedly spied on as well. More recently it came to light that two businesspeople and a political consultant were also among those informed in January 2025 that they were targets. (js)

Germany: Saxony-Anhalt will allow police to conduct automated data analysis

2026-03-11T08:04:00+01:00

In the German state of Saxony-Anhalt, revised legislation will allow the police to carry out automated data analysis. Experts warn that people with no involvement in crime could be subjected to police scrutiny.

For now, Saxony-Anhalt has no plans to use software developed by controversial analytics company Palantir. (Source: IMAGO / Jan Huebner)

Last week the parliament of the German state of Saxony-Anhalt passed a revision to the state’s policing law. The revised legislation includes provisions to allow automated data analysis. Experts consider the measures unconstitutional.

With the revisions to the “Law on Public Security and Order,” police in Saxony-Anhalt now have a legal basis for so-called “operative and strategic data analysis.” The law made it through parliament with a majority led by the CDU, SPD, and FDP, the three parties in the ruling coalition.

According to the revised language of the law, in the future the police will be permitted to use analytics technology to establish connections or links between persons, aggregations of persons, institutions, organizations, objects, and things. To this end, the police may process personal information. The law also allows police to use data analysis to identify dangerous or threatened locations.

Information already retained by the police, including data from case files and official information systems, can be pooled for this purpose. Data from “generally accessible sources” can also be fed into analysis software.

Data from individuals with no criminal record

This could also include information taken from social media, jurist Jonas Botta from the National Institute for Public Administration Germany told German broadcaster MDR. According to Botta, who specializes in security and data protection law, other German states have more precise rules in place to govern police data analysis – but in Saxony-Anhalt, there is no provision to ensure, for instance, that data from unrelated case files cannot be swept up into the analysis. In a position paper submitted to lawmakers while the legislation was being debated, Botta noted that this could include victim and witness information, significantly increasing the “scattershot” nature of the encroachment on fundamental rights.

For Botta, what is especially problematic about the legislation is that people who are unjustifiably subjected to data analysis might never learn that the analysis took place. The jurist did however cheer a provision in the law that bars the use of machine-learning systems.

Franziska Görlitz, jurist at the Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte (Society for Civil Rights – GFF), also voiced criticism. Speaking to the news site netzpolitik.org, Görlitz said: “With the revision of the police law, police in Saxony-Anhalt are now permitted to carry out complex, non-transparent data analyses. Huge amounts of data, including data pertaining to people with no connection to any police investigation, will be swept up in such analyses.” Görlitz warned that someone who is involved in a traffic accident or witnesses a crime could wind up in the police database and be included in the analysis. In the worst case scenario, people may be “mistakenly targeted by law enforcement.”

Criticism of the law

According to Görlitz, the law does not sufficiently meet the requirements for data analysis established by the German Federal Constitutional Court. The legislation, she argues, does not provide enough protections for fundamental rights.

Jonas Botta, the jurist at the National Institute for Public Administration Germany, told MDR that the law failed to require regular oversight to ensure that the analysis systems conformed to data protection laws. In his view, this lack of mandatory oversight is unconstitutional.

State seeks European software

It is currently unclear what analysis system will be used in Saxony-Anhalt. Some German states that allow data analysis have drawn additional criticism for using software developed by the highly controversial US company Palantir. Baden-Württemberg, for example, approved use of Palantir in November. Critics point out that the system is a “black box” and functions in an opaque manner.

In Saxony-Anhalt, the SPD, which forms part of the ruling coalition, promised in February that Palantir would not be used. Last week, the state parliament also adopted a resolution calling for an analysis system that is made and operated in Europe.

But Saxony-Anhalt’s Commissioner for Data Protection Maria Christina Rost told MDR that the law itself does not prohibit the use of Palantir. Franziska Görlitz, the jurist at the GFF, echoed this assessment. As Görlitz pointed out to netzpolitik.org, the resolution is non-binding.

Lawsuits challenging data analysis

The GFF told MDR that it was already considering a potential challenge to the law.

The organization is currently pursuing legal challenges to laws allowing automated data analysis in the states of Bavaria, North Rhine-Westphalia, and Hesse.

The changes to the law that have now gone into effect in Saxony-Anhalt drew criticism in the lead-up to the vote, including from the GFF.

The provisions allowing automated data analysis are not the only controversial change. The introduction of automated license plate scanning also drew criticism during the debate period. Last year the Green party said that such massive surveillance without cause would not make the state safer and would not prevent specific crimes.

In his position paper, Jonas Botta criticized the draft legislation for failing to impose a sufficient documentation requirement for the use of the technology.

Planned changes to police laws

A new police law has also been put forward in the state of Saxony. Legislators are planning to introduce data analysis as well as license plate scanners and so-called “intelligent video surveillance.” The Greens in the state call the planned legislation an attack on civil liberties.

In Lower Saxony as well there are plans for automated data analysis and “intelligent” video surveillance. (js)

Afghanistan: New criminal regulation threatens human rights

2026-03-10T08:05:00+01:00

A new criminal code in Afghanistan further limits women’s rights, Amnesty International warns.

Since retaking power, the Taliban have massively curtailed the rights of women and girls. (Source: IMAGO / Newscom World)

The new criminal code instituted by the Taliban could further entrench discrimination and violence against women, Amnesty International warns. The authorities are also making more crimes eligible for the death penalty.

The Taliban returned to power in Afghanistan in August 2021. Upon regaining power they declared the country’s existing laws void and began to impose their own legal standards. In January, the authorities introduced a new criminal code, the Criminal Procedure Regulation of the Courts. According to an analysis by Amnesty International, the new provisions violate Afghanistan’s obligations under numerous human rights agreements.

Amnesty regards the new criminal code as an instrument for institutionalizing discrimination on the basis of sex, religion, belief, or social status and cracking down on the Taliban’s opponents.

Little protection for women

Amnesty warns that the new regulation exacerbates the systematic undermining of women’s rights. A woman can now be punished for leaving her home to stay with relatives if her husband objects and a court rules that she must return. The punishment in such a case is three months in prison – the woman’s relatives are also subject to punishment.

Amnesty notes that in many cases a woman’s relatives are her “only source of refuge” when fleeing domestic abuse. The new criminal code robs women of this option.

Normalizing violence

Men are also permitted to inflict “discretionary” punishment on their wives. As Amnesty reports, only when a husband’s violence leads to “a broken bone, or an open wound, or a black and blue wound” visible on his wife’s body can he be imprisoned – for 15 days. Even in the case of such violence, the onus is on the wife to present the injury in court.

These provisions normalize physical violence, Amnesty warns – while non-physical forms of abuse are not criminalized at all.

The organization also raises concerns that women’s participation in public life will be further
restricted. The new criminal code makes it illegal for a person to even look at or inquire after a woman who is their neighbor.

Repressive legal system

Smriti Singh of Amnesty International said in a statement: “The regulation makes an already repressive legal system even more draconian. Women and girls are, of course, among the most affected, with provisions that normalize domestic violence and place even greater restrictions on their movement and autonomy.”

Members of religious minorities also face new punishments. The Taliban claim adherence to the Hanifi School of Thought, a branch of Sunni Islam – anyone who departs from this school can be imprisoned for two years. What’s more, according to the new regulation, anyone who holds beliefs contrary to the tenets of Sunni Islam is deemed heretical. According to Amnesty, these new provisions entrench “already rampant discrimination against religious minorities” in Afghanistan.

Floggings and beatings

The organization also condemns the new criminal code for institutionalizing the use of corporal punishments like flogging and beatings. The offense of insulting or humiliating a high-ranking Taliban official or judge is punishable with 20 lashes and six months’ imprisonment. Insulting an imam is punishable with 39 lashes. Smuggling “prohibited food products, medicine, and health products” into the country is likewise punishable with flogging and prison time.

Amnesty condemns these provisions, regarding them as being in violation of Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, “which prohibits torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” Per Amnesty, they also violate the UN Convention against Torture, another international agreement to which Afghanistan is a party.

UN human rights experts reported earlier this month that the Taliban have greatly increased their use of corporal punishment. According to the UN, more people were publicly flogged in 2025 than in the four preceding years under Taliban rule combined. In some instances, the punishment has been inflicted on children.

According to Amnesty, the new criminal regulation imposes additional inhumane and degrading punishments, including destruction of property. Such measures could have “crippling impacts” on those affected.

Expanded use of the death penalty

The Taliban also seek to expand the number of crimes eligible for capital punishment, which Amnesty argues is a violation of international law. The organization notes with concern that these “crimes” are not precisely defined. Persons convicted of committing “homosexual acts” or repeated theft could face the death penalty. A person can also be put to death for being “a magician or sorcerer.”

Amnesty warns that the new provisions will lead to more frequent imposition of the death penalty. The criminal code gives the Taliban license to sentence their political opponents to death without a fair trial. This is particularly concerning, Amnesty notes, in light of the Taliban’s ongoing efforts to persecute former government employees. The LGBTQ+ community is also greatly threatened.

Amnesty warns further that certain provisions in the new criminal code appear to recognize slavery – this even though slavery was abolished in Afghanistan in 1923 and is prohibited under international law. The regulation contradicts the right to a fair trial and the principle of equality before the law, Amnesty says. Under the new criminal code, people are divided into four social classes – different legal procedures and punishments apply depending on the offender’s social status.

According to Amnesty, the Taliban’s leader approved the Criminal Procedure Regulation of the Courts in January and ordered its publication in the Official Gazette. Though the regulation has yet to appear in the gazette – it came to light after media and rights organizations in Afghanistan began circulating it – the new provisions have reportedly been issued to the courts for implementation. According to media reports, they have already led to one prosecution.

Amnesty demands that the provisions be withdrawn immediately. The group also calls on the international community to reject the regulation and to press the Taliban to comply with international law.

Since the Taliban’s return to power, the human rights situation in Afghanistan has continued to worsen – women’s rights especially are being curtailed to an ever greater extent. The country also faces a humanitarian crisis. (js)

Workers review footage taken by Meta glasses

2026-03-09T09:41:00+01:00

Some of the footage filmed by Meta’s smart glasses is seen by human workers. Data privacy groups are expressing concern.

According to reports, Meta is even planning to equip the glasses with a facial recognition feature. (Source: IMAGO / snowfieldphotography)

Photos and videos taken by Meta’s so-called “smart glasses” are in some cases analyzed by workers in Kenya, according to a new investigation by two Swedish newspapers. Even intimate footage has been sent to the training centers.

Last year, Meta, Facebook’s parent company, introduced new models of its smart glasses, which it now markets as “AI glasses.” The glasses are designed to use so-called artificial intelligence (AI) to provide wearers with information relating to what they are seeing. The glasses can also take photos and videos. The wearer controls the glasses’ features through voice commands and gestures.

Meta promises in its advertisements for the glasses: “You’re in control of your data and content.” But a new investigation by the Swedish daily newspapers Svenska Dagbladet and Göteborgs-Posten shows that in some cases human workers are also viewing this footage.

Human AI work

In order for the algorithms designed by AI companies to perform the tasks assigned to them, they have to be trained with data. This involves sophisticated computing, but also manual labor, including by so-called data annotators, who analyze content and add notes. In reviewing footage taken by the glasses, for example, data annotators might identify an object and name it. Often this kind of work is performed in countries with lower per capita incomes. The Swedish journalists spoke with workers employed by the company Sama in Kenya who were analyzing footage taken by Meta glasses.

The workers told the journalists that they sometimes see very private footage. As one employee summed up: “We see everything – from living rooms to naked bodies.”

Another worker reported: “In some videos you can see someone going to the toilet, or getting undressed. I don’t think they know, because if they knew they wouldn’t be recording.” Other footage seems to show people watching porn or having sex. Credit cards, with the numbers unobscured, are also sometimes visible to the employees.

A few workers report being uneasy with having to view private footage. “But since it is a job, you have to do it,” one said. According to the investigation, many workers work ten-hour shifts. They are not actually authorized to speak about their work, since they have signed extensive confidentiality agreements. Violating these agreement could mean losing their job – and for many that would mean returning to a life of poverty.

Manual review by Meta

In its AI terms of service, Meta notes that it reviews users’ interactions with its AI feature “in some cases” – and that “this review may be automated or manual (human).” In some cases the company also saves information. Meta advises users: “Do not share information that you don’t want the AIs to use and retain.”

“You think that if they knew about the extent of the data collection, no one would dare to use the glasses.” Data annotator

According to the papers’ investigation, when users pose a question to Meta AI, the data processing isn’t performed locally on the device, but rather on Meta’s servers – meaning that all content could be included in the processing. Meta provides no information regarding how much data is analyzed or how long it is retained.

The company did not respond to specific questions posed by the newspapers, merely referring the journalists to its terms of use and privacy policy. Speaking to the BBC, Meta explained that in some cases content might be reviewed by subcontractors in order to improve the “experience” for users. “The data is first filtered to protect people’s privacy,” Meta said. This filtering could include blurring the faces in images.

But Kenyan workers told the Swedish journalists that in some of the footage they were able to see faces clearly. One former Meta employee confirmed that this was a possibility, telling the journalists: “The algorithms sometimes miss. Especially in difficult lighting conditions, certain faces and bodies become visible.”

NGO reviewing glasses

Kleanthi Sardeli, a lawyer at the Austrian data privacy organization Noyb, sees a transparency problem: users may not realize that the camera in the glasses is recording when they begin speaking to the AI assistant. She argues that consent must be obtained before the data can be used to train AI algorithms. “Once the material has been fed into the models, the user in practice loses control over how it is used,” she told the Svenska Dagbladet and Göteborgs-Posten. Noyb is currently reviewing the Meta glasses.

Petter Flink at the Swedish Authority for Privacy Protection (IMY) told the papers that few people think about what they’re actually agreeing to when they use Meta’s glasses. “The user really has no idea what is happening behind the scenes,” Flink said. The data Meta collects is more valuable for the company than the glasses themselves, he told the journalists. “The more details that can be extracted from the user’s everyday life, the more accurately advertising and services can be targeted at the person.”

One of the Kenyan workers said: “You think that if they knew about the extent of the data collection, no one would dare to use the glasses.”

The investigation calls to mind earlier controversies sparked by revelations that tech companies were using human workers to review recordings made by digital voice assistants.

Data regulators have questions

A spokesperson for the British Information Commissioner’s Office, speaking to the BBC, called the investigation “concerning.” The UK data watchdog told the broadcaster it would be writing to Meta “to request information on how it is meeting its obligations under UK data protection law.”

The Irish Data Protection Commission, which is responsible for exercising oversight over Meta in Europe, has contacted the company in response to the investigation, Euractiv reports. The site also reports that MEPs have voiced their concern to the European Commission and asked how the commission will ensure that the company is complying with EU data protection laws.

Secretly filmed

Even aside from worries over data analysis, the glasses have sparked concerns because they can be used to harass or spy on people. A small light in the corner of the frame is supposed to indicate when the glasses’ camera is filming. Meta claims that if the light is covered, the camera cannot record. The company also provides “tips” for users on how to wear the glasses responsibly – urging users to “respect people’s preferences” and stop recording if requested, and to turn off glasses in “sensitive spaces” like doctor’s offices.

Still, the BBC in January reported on several cases involving women who were filmed without their consent by men wearing smart glasses. The videos were posted online.

One woman was filmed after sunbathing on the beach. The video drew hundreds of comments when posted online – many were derogatory and sexually explicit. She told the BBC: “It really freaked me out – it made me feel afraid to go out in public.”

Another woman was filmed at the gym. This video was also posted online.

Responding to the January story, Meta said that the LED indicator was meant to make clear when a recording was being made. The BBC reports however that it’s possible to conceal this light and continue filming. The two women, who were filmed while speaking to men who had approached them and engaged them in conversation, said they hadn’t noticed any light on the men’s glasses.

According to news reports, the company is even planning to integrate a facial recognition tool in its glasses. In response, the Electronic Privacy Information Center has already called on the US Federal Trade Commission to put a stop to these plans. The organization warns that installing the feature would have dire consequences, putting everyone “at risk of stalking, harassment, doxxing, and worse.” (js)

London police to test facial recognition app

2026-03-05T08:32:00+01:00

Police in London will soon be equipped with a mobile facial recognition app. For now the technology will only be used on a trial basis.

The technology is already in use in South Wales. (Source: IMAGO / Action Plus)

London is expanding its use of facial recognition technology: police officers in the city will soon be able to use a facial recognition smartphone app to identify people. London’s mayor Sadiq Khan has announced a pilot project to test the tool – and drawn criticism in response.

One hundred officers with London’s Metropolitan Police will be testing the technology as part of a six-month pilot project, Khan announced last week. Known as Operator Initiated Facial Recognition (OIFR), the tool is available in the form of a smartphone app. It has been used by police forces in South Wales and Gwent since December 2024.

Police officers can use their devices to photograph individuals. The software then compares the captured images against a police watchlist. According to Mayor Khan, officers will be using the software to check the identity of people encountered during police stops. Khan argues that the tool will save time: currently, “the only alternative the police have is to arrest that person and take them to the police station,” Khan said.

Ethics panel to be involved

Khan did not say when the trial, which will cost £763,000 (roughly €877,785), is set to begin. On its website, the Metropolitan Police still states that it does not use the app.

The decision as to whether to begin using the technology on a regular basis will not be made until a later date. Khan promised that the London Policing Ethics Panel and the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime would oversee the pilot phase to ensure that its use was “right and proportionate,” the BBC reports.

Police have used the technology for years

For years now London police have used vans equipped with live facial recognition cameras that are clearly marked and deployed on a limited basis. There are also permanently installed facial recognition cameras in the borough of Croydon in south London. The introduction of Operator Initiated Facial Recognition expands this arsenal of surveillance tools.

The British Transport Police is also currently testing live facial recognition in London railway stations.

As the Guardian reports, London’s mayor announced the pilot program during a session of the London Assembly, which exercises oversight over his administration’s activities. He had been asked by Assemblymember Zoë Garbett, of the Green party, about the use of AI tools in police work.

Garbett said: “It’s shocking that I had to force the mayor to disclose that they are [trialing] operator-initiated facial recognition technology.” She added: “In Britain, no one has to identify themselves to police without very good reason and this unregulated technology threatens that fundamental right.”

“Guinea pigs”

Garbett also criticized the lack of a clear legal framework regulating the use of live facial recognition – as well as the government’s plans to expand use of the technology despite the absence of such a framework.

Jasleen Chaggar, legal and policy officer at Big Brother Watch, said the public were being used as “guinea pigs” to test surveillance technology. London police have “a history of rolling out facial recognition so-called ‘pilots’ that quietly become permanent fixtures,” Chaggar said. The OIFR trials must stop until the Home Office passes clear laws governing the use of the technology, she added.

Criticism of lack of legal framework

In addition to London’s Metropolitan Police, several other police forces in the UK use facial recognition technology. The Home Office wants to equip every force with the tool in the future. Policing minister Sarah Jones has called it “the biggest breakthrough for catching criminals since DNA matching.”

Critics, on the other hand, have for years pointed out the lack of legal basis for its use. In the past British researchers have called for a ban on the police use of facial recognition. The researchers had studied facial recognition deployments in London and South Wales and assessed their compliance with legal standards.

Zoë Garbett, the London Assemblywoman, published a report in February that included her recommendation that the London police immediately stop using live facial recognition. In the report she also criticized the Met Police for using the technology in the absence of a clear legal basis. This use greatly infringes on citizens’ rights, she writes. “In our legal system people are considered innocent until proven guilty,” Garbett writes in the report. This principle is flipped on its head when the faces of all pedestrians in London can be scanned and compared against a watchlist.

Garbett also notes in the report that despite the claims of facial recognition’s proponents, in practice the system is not used to find missing persons. To date, no wanted terrorists have been tracked down using facial recognition – instead, the large majority of people who have been arrested were wanted for theft or burglary. The police also deploy the technology primarily in parts of the city with higher than average populations of black, Asian, or mixed ethnicity residents. Facial recognition has been criticized for being more prone to error when seeking to identify people with darker skin color.

False match leads to arrest

Last month the Guardian reported that a man of south Asian heritage was arrested in Thames Valley, near London, after being falsely identified by facial recognition. Police were looking for a man who was suspected of committing burglary in a town 100 miles away – but the suspect, whose image was captured by CCTV footage, bore only a faint resemblance to the man who was arrested.

Even though the man had an alibi, police kept him in custody for nearly 10 hours. His photo was in the police database only because he had been wrongly arrested years earlier, the Guardian reported.

The man is now seeking damages from the police. He told the paper that his neighbors had witnessed him being led away in handcuffs and that he was unable to work the day after his arrest. He also fears professional consequences: he sometimes needs security clearances for work, and his past arrests might raise questions.

Police in London are also facing a lawsuit challenging their use of facial recognition. Silkie Carlo of Big Brother Watch and activist Shaun Thompson sued the Met Police in May 2024 after Thompson was falsely identified as a suspect by the Met Police’s facial recognition system. Carlo and Thompson argue that the use of the technology violates the European Convention on Human Rights.

The case was heard by the High Court in London in January. The court has yet to issue a decision. (js)

France: Patient data stolen, 15 million people affected

2026-03-04T14:57:00+01:00

In a cyberattack, hackers have stolen data relating to millions of French patients. The data have already been published, according to news reports.

Last month, a separate data breach impacted more than one million French bank account holders. (Source: IMAGO / Wirestock)

Hackers in France were able to steal the personal data of 15 million patients, the French Ministry of Health has confirmed. In some instances, sensitive health information was included among the stolen data.

According to news reports, unknown actors gained access to so-called administrative data relating to French patients. These include patients’ names, mailing addresses, telephone numbers, email addresses, and dates of birth.

France’s Minister of Health Stéphanie Rist confirmed on social media that roughly 15 million people were affected by the data theft. Additional, sensitive health data were also stolen from a subset of more than 160,000 individuals. No complete patient charts were compromised, Rist said.

Notes on patients’ health

The data stolen in the breach included notes made by doctors about their patients’ health. France Info reports that the stolen information has already been published online.

According to France Info, the notes provide a detailed picture of the patients’ health. They include mentions of patients’ illnesses, suicidal thoughts, and addiction. There are also details pertaining to patients’ sexual orientation, religion, or family circumstances.

The data were reportedly stolen in October from a system operated by the company Cegedim Santé. The information stored in the company’s database dates back as far as 15 years, which explains the large number of people impacted, according to the Health Ministry.

Provider confirms cyberattack

The company has confirmed that it became aware last year of an attack that resulted in the theft of data. The medical practices affected were contacted in January, the company said. The company has also reported the incident to the French data protection authority, CNIL, and notified the police.

The Health Ministry said the incident was under investigation.

Victims face great harm

One cybersecurity expert told France 24 that this might be the largest data breach ever to occur in the French health sector. He warned of “irreparable consequences” – once health information is released, “you can never go back,” the expert said.

Agnès Giannotti, president of MG France, a trade group representing general practitioners, told media that the software affected by the breach was widely used. Doctors use the software to record all the information that is relevant to their patients’ care, Giannotti explained. The data breach is a “real problem.” The compromised data are “supposed to be secret.” Giannotti added that the French government wants doctors to save as much information as possible online and share it with other professionals – but, she said, there was no assurance that this was done in the correct manner.

In September 2024, CNIL, the French data protection authority, imposed a fine of €800,000 on Cegedim Santé. The authority determined that the company had processed health data that was only pseudonymous, not anonymous. It was thus technically possible to identify individual patients. Given the large amount of data collected by the company, it was also possible to reconstruct a detailed picture of the medical treatment individuals had received. The company had not obtained authorization to process this data.

Bank account holders impacted by data theft

Last month France’s General Direction of Public Finances (DGFiP) announced that unknown actors had gained access to the bank account information of 1.2 million customers of French banks. The customers’ account numbers were stolen, as was identifying information such as mailing addresses.

According to the DGFiP, hackers used an official’s credentials to gain access to the national registry of bank accounts (FICOBA). All bank accounts opened in France are included in this registry. The hackers were not able to access account balances, the DGFiP explained, and no transfers could be initiated. Those affected were however warned to be on the lookout for fraud attempts.(js)

Greece: Four found guilty in spyware scandal

2026-03-04T07:59:00+01:00

A court in Greece has found four people guilty in connection with the country’s spyware scandal – and handed out lengthy prison terms. The founder of the spyware company Intellexa is one of the defendants.

The Greek data protection authority identified more than 90 phone numbers that were targets of surveillance. (Source: IMAGO / Pond5 Images)

A Greek court sentenced four people to lengthy prison terms last week in connection with the country’s spyware scandal. The defendants will not have to begin serving the sentences yet – and the court has ordered additional investigations into the suspected involvement of “unknown third parties.”

The defendants included Tal Dilian, the founder of the spyware company Intellexa, his business partner Sara Hamou, and Intellexa shareholder Felix Bitzios. The company is based in Greece. The fourth defendant was Yiannis Lavranos, whose company, Krikel, purchased Intellexa’s Predator spyware.

The Athens court found the defendants guilty of “breaching the confidentiality of telephone communications,” “tampering with a personal-data filing system,” and “illegal access to an information system or data.” According to news reports, they each received prison terms of 126 years, though the maximum they would actually have to serve is eight years. The defendants denied the charges. They did not attend the trial in person, but were represented by their attorneys.

Because the sentence is still subject to appeal, the court has delayed enforcement of the sentences. Intellexa co-founder Dilian has already announced his intention to appeal, according to media reports.

Spying scandal

The “Predatorgate” spying scandal – also known as “Greece’s Watergate” – dates back to 2022, when cybersecurity researchers found evidence that Predator had been used to spy on reporter Thanasis Koukakis. That same year it came to light that the head of the Greek opposition party PASOK, Nikos Androulakis, was also targeted with spyware. He was a member of European parliament at the time.

Media investigations soon identified more politicians, journalists, and businesspeople who had likewise been targeted with the spyware. A former Meta manager was also spied on in this manner.

Predator makes it possible for attackers to completely take over a target’s smartphone and to copy any information stored on it. The phone’s camera and microphone can be activated without the owner’s knowledge, and its location can be tracked. The intrusive surveillance tool is marketed only to government clients.

More than 90 victims

After the initial revelations, the Greek data protection authority launched an investigation and identified more than 90 phone numbers that had been selected as targets. Some of the victims – including Androulakis, the opposition politician – were reportedly spied on by the Greek national intelligence agency, which used conventional wiretapping methods. The government admitted to the phone surveillance of opposition leaders and called it a mistake. Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, who directly oversees the intelligence agency, has consistently denied that the government used spyware.

Both the head of the intelligence agency and the general secretary of the prime minister’s office resigned in 2022 in the wake of the scandal. In 2023, the government withstood a vote of no confidence prompted by the spying.

A prosecutor for the Greek Supreme Court ended her investigation into the case in 2024, saying that the inquiry had found no evidence that politicians or government agencies – including the national intelligence agency, EYP – had been involved in the purchase or use of Predator. Instead, the court began pursuing a case against the four businesspeople responsible for selling the spyware – this case culminated in last week’s convictions.

At the time, the Greek opposition sharply criticized the shuttering of the Supreme Court probe. One Greek NGO appealed to the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights to take over the investigation.

Involvement of “unknown third parties”

As the court determined last week, the defendants seem to have acted alongside “unknown third parties” – which could include officials working for Greek or foreign intelligence services. The Athens Prosecutor’s Office must now investigate whether additional crimes were committed.

A lawyer for the spying victims told the BBC: “After today’s decision, justice must, without distraction, investigate the involvement of third parties in felony offenses.”

Androulakis, the head of the opposition PAKOS party, told Politico that “the fight will continue until all those involved in this murky affair are brought to justice.” Androulakis has appealed the Supreme Court’s decision to shutter its investigation to the European Court of Human Rights.

The opposition party Syriza said in a statement: “The government and [Greek Prime Minister] Kyriakos Mitsotakis himself can no longer hide. The important thing is that the case is reopening.”

Open questions

Thanasis Koukakis, the journalist who was spied on, told the BBC he was satisfied with the court’s ruling.

Rebecca White, researcher at Amnesty International’s Security Lab, said in a statement: “Almost four years since the ‘Predatorgate’ scandal hit Greece, we are finally seeing consequences for those involved in the abuse of surveillance technology.” White added that questions remain about the role of the Greek government and stressed that “transparency is a a crucial part of accountability.”

The International Press Institute (IPI) also welcomed the convictions, but noted with concern that important questions about the potential involvement of state agencies had not yet been answered. The organization called attention to the landmark nature of the convictions: this is believed to be “the first case anywhere in the world of individuals in the commercial spyware sector being criminally charged and convicted” in connection with the surveillance of journalists.

Cases worldwide

Greece is not the only country where the use of Predator has come to light: in 2023, for instance, cybersecurity researchers and media discovered that the spyware tool had been used to target members of the press, politicians, members of civil society, and academics in the EU, US, and Asia.

At the time, Intellexa was reported to have sold surveillance technology to at least 25 states: including Qatar, Jordan, Singapore, and the United Arab Emirates – but also Austria, Switzerland, and Germany.

More recently, last month Amnesty International revealed that Predator had been used to spy on a journalist in Angola.

In July 2023 the US Department of Commerce imposed sanctions on Intellexa and its partner company Cytrox based on the companies’ role in facilitating repression and human rights abuses.

And in 2024, the US Treasury Department also imposed sanctions on companies and individuals linked to Intellexa – including Intellexa founder Tal Dilian and his business partner Sara Hamou. The sanctions against Hamou were lifted last year, those against Dilian remain in place. (js)

Germany: Morocco loses court case against German media

2026-03-02T09:42:00+01:00

The Kingdom of Morocco sued German newspapers Die Zeit and the Süddeutsche Zeitung for defamation – and has now lost its final appeal in German court. The papers had reported on Morocco’s suspected use of spyware.

Two lower courts had also ruled against Morocco.(Source: IMAGO / Ardan Fuessmann)

Last week the Kingdom of Morocco lost its lawsuit against German newspapers Die Zeit and the Süddeutsche Zeitung. Germany’s Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof) ruled that a foreign state does not have standing to seek injunctive relief from the speech activity of domestic media. The case centered around the papers’ reporting on the use of Pegasus spyware.

As the court announced last week, the state of Morocco has no legal standing under German civil law to seek an injunction against the defendants’ reporting. A state does not have “personal honor,” nor does the general right of personality, as defined by German law, apply to states.

The court also found that invoking the principle of state honor under international law did not confer standing upon the plaintiff. Though the German Basic Law gives precedence to “general rules of international law,” the court found that no general rule of international law could be determined which would empower a state to seek an injunction against the defamatory speech of private persons in another state. Finally, the plaintiff was found not to have standing under the provisions of German criminal law.

Reporting on spyware

The legal battle began in response to reporting by the two newspapers on the use of Pegasus spyware. Morocco’s intelligence agency was reported to be among those that used the controversial tool.

In 2021, a group of international media outlets took part in the “Pegasus Project,” which revealed the use of Pegasus spyware by governments around the world. Die Zeit and the Süddeutsche Zeitung were among the German news organizations that took part in the investigation. The papers reported on the existence of a list of espionage targets that included the phone numbers of leading politicians like French President Emmanuel Macron. Zeit Online reported in a June 2021 article that an analysis of the data yielded information about who had selected the telephone numbers for possible surveillance: “With high probability [it was] someone in the Moroccan security apparatus.”

Similar reports had emerged before the findings of the Pegasus Project investigation were published: the Süddeutsche Zeitung and Zeit Online reported in June 2020 on a Moroccan investigative journalist who had been spied on. The Süddeutsche Zeitung wrote at the time that it was presumably “Moroccan authorities who had set their sights on Omar Radi.”

Lawsuit filed in German court

Morocco denied the accusations – and filed suit in German court in 2021. The state claimed it never acquired Pegasus. In its lawsuit Morocco claimed that the reporting had caused severe damages to its reputation and its sovereign dignity.

The Hamburg District Court (Landgericht Hamburg) dismissed the lawsuit in June 2022 on the grounds that a foreign state did not have standing to sue for defamation.

Morocco appealed to the Hamburg Higher Regional Court (Oberlandesgericht Hamburg), which likewise rejected the suit in 2023. According to Die Zeit, the court found that, unlike individual persons, foreign states, categorically speaking, are not “capable of being defamed.” “Criticism of state power” is entitled to special protections, the court found, because otherwise an “imbalance” was to be feared that would threaten to “significantly limit the exercise of press freedom.” The Higher Regional Court did however allow Morocco to appeal to the Federal Court of Justice. This appeal was rejected last week – the Federal Court of Justice’s decision is the final ruling on the matter.

“Signal for press freedom”

The Süddeutsche Zeitung wrote in response to last week’s ruling: “We expected this ruling [by the Federal Court of Justice] and welcome it, because it bolsters the freedom of the press in Germany.”

Holger Stark, deputy editor-in-chief for Die Zeit and head of the paper’s investigative journalism desk, called the decision “an important signal for the freedom of the press and for investigative journalism – especially for investigations with international relevance.”

The Kingdom of Morocco, speaking through its legal representatives, said that it regretted the decision. In Morocco’s view, the ruling denied foreign states the right to defend themselves against untruths disseminated by media companies.

Christopher Resch from Reporters without Borders (RSF), reached by Posteo for comment, welcomed the decision and said: “States shouldn’t be able to use injunctive lawsuits to escape responsibility.” Pegasus, Resch said, has “enabled a frontal assault on press freedom around the world” and done severe personal harm to numerous journalists. “The state of Morocco is also badly suspected of having spied on members of the press,” Resch said. RSF has filed several court challenges in Paris in an attempt to force a legal accounting of the scandal, he added.

The Deutsche Anwaltszeitung, a legal newspaper, wrote in advance of the decision that it could have a signaling effect. A ruling that upheld the lower courts’ decisions would be a “clear acknowledgement of the extensive freedom of media in Germany – including when reporting critically on foreign states.”

Lawsuits dismissed in France and Spain

The Kingdom of Morocco also sued media in France for their Pegasus reporting. French courts likewise ruled that the challenges were impermissible.

Morocco also sued a Spanish journalist after he reported that he had been spied on by the kingdom. The lawsuit was dismissed by a Spanish court. (dpa / js)

Turkey: Deutsche Welle correspondent in pre-trial detention

2026-02-24T08:04:00+01:00

A correspondent for Deutsche Welle has been arrested in Turkey on charges of “insulting the president.” The broadcaster called the charges baseless.

According to observers, the charge of insulting the president has been systematically deployed to muzzle independent media. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

Alican Uludağ, a correspondent for Deutsche Welle, has been placed in pre-trial detention in Turkey. The broadcaster and a coalition of press freedom organizations call for his release.

Uludağ was arrested in Ankara on Thursday evening. As Deutsche Welle reported last week, he was detained in front of his family by approximately 30 police officers. His apartment was searched and his electronic devices were confiscated.

Uludağ** was taken to Istanbul and brought before a judge, who ordered that the journalist be formally placed under arrest and held on suspicion of “insulting the president.” Uludağ remains in police custody.

The prosecutor’s office in Istanbul has also charged Uludağ with “disseminating misleading information to the public” and “insulting the Turkish nation, the state, and its institutions,” Deutsche Welle reports.

Old social media posts

According to the broadcaster, the charges are related to posts that Uludağ made on X roughly a year and a half ago. In the posts he criticized measures taken by the Turkish government that, in his view, led to the release of suspected members of the Islamic State militant group. The journalist accused the government of corruption in connection with these measures.

Reporters without Borders (RSF) reports that the prosecutor’s investigation was also prompted by an article Uludağ wrote for the Turkish television channel Now TV in 2024. Uludağ worked for the broadcaster between December 2024 and December 2025.

Attorneys for Deutsche Welle appealed the arrest warrant and the decision to place the journalist in pre-trial detention. The court rejected the appeal, however, citing a flight risk.

Alican Uludağ, who has worked as a correspondent for Deutsche Welle for several years, called the charges politically motivated. He stressed that his posts are protected by his right to freedom of expression. Uludağ reports on human rights abuses, corruption, and the judiciary.

Director general calls charges baseless

Deutsche Welle’s director general Barbara Massing said in a statement: “The charges against our colleague are baseless. Alican Uludağ is a renowned investigative journalist who reports on corruption and other topics, is very well connected, and has access to important sources. In the eyes of the government, this makes him dangerous.”

Deutsche Welle is the Federal Republic of Germany’s international news outlet and reports in 32 languages. Its mission is “to promote understanding among different cultures and nations” and to provide access to impartial information, including in crisis regions.

Massing added: “Our many correspondents working abroad for DW fulfill the legal mandate to convey German and European perspectives and to report accurately and independently, including from our target countries. In doing so, they often expose themselves to danger – simply because they are doing their jobs as journalists and reporting independently in the spirit of press freedom.”

Massing demanded Uludağ’s immediate release and promised that Deutsche Welle would continue to campaign on his behalf.

A spokesperson for the German government said on Friday: “Freedom of the press and of expression are indispensable pillars of democratic societies, and journalists in particular must be able to do their work freely and without fear of repression.” This holds true for Turkey as well, the spokesperson added.

German Minister of State for Culture Wolfram Weimer also called the charges baseless and demanded Uludağ’s release from custody. “Journalism is not a crime,” Weimer said.

Erol Önderoğlu, RSF representative in Turkey, called the arrest arbitrary. Said Önderoğlu: “The judiciary is taking revenge on a journalist with integrity who is known for his investigations in the public interest.”

In a joint statement, 14 organizations, including the Committee to Protect Journalists and the International Press Institute, called on the Turkish authorities to release Alican Uludağ and drop the charges against him. The groups condemned the authorities’ actions, calling them “a clear act of intimidation” that is “aimed at chilling investigative reporting in Turkey.” The charge of “insulting the president” and the country’s “disinformation law” are systematically used to stifle independent media, the organizations said.

Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger, deputy chairwoman of the Friedrich Naumann Foundation, said in a statement: “A free and critical press is an indispensable part of any open society and of any political order that respects the rule of law. Journalists must not be criminalized for their reporting or for voicing their opinion.” The foundation stands in solidarity with Alican Uludağ, Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger said. Uludağ received the foundation’s Raif Badawi Award for his work in 2021.

Charged with “insult”

Turkey is ranked 159th of 180 countries on RSF’s Index of Press Freedom. According to RSF, Turkish authorities use “all possible means” to undermine critical voices. The judiciary regularly uses charges like those leveled at Uludağ to intimidate and punish journalists.

In April 2025, the Turkey correspondent for Swedish daily newspaper Dagens ETC was given a suspended sentence of eleven months and 20 days for the same charge of “insulting” the president. He was released after 51 days in custody.

Detained and suspended correspondents

Last month, a Deutsche Welle correspondent was detained in Niger. He is currently in pre-trial detention. The broadcaster reports that it is in touch with the journalist’s family, a local attorney, and other relevant authorities.

Last December, Ethiopia permanently suspended two of Deutsche Welle’s local correspondents. Prior to the two journalists’ suspension, all local correspondents for the broadcaster had been temporarily barred from working. (js)

United States: Lawsuit challenges repeal of climate guidelines

2026-02-23T07:59:00+01:00

The US government has revoked an important finding that guides regulatory standards on the climate. A coalition of environmental groups is challenging the move in court.

Experts say the repeal is at odds with the facts. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

More than a dozen health and environmental organizations have sued the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) after the agency revoked its scientific finding on the dangers of greenhouse gas emissions. The finding is the basis for US climate regulations.

The lawsuit, filed last Wednesday in Washington, DC, challenges a decision made by the EPA earlier this month to revoke its “endangerment finding.” The lawsuit names both the agency and its administrator, Lee Zeldin.

Determination based on scientific consensus

In 2009, on the basis of numerous scientific studies, the EPA found “that the current and projected concentrations of the six key well-mixed greenhouse gases,” including carbon dioxide and methane, “threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations.” This determination was the basis for the agency’s legal authority to regulate emissions of these greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. It authorized the EPA to set limits on the levels of harmful substances in the air and to establish quality standards. The endangerment finding is thus the basis for numerous climate protection measures in the US.

The US Supreme Court had already decided, in 2007, that the EPA is authorized to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. The court directed the agency to assess whether such emissions posed a threat to human health and welfare – and by extension whether it should act to curb them.

US President Donald Trump and EPA Administrator Zeldin referred to the repeal last week as a “deregulatory action.”

Plaintiffs point to court decisions

The 17 organizations named in the lawsuit argue that the decision to rescind the endangerment finding is unlawful. The plaintiffs include the American Public Health Association, the Clean Air Council, the Environmental Defense Fund, and the Union of Concerned Scientists. They are represented by Earthjustice and the Clean Air Task Force.

US courts have repeatedly upheld the endangerment finding, as Earthjustice points out. Most recently, in 2023, the US Circuit Court in DC rejected a challenge by an oil industry group, and the Supreme Court denied the group’s request for an appeal.

Earthjustice president Abigail Dillen said in a statement: “There is no way to reconcile EPA’s decision with the law, the science, and the reality of disasters that are hitting us harder every year. This is a slap in the face for all of the millions of Americans who are experiencing the devastating costs of extreme heat, wildfires, flooding, and storms.”

The group also criticizes the EPA for repealing emissions standards for motor vehicles. The transportation sector is the largest source of CO2 emissions in the US, which is the world’s second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases. Only China emits more.

Groups warn of danger to humans

Georges C. Benjamin, head of the American Public Health Association, said in a statement that the “science is clear”: “climate change and air pollution threaten everyone’s health.” Benjamin added: “To reverse course now, and to also repeal limits on climate pollution from vehicles, puts everyone in the country at risk.” It also weakens the US’s ability “to address the severe health impacts caused by climate change.”

Adina Rosenbaum, attorney for the Public Citizen Litigation Group, said in a statement: “The repeal of the EPA’s endangerment finding is illegal, and if allowed to stand, it will have devastating impacts on public health and a livable climate for decades.”

Gretchen Goldman of the Union of Concerned Scientists added: “This shameful and dangerous action by the Trump administration and EPA Administrator Zeldin is rooted in falsehoods not facts and is at complete odds with the public interest and the best available science.”

Additional lawsuits

Experts consider it likely that the legal battle will wind up before the US Supreme Court. It could take years for a final ruling on the matter.

States are also expected to challenge the decision. California governor Gavin Newsom has already announced his intention to sue.

Last Wednesday another lawsuit was filed on behalf of 18 young people. They argue that the EPA’s actions are unconstitutional.

According to the New York Times, individual lawsuits challenging EPA rules are usually consolidated into a single case before the DC Circuit Court.

US government against climate action

There is a long-standing scientific consensus that greenhouse gases, which are produced by the burning of oil, gas, and coal, are the main driver of the worsening climate crisis. Nevertheless, the current US administration has made severe cuts to funding for climate protection and research. In January 2025 Trump announced that the US would withdraw from the Paris climate agreement – the withdrawal became official last month.

The Trump administration has also shuttered the EPA’s research and development division and fired thousands of agency staff members.

Lee Zeldin, who was chosen by Trump to lead the agency, announced in July of last year that he planned to revoke the endangerment finding. The New York Times characterized the proposal as the administration’s “most consequential step yet to derail federal climate efforts.” The paper reported that the decision would not just repeal current standards: “If the move is upheld in court, it could make it significantly harder for future administrations to rein in climate pollution from the burning of coal, oil, and gas.” (dpa / js)

US Department of Homeland Security increases demands for user data from tech companies

2026-02-19T08:04:00+01:00

The US Department of Homeland Security has sent hundreds of subpoenas to tech companies. The department is demanding information related to social media accounts critical of the agency’s actions.

Civil liberties groups are urging tech companies not to release any information. (Source: IMAGO / Anadolu Agency)

The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is issuing demands to major tech platforms to release the personal information of users who have voiced criticism of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) online. The subpoenas also target accounts that monitor ICE’s activities, US media report.

According to the New York Times, Google, Reddit, Discord, and Meta have received hundreds of these subpoenas from the DHS in recent months. The paper spoke to four DHS officials as well as tech employees, all of whom asked to remain anonymous. The Times was also able to review two subpoenas sent to Meta.

According to the paper’s reporting, the subpoenas target accounts that either express criticism of ICE or post alerts about where ICE agents are currently active. After DHS agents shot and killed Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis last month, criticism of the department has reached a new pitch. Demonstrations against its actions continue. Some social media users alert their followers when they observe a large presence of ICE officers nearby.

The department has demanded personal information that tech companies retain in connection with such user accounts. Google, Meta, and Reddit have complied with some of these subpoenas, the Times reports.

Controversial legal tool

The DHS relies on a legal tool called an administrative subpoena. The subpoena is issued by the department itself – rather than a judge – and allows the DHS to demand information linked to a user’s account, including their name, email address, or log-in times. Because the subpoena is not a court order, however, the tech companies are under no obligation to comply. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a civil liberties group, explains that if tech companies refuse, the department either has to go to court – or withdraw its subpoena.

Administrative subpoenas are not new, but according to US media, they were used only rarely in the past – and primarily in connection with serious crimes. Over the last year, however, the DHS has increasingly wielded the tool to demand information on anonymous social media accounts.

In September 2025, for example, the DHS issued an administrative subpoena to Meta demanding information about an anonymous Instagram account that had shared a video in which the purported name of a Border Patrol agent was revealed. According to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the account’s owner posts about ICE and Border Patrol raids and shares information about protests. Meta informed the account’s owner of the request – and with the support of the ACLU’s Northern California office, the owner went to court. Before the court could rule on the case, the DHS withdrew the subpoena.

Onus on private individuals

Steve Loney, a lawyer for the ACLU’s Pennsylvania office, told the New York Times that it was important for the department to avoid a judge’s ruling – that way it could continue issuing its subpoenas. Nevertheless, “The pressure is on the end user, the private individual, to go to court,” Loney said.

The EFF considers the DHS’s use of administrative subpoenas to be unlawful. Users’ activities are protected by the US constitution, the organization argues. “But it is difficult for the average user to fight back on their own,” the EFF notes. To do so, a user has to respond quickly and hire a lawyer.

In January, US media reported on a case similar to the one in California. The DHS was requesting information from Meta about the owner of an account that posted about ICE operations in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. In this case as well, the account’s owner was informed of the request by Meta and went to court with the help of the ACLU. The DHS withdrew its subpoena.

Email triggers investigation

Earlier this month, the Washington Post reported on the experience of a retiree who had read in the news about an Afghan man who faced deportation. The man had testified in court that he feared the Taliban would kill him if he returned to the country.

Concerned for the Afghan man’s fate, the retiree had searched for the email address of the DHS prosecutor on the case. The prosecutor’s name was mentioned in the news story, and his email address was publicly available. From his Gmail account, the retiree wrote to the prosecutor and implored him: “Don’t play Russian roulette” with the Afghan man’s life.

According to the Post, within hours of sending the email the retiree received an alert from Google, informing him that the Department of Homeland Security had demanded information related to his Google Account. Google later said that it had not provided the requested information to the DHS. The company also alerted the user despite a request in the subpoena that it not do so. Nevertheless, DHS officers still came in person to the retiree’s home and questioned him about the email he had sent.

A Google spokesperson told the Washington Post that the company reviews all legal demands and resists demands “that are overbroad or improper, including objecting to some entirely.” The company told the New York Times that it informs users “unless under legal order not to or in an exceptional circumstance.”

Meta, Reddit, and Discord declined to comment on the subpoenas when asked by the Times.

In a statement repeated to multiple media outlets, the DHS said only that it has “broad administrative subpoena authority.” The department’s lawyers have argued in court that they are seeking information to ensure the safety of ICE agents.

Civil liberties group appeals to tech companies

Earlier this month the Electronic Frontier Foundation published an open letter to Amazon, Apple, Discord, Google, Meta, Microsoft, and Reddit. In the letter, the organization calls on the companies to protect their users’ privacy. The Trump administration “is aggressively targeting social media users engaged in First Amendment activity,” the EFF writes.

The organization asks the companies not to comply with subpoenas from the DHS and not to disclose information “without court confirmation that the subpoena is lawful and enforceable.” The companies must also provide notice to users and include a copy of the subpoena itself, the EFF urges – without this information, users don’t have the opportunity to assert their rights. When informing users of attempts by the DHS to obtain their information, the group writes, tech companies can refer them directly to the EFF and ACLU for support. (js)

Iran: Surveillance technology used to identify protesters

2026-02-18T07:57:00+01:00

Human rights groups report an ongoing wave of arrests in Iran. The government is using surveillance tools to identify people.

Iranian authorities deploy facial recognition and license plate readers, and monitor online activity. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

Iran is using surveillance technology to track down those who participated in recent demonstrations. Several media outlets report massive numbers of arrests.

In late December protests erupted in Tehran in response to Iran’s dire economic situation. As demonstrations quickly spread from the capital to other parts of the country, their focus broadened to include criticism of the authoritarian regime. The authorities responded with a brutal crackdown – Human Rights Watch (HRW) accuses security forces of perpetrating “countrywide massacres” and mass killings of protesters.

The authorities are evidently using surveillance technology to track down people who took part in the demonstrations. The New York Times reports that during the protests, some people received threatening text messages stating that their “presence at illegal gatherings” had been noted. The recipients were also informed that they were now under “intelligence monitoring” and should refrain from attending any further demonstrations.

Ongoing wave of arrests

According to the latest reports, in recent weeks the authorities have arrested thousands of people whom they believe took part in the protests. The AP writes that these arrests are happening in both cities and rural communities and have touched “large swaths of Iranian society.” Those who are detained are often held incommunicado for days or even weeks – unable to speak to either their families or to a lawyer.

Speaking to the New York Times, an Iranian security official confirmed that the authorities were hunting down protesters.

Location data and facial recognition

Human rights activists and researchers report that the government is now deploying surveillance technology to track people who participated in the protests, tracing them back to their homes or places of work and then arresting them.

Researchers believe that one tactic used by the authorities is to analyze location data from mobile phones. Another is to study video footage of protesters taken by security cameras on the street or in front of shops. In some cases the government is able to view camera feeds in real time. Drone footage is also used. The government is believed to use facial recognition technology to identify people.

In recent years, Iran has built up an ever-growing web of surveillance. According to human rights organizations, facial recognition technology has been used for years to enforce veiling laws. License plate scanners are also used for this purpose.

As the New York Times reports, the authorities are currently intent on finding the “leaders” of the protests.

Imported technology

Mahdi Saremifar of the digital rights organization Holistic Resilience told the Times: “They can follow you to the streets. The government ends up with a long list of names of people. They can visit every single one of those people, maybe a month later or two months later.”

In a report on surveillance in Iran published this month, the organization notes that Iran has been expanding its capacity for digital surveillance. China plays an important role in this effort by providing some of the technology used by the government.

A report published last week by the human rights organization Article 19 also attests to China’s involvement. According to the Article 19 report, the Iranian government has purchased facial recognition technology from Tiandy Technologies. In 2022, the United States imposed sanctions on the Chinese company for its involvement in the repression of China’s Uyghur minority in Xinjiang – and for selling its products to Iran’s Revolutionary Guard. Iran also reportedly imports technology from Russia.

Several overlapping surveillance systems

According to Holistic Resilience, Iran has not yet implemented a centralized, nationwide facial recognition network – rather it uses a “fragmented and opaque collection” of several different facial recognition projects.

The organization cautions however that the authorities don’t have to rely on a unified system in order to track people – they already have access to additional, interconnected surveillance systems. The authorities can track mobile phones, for instance: because a person’s SIM card is connected to their national ID, it’s possible to identify individual users. According to researchers, Iran began building up a centralized identity database in 2019.

The New York Times reports that in the past Iranian police have also used devices known as IMSI catchers. These devices emulate cell phone towers, prompting phones in the vicinity to transmit information that can then be used for tracking purposes. Last year, police in the city of Isfahan used IMSI catchers to identify and intimidate women who allegedly violated the country’s veiling laws. Officers in the city also used contactless card readers to scan people’s national ID cards as they walked past – many later received threatening text messages from the government, the Times reports.

In 2023, researchers at the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab reported that Iran was building up an “unprecedented surveillance architecture” in order to monitor Iranians’ mobile communications – or deny access to such communications entirely. The researchers also warned that the state’s capabilities allowed it to identify those who participate in anti-government protests.

Internet shutdowns

Following the recent demonstrations, some Iranians who had posted online about the protests have reportedly had their SIM cards blocked. Others received threatening calls or experienced interruptions to their banking service.

In January the government imposed a countrywide internet shutdown. According to news reports, access to the internet began to return in late January, but remains sharply curtailed.

For years the authorities have imposed stringent censorship controls on the internet. Popular international platforms are blocked in the country. According to human rights groups, blocking these sites is a way for the government to steer Iranian users toward national services – which are easier to monitor.

Mahdi Saremifar told the Times: “People in Iran know these platforms are used for interception and surveillance, but for some things you don’t have any other choice.”

Some are able to circumvent the censorship by using virtual private network (VPN) services. But even some of these have been infiltrated by the authorities: cybersecurity researchers have found fake apps that purport to be VPNs but that spy on users.

Tens of thousands of arrests

The exact number of arrests made in connection with the recent protests is unclear. According to the Human Rights Activist News Agency (HRANA), there have been more than 53,550 arrests since the outbreak of demonstrations. The organization also reports “ongoing arrests and security crackdowns in various cities.”

According to HRANA, at least 6,508 demonstrators were killed in the protests. More than 11,000 reported killings have yet to be verified. (js)

The Netherlands: Millions of people affected by data theft

2026-02-17T08:10:00+01:00

Identification details and bank account numbers, among other information, were stolen from customers of Dutch telecommunications provider Odido.

Dutch broadcaster NOS calls the incident one of the largest data breaches on record in the Netherlands. (Source: IMAGO / ANP)

Hackers breached the IT systems of Dutch telecommunications company Odido and stole personal information belonging to millions of customers. The stolen data includes customers’ full names, identification details, and banking information. Customers of the Odido subsidiary Ben were also affected.

As Odido announced late last week, unknown actors gained access to a system in which customer information was stored. On an information page that the company has set up on its website, Odido explains that customers’ full names, mailing addresses, mobile numbers, and email addresses were stolen. Identification details such as passport or driver’s license numbers were also stolen – as were dates of birth, bank account numbers, and customer numbers.

The attackers were also able to gain access to systems used by Ben, an Odido subsidiary. The same types of information were stolen from customers of the subsidiary as were stolen from Odido.

Former customers of Odido or Ben whose contracts ended less than two years ago may also have been affected by the breach.

Millions impacted

Speaking to Dutch public broadcaster NOS, the company confirmed that roughly 6.2 million customer accounts had been affected. This would make the incident one of the largest data breaches on record in the Netherlands, according to NOS. Odido is the country’s largest mobile network carrier and also provides landline telephone, internet, and TV service.

Odido stressed that no copies of identity documents had been stolen. Customers’ passwords, location data, call details, and billing information were not affected.

The company has stated that it first discovered signs of unauthorized access to its systems on February 7 and took immediate action. The company has yet to disclose any further details about the cyberattack, however.

NOS reports that the unknown actors who gained access to Odido’s internal systems did so in part by using so-called social engineering methods. By deceiving Odido employees, the attackers were able to circumvent security measures.

The company said that it has informed the Dutch Data Protection Authority of the incident. Odido also explained that affected customers would be informed by email or text message. Each customer would be notified individually and informed as to what specific data was stolen.

Fraud warning

In its announcement, Odido warned that criminals could use the stolen data for fraud or phishing purposes. Customers should be on the alert, especially if they receive unexpected emails, calls, or texts. They should also monitor their bank accounts for suspicious activity, the company warned.

Last year there were numerous reports of cyberattacks on telecommunications providers, with attacks occuring in several different countries. SK Telecom in South Korea, for instance, suffered a breach in which nearly 27 million pieces of customer data was stolen. In July the South Korean Ministry of Science and ICT determined that the provider had acted negligently and mandated that the company institute additional security measures.

In 2024 hackers stole phone records from customers of the US telecommunications company AT&T.

Another US telecom company, T-Mobile, has suffered numerous data breaches in recent years. Last year Washington state took legal action against the company in response to an incident involving the theft of data belonging to more than 79 million people.

French provider must pay €42 million fine

In January of this year France’s data protection authority imposed a €42 million fine on the telecommunications providers Free and Free Mobile. The fine came in response to a 2024 data breach in which unknown actors gained access to the companies’ IT systems and extracted data belonging to 24 million subscribers. The information that was stolen included customers’ names and addresses as well as their bank account numbers. Free and its subsidiary Free Mobile are among the largest telecom companies in France. (js)

London: Police test facial recognition at train stations

2026-02-16T08:18:00+01:00

British police have begun testing facial recognition technology at London train stations. The Home Office wants to expand use of the technology.

A number of British police forces have been using facial recognition for years. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

The British Transport Police has begun testing live facial recognition technology at London train stations. The pilot program started last Wednesday and is set to last for six months.

London Bridge railway station, which offers connections to both regional rail service and the London Underground, is the first location to host the pilot program. The station is among the busiest in the UK – with more than 54 million passengers per year.

Tests are scheduled to follow at additional London stations. The British Transport Police has said it will publish announcements on its website in advance of each pilot program. The agency has also promised to post highly visible signage in locations where facial recognition is in use.

The British Transport Police is responsible for policing railways and local mass transit throughout Britain. According to the agency, the goal of the tests is to determine how well the technology works in train stations, what impact it has on public safety, and how passengers respond to its use.

Real-time matching against a watchlist

The facial recognition cameras installed in the stations will capture footage of all passersby and, by analyzing each person’s biometric data, compare their images against a watchlist. According to the police, the aim is to identify persons wanted for “serious criminal offenses.” In case of a match, the system automatically generates an alert. According to the Transport Police, an officer will review the footage before deciding whether to take further measures. The images and biometric data of people who are not wanted by police will be deleted immediately, the Transport Police stated.

Facial recognition cameras at London Bridge station. (Source: British Transport Police)

Chief Superintendent Chris Casey, who is overseeing the pilot project, said in a statement: “I want to reiterate that this is a trial of the technology to assess how it performs in a railway setting.” Casey stressed that a “significant amount of research and planning” was done in advance of the trial. He added that during the testing period, alternative routes will be available for individuals who do not want to be captured by the cameras.

Civil liberties organization Big Brother Watch has voiced criticism. Advocacy Manager Matthew Feeney commented: “We all want train passengers to travel safely, but subjecting law-abiding passengers to mass biometric surveillance is a disproportionate and disturbing response.” He added that given the lack of regulation on the use of facial recognition technology in the UK, police forces are being allowed to write their own rules.

Said Feeney: “The use of this technology is especially offensive in a democracy where neither the public nor Parliament has ever voted on its use. Sadly, the UK stands out among democracies when it comes to the widespread use of facial recognition.”

Lack of legal basis

For years, critics have voiced concern over the fact that several police forces in Britain are using the controversial technology despite there being no legal basis for it. Currently at least 13 British police forces use live facial recognition – but the Home Office would like to equip every force in the country with the technology in the future.

According to Crime and Policing Minister Sarah Jones, “facial recognition is the biggest breakthrough for catching criminals since DNA matching.” The technology has helped police apprehend “thousands of dangerous criminals,” Jones said in December.

That month, the Home Office launched a period of public consultation, at the conclusion of which the government hopes to put new laws in place that will allow police forces around the country to use the technology “more often.” The consultation ended on February 12, a day after the trial began at London Bridge station.

Matthew Feeney of Big Brother Watch noted: “It is especially concerning that British Transport Police are moving ahead with facial recognition deployments before the Home Office has finished its consultation.”

Researchers demand restrictive legislation

Researchers Pete Fussey from the University of Southampton and Daragh Murray from Queen Mary University of London have published the response that they submitted to the Home Office’s consultation. Fussey and Murray observed a 2019 trial of live facial recognition by London’s Metropolitan Police – and criticized the system’s high failure rate. According to the scholars, theirs is the only independent academic study of the Met Police’s use of the technology.

In their response, the two scholars highlight what they regard as key issues. They write that any legislation regulating the technology should be “restrictive, rather than permissive.” The circumstances in which the technology may be used should be “clearly demarcated.” Each use should meet a standard of being “necessary in a democratic society.” The scholars write: “In the absence of an appropriate legal framework, law enforcement should not be permitted to experiment on the public.”

Fussey and Murray also warn that there can be no “one size fits all” approach to the regulation of facial recognition or other biometric identification technologies. For every unique use case, there must be an evidence-based assessment of the potential benefits for law enforcement and potential harm to human rights. The authors stress that “To date, no concrete evidence justifying the need for live [facial recognition technology] has been presented.”

Legal challenge to facial recognition in London

Meanwhile police in London are facing a lawsuit challenging their use of facial recognition. Director of Big Brother Watch Silvie Carlo and anti-knife crime activist Shaun Thompson filed a legal challenge against the force in May 2024 after Thompson was mistakenly identified by the Metropolitan Police’s facial recognition system. Carlo and Thompson argue that the technology violates the European Convention on Human Rights.

The case was heard by the High Court in London in January. A decision is still pending. (js)

India: Workers made to view violent images for AI training

2026-02-12T08:06:00+01:00

Workers in India monitor and annotate content for global tech companies and often suffer trauma as a result. At least half of those working in the field are women.

Content moderation is also a part of the process of training so-called AI. (Source: IMAGO / Depositphotos)

Women in rural communities in India moderate content for international tech companies. An investigation by the Guardian shows that many are traumatized by the work – but rarely receive support.

So-called artificial intelligence (AI) seems omnipresent at the moment. In order for the algorithms used by AI companies to be able to perform the tasks assigned to them, they have to be trained on data. This process also requires manual work like content moderation and so-called “data annotation,” which involves labeling or categorizing content.

In India, this work is increasingly done by women. As the Guardian reports, at least half of the workforce in the field is female. Workers are employed by local companies that contract with large tech firms – often companies based in the US.

The overwhelming majority of workers come from rural communities or marginalized backgrounds. The Guardian reports that companies deliberately base their operations in smaller cities or villages, where labor costs are lower. For the employees, the prospect of working in a digital field is often appealing: the work is cleaner and pays better than jobs in agriculture or mining – and because the work can be done remotely they don’t have to relocate.

Traumatizing tasks

But the work can be traumatizing: one 26-year-old woman told the Guardian that in her first months on the job she couldn’t sleep. She reviews material that has been flagged by a tech platform’s automated systems and determines if the content violates the platform’s rules. “On an average day, she views up to 800 videos and images, making judgements that train algorithms to recognize violence, abuse and harm,” the Guardian reports.

The woman told the paper that she no longer finds the work disturbing – she only feels “blank.” Sometimes she still dreams of the videos, she said. The Guardian reports that, according to researchers, such “emotional numbing” is a “defining feature” of this kind of work.

The sociologist Milagros Miceli leads the Data Workers’ Inquiry research project. She told the paper that “content moderation belongs in the category of dangerous work.”

Workers made to view depictions of abuse

Another woman reported that the tasks assigned to her were merely “dull” at first. But she also found it exciting to be “working behind the AI.” She felt the pay, at roughly €380 per month, was reasonable. But after a few months she was asked to “flag and remove content involving child sexual abuse.” She told the Guardian: “I had never imagined this would be part of the job.”

Soon after, she was given a new assignment, and asked to spend hours categorizing pornographic content. As she told the Guardian, the work had an impact on her personal life. She felt “increasingly disconnected” from her partner.

When she complained, her concerns were bluntly dismissed: “Your contract says data annotation – this is data annotation,” she was told.

“Easy money”

The researcher Priyam Vadaliya told the Guardian that job postings rarely provide specifics on what the work actually entails. For many workers, it is only after signing their employment contracts that they “realize what the actual work is.” The jobs are advertised online and on social media platforms as ways to earn “easy money.”

Vadaliya told the paper that in many places the jobs are a “rare source of paid employment.” This economic factor “can discourage workers from questioning the psychological harm” the work causes.

Studies have linked content moderation to emotional strain – it can also lead to anxiety and sleep disturbance. According to the Guardian, a study published last December determined that the most pronounced psychological risk was traumatic stress. The study included workers in India, and found that the risk of trauma existed even in workplaces that offered support mechanisms.

The Guardian contacted eight Indian companies that contracted with big tech firms. Only two provided psychological support to their employees.

Too little support

Vadaliya told the Guardian that because Indian labor laws do not recognize psychological harm, workers lacked protections. Even when companies do offer support, she said, workers usually have to seek it out themselves. What’s more, “many data workers, especially those coming from remote or marginalized backgrounds, may not even have the language to articulate what they are experiencing.”

According to the paper’s investigation, the psychological burden is exacerbated by the isolation workers face. Many have to sign non-disclosure agreements that prohibit them from speaking about their work, “even with family and friends.” Violating these agreements can cost workers their jobs or make them vulnerable to legal action.

Traumatizing jobs in Kenya, Ghana, and the Philippines

Similar reports have come from other countries. In 2023, Time magazine revealed that OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, worked with the subcontractor Sama to hire workers in Kenya to review snippets of text – including text that was seemingly drawn from the “darkest recesses of the internet.” The workers were paid at most two dollars an hour, and reported experiencing trauma.

Samasource (as the company was known before 2021) also contracted with Facebook and employed content moderators who had to view violent images and videos. After being diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder, more than 140 workers in Kenya filed a lawsuit against Meta, Facebook’s parent company, as well as the outsourcing firm. As of April 2025, a similar lawsuit was being prepared in Ghana.

It has long been known that workers in this field face potential harm. A 2018 documentary, “The Cleaners,” examines the psychologically demanding work performed by laborers in the Philippines who moderate content for social networks. (js)

Germany: Court bars supermarket chain from advertising "sustainable" palm oil

2026-02-11T08:03:00+01:00

The German supermarket chain Edeka must remove references to “sustainable palm oil” from its product packaging. A court has ruled that the claims are misleading.

Forests are often cleared to make way for palm oil plantations, releasing carbon dioxide. Oil palm monocultures also lead to a loss of biodiversity and land degradation. (Source: IMAGO / imagebroker)

The German supermarket chain Edeka must remove references to sustainable palm oil from the packaging of two of its products. A court in Hamburg has ruled against the company in a suit brought by the consumer advocacy group Foodwatch.

The case centered on claims featured on the packaging for two products, margarine and vegetable shortening, that were sold under Edeka’s “Gut & Günstig” store brand. The supermarket chain advertised the products with the seal of the “Round Table for Sustainable Palm Oil” (RSPO), a coalition of palm oil companies and non-governmental organizations. The coalition’s stated goal is to develop and implement global standards for sustainable palm oil.

The packaging claimed that the products contained “certified sustainable palm oil.” The labels also included the statement “Edeka and the WWF are working to ensure that palm oil is produced more sustainably” and listed two websites that customers could visit for more information.

Foodwatch criticized the packaging, arguing that it misled customers, and issued a formal call for Edeka to remove the sustainability claims from the products in question. After the company refused, the group filed a lawsuit with the support of the Berlin-based European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR).

Essential information withheld

The court sided with Foodwatch and the ECCHR. The groups announced the ruling on Monday, and the dpa wire service also reported that the court had confirmed its decision. The ruling has not yet gone into effect.

In their decision, the judges determined that Edeka had run afoul of a German law against deceptive advertising. They barred the supermarket chain from continuing to use the contested language in the product description.

The court found that “essential information for understanding the disputed statements” was withheld from consumers, such as why the palm oil used in the products was considered sustainable and what criteria were used to determine whether a product could feature the RSPO seal. The judges reasoned that when certifications or seals of quality are used to advertise a product, consumers have a “particular and justified” interest in learning which factors are considered in giving this form of assurance.

High bar for sustainability claims in advertising

In order to advertise a product as sustainable, a heightened standard has to be met with regard to the accuracy, specificity, and clarity of the marketing claims, the court found. The court cited a 2024 decision by the German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof) stating that companies that use the term “climate neutral” to advertise their products had to substantiate their claim.

The Hamburg court’s decision noted that the labels on the two Edeka products referred consumers to a pair of websites. While it is possible to satisfy the information requirement under the law against deceptive advertising by linking to web resources, the court found that it was insufficient in this particular case. Though the websites contained essential information, the principles and criteria on which the certification was actually based were not immediately accessible.

The margarine label under dispute. (Source: Foodwatch)

According to the court, the required information is only available in a lengthy PDF, written in English, to access which users must navigate through several menus on the RSPO website. The court determined that it was unreasonable to ask consumers to work their way through the several steps necessary to access this document; likewise unreasonable was asking German consumers to translate an English text in order to obtain the information essential to their ability to make an informed decision about whether to buy a product.

Rauna Bindewald of Foodwatch said in a statement: “Edeka’s palm oil greenwashing is illegal. Supermarkets and food manufacturers cannot advertise products with blanket claims of sustainability or rely on seals that make such assertions. They must disclose which specific standards lie behind their claims.”

Edeka, speaking to the dpa, stressed that the court had not found the RSPO seal itself to be misleading. The relevant information was revised after the criticism was raised, the company said.

Criticism of palm oil production

While Foodwatch and the ECCHR cheered the judges’ decision, they also regard it as a missed opportunity. The groups criticized the court for not examining whether the palm oil used in Edeka’s products actually comes from sustainable sources. Palm oil production is often associated with massive environmental destruction, including deforestation – as well as human rights abuses.

The two groups note that Edeka has marketed products containing palm oil produced by NaturAceites, a supplier based in El Estor, Guatemala. According to the groups’ research, NaturAceites runs oil palm plantations on land that has traditionally been used by Guatemala’s indigenous population. These indigenous groups have for years demanded recognition of their land rights. Protests against land grabs and environmental destruction have repeatedly been met with violent repression by security forces, according to Foodwatch and the ECCHR.

Laborers report excessive working hours, insufficient pay, and the hindering of their efforts to organize. The company’s use of pesticides has also reportedly led to the contamination of neighboring communities’ drinking water.

The Christian Initiative Romero (CIR) has also pointed out rights abuses by NaturAceites.

In response to these criticisms, RSPO suspended its certification for the palm oil producer in August 2024.

Supply chain complaint

In 2024, Foodwatch and the ECCHR filed a complaint with the German Federal Office for Economic
Affairs and Export Control under Germany’s supply chain law. Together with local groups affected by palm oil production, the two organizations demanded that Edeka “take suitable and effective measures to redress the human rights abuses in its palm oil supply chain in Guatemala.” (dpa / js)

Hong Kong: Publisher Jimmy Lai sentenced to 20 years

2026-02-10T08:08:00+01:00

The media mogul Jimmy Lai has been handed a decades-long prison sentence in Hong Kong. The trial has been widely criticized as politically motivated.

Lai has been serving time on a previous conviction. (Source: IMAGO / Nexpher Images)

The publisher and pro-democracy activist Jimmy Lai has been sentenced to 20 years in prison in Hong Kong. Human rights organizations sharply criticize the decision. The EU calls for Lai’s release.

Jimmy Lai was considered one of the leading voices of the pro-democracy movement in Hong Kong. Last December a court found the 78-year-old guilty of “collusion with a foreign country or external elements” and “conspiracy to publish seditious publications.” Lai himself had denied the charges.

On Monday the court announced a sentence of 20 years. Because the first two years of the sentence overlap with a sentence for a previous conviction, Lai is set to spend the next 18 years behind bars. His daughter Claire Lai said in a statement that the sentence was “heartbreakingly cruel,” given her father’s poor health. Her brother Sebastian Lai called the sentence “draconian” and “life-threatening.”

The Guardian reports that this is the harshest punishment handed down to date for a conviction under Hong Kong’s national security law. The controversial law was promulgated in 2020 in the wake of large demonstrations calling for more democracy in the territory. It targets the pro-democracy opposition and criminalizes actions deemed by the authoritarian government in Beijing to fall under the categories of “terrorist activities,” “secession,” “subversion,” or “collusion with a foreign country.” Critics view the law as an instrument for silencing the opposition and tightening the grip of the Communist Party. As of June 30, 2025, more than 160 people had been convicted of crimes under the law.

Founder of Apple Daily

Lai founded the pro-democracy newspaper Apple Daily in 1995. He served as the paper’s publisher and penned columns in which he criticized China. He also took part in pro-democracy protests and personally supported the movement. The media mogul has been in prison since 2020, having been convicted on previous charges in connection with “unauthorized” protests.

Apple Daily was forced to close in June 2021 after being targeted by the authorities for alleged violations of the national security law.

At the time, Amnesty International wrote that the paper’s closure marked the “blackest day for media freedom in Hong Kong’s recent history.” The paper had effectively been banned for publishing articles critical of the government, Amnesty charged.

The sentence handed down on Monday has also drawn widespread criticism. Amnesty’s Sarah Brooks called it a “grim milestone in Hong Kong’s transformation from a city governed by the rule of law to one ruled by fear.” Said Brooks: “Imprisoning a 78-year-old man for doing nothing more than exercising his rights shows a complete disregard for human dignity. Every day he spends behind bars is a grave injustice.” The sentence amounts to a “cold-blooded attack on freedom of expression.”

Nail in the coffin for press freedom

Jodie Ginsberg, CEO of the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), said in response to Lai’s sentencing: “The rule of law has been completely shattered in Hong Kong.” Ginsburg called Monday’s decision the “final nail in the coffin” for freedom of the press in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

The head of Lai’s legal team, Caoilfhionn Gallagher, echoed Ginsburg’s assessment: “Today marks the final blow to the rule of law in Hong Kong.”

Thibaut Bruttin, Director General of Reporters without Borders (RSF), said in a statement: “This court decision underscores the complete collapse of press freedom in Hong Kong and the authorities’ profound contempt for independent journalism.” Bruttin added: “From Lai’s arrest to his trial and conviction, this legal process has been nothing more than a sham.”

Bruttin appealed to other countries to exert pressure on China and Hong Kong so as to secure Lai’s release. Said Bruttin: “His sentence must not become a death sentence.”

EU and Great Britain demand release

A spokesperson for the EU’s diplomatic service called Lai’s prosecution politically motivated. The EU calls for the “immediate and unconditional release of Jimmy Lai” – and for Hong Kong to “stop prosecuting journalists.”

UK Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper likewise called for the publisher’s release and criticized the prosecution against him. Lai is a British citizen.

Cooper said in a statement: “We stand with the people of Hong Kong, and will always honor the historical commitments made under the legally binding Sino-British Joint Declaration. China must do the same.” In 1997 the UK transferred control of its former colony to China. As part of the treaty outlining the terms of the handover, it was stipulated that Hong Kong would maintain a semi-autonomous special status until 2047. The treaty guarantees rights like freedom of speech, and states that Hong Kong will maintain its own independent judiciary and laws.

In addition to Jimmy Lai, the court issued sentences to six of his colleagues at Apple Daily, and to two activists. Executive editor-in-chief Lam Man-chung was sentenced to ten years in prison, associate publisher Chan Pui-man to seven years. (dpa / js)

Reporters without Borders: 55 attacks on journalists in Germany

2026-02-05T16:12:00+01:00

Reporters without Borders documented numerous attacks on journalists in Germany in the preceding year. The delegitimization of journalistic work poses a great challenge, the group says.

The majority of attacks occurred around political gatherings, including protests. (Source: IMAGO / Jochen Tack)

Increasing polarization and a coarser social climate are leading to increased safety risks for members of the press. In its annual report on the state of press freedom in Germany, published on Tuesday, Reporters without Borders (RSF) details these and other challenges.

Last year RSF documented and verified 55 attacks on journalists and editorial offices. This figure does not include a large number of leads that could not be verified, due for example to lack of witnesses. Last year RSF documented 89 attacks. Violence against journalists in Germany hit its recent peak in 2022, when a total of 103 such incidents took place.

According to the report, “Nahaufnahme” (“Close-up”), the 55 attacks in 2025 included 46 cases of physical violence against journalists. In most cases journalists were kicked or punched by assailants; some were struck with objects. RSF counts an incident as an attack when contact is made either with a journalist’s person or their equipment. Three cases of property damage to editorial offices and six cyberattacks were also documented.

Attacks at demonstrations

20 of the verified physical attacks and cases of property damage occurred in Berlin, the highest total by region, followed by Saxony (9) and Saxony-Anhalt (5). RSF documented four attacks each in North Rhine-Westphalia and Hesse. Incidents were also recorded in Lower Saxony (3), Hamburg (2), and Thuringia and Bavaria (one each).

As in previous years, political gatherings were the most dangerous places for members of the press. Reporting on extreme right-wing demonstrations is particularly dangerous, as is conducting research on or filming activities within this milieu: 18 of the documented incidents involved journalists covering extreme right-wing activity. In March 2025, for example, a reporter from Spiegel TV suffered an injury to his face while covering a right-wing extremist gathering at Berlin’s Ostbahnhof. RSF also documented eleven attacks at pro-Palestinian demonstrations. Isolated attacks by police or participants at extreme left-wing demonstrations were also reported.

According to the report, many members of the press regarded the delegitimization of journalistic work as a great challenge in the preceding year. This was spurred on by “political actors, digital harassment, and new media milieux that increase their reach through exaggerated emphasis and disinformation.”

Disinformation and harassment

In this connection, RSF voices concern at the rise of “polarization and a new right-wing media system.” The situation in the US provides a model for this negative development: German actors on the right-wing-populist or right-wing-extremist end of the spectrum are increasingly following the example of extremist US media. This “new media milieu” has since become more professionalized and better funded, RSF reports. And it has used this better footing to disseminate its own narratives and disinformation and to launch smear campaigns.

This approach has a bearing on press freedom, RSF argues, when it entails systematic attempts by such media to attack other outlets or individual members of the press – over the previous year, several members of the press voiced their concerns to RSF about what they consider to be a dangerous development.

One concerning example was the portrayal by right-wing portal Nius of the research collective Recherche Nord, as well as the portal’s campaign against Recherche Nord photographer André Aden. Although the collective is known in Germany for its ongoing work documenting Neo-Nazism in the country and has received prizes for its work, Nius has questioned the validity of this journalistic work and presented a distorted view of it.

RSF also notes that a tense climate continues to surround reporting on the conflict in the Middle East following the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023. In 2024, journalists had complained of a limiting of discourse surrounding the topic. News outlets have since held additional discussions on journalistic standards, language, and responsibility, but those reporting on the conflict still face pressure. Individual journalists have also faced defamation from various camps and have been subjected to online smear campaigns.

Algorithms promote certain content

The big tech platforms pose additional challenges, RSF argues. These platforms have long since become media players in their own right, with algorithms that preference certain content, including disinformation. This works to the benefit of disinformation campaigns from Russia, for example.

Co-author of the report Katharina Viktoria Weiß said in a statement: “Given the myriad challenges we face, including technological challenges, journalism, politics, and civil society must not cave in to those who want to hollow out the information sector in favor of asserting power and economic interests. We must not continue to allow ourselves to be set against one another.”

The report also mentions the increasing concentration of media ownership in Germany as media organizations continued to announce reductions to their local and regional print offerings. This results from a decline in both circulation numbers and advertising revenue. According to RSF, a large portion of advertising income is flowing to US tech companies.

A majority stake in the private broadcaster ProSieben-Sat.1 was acquired by the Italian company Media for Europe, which has already replaced the broadcaster’s leadership. A reduction in programming is feared. In addition, a pending increase in the fee paid by German households to support public broadcasting – similar to the license fee paid by UK residents – has been blocked by state governments.

Despite a promise in the ruling parties’ coalition agreement to provide a tax break for journalism in the public interest, RSF reports that there are still no plans to enact the measure. The organization views it as necessary to counter the emergence of news deserts.

AI poses a challenge

The organization sees additional challenges arising from the use of news content to train so-called artificial intelligence. Lawmakers must reform the copyright framework in this area, RSF argues. Though large media organizations have made licensing agreements with tech companies, it remains unclear what measures exist to ensure copyright protections for journalists whose work is not covered by such agreements.

Google’s practice of using news content for its AI summaries has prompted a coalition of NGOs and media organizations to file a complaint with the German internet regulator. The groups warn of the risk of misinformation on the one hand, but also argue that Google has created a service that competes for web traffic with the news outlets that produce the actual content, as users no longer have to click on the original source.

Calls to protect exile journalists

The report warns of threats to journalists living in exile in Germany, and calls for their protection. The German government must also keep its promise to bring at-risk Afghan journalists to Germany, RSF urges. Accelerated visa programs for journalists from Belarus, Iran, and Russia should be reinstituted.

RSF also calls for a ban on the surveillance of journalists’ electronic communications and online activities; the ban is necessary to protect the confidentiality of sources. The German government should also drop plans to require internet providers to retain a log of users’ IP addresses, RSF urges. (js)

Spain shutters investigation into Pegasus surveillance for second time

2026-02-04T16:43:00+01:00

A Spanish court has shelved its inquiry into Pegasus attacks on politicians for a second time. The attacks first came to light in 2022.

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez was one of the figures targeted by the espionage. (Source: IMAGO / Europa Press)

Spain’s Audiencia Nacional (National Court) has once again suspended its inquiry into spyware attacks on politicians. The investigation had resumed after a previous decision to shelve it in 2023. The judge presiding over the case considers it unlikely that the inquiry will be relaunched in the future.

In 2022 the Spanish government revealed that Pegasus spyware had been used to spy on several Spanish politicians. Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez was reportedly one of the targets.

According to an announcement from the Spanish judiciary, the Audiencia Nacional decided last month to shutter its inquiry into the hacking.

No new findings

Judge José Luis Calama based his decision on the lack of new findings arising out of a set of materials provided by France. He also condemned the lack of cooperation on the part of Israeli authorities. Pegasus is made by the Israeli company NSO Group. The company claims to sell the software only to government agencies; exports of the product are subject to licensing requirements imposed by Israel.

As Calama explained in his decision, the court submitted several requests to Israeli authorities seeking help with obtaining information from NSO and with taking a statement from NSO’s chief executive. Israel’s failure to comply with the requests made it impossible to determine who specifically was responsible for the actions under investigation, Calama wrote.

Politicians spied on

In May 2022, the Spanish government announced that Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez and Defense Minister Margarita Robles had been targeted with Pegasus spyware. An examination of the politicians’ smartphones had turned up evidence of the attacks. Spanish media reported at the time that several gigabytes of data had been extracted from the prime minister’s official phone.

What is Pegasus?

Pegasus is a form of spyware developed by NSO Group, an Israeli company. The surveillance tool can gain complete control of an infiltrated device and, for example, turn on the camera and microphone without the user’s knowledge – or copy all stored data. The tool lets attackers access location data and passwords. Pegasus has faced criticism for years and has been linked with human rights abuses.

A subsequent examination of the phones of other members of the government also turned up traces of the spyware. Devices belonging to Interior Minister Fernando Grande-Marlaska and Agricultural Minister Luis Planas were also infected.

At the time the Spanish government did not provide any information on who was responsible, or who it suspected may have been responsible, for spying on the Prime Minister and his cabinet members.

Investigation shuttered again

The Audiencia Nacional first began its investigation in 2022. Based in Madrid, it is one of the highest courts in the land and hears cases related to organized crime and terrorism. There are also investigating judges working in the court’s criminal division.

Judge José Luis Calama first shuttered the investigation in 2023 – complaining at that time as well that Israeli authorities had failed to respond to numerous requests for cooperation.

In April 2024, Calama restarted the investigation after French authorities passed on information from their own investigations into spyware attacks on top politicians, journalists, and lawyers. But the material did not lead to any new findings.

Resumption of inquiry possible, but unlikely

In last month’s announcement, the court left open the possibility that the investigation could be resumed in the future. But in order for this to happen, Israel must comply with the court’s requests, which Calama judges to be unlikely. Alternately, new evidence could come to light that would make a resumption of inquiries possible.

The attacks on top politicians are not the only known instances of spyware use in Spain: in April 2022, cybersecurity researchers discovered that the mobile phones of at least 65 members of the Catalonian separatist movement had been targeted with spyware. The victims included lawyers, journalists, and politicians – and also members of European Parliament.

Not long afterwards, CNI, the Spanish intelligence agency, admitted to spying on some of the 65 individuals, including Pere Aragonès, the former regional president of Catalonia. The intelligence agency had reportedly secured judicial approval for the surveillance.

Shortly after the admission, then-head of the intelligence service Paz Esteban was removed from her post.

According to news reports, victims of the phone surveillance are still pursuing cases against CNI and the Guardia Civil. In November, Politico reported that the European Court of Human Rights had dismissed a case brought by former vice president of the Catalonian regional parliament, Josep Costa. (js)

US immigration agency invests in additional surveillance technology

2026-02-03T16:24:00+01:00

US Immigration and Customs Enforcement is building out an ever growing web of surveillance: the agency deploys spyware, buys location data, and scans faces.

ICE has been the focus of criticism for years. (Source: IMAGO / Anadolu Agency)

Mobile facial recognition technology and spyware: US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has considerably expanded its arsenal of surveillance technology over the past year. Democratic lawmakers are now demanding an investigation.

For the past year, images of masked ICE agents have circulated around the world. Agents wait to arrest people in courthouses and public buildings, or detain them in the middle of the street – including children. ICE agents have used harsh tactics in the field, and over the past year at least 30 people have died in ICE custody. And in Minneapolis last month, federal agents shot and killed a woman in her car and a man on the street.

More funding for immigration agencies

Over the summer, the Trump administration and congressional Republicans successfully passed legislation to increase the budgets of US immigration and border protection agencies: ICE is set to receive an additional $75 billion over the next four years. The agency now receives more funding than any other federal law-enforcement agency.

But following the recent killings in Minneapolis, a budget fight has erupted in Washington: Democratic members of congress have threatened to block the spending package for the 2026 budget, which includes more than $60 billion for the Department of Homeland Security, roughly $10 billion of which is earmarked for ICE specifically. Over the weekend the Senate passed most of the spending bills, but only agreed to extend funding for the Department of Homeland Security for the next two weeks. The extension is meant to give lawmakers time to debate reforms. In exchange for their vote, Democratic lawmakers want to impose restrictions – like a ban on ICE agents wearing masks. US media warn however that given the funds included in last year’s law, even if Democrats succeed in blocking this round of funding, they would not be able to stop the administration’s immigration crackdown.

ICE acquires surveillance technologies

In recent years US immigration and border protection agencies have spent billions to acquire surveillance technologies und have built up a formidable technological arsenal. Over the past year, ICE especially has significantly expanded its capabilities.

Among other tools, ICE agents now use a facial recognition app on their agency-issued smartphones. Using the Mobile Fortify app, they can take photographs of individuals in order to determine their identity – according to media reports, the photos are compared against a database of roughly 200 million images. The app also reportedly shows information on an individual’s nationality and immigration status. Regardless of whether the app finds a match, images taken by agents in the field are retained for 15 years.

Facial recognition used against protesters

The Wall Street Journal reported last month that since it was first introduced, the app has been used more than 100,000 times in the field. The app remains in use despite the fact that there have already been documented cases of false matches. Agents in Minneapolis are also using the app to identify people who are protesting against the ICE presence in the city.

Civil liberties and human rights groups have called the technology “dangerous” and “ripe for abuse” and have called for an end to its use. A group of Democratic senators has also demanded that the agency stop use of the app.

In January, Representative Bennie Thompson, a Democrat, introduced legislation that would prohibit the use of Mobile Fortify anywhere except at ports of entry.

An agent uses a smartphone to scan a person’s face. (Source: IMAGO / Anadolu Agency)

Thompson warned: “When ICE claims that an image it snaps and runs through an unproven app can be enough evidence to detain people for possible deportation, no one is safe.”

Iris scans

Last year, Immigration and Customs Enforcement spent $4.6 million to purchase another app that purports to identify people by scanning their irises. The scans are compared against a database which, according to official documents, contained 2.7 million entries as of 2023, with roughly 100,000 additional iris scans being added each month. The name of the entity that operates the database is redacted in the documents.

According to news reports, the agency has also acquired custom-modified vehicles that are equipped with so-called IMSI catchers. These devices mimic cellphone towers, prompting nearby cellphones to connect with them. In this way, the agents operating the devices can determine the phones’ location. ICE officers are also equipped with mobile license plate readers.

Immigration agencies purchase location data

In past years, US immigration agencies have also drawn criticism for purchasing location data. Civil liberties groups argued that by going through commercial data brokers, agencies were gaining access to data for which they would normally require a warrant. In 2023, Customs and Border Patrol announced that it would stop buying location data.

But ICE has since resumed paying to gain access to location data gathered from mobile phones. One tool, Webloc, can reportedly track devices’ movements over an extended period of time. Nathan Freed Wessler of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) told 404 Media: “This is a very dangerous tool in the hands of an out-of-control agency. This granular location information paints a detailed picture of who we are, where we go, and who we spend time with.” The agency has also acquired programs for monitoring social media – and is planning to put together its own social media surveillance team.

But this only reflects a portion of the immigration agency’s total surveillance procurement activities. In September for example ICE extended a contract with the Israeli company Cellebrite, whose software and hardware make it possible to extract information from smartphones. The agency has also licensed software from Magnet Forensics, another maker of products used to unlock and extract data from smartphones.

Contract with spyware maker causes concern

A contract with Paragon Solutions has come under particular scrutiny. Last year the company’s Graphite spyware was found to have hacked the smartphones of Italian activists and journalists. ICE first entered into the contract in 2024, but the Biden administration paused its implementation pending review. In September the government reactivated the contract.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) called the move “extremely troubling.” Democratic lawmakers also expressed their concerns in a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. They warn: “Allowing ICE access to spyware that can be used to easily track and monitor the public – including those vocally opposed to governmental overreach – threatens Americans’ freedom of movement and freedom of speech.”

Protest against the collaboration between Paragon and ICE. (Source: IMAGO / Anadolu Agency)

Senator Ron Wyden told the Washington Post in October that he was concerned the agency could use surveillance technology against critics: “I’m extremely concerned about how ICE will use spyware, facial recognition and other technology to further trample on the rights of Americans and anyone who Donald Trump labels as an enemy.”

Contracting with controversial companies

The agency has also deepened its working relationship with the controversial facial recognition provider Clearview AI. According to news reports, ICE aims to use the technology to investigate “assaults against law enforcement officers.” The government is paying the company more than $9 million.

John Sandweg, who led the agency during the Obama administration, told the Washington Post: “The acquisition and deployment of this technology in this environment is going to raise substantial concerns.”

But the deepening of ties with the highly controversial company Palantir has drawn the most criticism. The company has been paid $30 million to develop a tailor-made system called ImmigrationOS. According to news reports, agents will be able to use the platform to target individuals for arrest and deportation. Critics accuse Palantir of being complicit in human rights abuses and constitutional violations.

A “Google Maps” for arrests

According to news reports, Palantir products are used to compile data from various sources – including tax and medical records. Civil liberties advocates warn that Palantir is pooling data that is kept separate for a reason.

Reporting by 404 Media has shown what such data can be used for. According to the site, Palantir is developing an app called ELITE that tracks the locations of people whom the agency might detain and displays them on a map. The app has reportedly been tested in the field. One ICE official testified in court that the app “tells you how many people are living in this area and what’s the likelihood of them actually being there.” Said the official, “It’s kind of like Google Maps.” The app draws on information from the Department of Health and Human Services and other sources.

Like its parent agency, the Department of Homeland Security, ICE in its current form was created in the aftermath of the terror attacks of September 11, 2001 and first began operations in 2003. Despite this relatively brief tenure, surveillance technology has long played a role in the agency’s operations: according to a report from the Georgetown Law Center for Privacy and Technology, between 2008 and 2021, ICE has spent roughly $2.8 billion on surveillance technology and data collection and data-sharing programs. The agency first acquired facial recognition technology in 2008.

The report was first published in 2022. Nina Wang, one of the authors, said at the time: “I was alarmed to discover that ICE has built up a sweeping surveillance infrastructure capable of tracking almost anyone, seemingly at any time.” Last year the authors re-released their report with a new foreword, writing that when they initially published the report, “we understood that the surveillance infrastructure our report describes could one day be deployed by an authoritarian executive to coerce and control the US population at scale.” But, they add: “We did not anticipate that this day would come within three years.”

Calls for an investigation

Last week Democratic senators Mark Warner and Tim Kaine called on the inspector general of the Department of Homeland Security to launch an investigation into the collection, retention, analysis, and use of data by the department and its agencies.

In their letter to the inspector general, the senators express their concern that “ICE’s surge in brutality is being facilitated by the inappropriate and unsupervised use of surveillance technology.” They warn that the sensitive data collected by the DHS and its agencies could potentially be used to circumvent constitutional protections – protections that are guaranteed to all persons in the United States, regardless of nationality.
(js)

GFF files suit challenging German intelligence agencies' use of hacking tools

2026-01-21T08:05:00+01:00

The Society for Civil Rights sees the use of hacking tools by German intelligence agencies as a violation of fundamental rights – and is challenging the practice in court.

The GFF argues that the German government fails to report security vulnerabilities in order to continue exploiting them for its own purposes. (Source: IMAGO / viennaslide)

The Society for Civil Rights (Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte – GFF) has brought a suit before the European Court of Civil Rights (ECHR) challenging the use of state-developed spyware tools by German intelligence agencies. According to the GFF, the measures enable the agencies to “massively encroach on several fundamental rights” – without significant restraints or sufficient external control.

In 2021, the German parliament passed a revision of the Article 10 Act, thereby authorizing all 19 federal and state intelligence agencies to use state-developed hacking tools to surveil electronic communications. The law allows agencies not only to monitor active communications but also to access data stored on users’ devices.

The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France, is an institution of the Council of Europe and not of the European Union. The court is responsible for ensuring compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights. Its rulings are legally binding for the countries that are contracting parties to the convention.

In bringing its suit to the ECHR, the GFF is asking the court to find that the German law violates the right to respect for private life. This right, enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights, includes the right to confidentiality in telecommunications – and is clearly threatened by the authorizations granted under current German law, the GFF argues. Intelligence agencies can gain access to end devices covertly and, as a rule, do not reveal their spying after the fact. As a result, those affected by the spying have no way of defending themselves. The organization also argues that the 2021 revision infringes on another fundamental right as well, the so-called “IT-Grundrecht” guaranteeing the confidentiality and integrity of information technology systems.

State has a duty to protect citizens

State hacking tools pose a danger to fundamental rights in more than one respect, the GFF argues. Because state actors exploit security flaws in software to install their spying tools, they have an interest in leaving these “backdoors” open and secret – instead of reporting them to the software’s developer. But leaving these vulnerabilities unpatched increases the danger that users will be victims of cyberattacks. In the past, Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court has made clear that the state has an obligation to protect its citizens in the area of cybersecurity.

Jürgen Bering, case coordinator at the GFF, said in a statement: “It is unacceptable to expand the powers of the intelligence services without at the same time providing effective oversight. Authorities capable of engaging in mass surveillance must be subject to particularly strict and enforceable limits.”

At the time of the law’s passage, University of Freiburg legal scholar Ralf Poscher raised concerns about its constitutionality, citing among other issues the fact that the list of specific circumstances under which the intelligence agencies were legally empowered to conduct surveillance had not been revised to take into account the new set of authorized capabilities.

System for intelligence sharing

The GFF suit also challenges the information-sharing system (nachrichtendienstliche Informationssystem – NADIS) used by German intelligence agencies. According to the GFF, federal and state intelligence agencies use the system to share their findings. The shared intelligence includes highly sensitive data obtained by the use of government hacking tools.

Currently, however, there are hardly any regulations governing which data can be stored in NADIS, and for how long – or what rules apply for the data’s analysis. The GFF is asking the court to place effective limits on the intelligence agencies’ activities in this area as well.

Additional ECHR suits challenging state surveillance

In 2022, the organization filed a constitutional complaint against the use of state hacking tools by German intelligence agencies – but learned in September 2025 that the Federal Constitutional Court had declined to take up the case. The court did not provide a reason for its decision. In response, the GFF has now opted to take its case to the ECHR. Before challenges can be brought to the European court, all national legal avenues must be exhausted. As was the case with the constitutional complaint, the GFF is joined in its ECHR suit by several co-complainants, including journalists, lawyers, and activists, the group told Posteo.

In September, Reporters without Borders (RSF) filed a complaint with the ECHR that challenged the use of state hacking tools by Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND). RSF argues that the surveillance violates the right to respect for private and family life and the right to freedom of expression.

In March 2025, the GFF and RSF filed a joint complaint challenging a 2022 revision to the Federal Intelligence Service Act. The groups argue that the law fails to sufficiently protect members of the press and violates fundamental human rights that are guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights. (js)

Greece: Planned "smart policing" system is unlawful

2026-01-20T08:00:00+01:00

Greece’s national police force acquired devices capable of running facial recognition. But their use is unlawful, the Greek data protection authority has ruled.

According to the police, the system has only been used on a test basis.(Source: IMAGO / Pond5 Images)

Plans by Greek police to use mobile devices to analyze biometric data are unlawful. The Greek data protection authority has ruled against the program, following a complaint by local digital rights group Homo Digitalis.

As part of its “smart policing” project, the Hellenic Police, Greece’s national police force, planned to deploy mobile devices capable of comparing facial images, fingerprints, and license plates with data stored in government databases. In a 2022 response to Human Rights Watch (HRW), the police wrote: “The novelty of the program lies in the fact that it ensures seamless simultaneous search in all the databases to which the Hellenic Police have access.” Officers were to be issued the devices, which would allow them to check individuals’ identities during police stops.

But after an investigation, the Hellenic Data Protection Authority has determined that there is no legal basis for the data processing envisioned by the system. The regulator announced its decision last week, as Greek daily newspaper Kathimerini reports.

Unlawful data processing

The decision by the data protection authority included a warning to police and indicated that bringing the system online “would constitute unlawful data processing,” according to Kathimerini.

The Hellenic Police reportedly told the regulator that the system had only been used briefly, on a pilot basis. As part of its findings, the data protection authority determined that police had failed to carry out the required data protection impact assessment for this pilot phase in a timely manner.

Homo Digitalis called the decision an “important victory,” adding that the case “demonstrates the urgent need for meaningful legality checks, transparency, and accountability before adopting high-risk technological solutions.”

Contract signed in 2019

The Hellenic Police first signed a contract with the company Intracom Telecom in June 2019. Under the agreement, the company would develop the smart policing program and provide police with 1,000 mobile devices and 500 mobile fingerprint scanners. The contract was valued at €4 million, with 75 percent of the funds coming from the EU Internal Security Fund.

Implementation was first planned for 2021, but the rollout was subsequently delayed. As AlgorithmWatch reported in January 2021, the contract included an option to deploy an additional 9,000 mobile devices in the future.

Homo Digitalis first placed an information request with the Greek Ministry of Citizen Protection in December 2019, in order to “clarify critical issues of legality and data protection.” In its response, the ministry pointed to a law regulating the use of surveillance cameras in public spaces. But in June 2020, the Hellenic Data Protection Authority ruled that the CCTV law did not pertain to the use of facial recognition technology or similar identification methods. Homo Digitalis then asked the authority to review the legality of the planned project – with last week’s ruling, this review has now been concluded.

Years of criticism

The regulator’s decision shows “that the serious concerns we raised from the very beginning were fully justified,” Homo Digitalis wrote last week. The group also sees the case as highlighting the waste of public resources: with €4 million “spent on a system that, under the existing legal framework, was deemed unlawful before it was ever put into productive use.”

In 2022, Homo Digitalis and Human Rights Watch warned that the use of the technology would violate international human rights standards. The groups reported at the time that the devices would compare facial images, fingerprints, and license plates with roughly 20 databases maintained by national and international authorities – including Interpol, Europol, and the Schengen Information System.

According to Homo Digitalis and HRW, fingerprints taken from individuals stopped by police would be deleted immediately if no match was found. Facial images, however, would be stored for seven days – and if a match was found, the police would store the data for an unspecified amount of time.

The two groups argued that, as planned, the project was not compatible with Greek and European law. They also found it to be incompatible with human rights agreements like the European Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Warning of discrimination

Homo Digitalis and HRW also warned that the technology could exacerbate existing discriminatory practices, accusing Greek police of intentionally stopping individuals based on their perceived nationality or ethnicity. According to HRW research, Greek police regularly detained “migrants, asylum seekers, and other marginalized groups” for hours, even when they were in possession of identification documents.

The NGOs feared that the situation could be made even worse if authorities started using technologies like facial recognition which, as studies have shown, are less accurate when used to identify people from certain backgrounds. Even the police admitted that the technology would lead to a greater volume of police stops. (js)

French data watchdog imposes fine on internet provider Free

2026-01-19T08:02:00+01:00

Free and Free Mobile must pay multimillion-euro fines in France after failing to adequately protect customer data.

The French data protection authority had received a large volume of complaints about the companies. (Source: IMAGO / ABACAPRESS)

The internet and mobile service providers Free and Free Mobile must pay fines totaling €42 million in France, the French data protection authority CNIL has ruled. The fines come after the companies suffered a data breach.

Unknown actors gained access to the IT systems of Free and its subsidiary Free Mobile in October 2024. The companies are among the largest service providers in France. The attackers managed to scrape data relating to 24 million subscribers, including sensitive personal data – for example subscribers’ names, addresses and bank account numbers (IBANs).

According to news reports, the hackers first put the data up for sale and later published it.

Free and Free Mobile must pay penalty

As the CNIL announced last week, it identified multiple breaches of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) during its investigation. Based on these breaches, the regulator imposed a fine of €27 million on Free Mobile. The parent company Free must pay €15 million.

In determining the amount of the fine, the CNIL took into account the companies’ “lack of knowledge of essential security principles” as well as the number of people affected by their negligence. The risk posed by the theft of IBANs also factored into the decision.

The CNIL opened the investigation after receiving a large volume of complaints relating to the data breach – more than 2,500, according to the regulator. Over the course of its investigation the CNIL determined that the companies had failed to implement certain security measures that could have thwarted the attackers.

Inadequate security measures

According to the data protection authority, the authentication procedure used for accessing the company’s internal systems – in particular for employees working remotely – was not sufficiently robust. What’s more, the measures used to detect abnormal behavior in the companies’ computer networks were “ineffective.”

Free and Free Mobile have since implemented measures to strengthen their systems’ security level, the CNIL reports. The regulator has ordered the companies to complete implementation of these measures within three months.

Insufficient information

While the companies did inform those affected by the data breach, the French regulator found that the emails sent to affected subscribers did not contain all the information required by the GDPR. As a result, these customers may not have immediately understood the potential consequences of the data theft, “nor the measures they could take to protect themselves from them,” the CNIL ruled.

Over the course of its investigation, the CNIL also determined that Free Mobile improperly managed the data of former subscribers, failing to retain only the data necessary for accounting purposes. Despite being required to delete data that it no longer needs, Free Mobile “retained millions of pieces of data regarding its subscribers without justification for an excessive period of time,” the CNIL found.

Free Mobile first began to address its practices while the investigation was ongoing. The company has reportedly deleted some data that had been retained for an excessive period and is working to ensure that, going forward, it only retains, for a period of ten years, the data necessary for accounting purposes. The CNIL gave the mobile service provider six months to complete the “sorting and purging” of data.

In an earlier ruling involving Free Mobile in 2021, the CNIL imposed a fine of €300,000. In that instance the regulator found that the company had not replied to requests for information within the appropriate timeframe. The CNIL also found issues with Free Mobile’s security practices: the company had sent emails to customers containing their unconcealed passwords without prompting customers to change them. (js)

Uganda cuts off internet before election

2026-01-15T07:56:00+01:00

Ugandan authorities have blocked access to the internet in advance of Thursday’s election. Human rights groups report repressive violence against the political opposition.

Uganda’s president, Yoweri Museveni, is seeking his seventh term in office. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

The Ugandan government has shut down the internet in advance of national elections on Thursday. President Yoweri Museveni, who has ruled the country for 40 years, is seeking reelection. Opposition leaders and human rights groups had warned in recent weeks of a looming internet shut down.

The watchdog organization NetBlocks announced on Wednesday morning that the internet had largely stopped working in Uganda. According to news reports, the Uganda Communications Commission (UCC), the country’s media regulator, ordered mobile service providers to shut down internet connections on Tuesday evening (local time) – fixed-line connections are not widely used in the East African country. The IT company Cloudflare confirmed that web traffic across the country had declined precipitously within half an hour of the cutoff time set by the UCC.

The official justification given for the internet blackout was to prevent the “weaponization of the internet” and the spread of misinformation. The head of the UCC, Nyombi Thembo, told the New York Times that he did not know when internet service in the country would be restored. Human rights groups warn that internet shutdowns create an information vacuum which fosters the spread of misinformation and hate speech.

Presidential elections

Uganda will hold parliamentary and presidential elections on January 15. 81-year-old President Yoweri Museveni is seeking his seventh term in office – he has ruled the country since 1986. In order to remain in power, he has removed age and term limits from the Ugandan constitution.

While Museveni does face challengers, observers are not expecting a surprise result in the country of 46 million. One of the most prominent opposition leaders permitted to run in the election is former pop star Bobi Wine, whose real name is Robert Kyagulanyi. He is especially popular among young people, who make up a large percentage of the population. Wine came in second in the 2021 presidential election, claiming afterward that the results had been manipulated. The 2021 election was overshadowed by violence – and featured a four-day internet blackout.

Violence against opposition

In the lead-up to this year’s elections as well, political rallies by opposition parties have been violently broken up – with security forces reportedly firing live ammunition into crowds. In a report published last week, the UN Human Rights Office (OHCHR) describes how the political opposition, human rights groups, members of the press, and dissidents have become the targets of repression and intimidation. Amnesty International condemns what it calls a “brutal campaign of repression” and accuses security forces of using excessive force – and even torture.

According to the OHCHR, the authorities have used a series of newly enacted or amended laws to restrict the rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly. Opposition leaders and activists have been arrested; opposition party offices have been raided. The prominent opposition politician Kizza Besigye remains imprisoned after being abducted in neighboring Kenya in 2024 and brought back to Uganda to face “questionable” charges of treason. There are also reports of attacks on journalists by security forces – and, in one case, by bodyguards of presidential candidate Bobi Wine. The government has likewise restricted reporting and the work of NGOs: most recently on Tuesday, when two local human rights groups were ordered to cease operations.

Observers feared internet shutdown

In recent weeks, observers and the opposition warned that the authorities could again cut off internet access during the elections, as they had in the past. Earlier this month, the UCC ordered the satellite internet provider Starlink to restrict its services in the country. As recently as January 5, however, the UCC was claiming that it had no plans to shut down the internet.

On Monday, Access Now and other organizations repeated a warning that the internet could be blocked and called on the government to ensure continued access. The groups stressed that “internet shutdowns violate human rights, including freedom of opinion and expression” and “access to information.” They added: “Cutting off internet access during elections limits the flow of crucial, timely information, silences dissent and opposition voices, and hinders scrutiny and transparency of the electoral process.”

The organizations stated further that the work of journalists and human rights defenders is also impeded by internet blackouts. When journalists aren’t allowed to report on elections,
access to reliable information is limited for people both in and outside the country. Shutdowns also make it more difficult for human rights monitors to document human rights abuses, “thereby enabling perpetrators to evade accountability.” Restricting access hinders the work of election observers – and disrupts the everyday lives of citizens.

Internet shutdowns during previous elections

The groups argue that internet shutdowns violate national and international laws – including Uganda’s constitution. Nevertheless, this isn’t the first time that the government has imposed such a measure. During the 2021 election the authorities shut down the internet for four days and suspended individual communication platforms. And during the 2016 election, the government blocked social media.

Felicia Anthonio of Access Now said on Wednesday that authorities in Uganda had refused to listen to appeals from human rights groups and the international community. “Instead, they’ve decided to violate the rights of millions of people in Uganda by cutting them off from the rest of the world, a few days before elections.”

Edrine Wanyama from the Ugandan think tank CIPESA said in a statement: “Internet shutdowns have become a tool of affront against democracy. During pivotal times such as elections, it is fundamental to retain access to the internet and to not undermine citizens’ ability to access information, report irregularities, and participate meaningfully in democratic processes.”

The election results are expected to be announced over the weekend. (js)

Google criticized for providing false health tips

2026-01-14T08:02:00+01:00

A new investigation by the Guardian reveals factual errors in the AI summaries provided by Google in response to search queries on medical subjects.

Experts warn of “dangerous” consequences if people rely on false information. (Source: IMAGO / Blue Jean Images)

The AI-generated summaries displayed by Google’s search engine provide false and misleading information on health-related topics, a Guardian investigation has shown. In some cases the information is even “dangerous.” Google has taken limited action in response to the findings.

Google introduced its “AI Overview” feature in the US in 2024. The feature also became available in Europe in March 2025. In response to some search queries, the search engine displays an automatically generated summary of the queried topic. The summary appears above the standard list of search result.

Earlier this month, the Guardian newspaper reviewed Google summaries that were generated in response to health-related queries. The result of the investigation: some of the summaries contained false information and may even have posed a risk to users.

“Really dangerous”

As the Guardian reported, one Google summary offered nutrition advice for people suffering from pancreatic cancer that was “completely incorrect.” Experts told the paper that such tips were “really dangerous” – the “exact opposite” of the advice patients should be getting.

Anna Jewell, director of support, research, and influencing at Pancreatic Cancer UK, told the paper: “If someone followed what the search result told them then they might not take in enough calories, struggle to put on weight, and be unable to tolerate either chemotherapy or potentially life-saving surgery.”

People might refrain from seeking help

According to the investigation, the search engine also responded to queries on women’s cancer tests with “completely wrong” information. Experts consulted by the Guardian said that such responses could lead people to ignore genuine symptoms – endangering their health.

Google also provided false information relating to important liver function tests. In this case as well, the Guardian reported, such information could lead people who are seriously ill to wrongly conclude that they are healthy. As a result they may choose not to consult a doctor.

Searches relating to mental health conditions also prompted misleading summaries. One expert described the summaries as “very dangerous advice” that “could lead people to avoid seeking help.”

As noted in its reporting, the Guardian began its investigation after health organizations and professionals expressed concern about the AI feature.

Variable search results

Athena Lamnisos, head of the British cancer charity Eve Appeal, told the Guardian that tests conducted by her organization had shown that Google displayed different auto-generated summaries, drawing from different sources, at different times in response to the same search query. This, said Lamnisos, was another source of concern.

Other experts contacted by the paper also expressed criticism. Sophie Randall, director of the Patient Information Forum, told the Guardian: “Google’s AI Overviews can put inaccurate health information at the top of the online searches, presenting a risk to people’s health.”

And Stephanie Parker of the end-of-life charity Marie Curie said: “People turn to the internet in moments of worry and crisis. If the information they receive is inaccurate or out of context, it can seriously harm their health.”

Google responds

In its initial response to the Guardian, Google said that “the vast majority” of its AI summaries were factual and helpful, and that it is continuously making quality improvements.

On Sunday, the Guardian published a follow-up article revealing that Google had since taken down some of the flagged summaries – for example, the query “what is the normal range for liver function tests” no longer turns up an AI Overview. The Guardian found however that if the query was reworded slightly, the automated summary continued to appear as before.

Google told the paper that it was reviewing the new examples. A spokesperson also said that the company “[does] not comment on individual removals” within its search results. When asked why it had not removed other summaries with factual errors that had been pointed out in the initial investigation, the company reiterated its earlier response, saying that it linked to reputable sources and recommended that users seek expert advice.

Sue Farrington of the Patient Information Forum told the Guardian: “There are still too many examples out there of Google AI Overviews giving people inaccurate health information.” Farrington pointed out that millions of people worldwide already had trouble accessing reliable health information. “That’s why it is so important that Google signposts people to robust, researched health information and offers of care from trusted health organizations.”

Chatbot gives diet tips to people with eating disorders

The issue isn’t limited to Google. There is growing criticism of the unreliability of information provided by so-called AI chatbots. Research has shown that many of these apps have trouble accurately summarizing news stories.

There have also been past instances of chatbots giving out false or even dangerous health information. In the US, for example, an organization that offers to support to people with eating disorders introduced its own chatbot in 2023. It soon had to discontinue the service, however, after the bot started giving users diet advice.

Researchers in one study warned that chatbots give “plausible-looking but inaccurate responses” to queries on medical and scientific subjects. The responses reviewed for the study were frequently vague and sometimes included made-up citations or false information. The studies’ authors thus urged “extreme caution, because unwitting application of inconsistent and potentially inaccurate medical information could have adverse outcomes.”

In another study, scholars noted “significant deficiencies” in chatbots’ answers to queries related to emergency medicine. The authors concluded: “We strongly recommend proper medical consultation to prevent potential adverse outcomes.” (js)

Hundreds of deaths amid protests in Iran

2026-01-13T08:03:00+01:00

Hundreds of people have been killed during protests in Iran, human rights monitors report. The country has been under an internet blackout for days.

The protests began in late December and have spread throughout the country. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

More than 500 protesters have been killed amid ongoing demonstrations against the government in Iran. Human rights monitors have been tracking the death toll. More than 10,000 people have reportedly been detained.

The protests began on December 28. The organization HRANA reported on Monday that 505 protesters had since been killed. Among them are nine people under 18 who have also lost their lives. According to the group, the total death toll includes an additional 133 members of security forces.

HRANA also reports that more than 10,721 people have been arrested during the protests. The group, which is based in the US, relies on a network of sources inside Iran, and works to independently verify the data it receives. According to news reports, the Iranian government has not provided official data on the number of people killed or injured – though state television has broadcast footage of body bags.

Countrywide internet shutdown

HRANA assumes that the actual numbers are substantially higher than what it has been possible to verify so far. The flow of information outside of Iran has been significantly limited in recent days as a result of a countrywide internet shutdown. HRANA reports that the shutdown has severely disrupted its work. In addition to the confirmed deaths, the group is currently reviewing more than 579 reported deaths.

There have also been reports of forced confessions broadcast on television. One individual arrested during the protests has reportedly been sentenced to death.

The watchdog organization NetBlocks confirmed on Monday morning that the internet blackout which began on Thursday remained in place. Telephone and messaging services are also partly restricted, according to news reports. According to NetBlocks, the options for circumventing the blockade are limited, one of them being satellite communication. The US is reportedly considering whether Starlink can be used to provide internet in the country. Nevertheless, media reported last week that some Starlink connections were also blocked.

NetBlocks condemned the shutdown, calling it “a direct threat to the safety and well-being of Iranians at a key moment for the country’s future.”

Large wave of protest

Iranian authorities have restricted internet access during past protests and have at times imposed total blackouts – as was the case during the countrywide “Woman, Life, Freedom” protests of 2022. That year, Iranians took to the streets after 22-year-old Mahsa Amini died in custody following her arrest by the morality police. Amini had been detained for allegedly wearing an improper hijab.

According to observers, the current wave of protests is the largest since 2022. The demonstrations began on December 28, when shopkeepers in the capital of Tehran went on strike in response to the country’s dire economic situation. Iran’s inflation rate hovers at around 40 percent, and the value of the rial had dropped significantly in the lead up to the protests. While some demonstrators blamed the economic woes on mismanagement and corruption, the protests spread quickly and are now directed against the authoritarian government. According to news reports, protesters have been chanting slogans including “death to the dictator” and “freedom.”

According to HRANA, demonstrations have spread to 187 cities in all 31 of the country’s provinces.

Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, initially called concerns over the country’s economic situation “valid,” but he has also referred to protesters as “rioters” who “must be put in their place.” President Masoud Pezeshkian has since gone so far as to label protesters “terrorists” and to call for a resolute response from security forces.

These security forces, including the Revolutionary Guard, have led a brutal crackdown on demonstrators. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch (HRW) reported last week that officers armed with rifles and shotguns loaded with metal pellets were firing on protesters. Water cannons and tear gas have also been used to disperse crowds, and peaceful demonstrators have been beaten.

Violent response draws condemnation

Diana Eltahawy of Amnesty International said in a statement: “People in Iran daring to express their anger at decades of repression and demand fundamental change are once again being met with a deadly pattern of security forces unlawfully firing at, chasing, arresting, and beating protesters in scenes reminiscent of the Woman Life Freedom uprising of 2022.”

Michael Page of HRW said: “The frequency and persistence with which the Iranian security forces have unlawfully used force, including lethal force, against protesters, combined with systematic impunity for members of the security forces who commit grave violations, indicate that the use of such weapons to crush protests remains entrenched as state policy.”

A spokesperson for UN Secretary-General António Guterres said on Sunday: “All Iranians must be able to express their grievances peacefully and without fear,” adding that the rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly must be fully respected and protected. The secretary-general called on Iranian authorities to “exercise maximum restraint” – and to restore communications.

On Friday, UN human rights chief Volker Türk said in a statement that he was “deeply disturbed by reports of violence” during protests in Iran. “All deaths should be promptly, independently, and transparently investigated,” Türk said, adding that those responsible must be held to account.

With regard to the internet blackout in Iran, Türk said: “Such actions undermine freedom of expression and access to information, as well as impacting on the work of those documenting human rights violations, and access to essential and emergency services.”

US reportedly weighing response

Meanwhile US President Donald Trump has repeatedly threatened US intervention. Several media outlets report that Trump plans to meet with senior advisors on Tuesday to discuss potential options. These include using cyber weapons and extending support to opponents of the government. Military strikes are also under consideration. Iran has already threatened to respond to military force with strikes of its own on US bases in the region and on Israel.

Media also reported on Monday that Reza Pahlavi, the son of the last shah of Iran, has expressed interest in returning to Iran and leading a transition to democracy. Pahlavi, who lives in the US, has encouraged the demonstrations in recent days. It remains unclear, however, how much support he actually has in Iran. (js)

Saudi Arabia: 356 executions in a single year

2026-01-08T08:04:00+01:00

Last year more than 350 people were put to death in Saudi Arabia. Human rights groups demand a moratorium on executions.

More than two-thirds of those executed had been convicted of drug-related offenses. (Source: IMAGO / YAY Images)

Saudi Arabia executed at least 356 people in 2025. This marks a new high for executions in a single year, according to Reprieve, an advocacy group.

The organization reports that executions of foreign nationals for drug-related offenses are the “key driver of the execution crisis” in the country. 240 of the 356 individuals put to death had been convicted of drug crimes – and of these, 188 were foreign nationals.

Human rights groups have repeatedly criticized Saudi Arabia’s use of the death penalty for this type of offense, noting that the practice is prohibited under international law. In 2021 the country imposed a moratorium on executions in connection with drug crimes – but the moratorium was abruptly lifted in November 2022.

Forced confessions

Last year Saudi authorities also put to death several individuals who were under 18 years old at the time of their alleged offense. One of them, Abdullah al-Derazi, was killed in October. According to rights groups, al-Derazi was arrested in 2014 at the age of 17 after participating in demonstrations protesting the government’s treatment of the country’s Shiite minority. He was reportedly beaten by police at the time of his arrest.

After being detained, he was reportedly tortured in prison and forced to sign a false confession. According to UN human rights experts, al-Derazi was made to confess to membership in a terrorist group. The Specialized Criminal Court, which tries cases involving terrorism, sentenced him to death in 2018. The Saudi Supreme Court upheld the sentence in 2023.

Over the summer, Human Rights Watch (HRW) wrote that it was “highly unlikely that any of those executed in 2025 received a fair trial.” Rights groups have argued that the Specialized Criminal Court is used as a tool to silence critics.

In August, the Saudi government executed Jalal al-Labbad. He too had been arrested for participating in demonstrations – at the time of his arrest, in 2017, he was 15 years old.

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child prohibits the use of the death penalty for offenders who are under 18 at the time of their alleged crime. Saudi Arabia is a party to the convention. Organizations like Reprieve, HRW, and Amnesty International oppose the death penalty in all circumstances, regarding it as a cruel and inhumane form of punishment.

According to Reprieve, several defendants continue to face execution for offenses they are alleged to have committed as minors. In September, human rights experts at the UN again urged Saudi Arabia to halt these planned executions and to impose a general moratorium as a first step toward abolishing the death penalty.

Journalist executed

Reprieve reports that five women were among those executed in Saudi Arabia last year. The death penalty was also used to suppress freedom of speech in the country. In June, the journalist Turki al-Jasser was killed. According to Reporters without Borders (RSF), al-Jasser was arrested in 2018 and subsequently convicted, without evidence, of terrorism and high treason. The journalist had reported on women’s rights and other sensitive topics. The authorities also accused him of running an anonymous account on Twitter (now X) that linked members of the royal family to corruption and human rights abuses.

Turki al-Jasser was the first journalist to have been sentenced to death and executed in the country since Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman came to power in 2015.

Reprieve reports that a Saudi Arabian cleric currently stands accused of “expressing cynicism and sarcasm about the government’s achievements” and “describing the kingdom’s authorities as tyrannical.” He is among many who face the death penalty for exercising their right to freedom of expression.

Rise in execution tally

Throughout last year human rights organizations repeatedly raised concerns about the alarming number of executions in Saudi Arabia and warned that the tally might reach a new high. Amnesty International documented at least 345 executions in the country in 2024.

Reprieve writes that 2024 and 2025 were the “bloodiest” two years since NGOs began monitoring executions in Saudi Arabia in the 1980s. The organization warns that the high number of executions seems to have become the “new normal” under Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman – with death sentences carried out on almost a daily basis.

Taha al-Hajji of the European Saudi Organization for Human Rights (ESOHR) said in a statement: “Saudi Arabia is moving down an increasingly dangerous path. The repeated breaking of execution records confirms what we have long observed: there is no intention to honor the promises or commitments that have been publicly made. Children, migrant workers, and people who have been denied even the most basic due process remain at severe and constant risk.”

ESOHR and Reprieve work together to document executions in Saudi Arabia. They do so by monitoring official announcements, cross-checking them against other public sources, and, when possible, contacting lawyers and family members to verify official statements. (js)

US school: Surveillance system mistook clarinet for gun

2026-01-07T07:59:00+01:00

Surveillance technology used at a Florida middle school mistook a musical instrument for a gun. A similar incident occurred in October in Baltimore.

In a 2023 report, the ACLU argued that surveillance technology does not lead to safer schools. (Source: IMAGO / Dreamstime)

In December an automated weapons detection system used by a school in the US state of Florida mistook a clarinet for a rifle – prompting a lockdown at the school and a police response.

The system used by the Oviedo, Florida school was triggered when a student pointed his clarinet at a door. The Washington Post reported on the incident last month, citing the police report. Police were alerted that a man dressed in camouflage was holding a “suspected weapon.”

According to the Post, the school implemented lockdown measures and the police began searching for the suspect. Finally police dispatchers informed officers at the scene that upon closer inspection of the camera footage, the suspected weapon might have been a band instrument.

A police officer then went to the band room, where the student who had triggered the alarm was hiding along with his classmates. The “suspected weapon” was identified as a clarinet. The student was wearing camouflage for the school’s themed dress-up day – he had dressed as a character from the Christmas movie “Red One”. The school later confirmed that at no point had there been a threat to students.

False alarm despite human review

According to the Washington Post, the school uses a system run by the company ZeroEyes that is designed to automatically detect weapons by scanning security camera footage in real time. According to the company, alerts issued by the technology are first reviewed by employees before police are contacted. Employees reviewing the footage, however, must decide within seconds whether to alert the authorities.

Speaking to the Post, the company defended its decision in the Florida incident, noting that the student was holding his instrument like a weapon. “We don’t think we made an error,” ZeroEyes co-founder Sam Alaimo told the paper.

Chad Marlow of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) told the Post that the case showed that technology like the ZeroEyes product is still prone to error, even when the automated alerts are reviewed by humans. If a gun is detected and “literally seconds may be critical,” Marlow said, the human evaluator will tend to trust the technology rather than doubt the alert.

The student told police that he was not aware that the way he was holding his clarinet could trigger an alarm. The police took no further action against him.

The school, however, evidently felt that the student bore some responsibility: according to the Post, the school principal wrote to parents after the incident urging them to speak with their children “about the dangers of pretending to have a weapon on a school campus.”

Surveillance technology in schools – a multibillion-dollar industry

The Post reports that many schools in the US use surveillance systems like the one deployed in Oviedo. According to the New York Times, sales of security products for the educational sector added up to $3.1 billion in 2021. The Post writes that the demand for such products continues to rise in the wake of high profile shootings at US educational institutions. Just last month, for example, two people were killed and several more injured in a shooting at Brown University in Rhode Island.

But critics have warned for years that surveillance technology cannot prevent violent attacks – and have pointed out the potential for false alarms. In October of last year an incident similar to the one in Florida occurred in Baltimore, Maryland: There a surveillance system run by the company Omnilert mistook a student’s empty bag of chips for a gun and alerted police. Officers arrived with guns drawn and placed the student in handcuffs.

Another such incident took place that same month at a high school in Texas, according to news reports. This case involved the ZeroEyes product, which flagged what it suspected was a rifle. In this instance the system was reportedly deceived not by a specific object, but by “how the [suspected] individual’s arm was positioned” in the footage, combined with other elements like foliage and “shadowing.”

Meanwhile, in Nashville, Tennessee last January, a 17-year-old did in fact bring a gun to school and shot and killed a fellow student. The school district had paid roughly $1 million in 2023 for the Omnilert system – but the system failed to alert authorities. The company explained at the time that “based on the shooter’s position and location relative to our cameras,” the technology could not “see” the gun.

Marketing claims prohibited

In 2023 the BBC reported on a stabbing at a US school. The school had a weapons detection system in place, but it had failed to detect the knife. A previous BBC investigation had shown that the system in question, which is sold by the US company Evolv Technologies, cannot reliably detect knives.

In November 2024 the US Federal Trade Commission barred the company from making claims that its security systems could “detect all weapons” and were more efficient than metal detectors. Evolv was also made to give schools an option to cancel their contracts with the company.

Amanda Klinger, director of operations at the Educator’s School Safety Network, told the Washington Post that frequent false alarms could lead to “alarm fatigue,” which carries the risk that people will fail to respond appropriately when faced with a legitimate threat. Klinger also warned that if armed police show up at a school looking for a shooter, this in and of itself could become a dangerous situation.

Surveillance in schools

Critics of the weapons detections systems don’t just point to their unreliability, however. In a 2023 report on surveillance technology in schools, the ACLU warned that the tools pose a threat to privacy. Visible surveillance tools can also increase students’ anxiety by constantly reminding them of potential dangers, the organization wrote. The ACLU also warned that race-based discrimination can be exacerbated by surveillance.

In the report, the ACLU examined a range of surveillance technologies. Some schools were found to use facial recognition, while others monitored what students wrote using school-provided email accounts. (js)

Deaths in protests in Iran

2026-01-06T08:04:00+01:00

The Iranian government has responded to protests with a brutal crackdown. At least 19 people have reportedly been killed in demonstrations that are still ongoing.

In the last week, the protests have spread to at least 50 cities across 20 provinces. (Source: IMAGO / Pacific Press Agency)

At least 19 people have been killed since protests began nearly two weeks ago in Iran, human rights organizations report. According to the groups, security forces are using military-grade weapons against demonstrators. Observers call it the largest wave of protests since 2022.

The demonstrations began on December 28, with shopkeepers expressing anger at the dire economic situation in the country – the inflation rate hovers at around 40 percent, and the value of the rial had dropped significantly just prior to the protests. Some in Iran blame the economic woes on mismanagement and corruption. According to reports, however, the focus of the demonstrations quickly turned to the government itself, with protesters chanting slogans including “death to the dictator” and “freedom.”

According to human rights organizations, Iranian security forces have met the demonstrations with a brutal crackdown. In some cases, military-grade weapons have been used. The Oslo-based organization Iran Human Rights reported on Sunday that at least 19 people had been killed so far. The NGO HRANA has also documented at least 19 deaths. Other groups report that minors are among those killed.

Hundreds of arrests

One witness from the city of Malekshahi in western Iran told the Guardian that demonstrators there had been demanding the release of jailed individuals. When demonstrators gathered in front of a government building, security forces opened fire. “It felt as if they were shooting at enemies or armed groups. I felt like I was in a war zone. I saw several people injured, and I believe some were killed on the spot,” the witness said.

According to the human rights groups, hundreds of people have been injured or arrested. Iran Human Rights reports that more than 150 protesters are being held in Isfahan Central Prison, in Isfahan province, including some who are under 18 years old. According to news reports, the Iranian government has not provided information on the number of people killed or imprisoned.

Internet access in the country has reportedly been partially restricted in recent days. According to the IT company Cloudflare, at times over the weekend web traffic in the country was down by roughly a third. On social media, many Iranians were reporting massive internet disruptions, according to the Deutsche Presse-Agentur (dpa). In the past, Iranian authorities have repeatedly restricted internet access during protests – at times imposing a complete blackout.

Protests spreading

The protests began in Tehran, Iran’s capital. They have since spread to at least 50 cities in 20 provinces, according to Iran Human Rights, while HRANA reports that demonstrations have taken place in 78 cities across 26 provinces.

According to observers, the protests are the largest the country has seen since 2022. That year saw anti-government demonstrations break out across the country after the 22-year-old Mahsa Amini died in custody following her arrest by the morality police. Amini had been detained for allegedly wearing her hijab improperly. According to human rights organizations, more than 500 people were killed during the 2022 protests.

The current round of protests has not yet reached the extent of the “Woman, Life, Freedom” protests of 2022, observers say.

Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam, director of Iran Human Rights, said of the current situation: “The people of Iran have once again come out into the streets to declare loudly that they do not want this incompetent, corrupt, and repressive dictatorship. Protest is a fundamental right of citizens; yet the Islamic Republic, as in the past, responds to the people’s peaceful protests with violence and repression, because it knows full well that accepting the people’s demands would mean the end of this system.” Amiry-Moghaddam also criticized the use of military weapons against protesters, calling it “an international crime.”

Awyar Shekhi from the human rights organization Hengaw told the Guardian that “State forces are firing directly at gatherings and protests without regard for whether those targeted are children or adults.” Tear gas is also being used, Shekhi said, adding that detainees are being beaten and taken to undisclosed locations.

Ongoing repression

After suppressing the “Woman, Life, Freedom” protests, the Iranian government has continued its repression of the population – and last year executed more people in a single year than it had in 15 years. As in 2022, the authorities have responded to this latest round of protests with brutal measures. Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has reportedly called concerns over the country’s economic situation “valid” – but has also referred to protesters as “rioters” who “must be put in their place.”

Mai Sato, UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Iran, called on the government to respect the rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly. “The violent response witnessed during the Woman, Life, Freedom movement must not be repeated,” Sato said. The German government has also called on the Iranian authorities to respect demonstrators’ rights. And US President Donald Trump on Sunday repeated his threat that the US could intervene if peaceful demonstrators were killed. (js)

Canada: Privacy commissioner investigating billboards with built-in cameras

2025-12-18T08:01:00+01:00

Canada’s privacy commissioner is investigating billboards that reportedly use cameras to determine the age and sex of passersby.

Similar technology has been used in Europe on a trial basis. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press)

In Toronto, Canada, cameras attached to billboards can reportedly determine the age and sex of people who view advertisements. Now the Canadian privacy commissioner has stepped in to investigate. In the UK as well there is an ongoing debate about digital noticeboards outfitted with the technology.

A spokesperson for Privacy Commissioner of Canada Philippe Dufresne confirmed in a statement to the Global News TV network last week that the commissioner’s office had opened an investigation into the Toronto billboards. The digital displays are reportedly installed near Union Station, a Toronto commuter hub.

Internet users first called attention to the large, camera-equipped billboards in November. A segment broadcast by CityNews Toronto shows a small notice posted next to the screens alerting passersby to the use of the technology. The notice states that “anonymous software” is used to determine the gender and approximate age of people who look at the billboard. According to the report, the software also records how long a person spends looking at the ad.

The owner of the billboards, Cineplex Digital Media, confirmed to media that it uses the technology. The company insists that the software is not facial recognition – rather it is “facial detection” – and that no images are saved. The data collected is used to show “relevant advertising,” the company said.

Privacy complaints received

The Canadian privacy commissioner’s office told media that it had launched an investigation after receiving complaints against the billboards.

Passersby expressed their discomfort to media, saying they hadn’t even noticed the cameras. One commuter told Global News that he was “not a fan” of the technology, adding: “I feel like we all have a right in public space to have our privacy not infringed upon.”

Another commuter told CityNews: “It’s a human right to privacy, I may not want anyone to know I’m down here, and I don’t know what you’re doing with my facial image or how you’re selling it.”

Criticism from former privacy commissioner

Ann Cavoukian was privacy commissioner for the province of Ontario, of which Toronto is the capital, from 1997 to 2014. Speaking to CityNews, she criticized the technology: “In this day and age, if you collect any data relating to individuals, the possibilities are enormous over what you could potentially do with that data, so this is just completely unacceptable.” Cavoukian said that she would have ruled against the cameras if the case had been brought to her in her former role.

Said Cavoukian: “Privacy forms the foundation of our freedom, it is essential to our daily activities, our life, etc., and increasingly with so much technology taking place that captures data, especially unbeknownst to you, that danger arises, and is growing. That’s what concerns me.”

“Creepy” billboards in British apartment buildings

As the Guardian reported last week, a similar debate is taking place in the UK, where the company 30Seconds Group has begun installing digital noticeboards with built-in cameras in the common areas of apartment buildings. The screens, which display weather forecasts and notices about balcony etiquette, among other content, will reportedly be installed in 1,000 buildings by the end of this year. According to the company, the cameras capture demographic data.

According to the Guardian, almost 50 property companies have already contracted with 30Seconds Group. One management company told the paper that the electronic noticeboards had been installed in 126 developments with a total of 50,000 residents. The cameras, however, aren’t active, according to the management company.

One building resident, speaking to the Guardian, complained that common charges paid by residents were being used to fund the billboards. The resident said he had seen that in other buildings the screens were being used to display advertisements. He also expressed skepticism about the cameras. The property manager may claim that residents are not being watched, “but there are cameras in the devices, you can see them.” The resident said he would oppose the billboards even if he didn’t have to pay for them.

Jake Hurfurt of the British civil liberties group Big Brother Watch told the Guardian that the devices were “creepy.” Said Hurfurt: “Billboards equipped with demographic scanning tech have no place in people’s homes.”

Inconspicuous cameras scan 5 million people

In 2020 the Privacy Commissioner of Canada and the privacy commissioners for the provinces of Alberta and British Columbia took action in a similar case. The commissioners stepped in to sanction a real estate company that had installed digital information kiosks with built-in cameras in 12 shopping malls. As with the Toronto billboards, the kiosks used software to determine the age and sex of visitors. The company claimed that the images captured were deleted after a brief analysis.

The privacy commissioners, however, determined that the company, Cadillac Fairview, had collected personal data. The information kiosks had used “small, inconspicuous cameras” to take photos of 5 million people without obtaining their consent – and in so doing had broken data protection laws. The software analyzed sensitive biometric data, the commissioners found. The photos taken by the cameras may have been deleted, but the biometric data was stored in a centralized database operated by a third party.

The company told the commissioners that it was not aware of such a database. The regulators concluded that this unawareness “compounded the risk” that unauthorized parties or malicious actors could misuse the data.

Then-Privacy and Information Commissioner of Canada Daniel Therrien said at the time: “Shoppers had no reason to expect their image was being collected by an inconspicuous camera, or that it would be used, with facial recognition technology, for analysis.” Therrien added that biometric data is “a key to our identity” – which made the case “particularly concerning.” As a result of the investigation, the company removed the cameras.

Tests in pharmacies and supermarkets

Such technology has been used in the EU as well, at least on a trial basis. In 2017, the pharmaceutical company Bayer had digital displays with built-in cameras installed in pharmacies in Linz, Austria. These too were reportedly designed to determine the sex and age of customers and to display tailored ads. Criticism came not only from data privacy advocates, but also from customers. Though the trial was intended to go on for three months, it was ended after just a few days.

Also in 2017 it came to light that the Real supermarket chain had installed screens displaying advertisements in the checkout area of 40 German stores in order to determine the age and sex of customers. This too drew criticism – and in June 2017 the supermarket chain ended the tests, which had begun in fall 2016, explaining that it had made the decision in response to public discussion. (js)

Ethiopia: Deutsche Welle correspondents permanently suspended

2025-12-17T07:59:00+01:00

Ethiopia has permanently suspended two local correspondents for Deutsche Welle. Human rights groups condemn the move, calling it another blow to press freedom in the country.

Observers stress the importance of independent reporting in Ethiopia in light of ongoing conflicts in the country and elections slated for next year. (Source: IMAGO / photothek)

The Ethiopian media regulator has permanently suspended two local correspondents for Deutsche Welle. The broadcaster is now weighing legal steps.

In October, the Ethiopian Media Authority (EMA) temporarily suspended all nine local correspondents for the German international broadcaster, forcing the reporters to stop “all journalistic activities.” As Deutsche Welle announced on Friday, seven of the journalists have been allowed to resume work as of last week. The remaining two journalists however have been permanently suspended.

According to Deutsche Welle, the two journalists have reported from the crisis regions of Tigray and Amhara. Tigray is the site of a civil war that broke out in 2020. A peace deal was agreed to in 2022, but this year has seen renewed clashes in the region. Amhara has also seen fighting between militias and the Ethiopian army since 2023.

Sweeping accusations

The media regulator has broadly accused the suspended correspondents of “non-compliance with Ethiopian laws.” In October the EMA accused Deutsche Welle of violating the country’s media laws but made no specific allegations. Deutsche Welle stresses that despite several requests the authority has provided no specific examples of alleged problems with the outlet’s reporting.

Editor-in-chief Manuela Kasper-Claridge said in a statement: “It is unacceptable that our two correspondents must stop their work without any concrete explanation.”

Accusations against Bonn editorial team

The Ethiopian Media Authority has also leveled accusations against the editorial team in Bonn responsible for Deutsche Welle’s Amharic coverage, alleging that the programming disseminates “misleading information” that could “incite unrest or threaten national peace and security.” Deutsche Welle stresses that the regulator again provided no evidence for these allegations, which the broadcaster regards as baseless. In Friday’s announcement, Deutsche Welle declared itself willing to review concrete examples of problematic reporting – if the authority were to provide them.

After the broadcaster’s local correspondents were forced to temporarily stop work in October, the editorial team in Bonn had continued providing Amharic-language news coverage in the country.

Editor-in-chief Kasper-Claridge said: “Millions of Ethiopians rely on our Amharic-language programming, trusting us to deliver well-researched reporting from across the country. We also firmly reject the sweeping accusations made by the Ethiopian media regulator against our staff and stand fully behind our correspondents and editorial team.”

The broadcaster is now weighing legal steps to fight the suspensions.

Limited press freedom

Human Rights Watch (HRW) sees the case as the latest example of the crackdown on independent media in Ethiopia. HRW wrote on Monday that the move to suspend the journalists “underscores the Ethiopian government’s hostility to independent scrutiny and critical reporting.” For years, HRW added, Ethiopian journalists have described a climate of fear “in which authorities regularly threatened, arrested, and detained them for publishing stories that exposed rights abuses or criticized the government.” The situation has forced many journalists into exile.

The organization reports that in the past five months Ethiopian police have arrested at least six journalists. Some have been denied contact with the outside world or have been held without charge. In October HRW condemned the police’s reliance on overly broad definitions of hate speech and misinformation in order to bring charges against journalists. Some critical reporting has even prompted charges of terrorism.

In April of this year, the country’s media law was amended. The changes to the law include a measure that shifts responsibilities within the Ethiopian Media Authority from the board to the director general, who is appointed by the prime minister. The amendments also lift a ban on political party affiliation for board members. According to HRW, the changes allow the government to tighten its control over the Ethiopian media regulator.

Chilling effect

The organization predicts that the suspension of the two Deutsche Welle correspondents “will no doubt have a chilling effect on the country’s remaining space for independent media.” But with ongoing conflicts within the country, escalating tensions with neighboring Eritrea, and elections planned for June 2026, “the need for critical, independent reporting has never been greater.” HRW calls on the government to lift the suspensions of the Deutsche Welle correspondents and to “end further attacks on the media.”

Reporters without Borders (RSF) also demanded an immediate end to the suspensions.

Deutsche Welle noted in its Friday announcement that “press freedom in Ethiopia has deteriorated since the outbreak of the Tigray conflict in 2020.” According to RSF, during the war numerous reporters were detained whose reporting diverged from the government line. Following the outbreak of fighting in the Amhara region, reporters who have covered the clashes there have also been arrested.

Ethiopian authorities have accused Deutsche Welle of false reporting in the past as well – in particular after the 2005 parliamentary elections. That year, violence erupted in the weeks after the elections when the government stopped the tallying of votes and declared itself the winner – at least 46 people were killed. According to Deutsche Welle, however, a commission charged with looking into the government’s allegations “did not yield any proof of misreporting.”

On the RSF Index of Press Freedom, Ethiopia is ranked 145th out of 180 countries. (js)

Nobel laureate Mohammadi detained

2025-12-16T15:01:00+01:00

Winner of the Nobel Peace Prize Narges Mohammadi has been detained in Iran. She was temporarily released from prison last year.

Mohammadi was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2023.(Source: IMAGO / Middle East Images)

Iranian human rights activist Narges Mohammadi was detained on Friday at a memorial service in the eastern Iranian city of Mashhad. She was reportedly injured during the arrest. Other activists were also arrested at the event, according to reports. In December 2024, the authorities had temporarily released Mohammadi from prison.

According to news reports, on Friday security forces broke up a memorial service for the late human rights lawyer Khosrow Alikordi, firing tear gas into the crowd. As the New York Times reports, the authorities have since confirmed to local media that Narges Mohammadi and others were detained. They were arrested for chanting “disruptive slogans,” the authorities said. Videos of the event show the crowd calling out the names of imprisoned activists and saying “long live Iran.”

The Narges Foundation, which advocates for Mohammadi’s release, announced on Monday that the Nobel laureate had been able to speak briefly with relatives by phone. Mohammadi told relatives that during her arrest she was struck repeatedly with baton blows and was injured so severely that she had been taken to the emergency room twice since Friday. “Her physical condition at the time of the call was not good,” the foundation wrote. During the brief phone call Mohammadi stressed that she did not know which security authority is currently detaining her.

On Sunday, the foundation had condemned the silence on the part of the authorities – nearly 48 hours after Mohammadi’s arrest, they still had not provided any information about her whereabouts. As of Sunday only a limited number of detainees had been able to contact relatives, the foundation reported, adding that the total number of people arrested at the memorial ceremony may have been more than 50.

Several activists and journalists were among those arrested at the memorial service, according to the Free Narges Coalition.

Khosrow Alikordi had been found dead earlier this month. According to the authorities, the cause of death was a heart attack, but activists have expressed doubts. Last week, 81 Iranian lawyers put out a statement demanding a thorough investigation of the circumstances surrounding Alikordi’s death.

Warnings in advance of the service

Alikordi had represented critics of the government and people who had participated in the Woman, Life, Freedom protests. The country-wide demonstrations had begun after Jina Mahsa Amini, a young Kurdish woman, died in detention following her arrest by the morality police in September 2022. In advance of the memorial service on Friday, security forces reportedly warned activists not to give speeches.

Narges Mohammadi is known for her work as an activist opposing mandatory veiling laws and the death penalty. In 2023 she was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. The 53-year-old was in prison when she received the prize. She has been given several prison sentences, including for allegedly spreading “propaganda against the state.”

Temporary release

In December 2024 the authorities had granted Mohammadi a temporary release to allow her to receive medical treatment. The activist suffers from a heart condition. A few months prior to her release it was reported that she had been violently abused in prison. According to her supporters, her health had greatly deteriorated during her time in detention.

The term of her release had initially been set for only three weeks, but she had remained at liberty – and had continued her activism. Earlier this month she published an article in Time Magazine criticizing an Iranian state that “controls every aspect” of Iranians’ personal and public lives.

Demands for Mohammadi’s release

Taghi Rahmani, Mohammadi’s husband, spoke with media from his home in exile over the weekend. He expressed concern about his wife, saying: “We don’t know where Narges and the rest of them are; we haven’t heard from them since they took them – no phone call, no clear answer from authorities.”

The Norwegian Nobel Committee also condemned the “brutal arrest” and called on the authorities to release the activist “without conditions.”

Human Rights Watch and the European External Action Service likewise called for Mohammadi’s release.

Recent reports from Iran note that while more women without veils can be seen on the streets of Tehran, the government in recent months has been cracking down harder on activists, journalists, and even students. Some observers believe the government is putting on a show of openness in order to mask the increasing repression.

Meanwhile executions in Iran have reached a new high this year: according to human rights organizations and the UN Human Rights Office, as of late September more than 1,000 people had been put to death by the state. (js)

British Home Office admits to problems with facial recognition

2025-12-15T09:54:00+01:00

The facial recognition technology used by British police is worse at identifying minorities. According to a new report, police have long been aware of flaws in the system.

British police plan to expand their use of facial recognition in the future. (Source: IMAGO / Michael Gstettenbauer)

British police forces use facial recognition technology that is less accurate when asked to identify members of certain demographic groups. The British Home Office has now admitted to the flaws in the system. Civil liberties groups, the Information Commissioner’s Office, and the police commissioners’ association have all voiced criticism.

The Home Office is planning to expand use of the technology and has launched a period of public consultation. At the end of the consultation process, the government hopes to put new laws in place to allow police forces around the country to use the technology “more often,” the Home Office announced earlier this month.

All police forces in the country can already access the Police National Database to conduct searches using so-called retrospective facial recognition. Such a search uses photos taken as part of an investigation, for example footage from security cameras at a crime scene, and compares them against the photos in the database. In 2024, police forces conducted more than 250,000 searches using the database.

In connection with this month’s announcement, the Home Office has now admitted that “in a limited set of circumstances” the algorithm used to perform retrospective facial recognition matches “is more likely to incorrectly include some demographic groups in its test results” – meaning that individuals who are unconnected with the crimes under investigation can be erroneously identified as suspects. Evidence of the bias was uncovered in independent tests performed by the National Physical Laboratory (NPL), the national measurement standards body for the UK.

Evaluating the algorithm

According to the evaluation, depending on the search parameters, the algorithm can be less accurate when examining photos of people of color than when scanning those of white people. The rate of false positives for black women can be up to 9.9 percent.

The system is also less accurate when finding matches for people in their twenties than it is in identifying people older than 40 years old.

The Home Office said through a spokesperson: “The Home Office takes the findings of the report seriously and we have already taken action. A new algorithm has been independently tested and procured, which has no statistically significant bias.” The new system is set to be tested early next year, spokesperson added.

“Concerning in-built bias”

Members of the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners (APCC), which represents the elected officials responsible for overseeing police forces in England and Wales, expressed criticism. The group pointed to a “concerning in-built bias” in the technology. “This has meant that, in some circumstances, it is more likely to incorrectly match black and Asian people than their white counterparts.” The NPL’s evaluation shows “that technology has been deployed into operational policing without adequate safeguards in place.”

The APCC statement acknowledges that “there is no evidence of adverse impact in any individual case,” but views this as being “more by luck than design.” What’s more, police have long been aware of the flaws in the system. “Robust and independent assessment” is needed before such a technology is put into use, the statement continues – “full transparency is vital.”

Emily Keaney, Deputy Commissioner for the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), the British data protection authority, expressed disappointment that the ICO had not been informed of the problems before. “We have asked the Home Office for urgent clarity on this matter so we can assess the situation and consider our next steps,” Keaney said in a statement.

The police has evidently known of the problem for more than a year: the Guardian reported last week that top police officials were informed of the system’s biases in September 2024. The initial response was to adjust the parameters of the facial recognition software to ensure that only results with a high probability of accuracy were displayed, a step that would reduce false matches. But after police forces complained that with the new settings in place the system produced fewer “investigative leads,” the order was rescinded. According to the Guardian, the Home Office refused to say what parameters are currently in use.

“Discriminatory algorithm”

Charlie Whelton of the human rights organization Liberty called it “deeply troubling” that the police continued to use a system “they knew was biased against women, young people, and people from racially marginalized groups.” He added: “With thousands of searches a month using this discriminatory algorithm, there are now serious questions to be answered over how many people have been wrongly identified, or what impact this may have had on their lives.” Whelton called for the government to “immediately stop the rollout of facial recognition technology until we have safeguards in place.”

Professor Pete Fussey of the University of Southampton told the Guardian that the decision by police to resume use of the looser parameters “raises the question of whether facial recognition only becomes useful if users accept biases in ethnicity and gender.” He said: “Convenience is a weak argument for overriding fundamental rights, and one unlikely to withstand legal scrutiny.”

In 2019 Fussey observed an early trial of the Metropolitan Police’s live facial recognition system – and criticized the system’s high failure rate. The London police force now claims to have fixed the problems, citing a new report. Fussey disagrees, however, saying that the claims “are not substantiated by the facts in that report.”

For live facial recognition deployments, police use cameras in public locations that scan the faces of all passersby and compare them with a watchlist in real time. If the system turns up a match, officers are notified immediately. Currently 13 police forces in England and Wales use this system – but in the future the Home Office wants police throughout the country to be equipped with the technology.

Silkie Carlo of Big Brother Watch, a civil liberties organization, warned that this could mean “the end of privacy as we know it.” Already the organization has frequently seen “innocent people being stopped and questioned by police due to mistakes with the tech.”

Critics have long pointed to the false matches turned up by facial recognition systems as an argument against the technology’s use. Tests conducted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology in the United States have also found that the technology is less effective at identifying people of color. (js)

US: Environmental groups demand moratorium on construction of new data centers

2025-12-11T08:15:00+01:00

More and more data centers are being built in the US – and consuming massive amounts of electricity and water. A coalition of groups warns of the consequences for the environment and climate.

The groups fear that the centers’ high electricity consumption will also result in higher energy costs for consumers. (Source: IMAGO / Pond5 Images)

More than 230 organizations demand a moratorium on new data centers in the United States. The boom in so-called artificial intelligence (AI) and cryptocurrencies has spurred the construction of ever more server farms in the country. The groups warn that the current pace of construction poses an enormous ecological and social threat.

Led by the environmental NGO Food & Water Watch, the organizations sent an open letter this week to members of the US Congress. The signatories include large organizations like Greenpeace USA and Friends of the Earth US as well as local organizations active in individual states. Together they represent millions of people in all 50 US states, the groups write.

In the letter they call on Congress to support a “national moratorium on the approval and construction of new data centers.” The moratorium should remain in place until new regulations can be instituted to “fully protect our communities, our families, our environment, and our health” from the “runaway damage” that the groups argue will result from the large-scale construction of new data centers.

Wenonah Hauter, head of Food & Water Watch, said in a statement: “At a time when millions of Americans are already struggling with soaring utility costs, the sudden explosion of the Big Data industry represents an existential threat for communities ill-equipped to handle the massive environmental and economic hardships these data centers inflict.” The industry’s “unfettered expansion” must be stopped, said Hauter.

AI boom

The letter identifies so-called AI and cryptocurrencies as the primary drivers of the rapid growth in data center construction. These technologies demand ever more computing capacity. The expansion of data centers leads to rapidly rising energy demand, which in turn leads to an increase in environmental pollution by fossil fuels. The burning of fossil fuels releases large quantities of the greenhouse gases that are the chief cause of global warming. According to estimates, a single ChatGPT query uses up to ten times as much energy as a classic internet search.

According to Food & Water Watch, AI servers are the fastest growing energy users in data centers. By 2028 they could consume as much energy annually as would be necessary to power 28 million American households. Already in several US states, coal-fired power plants that were slated for closure have been kept in operation to supply data centers with energy. New natural gas plants are also being planned for this purpose. And in Pennsylvania a nuclear power plant is set to be restarted to supply Microsoft AI data centers with electricity.

Massive water consumption

The organizations also warn in their letter of the massive and unsustainable amount of water consumed by data centers. Water is necessary to cool the servers in these centers. The organizations write that a tripling of the number of data centers in the US “would require as much water as is used by 18.5 million households.” The assessment comes from an analysis of AI data centers’ energy and water consumption that Food & Water Watch published earlier this year.

According to the signatories, data centers’ hunger for resources is causing a spike in electricity prices across the country. The price of electricity has already risen sharply in recent years – a rise the organizations attribute in part to the construction of new data centers.

“The rapid, largely unregulated rise of data centers,” the letter concludes, “is disrupting communities across the country and threatening Americans’ economic, environmental, climate and water security.”

Expansion expected

Market observers expect that the growing use of AI, cloud computing, and similar technologies will fuel large investments in the construction of data centers in the coming years. Some analysts predict that new investments in computing infrastructure will total nearly $7 trillion by 2030 – with more than 40 percent of that total to be invested in the US. The analysts anticipate challenges as well, including rising electricity demand that could put a strain on electric grids. Data center expansion could also cause water scarcity: according to one report, water consumption by data centers in the US could rise by 170 percent by 2030.

Given these impacts, there have already been local efforts to block new data centers. According to Data Center Watch, as of March 2025, $64 billion in data center projects in the US had been blocked or delayed by such efforts. The nonpartisan research firm cites worries over increased water and energy demand among the reasons that communities have resisted the construction projects – but also notes local concerns about noise and the impact on property values.

Protecting the environment and natural resources

According to an analysis by Bloomberg, about two-thirds of new data centers built or in development in the US since 2022 are located in places already facing “high levels of water stress” – meaning that the fresh water resources in the region are no longer sufficient to cover the needs of households, industry, and other consumers.

Food & Water Watch reports that data centers frequently take water needed by local residents and farmers. In 2023, data centers were being built outside of Phoenix, Arizona in the middle of a water crisis, with farmers no longer able to irrigate their fields and a community on the eastern outskirts of the city going without tap water for most of the year.

The organization calls for data centers to be powered by renewable energy and demands protections for consumers who face rising power and water bills. In its analysis the group writes: “If AI is to truly help us advance, it must occur in ways that are aligned with protecting our environment and increasingly scarce natural resources.” (js)

More than 500 journalists imprisoned worldwide

2025-12-10T16:22:00+01:00

Hundreds of journalists are detained worldwide, Reporters without Borders reports. In Syria, many journalists remain missing after the fall of the Assad regime.

A total of 67 journalists were killed last year, according to RSF’s statistics. (Source: IMAGO / IPON)

Worldwide more than 500 members of the press are behind bars because of their work. The tally comes from the annual round-up published by Reporters without Borders (RSF) on Tuesday, documenting the total number of journalists killed, detained, missing, and held hostage worldwide. Armed conflict and organized crime were the greatest threat to journalists’ safety, according to the report.

As of December 1, 2025, the cutoff for inclusion in this year’s round-up, at least 503 journalists were detained in 62 countries. The number is somewhat lower than last year’s, when according to RSF at least 550 journalists were imprisoned worldwide.

As in previous years, China remains “the world’s largest prison for journalists,” with 113 detained in the country, plus eight more in Hong Kong. One of the detainees is Li Yanhe, an editor and presenter for public broadcaster Radio Taiwan International who was sentenced to three years in prison for allegedly “inciting separatism.”

Many imprisoned in Russia and Myanmar

Russia (48 detained) and Myanmar (47) are next after China with the second and third-highest numbers of journalists behind bars. In Russia, journalists Konstantin Gabov, Sergei Karelin, Antonina Kravtsova (also known as Favorskaïa) and Artyom Kriger were tried together and sentenced to five and a half years in prison each. The charges against them stemmed from their coverage of Alexei Navalny, the opposition figure who died in prison in February 2024. Of the 48 journalists imprisoned in Russia, 26 are Ukrainian, according to RSF – the largest number of foreign journalists detained in any country.

Belarus (33 imprisoned), Vietnam (28), and Azerbaijan (25) also rank high on the list of countries with journalists in prison. As detailed in the report, seven journalists in Azerbaijan were sentenced to nine years in prison each on “trumped-up” charges of “smuggling foreign currency” – RSF calls the trial politically motivated.

According to RSF, at least 77 of the journalists imprisoned worldwide are women.

Releases in 2025

The RSF report does include some good news: a total of 22 journalists were released in 2025, some after spending several years in prison. Nine Belarussian journalists were freed, as was the British-Egyptian blogger Alaa Abdel Fattah, who had spent nearly a decade in Egyptian prisons.

Still, according to the round-up, 2025 was another deadly year for journalists: a total of 67 journalists were killed, including three women. At least 37 of the journalists killed were the victims of state armed forces or paramilitary groups. 16 were killed by members of criminal groups.

Anja Osterhaus, head of RSF’s German chapter, said in a statement: “To see such a large number of journalists killed is horrifying. It is the result of systematic violence by armies, militias, and criminal networks.” Osterhaus added: “We cannot accept this violence any longer and must get governments around the world to rethink and act. It puts democracy at risk around the world when those who report critically have to fear for their freedom or even for their lives.”

Many killings in Latin America

According to RSF, 29 journalists were killed in Gaza. Some of them were killed in targeted strikes, RSF reports. The second-most dangerous country is Mexico, where this year nine media professionals were killed. They reported on the ties between politicians and organized crime, among other topics. Some had received explicit death threats – one journalist, Calletano de Jesús Guerrero, was even murdered while under government protection.

RSF singled out Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum for criticism: despite making commitments to ensure the protection of journalists, 2025, her first year in office, “was also the deadliest of the past three years for journalists in Mexico.” Latin America in general is a dangerous region for members of the press: nearly a quarter (24 percent) of the killings documented by RSF occurred in the region.

News gathering is also dangerous in Sudan: four journalists were killed while reporting from the country. In Ukraine, three journalists were killed in Russian drone strikes. And in Saudi Arabia the journalist Turki al-Jasser was executed.

RSF also counted 20 journalists held hostage in four countries. Seven were taken captive in 2025 by Houthi rebels. This brings the total number of journalists held hostage by the Houthis to nine.

Missing in Mexico und Syria

As of December 1, 135 journalists in 37 countries were considered missing – some have been missing for more than 30 years. The numbers are particularly high in Mexico (28) and Syria (37). The Assad regime that was toppled last year in Syria had held many journalists in detention, and the so-called Islamic State (ISIS) had held journalists hostage. But even after the fall of both regimes, many of the detainees have yet to be found and their fate remains unknown. According to RSF, the jihadist group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which played a leading role in the overthrow of the government, also continues to hold journalists hostage.

RSF also reports that this year journalists in several countries faced obstruction when attempting to report on protests. Law enforcement was the main party responsible for the repression, as was the case in Serbia, for example. In Indonesia, dozens of reporters were attacked in March 2025 when reporting on protests against a new law that increases the military’s role in civil affairs. In August a new wave of protests led to more attacks.

The United States also saw attacks on media professionals: at protests against raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in Los Angeles in June 2025, RSF documented 27 attacks on members of the press.

30th annual round-up

Each year since 1995, Reporters without Borders has published an annual round-up of the violence and abuse faced by journalists. In the past the data included cases recorded between January 1 and December 1 of each year. This year’s report took into account all cases known to have occurred between December 1, 2024 and December 1, 2025. The chronological adjustment is meant to ensure that cases occurring in December are no longer left out of the accounting.

In its tally, RSF only includes cases in which the organization can verify that the abuse suffered was “a direct result” of the victim’s work as a journalist. The statistics include both professional and non-professional journalists, as well as auxiliary staff like camera operators or sound technicians. In authoritarian countries and in war zones especially, RSF writes, citizen journalists and support staff play an important role in gathering and disseminating relevant information. (js)

Afghanistan: UN demands end to restrictions on female staff

2025-12-10T08:02:00+01:00

The United Nations has called on the Taliban to lift a ban on women entering UN premises. Women staff and contractors are indispensable, the UN said.

The Taliban returned to power in Afghanistan four years ago. According to observers, the human rights situation in the country has continuously deteriorated since then. (Source: IMAGO / Newscom World)

The United Nations has called on the Taliban to lift restrictions barring women from entering UN premises in the country. The international body warns of the impact on “life-saving services.”

UN Women, the UN organization focused on services and policy relating to women and girls, said on Sunday that despite the ban women staffers have continued their work from home and in their local communities over the past three months.

The Taliban first banned women from working for UN agencies in the country in 2023 – a move that drew international criticism. But after negotiations with the de facto government, the UN was able to ensure that aid for women in the country would continue to be delivered by women. In September of this year, however, the authorities imposed further restrictions on women’s ability to work for UN agencies – and barred them from entering UN premises.

Several UN organizations have reported on the negative impact the restrictions have had on their work. The UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) for example was forced to temporarily close several support centers.

Human rights violation

As UN Women warned on Sunday: “The longer these restrictions remain in place, the greater the risk to these life-saving services.” The organization added that “Afghan women are indispensable to the United Nations’ work in Afghanistan.” Aid for women and girls must be administered by women, UN Women wrote – and demanded an end to all entry restrictions for Afghan women staff and contractors. Their “safe access to offices and the field” must be ensured.

The organization stressed that the limits put in place by Afghan authorities violate the “founding principles of human rights and equality” enshrined in the UN Charter.

The restrictions also prevent UN agencies from fulfilling their mandate. Since the ban went into effect, UN agencies have implemented “operational adjustments” so as to be able to continue providing aid. According to UN Women, some female staffers have continued working from home or have provided support in their communities – including to families affected by this year’s earthquakes. Several earthquakes have struck Afghanistan in recent months. More than 2,200 people were killed, and more than 3,600 injured, by a quake that hit on August 31. Another earthquake in November killed more than 20 and injured roughly 1,000.

Returning Afghans in need of aid

Since the beginning of this year, the humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan has been further exacerbated by the return – in many cases involuntary – of millions of Afghans who had been living in neighboring countries. According to the UN, roughly 2.7 million people had returned from Iran and Pakistan as of November 29.

Many of these people are in need of emergency assistance, including shelter, food, clean water, and medical treatment. The UN Refugee Agency wrote earlier this month that many of the returning Afghans faced serious risks due to the human rights situation in Afghanistan – women and girls especially. In September the UNHCR warned that without its female staff, its capacity to deliver aid was limited.

Women’s rights curtailed

Since retaking power four years ago the Taliban have imposed increasingly repressive measures – especially with regard to the rights of women and girls. According to the UN, since August 2021 nearly one hundred laws and edicts have been passed with the aim of curtailing women’s rights.

Richard Bennett, UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Afghanistan, reported in October that all the Taliban’s restrictions on women and girls continued to be in force. The ban on education, affecting roughly 2.2 million Afghan women and girls, is “of particular concern,” Bennett wrote. For the women and girls impacted by this ban, online and underground schools are particularly important – but these initiatives suffer from cuts to international funding.

Bennett’s report also criticized the broad restrictions on women’s ability to work. Even those women who are still permitted to work are subject to “strict gender-based segregation.” These women also reportedly face threats and intimidation – including United Nations staff, dozens of whom have received death threats.

The Special Rapporteur condemned as well what he described as increased discrimination against ethnic and religious minorities. According to Bennett’s report, the number of public executions has risen, and people convicted in Taliban courts are frequently sentenced to forms of corporal punishment like flogging. “More than four years after the Taliban retook power,” the report concluded, “the human rights situation in Afghanistan continues to deteriorate.”

Bennett admonished the international community to avoid normalizing the Taliban, and urged countries to continue providing humanitarian aid and working to protect particularly vulnerable groups. (js)

Spyware maker Intellexa still active despite sanctions

2025-12-08T11:21:00+01:00

Cybersecurity researchers continue to see signs of activity from the spyware company Intellexa. According to a new investigation, the company even has the ability to monitor its clients’ use of its flagship Predator spyware.

The US imposed sanctions on Intellexa and individuals connected to the company in 2023 and 2024. (Source: IMAGO / MiS)

The spyware company Intellexa reportedly has the ability to monitor its clients’ espionage operations. An investigation published last week reveals the company’s recent activities. Led by Amnesty International in collaboration with international media outlets, the investigation also turned up evidence that the spyware is being used in Pakistan.

Intellexa is a network of companies known primarily for developing Predator spyware. The surveillance tool was used to spy on opposition politicians, journalists, and others in Greece – but other governments use it as well.

According to the Amnesty-led investigation, Intellexa still has offices based in Europe. In 2023, the company was placed on the US Department of Commerce’s Entity List. The company’s spyware enables “campaigns of repression and other human rights abuses,” the Commerce Department said when announcing the move. The designation means that US companies are prohibited from doing business with the company or its affiliates without obtaining a special license from the US government. In 2024 the US Treasury Department imposed further sanctions on five firms in the Intellexa Alliance. It also placed sanctions on the company’s founder, Tal Dilian, and other individuals connected to the company.

Predator in Pakistan

Nevertheless, the spyware maker has remained active, as the latest investigation shows. Researchers at Amnesty International have found evidence that Pegasus was used to target a human rights lawyer in Pakistan this summer. This is the first known use of spyware in the South Asian country. Amnesty has announced plans to publish more details on the case in upcoming reports. The group will also detail additional cases of Predator abuses in Africa.

Google and the cybersecurity company Recorded Future have also detected Predator attacks in Pakistan. It is so far unclear which government client is responsible.

Access to client systems

Together with its international media partners, Amnesty was also able to review internal files and materials from Intellexa. This review showed that, at least in some cases, Intellexa is able to access its customers’ Predator systems. That finding is based in part on a 2023 training video for new hires that was seen by investigators. In the video, the Intellexa employee who is leading the training explicitly states that the company has access to an active client system. The client in this case was reportedly Kazakhstan, though a list of other clients, identified by code names, was also exposed, according to the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, which took part in the investigation.

According to Amnesty, the training video and other material reviewed by investigators show that at least in some cases Intellexa has a level of access to clients’ systems that “goes far beyond the minimal visibility required for troubleshooting.” Intellexa employees are evidently able to view information relating to surveillance targets – and even have access to data collected from infected end devices. Predator spyware can take complete control of a smartphone, allowing those who deploy it to read a target’s chats and listen in on phone calls. Attackers can also activate a device’s camera and microphone and follow its location.

In the past, spyware makers have often insisted that they have no insight into how their customers use their surveillance programs, and have denied responsibility for any cases of abuse.

Trial in Greece

A criminal trial involving former Intellexa executives is currently underway in Greece. The case revolves in part around the question of whether the company shares responsibility for recent spyware attacks on opposition politicians, journalists, and others. Last year an investigation into the country’s spyware scandal was brought to a close. The prosecutor who ended the probe claimed to have found no evidence that politicians or state authorities were involved in the spying. Charges were however brought against four representatives of companies that sold Predator – they are accused of violating telephone communication secrecy.

Amnesty noted that the latest revelations raise questions as to whether Intellexa’s government clients are aware that the company can access their systems. The organization called the findings extremely concerning: not only can governments use spyware to obtain sensitive data from surveillance targets – the data are also apparently accessible to the company that makes the spyware. According to Amnesty, spyware makers’ government clients likely don’t expect that the companies have access to their systems and data. The clients presumably want to ensure that their operations are strictly confidential – but it’s not clear whether Intellexa does not in fact have the ability to access all its clients’ systems at any time, Amnesty wrote.

Donncha Ó Cearbhaill, head of Amnesty’s Security Lab, told Haaretz that the access “raises immediate questions about whether customers understood the extent of this access or consented to it.”

In response to detailed questions about the company’s access to client systems, Intellexa founder Tal Dilian, speaking through an attorney, said only that “I have not committed any crime nor operated any cyber system in Greece or anywhere else.”

Infected advertisements

According to the new investigation, Intellexa has also developed a tool to carry out so-called zero-click attacks using manipulated internet advertisements. In order for the attack to be successful, the target reportedly does not have to click on the malicious ad. To date Predator has primarily used so-called one-click attacks, in which a manipulated link might be sent to a target. The new method, known internally as Aladdin, requires that the attackers obtain a unique identifier for the target’s smartphone. Using this identifier, they can serve the malicious ad to the potential victim’s phone through the commercial mobile advertising ecosystem. Once displayed, the ad delivers the Predator infection.

Haaretz first reported last year that Intellexa was working to develop this exploit. It’s unclear whether any such attack has been successfully carried out yet: researchers at the cybersecurity firm Recorded Future write that they have seen no indication that this has happened. Amnesty believes however that the prevalence of such “silent” attack methods is bound to increase – other spyware companies are reportedly developing similar tools. Amnesty calls on the advertising sector to prevent attacks over the digital advertising ecosystem.

According to Amnesty, the materials reviewed for this latest investigation also confirm forensic investigations into previous Predator cases, including the 2021 attack on the Egyptian activist-in-exile Ayman Nour.

Hundreds of victims

Cybersecurity experts at Google reported last week that they too are seeing continued activity from Intellexa. Because of this, the Google Threat Intelligence Group decided to deliver warnings to “all known targeted accounts associated with Intellexa’s customers since 2023.” This extends to hundreds of accounts in countries including Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Angola, Egypt, Uzbekistan, Saudi Arabia, and Tajikistan.

Recorded Future also published a report on Intellexa last week. The cybersecurity company’s researchers have identified other firms with apparent links to the spyware maker. These include companies headquartered in the Czech Republic and the United Arab Emirates. Meanwhile companies in Kazakhstan and the Philippines are reportedly involved in the import of Intellexa products. According to Recorded Future, there are also indications that Predator has been deployed in Iraq.

Summing up the new findings, Amnesty International wrote that despite intensified scrutiny in recent years, and despite sanctions and court cases, Predator spyware continues to be used to facilitate human rights abuses. This is evident from the attack on the Pakistani human rights lawyer, whose rights to privacy and freedom of expression were violated. The attack also jeopardizes the rights to a fair trial and effective remedy, Amnesty said. Amnesty has criticized the global spyware industry for years and has repeatedly called for a moratorium on the sale and use of these surveillance products. (js)

US: Criticism of White House media "hall of shame"

2025-12-04T08:04:00+01:00

The White House has launched a new webpage pillorying media it accuses of publishing inaccurate reporting. Journalist organizations call the shaming a tool of authoritarian regimes.

Since his return to office, Donald Trump has intensified his attacks on the free press. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

The White House has launched an online “hall of shame” listing media outlets and journalists that it accuses of inaccurate reporting. Journalist organizations call the move a further escalation of the administration’s attacks on the press.

The administration unveiled the new webpage, which is part of the official White House website, on Friday. The site names media organizations and individual journalists in an apparent effort to publicly discredit them.

The administration claims that the outlets and journalists listed on the webpage have published false or biased reporting. The Boston Globe, CBS News, and the British online newspaper the Independent are together labeled the “Media Offender [sic] of the Week” and accused of misrepresenting statements made by President Trump. The administration calls the organizations the “fake news media” and also accuses the Democratic Party of spreading falsehoods.

List of unwelcome media

The new White House webpage also includes a “Hall of Shame” featuring more media outlets that have published allegedly “false and misleading stories.” Individual news stories are displayed under categories such as “Lie” or “Left-wing lunacy.” As Reporters without Borders (RSF) points out, the White House provides no concrete evidence for its allegations.

The list includes outlets like the Washington Post, CBS News, CNN, and the news channel MSNBC, now known as MS NOW. Publications like Axios, Politico, and the New York Times are also named by the White House, as are individual reporters for these outlets. According to the Washington Post, Fox News was initially included on the list as well – but was removed after lodging a protest. A spokesperson for the conservative news channel told the Post that it had been included by mistake. Fox News is considered Donald Trump’s favorite channel.

Disdain for the press

Anja Osterhaus, director of RSF’s German chapter, sharply criticized this latest move by the administration, saying in a statement that “with this public branding of journalists and media, the White House once again makes clear its disdain for and hostility toward the independent press.”

Said Osterhaus: “Press freedom doesn’t mean bolstering pre-government narratives – it means engaging in reporting that is uncomfortable and asks tough questions.” Publicly shaming journalists and media outlets is a tool of authoritarian governments, Osterhaus continued. The webpage represents a further escalation of the administration’s attacks on US media.

The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) wrote that the webpage “creates a skewed representation” of journalists’ work and seems deliberately aimed at undermining independent reporting in the US.

Katherine Jacobsen, US, Canada, and Caribbean Program Coordinator for the CPJ, said in a statement: “This latest move from the Trump administration should be a wakeup call to Americans that their tax dollars are being used to suppress rather than encourage freedom of speech.” Jacobsen warned that the White House’s actions could lead to attacks on journalists. “This type of behavior is more in line with an authoritarian regime, and has no place in a democracy.”

Demands to take down webpage

Criticism also came from the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ), a US press association. Over the weekend the group called on the administration to immediately remove the webpage. In an open letter to White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, the organization pointed out that journalists follow an established set of standards. These standards include a commitment to transparently correct errors. The administration has a right to criticize reporting, the SPJ acknowledged – but stressed that this criticism shouldn’t be done on a webpage that characterizes news stories as “lies.”

By singling out individual reporters and media outlets, “the White House is naming and shaming members of the press in a highly charged political and social environment,” the group wrote. This amounts to “a form of online harassment that exposes members of the media to potential online or offline threats and even violence.”

President insults female journalists

Members of the press are already subjected to online harassment, the SPJ pointed out, and this can turn into physical violence. The issue impacts women in particular – and women have also been publicly insulted by President Trump in recent weeks. The US president has called female reporters epithets like “little piggy,” and has referred to them as “ugly” and “stupid.”

RSF also criticized Trump’s tendency to react aggressively toward reporters who ask critical questions, or to insult those whose reporting contradicts his own views. The online “hall of shame” is just the latest escalation in a years-long series of attacks on the media, the group wrote – insults and defamation are only one part of Trump’s antagonistic behavior toward the press.

According to RSF, the Trump administration deliberately uses state power to damage media outlets that it doesn’t like. The administration’s decision to cut funding to National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcast Service (PBS) is one instance of this. The White House also cut funding for international broadcasters like Voice of America (VOA) – which led to massive layoffs.

In another effort to stymie the press, the administration has limited wire services’ access to White House events. And Trump has sued or threatened lawsuits against several media outlets.

In its letter, the SPJ wrote that the White House webpage is reminiscent of a 2017 effort by the Russian government. That year the Russian foreign ministry began listing news stories on its website that it claimed contained false information – the site is still up. The SPJ wrote: “The United States should not follow that example.”

Journalists “are not political opponents,” the group added. Rather they “have a long-standing constitutionally protected and societally encouraged duty to hold power to account.” (js)

UK: Police use facial recognition to search for children

2025-12-03T08:03:00+01:00

Police forces in the UK are including photos of minors on their facial recognition watchlists. Critics stress that children’s privacy requires special protections.

The use of facial recognition in the UK has faced criticism for years. (Source: IMAGO / NurPhoto)

Police in the UK are using facial recognition technology to search for children suspected of committing crimes. A joint investigation by the Times of London newspaper and Liberty Investigates, the investigative journalism arm of the human rights organization Liberty, has brought the practice to light. While critics warn of the risks, especially for children, British authorities are preparing to expand use of the technology.

Several police forces in the UK already deploy so-called live facial recognition, generally by way of specially equipped police vans that temporarily monitor particular locations. The cameras mounted on the vans compare the faces of all passersby against a list of individuals wanted by the police. In London, for example, police have used facial recognition in public settings for years.

As Liberty and the Times now report, six British police departments have also been using the technology to search for minors, some younger than 13. The journalists sent freedom of information requests to six police forces, asking how many children had been included in their searches. These responses form the basis of the new report.

Thousands of children potentially affected

London’s Metropolitan Police provided journalists with data on only nine deployments conducted over the past three years. An average of 105 minors were included on the watchlist used for each deployment. Given the “hundreds of deployments” conducted in the city since 2022, this suggests that thousands of children may have been on watchlists in that time period, Liberty and the Times report.

According to the Metropolitan Police’s latest annual report on live facial recognition, at least six children between the ages of 13 and 16 were arrested over a 12-month period after they were identified with the help of facial recognition. A police spokesperson told the journalists that an authorizing officer had to approve the inclusion of minors on a watchlist.

According to the British College of Policing, the professional body for UK police, there are several reasons why a person might be included on a facial recognition watchlist: they may be wanted by the police in connection with a crime, but they could also have been reported missing, or be a victim of a crime themselves.

According to Liberty’s report, the College of Policing also says that police “should specifically identify and document” when they use facial recognition to search for minors. But, Liberty writes, “none of the forces provided a breakdown of reasons for the children’s inclusion” on watchlists.

Under the age of 13

Police in South Wales told the journalists that since 2022 they had placed a total of 632 people under 18 on their facial recognition watchlists. Six of these children were under the age of 13. According to the College of Policing, facial recognition tools don’t function as well when identifying children younger than 13 – using the tools on children so young may lead to more false identifications.

In Bedfordshire, in the east of England, police this year searched for 22 children in four facial recognition deployments, according to Liberty and the Times’ reporting. The official in charge of facial recognition for Bedfordshire Police told Liberty that “only juveniles wanted for the most serious arrestable offenses are considered for inclusion in the watchlist,” and added: “No one under the age of 13 is included.”

But whatever the circumstances, police departments have been criticized for using the technology to search for minors. Rachel de Souza, England’s children’s commissioner, said she was “deeply concerned.” The latest revelations about facial recognition raise “serious questions about why this is needed and how it is being used,” de Souza said. “The police’s duty to protect the public must not come at the expense of the protection of vulnerable children who need care and support.”

Criticism of lack of legal basis

Data protection activists have also stressed that children’s privacy is entitled to strict protections. For years observers have criticized the use of facial recognition by police in the absence of any legal regulations.

Conservative MP David Davis said: “It has long been clear that legislation is needed.” The journalists’ latest findings “only reinforce this.”

Clive Lewis, a Labor MP, described the situation as a “regulatory wild west.” Lewis called for urgent action. If the government fails to act, “they will erode trust and enable authoritarian infrastructure to be built that is clearly open to abuse.”

Green Part MP Siân Berry said: “It is appalling to find police using this invasive technology on children, who are particularly vulnerable to the privacy and safeguarding risks that live facial recognition carries. The government must act urgently to set conditions and limits on this rapidly spreading dystopian technology to protect our vital human rights.”

A spokesperson for the British Home Office told Liberty that when using facial recognition technology, police forces “are required to comply with all existing laws, as well as their human rights and equality obligations, to ensure its use is lawful and proportionate.” The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), Britain’s data protection authority, said that in balancing children’s privacy with efforts to safeguard children from other dangers, “careful consideration is needed.” The data watchdog added that facial recognition “remains a priority for the ICO.”

More police forces to receive facial recognition tools

Meanwhile the technology is being deployed on a broader scale: over the summer, the British Home Office announced plans to equip seven more police departments with the technology. Civil liberties organization Big Brother Watch called the move a “significant expansion of the surveillance state.”

Last week, the British Transport Police announced that it would be testing live facial recognition in London train stations over a period of six months. “We’ll inform members of the public about the deployments online and via social media before they happen,” the announcement stated.

As Liberty and the Times report, the government this week is set to announce that it will be considering proposals to expand the use of facial recognition to 43 regional police forces. A consultation process will accompany the proposals.

Incompatible with human rights convention

In August the British Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) criticized the use of facial recognition by the Metropolitan Police, calling the force’s current practices “incompatible” with the European Convention on Human Rights. Despite having left the European Union, the UK is still a party to the human rights convention.

John Kirkpatrick, Chief Executive of the EHRC, said in a statement: “The law is clear: everyone has the right to privacy, to freedom of expression, and to freedom of assembly. These rights are vital for any democratic society.” Because of this, “there must be clear rules which guarantee that live facial recognition technology is used only where necessary, proportionate, and constrained by appropriate safeguards.” In the view of the EHRC, the situation in London “falls short of this standard.”

The EHRC also pointed to the lack of legal regulation, and noted that even a low failure rate could lead to a high number of false identifications if large watchlists are used. The EHRC has submitted its assessment to a court that is currently hearing a challenge to the Metropolitan Police’s use of facial recognition technology. (js)

France: Condé Nast must pay fine for deceptive cookie use

2025-12-02T08:02:00+01:00

The media company Condé Nast has violated data protection laws in France due to its use of cookies. The French data protection authority has now imposed a fine.

The CNIL first ordered the company to bring its cookie practices into compliance in 2021. (Source: IMAGO / ABACAPRESS)

The media company Condé Nast must pay a fine of €750,000 for violating a data protection law. The French data protection authority, the CNIL, has found that the company used cookies without obtaining the necessary consent from users.

The company publishes various print and online magazines, including the prominent publication Vanity Fair. The CNIL announced last Thursday that it had found violations of the French Data Protection Act on the website vanityfair.fr.

The CNIL determined that the company automatically placed cookies on the devices of visitors to the website without obtaining the required consent. According to the regulator, the website prompted users’ devices to accept cookies before the users had even interacted with the cookie banner.

The authority also found the site’s mechanisms for refusing and revoking consent ineffective. Cookies that legally required consent were placed on users’ devices even when users had clicked “refuse all” in the cookie banner. And users who had previously given consent for tracking cookies and then revoked that consent nevertheless continued to be tracked.

Unclear information

Cookies are text files sent by websites that are saved on a user’s end device. They can be used to show users personalized ads and to analyze their browsing behavior. The cookies placed automatically by vanityfair.fr were of the type that legally required users’ consent, according to the French data protection authority.

The CNIL also holds the company to be at fault for giving users unclear information. Some cookies were labeled “strictly necessary” – which would make them exempt from the legal requirement to obtain user consent. Nevertheless, vanityfair.fr failed to provide users with any “useful information” about what actual purpose these cookies served.

Earlier investigations

The CNIL conducted several investigations before reaching the decision announced last week. In September 2021, the authority ordered the company to comply with French data protection regulations. These proceedings were then closed in July 2022, the authority said.

But in July and November 2023, and then again in February 2025, the regulator performed follow-up investigations of how cookies were used at vanityfair.fr and determined that Condé Nast was not in compliance with the French Data Protection Act. The law applies the cookie provisions from the EU’s ePrivacy Regulation.

Given these violations, the CNIL committee responsible for issuing sanctions decided to impose a fine in the amount of €750,000 on the media company. As the CNIL explained in its announcement, the amount of the fine was determined based on the company’s failure to comply to a previous order. It also takes into account the number of people affected.

The CNIL investigation initially came in response to a complaint filed by the Austrian privacy group Noyb in December 2019. The complaint mentioned several French websites, including vanityfair.fr. According to Noyb, the websites’ cookie banners turned a “no” into a “fake consent”: even if users refused to opt-in, the websites still “sent digital signals to tracking companies.”

Cookie fines

In September, the CNIL noted that it had strengthened its efforts to enforce cookie compliance in recent years. That month, the authority imposed steep fines on Shein and Google: the online fashion company Shein had to pay €150 million for automatically placing cookies on the devices of visitors to its online shop. The authority also found that the company had provided insufficient information on the cookies it used.

In Google’s case, the regulator found that until October 2023, “the consent of users creating a Google account was not freely given.” This was because it was harder to refuse cookies linked to the display of personalized advertisements than it was to opt-in. The CNIL also found fault with a feature in the company’s Gmail email client. For these violations the regulator assessed a total fine of €325 million.

The French data protection authority had imposed substantial fines on Google before, first in 2020 and again in 2022 – both times in connection with cookies. The CNIL has also taken action against Facebook and Amazon, imposing fines for their cookie practices. (js)

US immigration agency urged to stop use of mobile facial recognition

2025-12-01T08:06:00+01:00

Civil liberties groups and human rights organizations demand that US Immigration and Customs Enforcement stop use of its facial recognition app. Lawmakers have also voiced criticism.

Biometric data collected using the app will be saved for 15 years. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

In an open letter, a coalition of 25 organizations demands that US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) immediately stop using mobile facial recognition. The groups in the coalition advocate for human rights and privacy and sharply criticize the use of the technology.

In the letter, published last Wednesday, the organizations point to reports that ICE agents are using a facial recognition app on their smartphones. Use of the Mobile Fortify app was first reported over the summer.

According to media investigations, officers in the agency’s Enforcement and Removal Operations division are using the app to identify “unknown persons” in the field – and to check their immigration status. Enforcement and Removal Operations is the division of ICE specifically responsible for deportations.

Last week’s letter is addressed to the Chief Privacy Officer at the Department of Homeland Security, ICE’s parent agency. It was signed by a coalition of organizations including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Amnesty International USA, and the Center for Democracy and Technology. The Project on Government Oversight and the Center on Race, Inequality and the Law at the New York University School of Law are also signatories.

“Dangerous” and “ripe for abuse”

The organizations write that the Department of Homeland Security has itself acknowledged that the use of facial recognition requires “safeguards for privacy, civil rights, and civil liberties.” But ICE’s facial recognition app undermines these very rights and liberties. The groups call the technology “dangerous” and “ripe for abuse.”

The use of the app is “especially troubling,” the groups write, given facial recognition technology’s known flaws. The letter cites recent studies showing that facial recognition has higher error rates for women and people of color. How well the technology functions depends largely on the quality of photos used – but images taken in field settings tend to be lower quality. The signatories warn that the way ICE agents are using the app “virtually guarantees incidents of misidentification.”

Warning of consequences

According to news reports, ICE agents do not give people a choice to opt-out of having their face scanned and analyzed. The Mobile Fortify app compares photos and fingerprints with various government databases and provides information on individuals’ nationality and immigration status. Agents are reportedly authorized to rely solely on the app’s search results – even if an individual can produce a birth certificate as proof of US citizenship, ICE agents can ignore it.

The groups call this “immensely disturbing.” They fear that the use of facial recognition will lead to “wrongful detentions, deportations, or worse.”

One such case has already been reported: After a man was arrested in Florida in April, the agency mistakenly determined, based on “biometric confirmation,” that the man could be deported. In fact the man was a US citizen. He told media that he was arrested during a traffic stop and provided both a valid ID and a Social Security card. He was later released.

In their letter, the organizations point out that even Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the agency that developed the facial recognition app, always checks other sources to determine a person’s identity.

Agency must stop use of app

“Make no mistake,” the coalition writes, “ICE’s use of facial recognition in the field would be just as disturbing even if the technology was 100 percent accurate.” Mobile Fortify lets agents search several databases to gather information on individuals. The app has even been used to identify people at demonstrations, the groups note, citing online videos. Such actions threaten “privacy, civil liberties, and civil rights” and may create a “chilling effect,” as people may choose not to take part in protests for fear of surveillance.

The groups also criticize ICE for failing to conduct the necessary privacy impact assessment. Given the risks associated with Mobile Fortify, the agency must immediately stop its use of the app, the groups demand. They also call on the DHS Privacy Office to release all documents pertaining to any analysis performed in connection with the use of facial recognition in the field.

Criticism from civil liberties groups and politicians

Over the summer, Nathan Freed Wessler of the ACLU called ICE’s use of the app a “dangerous experiment.” To have ICE agents relying on this technology to identify people on the street is a “recipe for disaster,” Wessler said.

US Senators Jeff Merkley, Ron Wyden, and Edward J. Markey (all Democrats) issued a letter in September demanding that the agency cease use of the app. The senators criticized the “absence of meaningful regulation” of the use of facial recognition technology by government agencies. These tools could lead to ongoing surveillance of public space – and pose a threat to constitutional rights. In their letter, the lawmakers also ask whether ICE performed any testing to determine how well the facial recognition actually worked.

In early November, Markey wrote another letter to ICE, joined this time by Senators Chris Van Hollen and Adam B. Schiff (both Democrats) as well as Senator Bernie Sanders (an independent). In the follow-up letter the senators call it “unacceptable” that ICE has failed to respond to the questions posed in September. The lawmakers repeat their demand for answers – and again demand that ICE stop using the Mobile Fortify app.

Meanwhile the agency is continuing its aggressive tactics. “The US government is conducting an ongoing campaign of raids and detentions across the country,” Human Rights Watch (HRW) wrote last month. The goal of these actions is “to advance a policy of mass deportation.” The group accuses ICE and CBP of using violence and disregarding human rights. (js)

NSO files latest appeal in case with WhatsApp

2025-11-27T07:57:00+01:00

Spyware maker NSO is seeking to delay implementation of a court order prohibiting the company from targeting WhatsApp users. The company fears “catastrophic” consequences for its business.

The legal battle between the two companies has been ongoing since 2019. (Source: IMAGO / SOPA Images)

The spyware maker NSO Group has filed its latest appeal in its legal battle with WhatsApp. The company has asked the court to delay implementation of a recent court order prohibiting NSO from targeting users of the messaging app.

In December 2024, a court ruled that NSO was responsible for attacks on 1,400 WhatsApp users that had occurred in 2019. In October, the court imposed a permanent injunction prohibiting NSO from targeting WhatsApp and its users. Last week, however, NSO filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and also submitted a motion to stay the injunction until the appeal has been heard.

NSO fears being forced out of business

The company argues that it would suffer “catastrophic” damages to its business if the injunction is allowed to take effect – damages that would be irreversible even if the company’s appeal should be successful. The injuries NSO would suffer are “potentially existential,” the court filing states. In its motion the company points to the court’s order that it “delete and destroy any and all computer code or technologies that use, access, or depend on the WhatsApp Platform.” This, the company argues, would cause irreparable harm.

The company also argues that its competitors make spyware that is similar to Pegasus. These competitors can continue to collect information from WhatsApp, while NSO is prohibited from doing so. The company says that it would be forced to stop “much if not all of its business” while the court considers its appeal.

NSO claims further that the court order misapplies the US Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, arguing that the law makes an exemption for legitimate law enforcement activity by US authorities. Because the court refused to exempt such activities from its injunction, allowing the order to go in effect would “deprive US law enforcement of the ability to use” Pegasus in the future. This, NSO argues, is against the “public interest.”

Injunction against spyware

According to the spyware maker, sanctions imposed on NSO Group by the US would not prevent US law enforcement agencies from buying Pegasus. The sanctions merely prevent US individuals and companies from exporting items to NSO. Nevertheless, an executive order issued in March 2023 by then-President Joe Biden prohibits US government agencies from using commercial spyware “that poses risks to national security or has been misused by foreign actors to enable human rights abuses around the world.” Pegasus has repeatedly been tied to human rights abuses.

What is Pegasus?

In October it came to light that a US investment group had acquired NSO. The spyware maker will reportedly remain headquartered in Israel. Shortly after news of the purchase came to light, it was announced that David Friedman had been named executive chairman of the new ownership group. Friedman was US ambassador to Israel during the first Trump administration and has also represented Trump as a bankruptcy lawyer. According to media reports, he has announced an interest in promoting NSO’s business in the US. There are also plans to work towards having sanctions lifted.

A WhatsApp spokesperson told news media that the appeal by NSO is another attempt by the company to avoid accountability. “NSO’s attacks on an American company and our users’ private communications were illegal, and we’re committed to holding them and the surveillance industry accountable,” the spokesperson said.

Years-long legal battle

The legal battle has stretched on for years: WhatsApp and its parent company Meta (then Facebook) first filed suit against the spyware maker in 2019 after detecting Pegasus attacks on 1,400 users of the messaging app. NSO had exploited a security flaw in the app’s call feature to plant its controversial spyware in the targets’ smartphones. The device receiving the call was infiltrated even if the user did not accept the call. The victims included journalists, lawyers, dissidents, human rights activists, diplomats, and government officials.

NSO has tried several times to have the case dismissed. But multiple courts and finally even the US Supreme Court have rejected the Israeli company’s motions. The US Justice Department also filed a brief in support of allowing WhatsApp’s case to go forward.

Over the course of the years-long legal proceedings, NSO has admitted that it does in fact target users in the manner WhatsApp has described. In December 2024 the United States District Court for the Northern District of California ruled that NSO was responsible for the attacks and violated US law, including the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. The company was also found to have violated WhatsApp’s terms of service.

In May of this year a jury decided that NSO must pay more than $167 million in damages to WhatsApp. In October, US District Judge Phyllis Hamilton reduced this penalty to roughly $4 million, citing standards established by US case law. (js)

California: Court prohibits blanket surveillance of power usage

2025-11-26T08:05:00+01:00

An electric utility in California is not permitted to share data on its customers’ electricity usage on a large scale with police, a court has ruled.

The EFF warns that data on electricity usage can reveal details about individuals’ private lives. (Source: IMAGO / Depositphotos)

A California court has prohibited the Sacramento electric utility from routinely sharing data on its customers’ electricity use with the police. The years-long practice of sharing electricity usage data by zip code violates California privacy regulations.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a civil rights group, sued the Sacramento Municipal Utilities District (SMUD) and the city of Sacramento in 2022, challenging the arrangement between the utility and the police, which the EFF described as a “mass surveillance scheme.”

Last week the Sacramento County Superior Court declared this practice unlawful. The EFF cheered the decision.

Smart meters relay electricity usage data

As detailed in the ruling, SMUD began installing so-called “smart meters” in customers’ homes in 2009. These networked electric meters automatically send customers’ electricity usage data to the supplier every four hours. Customers have the option to refuse to have a smart meter installed and continue using an analog meter instead.

According to the ruling, the utility has a specialized unit that analyzes usage data to detect potential power theft – and that works together with law enforcement. In the past, the Sacramento Police Department has sent requests approximately every three months asking the utility to identify, by zip code, all households whose electricity usage exceeds 2,800 kilowatt hours per month. The police department then asks the utility to “filter this data by subscribers exhibiting either a 12-hour or 18-hour consumption pattern.”

Searching for grow operations

The police interpret high electricity usage as a potential indicator of an illegal cannabis grow operation, given that the lamps used in such an operation would drive up power use. In responding to the police requests, the utility searched its entire database of roughly 650,000 customers. According to the EFF, such monitoring is only possible because the networked electric meters collect and share granular usage information. The organization warns that such data make it possible to determine detailed information about a household: such as when the inhabitants go to sleep, when they shower or when they are typically away from home.

In the lawsuit, the EFF points out that the police kept lowering the threshold for what was considered suspicious power usage. In 2014, for example, the police were only interested in households using more than 7,000 kWh per month.

According to the organization, the utility itself admitted in court filings that there could be many factors contributing to high power usage, including air conditioning.

Data-sharing only in response to investigations

The EFF warned that under this arrangement, innocent people could find themselves under police suspicion. SMUD and the police worked together in this way for more than a decade. In this time period the utility “passed on more than 33,000 tips about supposedly ‘high’ usage households to police,” the EFF said. According to the ruling, there were no requests by zip code from police this year – though there were thousands of requests for information on individuals’ power usage. The lawsuit did not challenge the sharing of information pertaining to these individual requests.

Last week’s ruling was a partial success for the petitioners: the court ruled that the practice of sharing usage data on a zip code level violated a section of the California Public Utilities Code and was thus unlawful. The statute specifies that electrical consumption data may only be shared with the customer’s consent – or “upon court order or the request of a law enforcement agency relative to an ongoing investigation.” Sacramento police looking into high power usage are not in fact engaged in an “ongoing investigation,” the court found. Instead, as the ruling states, police are “attempting to gather evidence to see if perhaps a crime may have occurred.” Only if the data thus obtained seem suspicious do the police begin an investigation.

The EFF also alleged that the practice violated the California state constitution – but the court rejected this claim.

Home search based on power usage

The organization filed the lawsuit alongside the Asian American Liberation Network and two Sacramento residents. One of the two individual petitioners, Alfonso Nguyen, uses an electric wheelchair and has to charge it frequently. He also has a medical condition that inhibits his body from regulating its temperature, and because of this he uses electric heat pumps and air conditioning year round. Nguyen states in a court filing that he came to the police’s attention because of his electricity usage. He alleges that in 2020 the police tried to search his home without a warrant – and that after he refused to allow the search, the deputies threatened to arrest him. In an earlier incident, Nguyen says, police officers had searched his home without a warrant, forcing their way inside after he refused them entry. Despite their suspicions, officers did not find any evidence of a cannabis grow operation. A second lawsuit relating to these incidents is still pending.

EFF president Adam Schwartz cheered last week’s ruling. Speaking to local media, he said: “The [surveillance] program was bad for every customer of SMUD because it invaded their privacy.”

SMUD, the electric utility, said it would “happily comply” with the ruling. To date the utility had believed it was complying with what it called a “broad” California law requiring it to cooperate with law enforcement. Now it was “grateful” for the court’s clarification that it must not respond to this “labor-intensive” type of police request. (js)

COP30: Criticism of lack of plan to transition away from fossil fuels

2025-11-25T15:41:00+01:00

The countries participating at the world climate summit could not agree to a plan to phase out fossil fuels. NGOs call the result disappointing.

The climate talks took place amidst protests, with demonstrators urging states to act. (Source: IMAGO / TheNews2)

The COP30 world climate conference came to an end over the weekend in Belém, Brazil. NGOs criticize the lack of specific commitments to come out of the conference, the first to take place in the Amazon. The nearly 200 participating countries agreed only to a voluntary initiative to speed up their climate efforts.

Brazilian President Lula da Silva had designated this year’s conference the “COP of truth.” Ten years after committing in Paris to limit the rise in average global temperatures to as close to 1.5 degrees Celsius as possible, the expectation was that countries would agree to a road map for phasing out fossil fuels like oil and gas. Just two years ago the international community agreed on a “transition away” from fossil fuels – but left the details unspecified.

In Belém a large coalition of roughly 80 countries had pushed for a road map for moving away from oil, gas, and coal, but without success. In the final resolution there is no direct mention of fossil fuels, and oil, coal, and gas are not explicitly named – though the term “greenhouse gases” appears several times.

Petrostates block more ambitious plan

Martin Kaiser, head of Greenpeace Germany, voiced criticism, saying that oil companies and oil-exporting countries like Saudi Arabia and Russia had blocked an agreement on an accelerated phase-out of oil, gas, and coal. He placed additional blame on the United States. The Trump administration did not send a delegation to Brazil, but the country put pressure on smaller nations ahead of the conference, Kaiser said.

Kaiser called this year’s world climate conference “another victim of the petrostates’ lobbying power.” The conference began with huge expectations, but ended with “bitter disappointment.”

German Environmental Minister Carsten Schneider (SPD) admitted to being “a little disappointed” and said that the oil-producing countries had blocked more ambitious commitments.

The chair of the EU delegation, Lídia Pereira, said in a statement that despite the European Parliament’s “clear mandate” to phase-out fossil fuels, “we must regret that the final outcome did not go further.”

Kaiser of Greenpeace was more critical, however, saying that Europe did not play its necessary role. Said Kaiser: “As a result of the long-delayed decision on EU climate goals, progressive alliances were built much too late, and additional financial resources were lacking. Thus in the end the EU’s correct efforts on behalf of a quick transition away from fossil fuels were unable to build momentum or sufficient majorities.”

No “Paris moment”

Sascha Müller-Kraenner, the head of Deutsche Umwelthilfe, a German environmental group, also voiced criticism: “The ‘Paris moment’ failed to materialize in Belém. Given the challenges, the commitments to transition away from fossil fuels and stop global deforestation come up short.”

In a speech given last week at the beginning of the summit, President Lula da Silva of Brazil had called for road maps that would enable humanity to overcome its dependence on fossil fuels and to stop and reverse deforestation. But the delegates also failed to agree on a concrete “forest action plan” to stop the destruction of forests. The resolution adopted at the close of the conference merely referred back to a previous commitment to stop deforestation by 2030. A rainforest fund was also set up to incentivize countries to preserve their forests.

The WWF sees it as positive, “in light of the political circumstances,” that Brazil, which held the conference presidency, has committed to developing the needed road maps by the next COP. Detailed plans for the transition away from fossil fuels and the end of deforestation cannot be avoided at the next conference if global warming is to be limited to 1.5 degrees Celsius, the group said.

Viviane Raddatz, head of climate protection and energy policy for WWF Germany, said that what is crucial now is to take concrete steps and make real progress. She said of the conference: “The results of this COP do not align with what is necessary and what many states here demanded.”

Wealthy countries will contribute more climate aid

The WWF does regard it as a generally positive step that participants agreed to triple so-called adaptation finance, or financial aid that wealthy states make available to poorer countries to help them adapt to the impacts of global warming. Jan Kowalzig of Oxfam voiced criticism, however, pointing out that the commitment specifies “no base year for the tripling and no concrete amount.”

Viviane Raddatz of the WWF said: “With the new steps for implementing the collective financing goal, a framework has been created that must now be filled in with definite contributions.”

Participation of indigenous communities

This year’s COP took place in the Amazon. The rainforest plays a crucial role for the global climate and is home to many indigenous communities. They were strongly represented: around 3,000 leaders from different countries were present, according to the COIAB, an umbrella group representing Brazil’s indigenous peoples. During the conference, Brazil announced the creation of ten new indigenous territories – Brazilian law protects the culture of the inhabitants of indigenous regions, and the environment of those regions as well.

Ann Harrison of Amnesty International took a critical view, however, pointing out that indigenous communities and civil society groups were shut out of the actual decision-making process, while a “record number of fossil fuel lobbyists” were on hand. Nevertheless, indigenous communities tirelessly pressed for their goals, Harrison said.

Martin Kaiser of Greenpeace said: “Even if the result didn’t match our hopes and expectations, one thing became abundantly clear in Belém: the global climate movement is back. Working alongside indigenous communities, it demands solutions and political action.”

Emissions continue to rise

In light of the escalating climate crisis, rapid action is necessary. The burning of oil, gas, and coal produces most of the harmful greenhouse gases that cause the planet to continue warming. The last ten years were the warmest decade since recording began. According to the Global Carbon Project, this year a projected 38,1 billion tons of CO2 will be emitted by the use of coal, oil, and gas. This is an increase of 1.1 percent compared to last year.

Scientists assume at this point that what the Paris Agreement set as the maximum warming goal of 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels will likely be exceeded, at least temporarily. This will happen soon, no later than in the early 2030s. The drastic consequences will be more frequent and more severe storms, forest fires, droughts, and floods.

Next year’s COP31 climate conference will take place in Turkey. The country will host the conference while Australia will lead the negotiations. (dpa / js)

Germany: Search of journalist's home ruled unconstitutional

2025-11-24T08:09:00+01:00

A police search of the home of a producer for Radio Dreyeckland was unconstitutional. Authorities ordered the search after the journalist included a link in an online news article.

In 2024 the producer was cleared of the charge of supporting an illegal organization. (Source: Radio Dreyeckland)

A police search of the private apartment of Radio Dreyeckland producer Fabian Kienert violated the freedom to broadcast, according to the German Federal Constitutional Court. The court’s ruling on the case, issued earlier this month, was announced last week.

In January 2023 investigators searched the production offices of the Freiburg radio station Radio Dreyeckland. They also searched the apartments of the producer Kienert and of one of the station’s managers. Laptops and data storage devices were confiscated as part of the investigation. The search was ordered after a news article published on the station’s website included a link to the archive of a website, “linksunten.indymedia.org,” that had been banned in 2017. In the judgement of the state prosecutor’s office, including the link in the article amounted to criminal support of a prohibited organization.

Kienert, his lawyer Angela Furmaniak, and the Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte (Society for Civil Rights – GFF) filed a constitutional complaint challenging the apartment search in December 2023. They can now claim success: The Federal Constitutional Court has ruled that the search of Kienert’s private apartment violated Article 5 of Germany’s Basic Law, which guarantees freedom of the press and specifically the freedom to broadcast. The GFF announced the ruling last week.

Freedom to broadcast has high level of priority

The court stressed in its ruling that the freedom to broadcast enjoys a high level of priority over other conflicting interests, being, “like the freedom of the press, freedom of expression, and freedom of information, absolutely essential to the free democratic constitutional order.” State authorities are categorically prohibited from looking into the activities that lead to the production of news articles and audio reports that appear in the press or on the radio, the ruling stated.

Because Kienert also used his apartment for his journalistic work as a producer and kept his computer and other working materials at home, the search of his home was comparable to the search of the station’s production offices.

Additionally, the court ruled that the claim that the initial suspicion of a crime in this case was based on concrete facts was not sufficiently substantiated. The authorities had only vague reasons to believe that the association “linksunten.indymedia.org,” having been banned in 2017, still existed when the article was published in 2022. The court did not address the question of whether linking to the site’s archive could itself be considered an illegal act of support.

A “lesson on constitutional rights”

David Werdermann, staff attorney and case coordinator at the GFF, said in a statement that the Federal Constitutional Court had ruled that searches of production offices and the homes of journalists posed a danger to editorial confidentiality and to journalists’ ability to protect their sources: “Such a severe violation of press freedom can’t be based on vague suspicions.” With this month’s ruling, the Federal Constitutional Court gave the prosecutor’s office, the Karlsruhe District Court, and the Stuttgart Higher Regional Court a “badly needed lesson on constitutional rights,” Werdermann said.

Fabian Kienert commented: “My privacy and editorial confidentiality were trampled on for linking to a website. I hope that the ruling by the Federal Constitutional Court leads the police and state prosecutor’s office to be less careless in their treatment of constitutional rights.”

A long judicial battle

The Federal Constitutional Court’s decision puts an end to a long legal battle. When the GFF and Radio Dreyeckland first filed a complaint challenging the Karlsruhe District Court’s authorization of the search and confiscation of materials, they were initially successful: The Karlsruhe Regional Court ruled in August 2023 that the search was not permissible.

The court based its ruling in part on the considerable intimidation effect that such searches might have – the journalists who worked at the station might hesitate to report critically on matters relating to the government in the future, the court warned.

But after the state prosecutor’s office in Karlsruhe appealed, the Stuttgart Higher Regional Court in November 2023 declared the search of Kienert’s private apartment to have been lawful. The step was justified, ruled the court, because there was an initial suspicion of a crime – but as this month’s ruling shows, the Federal Constitutional Court took a different view.

Cleared of charges last year

The producer was acquitted by the Karlsruhe Regional Court last year of the charge of supporting a prohibited organization.

The regional court had originally refused to even consider the charges against Kienert. In the court’s view, linking to another website in an article was part of Kienert’s journalistic work, and therefore did not amount to criminal support of a prohibited organization. But on this point as well the Stuttgart Higher Regional Court ruled differently in summer 2023, and ordered the case to go forward.

The website “linksunten.indymedia.org” was banned in 2017 by then German Interior Minister Thomas de Maizière, who alleged the site was used to foment violence and claimed authority to ban it based on the law governing organizations. The GFF considers the ban disproportionate. A renewed attempt to investigate persons alleged to be behind the website was abandoned in May 2025.

“Attack on press freedom”

The searches in Freiburg drew sharp criticism. Reporters without Borders called the police measures an “attack on press freedom.” The Deutsche Journalistenverband, a professional organization for German journalists, called the searches a “targeted attempt to intimidate unwelcome journalists.”

Radio Dreyeckland emerged out of the anti-nuclear power movement of the 1970s and in 1988 became the first independent radio station in Germany to receive a broadcasting license. (js)

San Jose: Lawsuit challenges license plate surveillance

2025-11-20T08:01:00+01:00

Police in San Jose can search data collected from license plate readers without obtaining a warrant. Civil liberties groups call this unconstitutional – and have filed suit.

The automated license plate reader network in San Jose has nearly 500 cameras. (Source: IMAGO / Newscom World)

Civil liberties groups in the US have sued to stop police searches in a license plate reader database in San Jose, California. The plaintiffs are seeking an injunction requiring police to obtain a warrant for future searches.

The complaint was filed on Tuesday in the Santa Clara County Superior Court by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California (ACLU-NC) on behalf of two local organizations: Services, Immigrant Rights and Education Network (SIREN) and the California chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-CA). The city of San Jose is named as a defendant in the suit, as are San Jose’s mayor and police chief.

The complaint specifically challenges the San Jose Police Department’s practice of searching its automated license plate reader (ALPR) database without obtaining a warrant beforehand. According to the plaintiffs, this violates the California state constitution. The groups also voice concerns over the fact that San Jose police provide access to their database to other California law enforcement agencies – likewise without requiring a warrant.

Millions of scans in a single month

As the complaint details, the streets of San Jose are monitored by more than 470 license plate readers. Less than two years ago, the number of cameras installed was just 149. The devices capture the license plate numbers of every vehicle that drives past, noting when and where the vehicle was sighted – this information is then stored in a database for one year. The plaintiffs point out that most other law enforcement agencies in California do not retain data for so long a period. The San Jose Police Department uses a system operated by Flock Safety, a company that contracts with roughly 3,000 police departments throughout the US.

In October 2025 alone, the license plate readers in San Jose detected more than 2.6 million vehicles, according to the complaint. The plaintiffs call this practice “mass surveillance.”

Of all the license plates scanned in 2024, however, only 0.2 percent were actually identified as being of interest to the police. This means that nearly every person whose movements were tracked by the license plate scanners was “under no suspicion whatsoever,” the complaint states. Police officers can search the ALPR database without providing any specific grounds for suspicion.

Extensive record of movements

The plaintiffs write that the data collected by police make it possible to reconstruct individuals’ movements within the city over a lengthy period of time. It’s also possible to compare a car’s license plate number against vehicle registration records and thus gain information about the vehicle’s owner.

As stated in the complaint: “A person who regularly drives through an area subject to ALPR surveillance can have their location information captured multiple times per day. This information can reveal travel patterns and provide an intimate window into a person’s life.” The information can be used to determine where a person works or where their children go to school. It can potentially reveal when they go to the doctor or take part in a protest. And, the complaint continues: “It could also reveal whether a person crossed state lines to seek health care in California.”

Some of the cameras in San Jose are installed near “highly sensitive” locations such as “clinics, immigration centers, and places of worship.” The complaint notes that license plate readers are also installed at intersections “outside of a reproductive health clinic.” Visitors to the clinic are likely detected by the system.

Plaintiffs regard practice as unconstitutional

The groups argue that information about a person’s movements is protected by the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution – even if the person is moving through public space. What’s more, this type of information enjoys even greater protections under the California state constitution. In the complaint the plaintiffs write that “the SJPD’s [San Jose Police Department] widespread collection and searches of ALPR information poses serious threats to communities’ privacy and freedom of movement.”

The plaintiffs have asked the court to rule that the practice is unconstitutional and to require police to obtain a warrant before searching the database in the future.

Lisa Femia, staff attorney with the EFF, told Courthouse News: “It is urgent we put guardrails on this unchecked police power.” She added: “Mass surveillance technologies, like ALPRs, are especially dangerous in moments like the present, where law enforcement is taking extreme measures to crack down on the civil liberties of immigrants, protestors, people seeking abortions, and many others.”

Huy Tran of SIREN, one of the organizations backing the lawsuit, said in a statement: “What we need to guard against is a surveillance state.” Tran continued: “We can protect the privacy rights of our residents with one simple rule: Access to the data should only happen once approved under a judicial warrant.”

Criticism of license plate readers and Flock

The EFF has repeatedly criticized license plate readers and pointed out multiple instances of authorities abusing the technology. The devices make it possible to track any person for any conceivable reason, the group warns.

In the past both the EFF and the ACLU have accused Flock Safety of building up the infrastructure for a dangerous nationwide mass surveillance system. Critics have also raised concerns over US border protection and immigration enforcement agencies’ reported use of data collected by Flock.

A separate lawsuit challenging the use of automated license plate readers operated by Flock Safety in the city of Norfolk, Virginia was filed last year. The complaint challenges the use of license plate readers itself – the plaintiffs argue that the practice amounts to unconstitutional surveillance. (js)

German court rules that facial recognition used during online exam was unlawful

2025-11-19T08:03:00+01:00

The University of Erfurt unlawfully collected a student’s biometric data during an online exam. A court has now ruled in the student’s favor.

The use of facial recognition and other surveillance tools to administer online exams during the pandemic drew international criticism. (Source: Unsplash)

The use of facial recognition technology to administer an online exam at the University of Erfurt was unlawful, a court in the German state of Thuringia ruled on Monday. A student at the university had filed a lawsuit challenging the practice, supported by the Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte (Society for Civil Rights – GFF) and the Freier Zusammenschluss von Student*innenschaften (FZS), a group representing German university students.

The complainant, Jennifer Kretzschmar, was a student at the University of Erfurt during the Covid-19 pandemic. Like many other students around the world, she had to complete exams online. The university required that certain online exams be monitored by video in order to confirm the identity and continued presence of test takers.

Kretzschmar, with the organizations’ backing, first filed suit against the university in October 2022. The groups took issue with the so-called proctoring software used to supervise the exam. The software took photos of the complainant at regular intervals during the period when the test was being administered. It then used facial recognition technology to compare these photos with a reference photo.

Sensitive data processed

As the GFF announced on Tuesday, the Thuringian higher regional court (Oberlandesgericht) has now ruled that the video monitoring was unlawful. The court found that this processing of biometric data violated the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

Biometric data is especially sensitive: it cannot be changed, and therefore can be used to identify people throughout their lives. The GDPR places special protections on this type of data. According to the GFF, the court ruled that biometric data can only be processed in exceptional cases.

Reached by Posteo for comment, a spokesperson for the Thuringian court said that the ruling in the case was delivered on Monday. Per the spokesperson, the processing of biometric data was unlawful in this instance because the complainant did not give her explicit consent to the processing of her data. The spokesperson also stressed, however, that the court’s ruling applied only to this particular case.

According to the GFF, however, the ruling shows that many universities’ practices for administering online exams during the Covid-19 pandemic were too intrusive and infringed on students’ fundamental rights – both the right to privacy and the right to control their personal data. In the organization’s view, the decision could also have a signaling effect that extends into other areas as well, like surveillance in the workplace.

GFF jurist David Werdermann said in a statement: “Big Brother doesn’t have tenure. Universities should supervise their students during exams, not spy on them.”

Online exams during the pandemic

During the Covid-19 pandemic, many universities switched to administering exams online – and in some cases used so-called proctoring software to detect cheating attempts. According to the GFF, the University of Erfurt used a program called Wiseflow. The program worked by first taking a reference photo and then, over the course of the exam, taking photos of the complainant and comparing them to the reference photo. Those administering the exam were able to see the match scores. The GFF criticized the fact that the software sent the data to the US-based cloud computing platform Amazon Web Services. And as the organization also noted, numerous studies have shown that facial recognition technology has higher failure rates when seeking to identify people of color.

Another issue with the use of such software is that often students are required to install the programs on their computer, which puts the personal data stored on the computer at risk. The organization points out that there are alternatives to this type of monitored exam that are significantly less intrusive and encroach less on the rights of test takers.

In a statement issued when the lawsuit was first filed, GFF jurist David Werdermann said that online exams could be a useful supplement to in-person exams, especially during a pandemic. He stressed, however, that students’ privacy shouldn’t be trampled upon in the process.

Complainant Jennifer Kretzschmar said in response to this week’s ruling: “The software triggered strong feelings of anxiety in me at the time. I didn’t know how it worked or what was happening with my data. But I had no other choice, because I wanted to move ahead with my studies.” Kretzschmar cheered this week’s ruling.

Kretzschmar, the GFF, and the FZS student group first filed their suit with the district court (Landgericht) in Erfurt in October 2022. That court dismissed the suit in November 2024 on the grounds that the complainant had suffered no damages. According to the GFF, the court at the time did not rule on whether the use of the software was lawful. The groups appealed to the higher regional court, which in this week’s ruling found that the data processing was in fact unlawful. The court also granted the complainant damages in the amount of €200. As the court spokesperson explained to Posteo, the appeal was only partly successful, given that the complainant had asked for a higher sum.

Impermissible facial recognition

The issue of online exams drew the attention of data protection officials during the Covid-19 pandemic. In July 2021, Stefan Brink, then the Data Protection Commissioner for Baden-Württemberg, published a set of guidelines for universities pertaining to online exams. Brink classifies the processing of biometric data as “impermissible.” Other, “particularly intrusive” tools, like those that track eye or head movements, are also prohibited by his guidelines.

Bettina Gayk, Data Protection Commissioner for North Rhine-Westphalia, issued a separate set of guidelines in 2022. She also concluded that the use of facial recognition software was impermissible.

A court in the United States took up a similar case in 2022. The case involved a student who had to submit to a “room scan” – an inspection of the test taker’s surroundings via webcam – before the start of an online exam administered by a state university. The student sued the university, arguing that her right to privacy – specifically her constitutional right to protection from unreasonable searches – had been violated. The court sided with the student and ruled that the video surveillance was unconstitutional. The ruling was later thrown out on procedural grounds, however.

According to an article on the case published in the Penn State Law Review in April, it remains uncertain whether courts will judge this type of surveillance to be allowable under the constitution. (js)

Germany: Baden-Württemberg approves use of Palantir

2025-11-17T08:03:00+01:00

The state parliament in Baden-Württemberg has approved a revision of the state police law. Starting next year, police in the German state will be able to use Palantir software.

In advance of the vote, civil society groups called on the Green Party to reject the legislation. (Source: IMAGO / Arnulf Hettrich)

Starting next year, police in Baden-Württemberg will be able to use the controversial Gotham analytics software made by the US company Palantir. The state parliament (Landtag) on Wednesday approved a revision to existing legislation governing police powers. The issue had been at the center of a conflict between the two parties in the coalition government.

113 members of the state parliament voted to change the police law. There were 22 votes against and one abstention. The revision of the law creates a legal basis in Baden-Württemberg for so-called automated data analysis. It allows authorities under certain conditions “to automatically merge, link together, compare, process, analyze, and evaluate personal data stored in police file systems on an analysis platform.”

In addition to the information stored in police databases, the law also allows for the integration of “data in separately maintained state registers as well as select separately stored data from internet sources” as necessary on a case-by-case basis. It also authorizes the further processing of “personal data for developing, training, testing, validating, and monitoring information-technology products.”

Dispute over “black box”

The revision to the law is necessary to allow the use of Palantir’s controversial Gotham analytics software. Critics point to several issues, however, including that the tool is a “black box,” functioning in a way that is not fully clear.

The months preceding last week’s vote saw a dispute flare up between the Green Party and the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), the two parties that make up the ruling coalition in Baden-Württemberg. In March the state interior ministry, which is controlled by the CDU, signed a five-year contract with the US company valued at roughly €25 million – even though at the time there was no legal basis for the software’s use. The justification offered by the ministry was that the price of the analytics software was set to increase.

The move drew clear criticism from the Greens, however, who are the leading partner in the coalition. Green lawmakers condemned the interior ministry for agreeing to the contract without their knowledge or approval. One member of the Green party faction, Oliver Hildenbrand, told German broadcaster SWR in July that there was no agreement between the two partners regarding the software’s use. “We have major concerns about the use of this software,” Hildenbrand said. “We don’t think it’s okay to resort to using software made by a company that is so problematic and poses such a threat to democracy.”

Controversial company

Palantir has drawn criticism for years – in part because of its co-founder, Peter Thiel. Thiel has repeatedly voiced anti-democratic opinions and is a supporter of US president Donald Trump – whom he has backed publicly and financially since 2016 – and his vice president J.D. Vance.

The company is also controversial because of its connections to US intelligence agencies and its partnerships with US immigration authorities. In 2020 Amnesty International raised concerns that there was a “high risk” that Palantir was “contributing to human rights violations of asylum-seekers and migrants.” Since the current administration took power, the company has entered into new contracts with US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Data privacy concerns

Members of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) faction in the state parliament, speaking to SWR over the summer, also expressed doubts about the use of Palantir software and called on the state government to drop its plans to change the police law. Baden-Württemberg’s commissioner for data protection Tobias Keber called Gotham a “highly invasive instrument” and warned that people with no involvement in any suspicious activity could still be subject to data analysis.

The heads of the two ruling parties finally reached a compromise over the use of the software in July. SWR reported at the time that, under the compromise, the use of the software would be subject to oversight by the parliamentary oversight committee, which also oversees the state domestic intelligence agency. This provision is now included in the revised law.

Criticism of “horse trading”

According to SWR, before an agreement was reached, the Greens also demanded a concession from the CDU involving an expansion of the Black Forest National Park. Sascha Binder of the opposition SPD voiced criticism, calling the move “political horse trading.” On Wednesday the state parliament approved the expansion of the park.

Palantir software will now go into use in Baden-Württemberg beginning in the second quarter of 2026. Green lawmaker Hildenbrand said again on Wednesday: “We would rather not have a contract with Palantir.” But he added that they didn’t want to withhold the tool from police for years. Absent a change in the police law, the state would pay €25 million to Palantir “without receiving anything in return,” the Greens said in a statement. Changing the law, the statement continued, “changes nothing about our critical stance toward the use of Palantir software.”

The lawmakers on Wednesday also adopted a resolution, proposed by the Greens and the CDU, calling for a transition to a European Palantir alternative by 2030 at the latest.

Civil society groups demand rejection of Palantir

Many groups voiced criticism in advance of the vote. A coalition of several organizations, including Campact, Amnesty International, LobbyControl, Reporters without Borders, and Wikimedia, appealed to Green Party lawmakers to reject the change to the police law and instead work to “strengthen fundamental rights.”

In August, the Stuttgart chapter of the Chaos Computer Club (CCC) criticized the draft legislation. The group argued that the proposed revision was not compatible with a 2023 Federal Constitutional Court ruling that imposed limits on police data analysis. Moreover, the CCC argued that the change to the law should not only adhere to constitutional guardrails “but should also be crafted in a way that makes sense from a cybersecurity and civil rights standpoint.” According to the CCC, the law falls short in both respects.

More than 13,000 people signed an online petition to the state parliament demanding, among other things, that the state rescind its contract with Palantir. The petition was started by a member of the Green Party from Freiburg.

Legal challenges prompted by Palantir

Palantir’s platform is currently in use in several German states, including in Bavaria, where it powers a system known as VeRA (“Verfahrensübergreifendes Recherche- und Analysesystem” – Comprehensive Research and Analysis System). In July the Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte (Society for Civil Rights – GFF), with support from the CCC, filed a constitutional challenge to the state police law, which provides the legal basis for the software’s use. The groups argue that the broad-reaching data analysis violates the fundamental right to informational self-determination and the right to privacy in telecommunications.

CCC spokesperson Constanze Kurz said at the time the challenge was filed: “Palantir’s dragnet-style manhunt sweeps up an enormous amount of people. It brings together data that were previously kept separate and intended for very different purposes. For that reason alone, automated mass-scale analysis must not be a part of everyday police work.”

Franziska Görlitz, jurist and case coordinator at the GFF, said in a statement: “The police are not allowed to let opaque algorithms drive their investigations. Thanks to this software, anyone who reports something to the police, is the victim of a crime, or is simply in the wrong place at the wrong time can come under police scrutiny.”

Over the summer, in response to a query from Posteo, the GFF said it was monitoring the deliberations over a change to the law in Baden-Württemberg – and weighing options for a potential legal challenge should the change go into effect.

The GFF has filed lawsuits in North Rhine-Westphalia and Hesse challenging the constitutionality of each state’s police law as it pertains to automated data analysis. Police in both states use Palantir software. The lawsuits are pending.

The state of Saxony-Anhalt is also planning to license the software for use by the police. And the prospect of use at the federal level has also come up for discussion: over the summer, the Federal Interior Ministry confirmed that it was considering the step. (js)

Germany: GEMA wins court case against OpenAI

2025-11-13T08:00:00+01:00

GEMA has won a court battle against OpenAI over song lyrics. The German music rights society views the ruling as a landmark decision.

GEMA says it has come up with a licensing model for companies that market AI tools. (Source: IMAGO / NurPhoto)

OpenAI, the developer of ChatGPT, violated copyright law in its use of song lyrics, a district court in Munich ruled on Tuesday. The ruling has not yet taken legal effect and is still subject to the appeals process.

The US-based company OpenAI develops so-called large language models which underlie its ChatGPT chatbot. ChatGPT can respond to prompts from users written in everyday language. The company’s language models are “trained” with a vast quantity of different data – including texts that are protected by copyright, as GEMA, which manages the rights of German composers, lyricists, and publishers, has argued.

GEMA filed suit against OpenAI last year, accusing the US-based company of reproducing song lyrics by German composers without obtaining a license. The lawsuit mentions nine songs, including “Männer” by Herbert Grönemeyer, “Atemlos” by Kristina Bach and “Wie schön, dass du geboren bist” by Rolf Zuckowski.

The district court in Munich has now sided with GEMA and ruled that OpenAI must stop storing the song lyrics in its models’ database and allowing their reproduction by ChatGPT. The company was also held liable for damages, and must provide information about the unauthorized use and the revenue generated from it. The court did not however find that OpenAI had violated artists’ personality rights.

Unlicensed reproduction

GEMA based its lawsuit on the claim that OpenAI’s language models “memorized” the lyrics to the artists’ songs: in other words, the lyrics were stored in the models’ database and could be reproduced in a manner faithful to the original as responses to user prompts. This, GEMA argued, constituted unlicensed reproduction of the song lyrics.

OpenAI for its part argued that no specific training data was saved by its models. As summarized by the court, OpenAI’s argument was that because the answers are only generated in response to user inputs, individual users, not the company, were responsible for any violation.

The court however regarded the fact that the models’ outputs reproduced the song lyrics in full as proof of “memorization.” In light of the complexity and length of the song texts, the court ruled out the possibility that they were reproduced by coincidence. According to the court, the criteria were met for what is classified as reproduction of copyrighted materials. The song lyrics were stored in the models in a form that allowed them to be reproduced.

The court did not accept OpenAI’s argument that certain exceptions in copyright law pertaining to text and data mining applied in the present case.

The court also ruled that OpenAI could not claim the rightsholders’ consent as justification for violating GEMA’s exploitation rights, since the training of large language models could not be considered a common form of use that rightsholders might be expected to take into account. The court also stated clearly that OpenAI – and not its users – was the party responsible for the copyright infringement.

Purchasing building materials

The presiding judge, Elke Schwager, remarked when issuing her ruling that the defendants were “highly intelligent” and had “managed to create the most modern of technologies.” Schwager expressed astonishment that despite its apparent sophistication, OpenAI did not seem to recognize the legal situation. If a company is seeking to build something and needs materials, the company “must purchase them,” Schwager said. “You don’t use other people’s property.”

GEMA cheered the ruling, saying that for the first time in Europe a court has looked at the use of copyright-protected works by generative AI systems and ruled in favor of creators. The court “stated in unmistakable terms” that OpenAI should have acquired the rights to the song lyrics that it used to train and operate Chat GPT.

CEO of GEMA Tobias Holzmüller said in a statement: “The internet isn’t a self-service buffet, and human creative achievements are not templates offered up free of charge. Today, we have set a precedent that both protects and clarifies the rights of creative copyright holders: operators of AI tools such as ChatGPT must also comply with copyright law.”

GEMA general counsel Kai Welp said: “Today’s ruling is the first to clarify key legal questions pertaining to the relationship between a new technology and European copyright law. It is a milestone on the way to obtaining fair remuneration for authors and creators throughout Europe. Even tech giants must obtain licenses for the use of intellectual property.”

Appeal likely

OpenAI, however, has stated that it disagrees with the ruling and is considering next steps. The company said that the ruling only affects a limited set of song lyrics and has no impact on users. “We respect the rights of creators and content owners,” the company said.

The ruling has not yet gone into force, and it is considered likely that OpenAI will fight it. The case is subject to appeal.

Copyright expert Silke von Lewinski from the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition told the dpa that she expects the ruling will have implications beyond just song lyrics. An ultimate ruling in GEMA’s favor would have “fundamental significance for all works, be it literature, journalistic texts, music, visual art, photography, or any other works that are used for generative AI.”

Mika Beuster, the chairman of the Deutsche Journalistenverband, a leading journalists’ trade union, said: “The training of AI models is the theft of intellectual property.” The union called Tuesday’s ruling a milestone victory that would also help bolster the legal position of journalists who sought to take action against AI developers.

Additional lawsuits

OpenAI faces copyright challenges elsewhere in the world as well. The New York Times has taken legal action against the company, alleging that it violated the paper’s copyright by using its articles to train ChatGPT.

GEMA has also sued the US company Suno, whose AI tool generates audio content. This tool has also been trained with original recordings of works from the GEMA repertoire, GEMA alleges. The case is pending before the Munich district court – and is expected to be heard in January 2026. (dpa / js)

Italy: Spyware scandal continues to widen

2025-11-12T08:00:00+01:00

An Italian political consultant has come forward as the latest victim in an ongoing spyware scandal. Opposition politicians condemn the spying as an attack on democracy.

So far only a few of the cases involving the use of spyware have been clarified. (Source: IMAGO / UIG)

Italian political consultant Francesco Nicodemo came forward last week to announce that he had been targeted with spyware. He was first informed of the attack on his smartphone in January. Cybersecurity experts and politicians are calling on the government to shed light on the spyware cases.

As the Italian news site Fanpage reports, Nicodemo was informed by WhatsApp in January of an attack on his device. That month, the messaging service announced that 90 users in two dozen countries had been targeted by Paragon’s Graphite spyware. Paragon sells its surveillance program only to government agencies.

Nicodemo is a co-founder of a Naples-based public relations company. In the past he has worked for the center-left Partito Democratico, work that included involvement in election campaigns. According to Fanpage, he was also head of the party’s communications division in 2013 and 2014 under Matteo Renzi, who became prime minister in February 2014.

Nicodemo explained in a Facebook post that he hadn’t wanted to speak publicly about the matter initially. But now, he said, it was time to ask questions: “Why? Why me? How is it possible that a highly refined and complex instrument was used to spy on a private citizen, as if he were a drug trafficker or a subversive threat to the country?” Nicodemo went on to say that he himself would not speak further about the matter, but would place his trust in the work of the judiciary. “There are others who need to speak,” he wrote. “There are others who have to explain what happened.”

Prominent businessmen also targeted

Just a few weeks before Nicodemo’s announcement, Italian investigative journalism outlet IrpiMedia and daily newspaper La Stampa reported that businessman Francesco Gaetano Caltagirone was among those informed by WhatsApp in January of a spyware attack on their mobile phones. Caltagirone is the founder and head of the holding company Caltagirone S.p.A., which is active in the real estate and financial sectors. Caltagirone is also the chief shareholder in one of Italy’s largest publishers, Caltagirone Editore, which owns several daily newspapers. In addition, he is an important shareholder in several insurance companies and banks. IrpiMedia and La Stampa also report that in April, the head of the major bank Unicredit, Andrea Orcel, was notified by Apple that he had been the victim of a Graphite spyware attack. Both men are reportedly key players in the world of Italian finance.

These latest revelations expand the group of people known to have been targeted by spyware in Italy. Before now the group included activists and journalists, including the founders of the sea rescue organization Mediterranea Saving Humans and Fanpage’s editor-in-chief Francesco Cancellato – as well as another journalist for the site who was notified by Apple in May that he too was a surveillance target.

Government admits to spying on activists

An investigation by the intelligence oversight committee in parliament, known as COPASIR, determined in June that the Italian foreign intelligence service AISE had used Graphite spyware to keep tabs on the founders of the sea rescue organization – the committee ruled that the surveillance was lawful. According to news reports, the activists were being investigated for alleged “facilitation of illegal immigration.” They deny the allegations. The committee also looked into the surveillance of another activist, David Yambio – this surveillance involved a different type of spyware.

It remains unknown who was responsible for spying on the two journalists. According to the intelligence oversight committee there is no evidence that the intelligence services targeted them. It has also not been determined who used spyware against Mattia Ferrari, a priest who works as a chaplain for Mediterranea Saving Humans.

John Scott-Railton from the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab, which has investigated numerous instances of spyware use around the world, called the news of the attack on Francesco Nicodemo a “super concerning case” and “a reminder that Italy has a growing pile of unexplained infections with Paragon’s Graphite spyware.”

Scott-Railton also told the news site TechCrunch: “None of this looks good for Paragon, or for Italy. That’s why clarity from the Italian government is so essential.” The cybersecurity researcher added that he believed that Paragon could also help provide clarity.

In the summer, the spyware company told media that it had offered to help the Italian government investigate the attack on the Fanpage editor-in-chief. After the government refused the offer, Paragon had terminated all its contracts with Italy. The Italian government disputes this version of events: according to the government, it refused Paragon’s help because it would have meant disclosing confidential information to the company. Both parties mutually agreed first to suspend the contracts, then to terminate them, the government claims.

Lawmakers demand answers

Meanwhile politicians are voicing criticism. MEP Sandro Ruotolo from the Partito Democratico told Fanpage: “The Nicodemo case confirms the danger of an out-of-control surveillance system.” He criticized the government’s continued silence on the spying cases. The use of spyware against members of the press, activists, and political consultants is a “step backwards for democracy,” Ruotolo said.

According to Fanpage, other lawmakers from the Partito Democratico demanded answers from the government led by Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni. MP Enzo Amendola called the news “alarming” and added: “You ask yourself what kind of country we live in if anyone can be spied on without any reason.”

Tommaso Bori, vice president of the Umbria region, also called for a full explanation. He condemned the spying as a “direct attack on democracy” and on citizens’ trust in institutions. (js)

Reporters without Borders demands better protections for environmental journalists

2025-11-11T07:59:00+01:00

Around the world, it’s getting more dangerous to report on environmental topics, says Reporters without Borders. The group calls on governments to stand up for journalists at COP30.

The two-week global climate conference is taking place in Brazil. (Source: IMAGO / Kyodo News)

Environmental journalists around the world face risks when doing their jobs: they are obstructed, threatened, imprisoned, attacked – and some are even killed. To mark the beginning of the COP30 global climate conference, Reporters without Borders (RSF) is spotlighting journalists whose personal safety is at risk because of their work.

COP30 began on November 10 in Belém, Brazil. At the conference, participating countries will be discussing measures to combat anthropogenic climate change. RSF calls on governments to guarantee the protection of independent and reliable climate and environmental reporting, which the group calls a “crucial component of the fight against the climate crisis.”

Anja Osterhaus, director of RSF’s German chapter, stressed the life-threatening dangers that journalists who report on climate or environmental topics sometimes face. According to RSF, nearly 30 members of the press who have reported on such issues have been killed in the last ten years.

To mark the beginning of the conference, RSF has spotlighted 30 environmental journalists, calling attention to the challenges they face.

Illegal mining

One of the featured journalists is Erastus Asare Donkor from Ghana, who has received numerous awards for his reporting on topics such as the destruction of farmland and water contamination. In October 2024, he and his film crew were reporting on illegal mining in the country’s Ashanti region when they were attacked by armed men. The attackers forced the journalists to drive to a remote forested area, where they assaulted them and stole their equipment. For safety reasons, Donkor had to leave his home country before the parliamentary elections in December 2024.

Journalist Francis Ramanantsoa Mahasampo of Madagascar also reports on illegal mining. According to RSF, he was openly threatened by the authorities after reporting on demonstrations against the resumption of a controversial mining project.

Dangerous work in the Amazon region

In Latin America, journalists’ work is similarly dangerous. Last year, journalist Jaime Vásquez was shot in Columbia – despite being under police protection. Vásquez had reported on topics including lack of access to water.

Katia Brasil is one of the founders of Amazônia Real, a Brazilian media company committed to protecting the Amazon region. The outlet reports on the consequences of deforestation, illegal mining, and land theft. Brasil has faced threats, attempts at intimidation, and defamation campaigns because of her work. According to RSF, she has also been the target of unfounded criminal charges – all with the goal of obstructing her work.

Eliane Brum is the founder of another independent media company based in the Brazilian Amazon. Sumauma, as the company is known, was founded to give indigenous communities a voice. Brum’s reporting has shed light on illegal mining and threats against activists – and as a result, she herself faces threats, defamation, and harassment.

In September, RSF called for better protections for journalists who work in the Amazon region, which extends across nine countries.

Peruvian journalist Manuel Calloquispe also works in the region. For more than a decade he has focused on illegal gold mining. In August he received death threats after investigating the illegal gold-mining town of La Pampa.

Violence against reporters

RSF also spotlights two Cambodian journalists. In December 2024, Chhoeung Chheng was shot while investigating illegal logging in a wildlife sanctuary. He died of his wounds three days later. Another journalist, Uk Mao, faces numerous legal complaints connected to his investigations into deforestation, RSF reports.

In Indonesia, environmental reporter Muhammed Rifky Juliana was attacked in August along with other members of the press. Juliana suffered a head injury that sent him to the hospital. He and his colleagues had been reporting on the environmental ministry’s inspection of a lead factory.

Another assault occurred in India, where reporter Sneha Barwe was violently attacked in July while documenting an illegal construction site near a river bed. Last year, after being threatened by a former member of parliament, Barwe filed charges – without success.

In Egypt, journalist Nada Arafat faces regular obstruction, RSF reports. The authorities refuse to provide Arafat with the necessary permits to travel to regions where major government projects are underway, including a plan to divert the waters of the Nile for agricultural use.

RSF also calls attention to the work of European environmental journalists. Venelina Popova from Bulgaria reports on topics such as waste management. According to RSF, she was fined more than €500 by a court in July. Popova had requested documents on a waste incineration project under Bulgaria’s freedom of information law. The court ruled that the local authorities did not have to release the documents – and forced the journalist to pay the municipality’s legal fees. RSF criticized the ruling, calling it an “alarming step backwards from the right to access to environmental information that is of public interest.”

French journalist Inès Léraud has become the target of defamation suits and online hate for reporting on the food industry in Brittany and its links to health risks and local corruption.

UNESCO report

Last year, UNESCO published a report, “Press and Planet in Danger”, on the dangers faced by environmental journalists. According to the report, between 2009 and 2023 there were attacks on at least 749 journalists or news outlets reporting on the environment and climate issues. The attacks took place in 89 different countries. The number of attacks rose significantly in the last five years of the time period analyzed in the report.

State actors were responsible for at least half of the attacks documented in the UNESCO report. Along with threats and physical attacks, UNESCO also included legal intimidation and digital violence in its tally.

Over the 14 year-period analyzed by UNESCO, at least 44 environmental reporters in 15 countries were killed. Only five of these cases resulted in convictions. (js)

Spyware companies received EU funds

2025-11-06T08:01:00+01:00

The European Commission has confirmed that EU funds flowed to spyware companies. The funding was revealed by journalists in September.

In recent years several instances of spyware abuse have come to light, including within the EU’s borders. (Source: IMAGO / dts Nachrichtenagentur)

The European Commission has confirmed that spyware companies benefitted from EU subsidies. Investigative journalists have criticized the Commission’s response, however, calling it incomplete.

The Commission issued a written response to a letter from lawmakers, explaining that funds from several sources, including the European Defense Fund and the EU research initiative known as Horizon 2020, flowed to spyware companies. Surveillance firms also received funds from the Digital Europe program.

The admission comes after online magazine Follow the Money published an investigation in September revealing that public funds had gone to support spyware companies. In some instances the funding amounted to millions of euros – though whether the money was used specifically for the development of spyware is unclear.

Lawmakers voice criticism

After the investigation was published, 39 members of European Parliament from four parties sent a letter to the European Commission expressing their concern over revelations that “European Union subsidies, alongside national taxpayer funds, have directly financed companies implicated in the development, deployment, and export of spyware.”

Henna Virkkunen, Executive Vice President for Tech Sovereignty, Security, and Democracy at the European Commission, answered the lawmakers’ questions in a document published in advance of a November 6 hearing. Virkunnen’s response comes as part of the budgetary process known as the “Discharge Procedure,” which allows the European Parliament to exercise oversight over the Commission’s implementation of the EU budget. Several more hearings are scheduled for this week in Brussels in connection with the process.

In their letter, the MEPs asked which EU programs or financial instruments had contributed funds to companies like Cy4Gate, Cognyte, and members of the Intellexa Alliance.

Controversial companies

According to the Follow the Money investigation, the French company Nexa Technologies received roughly €60,000 from the European Commission in 2015. At the time the company was part of the Intellexa Alliance. The United States imposed sanctions on the Intellexa Consortium in 2023 and 2024 for its role in developing and marketing Predator spyware. Predator is at the center of a Greek spyware scandal and has reportedly been exported to other countries as well.

The September investigation revealed that still more companies have received funding. Some of the companies are mired in controversy. In their letter the MEPs wrote that technologies developed by these firms “have been linked to unlawful surveillance of journalists, human rights defenders, and political actors in the EU, as well as in third countries with dreadful human rights records.”

Follow The Money reported this week that the Commission “fails to list all EU programs from which surveillance companies have benefitted.” The Commission claims that such information can be accessed through its Financial Transparency System, but as Follow the Money points out, the Commission’s response fails to mention the European Social Fund – which awarded a grant to the Italian company Area in 2022.

In 2014, Area had to pay a $100,000 fine in the US for selling a surveillance system to the Assad regime in Syria.

No complete accounting

Follow the Money also reported that the Commission “neglects to mention the recent funds the European Investment Fund (EIF) gave the Israeli spyware firm Paragon Solutions.” Belgian news site Apache first reported on the EIF’s backing of Paragon. It’s unclear how much money was invested in Paragon specifically.

The company’s Graphite spyware tool is at the center of a wiretapping scandal in Italy, where activists and members of the press were targeted for surveillance. The Italian authorities were responsible for the spying on activists – but it remains unclear who targeted the journalists.

In their letter the MEPs posed additional questions. They wanted to know, for example, how the Commission verifies the “integrity, ownership structures, and human rights compliance of companies that receive EU funds.” They also asked if the Commission had received any warnings before granting funds to the spyware companies.

“Vague references”

Responding broadly to the MEPs letter, the Commission states that all contracts must abide by EU law and that the misapplication of EU funds must be avoided. All applications for funding “undergo a rigorous assessment and evaluation.” The Commission notes further that “surveillance products and software can serve legitimate purposes” – but adds that it “will immediately take action” should it learn of, for instance, any “breaches of EU values.”

Aljosa Ajanovic Andelic at European Digital Rights (EDRi), an advocacy group, told Follow the Money that the European Commission “hides behind vague references to ‘EU values,’ while openly admitting that European funds have financed companies whose technologies are used to spy on journalists and human rights defenders.” He added that the recent revelations indicate “a complete absence of control mechanisms.”

MEP Hannah Neumann (Greens/EFA), a signatory to the letter sent last month, told Follow the Money that while the Commission claims to follow the recommendations of the PEGA committee – which was established to investigate Pegasus and other forms of spyware – it has taken little action in the past two years.

Lawmakers and cybersecurity experts have repeatedly criticized the Commission for failing to take any concrete measures to enact the recommendations made by the PEGA committee. The committee wrapped up its work in 2023 and recommended strict regulations on the sale and use of spyware. The committee also recommended implementing “more rigorous control mechanisms” to ensure that EU research funds do not finance spyware.

In June of this year, spyware was again the focus of debate in the European Parliament. MEPs renewed their calls for the Commission and members states to act. (js)

US immigration agency retains facial images for years

2025-11-05T08:02:00+01:00

US immigration agents are using a smartphone app equipped with facial recognition technology. Photos taken by the app are saved for 15 years.

Lawmakers have called on US Immigrations and Customs Enforcement to stop using the app. (Source: IMAGO / Newscom World)

US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents can use a smartphone app to collect sensitive biometric data – which is then stored for 15 years. Individuals who encounter ICE agents have no opportunity to withhold their consent to the data collection, online magazine 404 Media reports.

A July investigation by the magazine revealed that ICE agents are using the Mobile Fortify app as a means of identifying people in the field. Through public records requests, 404 Media has now obtained a document detailing what data the app processes and collects. The document, known as a Privacy Threshold Analysis, was generated by ICE’s parent agency, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), to “determine and describe the privacy risks” of the new technology.

As 404 Media reports, agents for both ICE and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) use the app to check the nationality of people they encounter.

According to the Privacy Threshold Analysis, “ICE does not provide the opportunity for individuals to decline or consent to the collection and use of biometric data/photograph collection.” ICE agents can use the app to photograph people or scan their fingerprints. Both operations can be performed using a standard smartphone camera. The fingerprinting technology, known as “contactless fingerprinting,” has been in development for years – and in that time has sparked controversy.

Matched against state databases

The data gathered by the Mobile Fortify app is compared against government databases, including the Traveler Verification Service maintained by CBP. This system was initially developed to verify the identity of people entering the US. In July, 404 Media wrote that connecting the system to the ICE app “shows how biometric systems built for one reason can be repurposed for another.” Critics have long warned that the technology could be repurposed in this way.

In its July investigation, 404 Media reported that photos taken by the Mobile Fortify app are matched against roughly 200 million images. If the app discovers a match, it provides agents with information on the person purportedly identified, including their name, date of birth, and nationality. As 404 Media now reports, it also indicates “whether a judge has ordered they should be deported.”

Fingerprints taken by the app are also compared against DHS’s Automated Biometric Identification System. According to the DHS, this is a centralized system for storing and processing biometric data for purposes including immigration and border management, law enforcement, and national security.

Data retained for 15 years

The DHS retains every newly captured photograph and fingerprint for 15 years – regardless of whether the app has found a match and regardless of the scanned individual’s immigration status. US citizens’ biometric data is stored as well. The app also keeps a record of the location where the data was collected.

Bennie Thompson, ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee in the US House of Representatives, told 404 Media that, according to ICE officials, agents are relying on the Mobile Fortify app as their primary means of determining an individual’s immigration status. If the app finds a match, Thompson said, “an ICE officer may ignore evidence of American citizenship – including a birth certificate – if the app says the person is an alien.”

Thompson, a Democrat from Mississippi, called the use of the app “a frightening, repugnant, and unconstitutional attack on Americans’ rights and freedoms.”

Criticism of mobile facial recognition

The app has come in for criticism before now. Nathan Freed Wessler of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), speaking to 404 Media in July, called the use of the technology a “dangerous experiment.” Said Wessler: “Facial recognition technology is notoriously unreliable, frequently generating false matches and resulting in a number of known wrongful arrests across the country. Immigration agents relying on this technology to try to identify people on the street is a recipe for disaster.”

US Senators Jeff Merkley, Ron Wyden, and Edward J. Markey (all Democrats) in September demanded that ICE stop using the app. In a letter to the agency’s acting director, the senators wrote: “In the absence of meaningful regulation of the government’s use of facial recognition tools, the public is likely to be increasingly subject to ongoing, real-time surveillance.” This poses a danger to constitutional rights, the senators warned.

The Mobile Fortify app is only one tool in the growing surveillance arsenal that US immigration authorities have at their disposal. ICE for example recently signed a new contract with Clearview AI, a controversial facial recognition company.

Agency “violates human rights”

Meanwhile ICE is continuing its aggressive tactics. According to Human Rights Watch (HRW), “the US government is conducting an ongoing campaign of raids and detentions across the country to advance a policy of mass deportation that is ripping families apart and terrorizing entire communities.” The campaign started in Los Angeles this summer and has since expanded to other cities throughout the country.

HRW condemns agencies including ICE and CBP for their use of violence during raids and for “blatantly” violating human rights. As HRW reports, officials have admitted that “they are detaining people based on their perceived race, ethnicity, or national origin.” (js)

Tanzania offline for days following elections

2025-11-04T07:57:00+01:00

Internet access in Tanzania was blocked for days in the wake of last week’s election. The opposition does not recognize the results.

Tanzanian authorities imposed an internet shutdown during elections in 2020 as well. (Image: Campaign poster featuring President Hassan) (Source: IMAGO / HMB-Media)

Internet access in Tanzania was blocked for days after last week’s contested election sparked protests. Some of the protests have been violent – according to opposition figures, the clashes have led to numerous deaths and injuries.

The East African country with a population of 70 million held presidential and parliamentary elections on October 29. On Saturday the electoral commission declared President Samia Suluhu Hassan the winner, and on Monday she was sworn in for a second term. Her party, Chama Cha Mapinduzi (CCM), has ruled Tanzania since the country gained independence in 1961.

Mass protests and unrest began on election day in the city of Dar es Salaam. The protests later spread to other cities. According to reports, the demonstrations are a response to the exclusion of opposition parties and presidential candidates from the elections. The opposition does not recognize the official result, which holds that President Hassan won 98 percent of the vote.

As NetBlocks and other observers reported last week, the government cut access to the internet across the country on election day. A curfew was also imposed. NetBlocks condemned the measure for “threatening the transparency and credibility of the election process.”

As of Tuesday the full internet blackout has reportedly been lifted, but restrictions remain in place on several social media and messaging platforms. There has been no official explanation for the shutdown. According to news reports, the situation in Dar es Salaam and other cities was calmer over the weekend, with a “near-total lockdown” in place.

On Monday a diplomatic source told the AFP wire service of “concerning reports” that police are using the internet blackout as a way to buy time as they “hunt down opposition members and protesters who might have videos” of atrocities committed by security forces.

Violent clashes

Reports have differed greatly as to the number of deaths and injuries suffered during the protests. The UN Human Rights Office (OHCHR) on Friday reported, citing “credible reports,” that at least ten people had been killed in the demonstrations, with security forces using “firearms and teargas.” The OHCHR called on the authorities to deescalate tensions – and on protestors to demonstrate peacefully.

According to the main opposition party Chadema, at least 800 have been killed. The BBC on Monday cited a diplomatic source in Tanzania who claimed that “there was credible evidence that at least 500 people had died.” The government has reportedly provided no figures, but claims that no “excessive force” has been used.

German broadcaster ARD and the BBC both caution that the internet blackout has made it difficult to obtain reliable information from the country. Death tolls in particular are hard to independently verify. Last week there were reports of severe disruptions to the country’s telephone network as well. International media were largely barred from covering the election.

Warnings before the shutdown was imposed

The UN Human Rights Office on Friday urged Tanzanian authorities to immediately restore access to the internet and “facilitate citizens’ full enjoyment of their rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly. Curtailment of communication will only further undermine public trust in the electoral process.”

In advance of last week’s elections, Access Now and other organizations had called on the Tanzanian government to refrain from imposing an internet shutdown. The groups warned that doing so would create an “information vacuum,” fueling the spread of misinformation. It would also make it more difficult for media outlets to do their work – and thus harder for people in and outside of Tanzania to obtain reliable information.

Repression in the lead-up to elections

Human Rights Watch (HRW) expressed doubts in the lead-up to elections that the contest would be free and fair. The group reported in September that in recent months the government had intensified its attacks on political opponents. In April, Tundu Lissu, head of the opposition Chadema party, was arrested, HRW reported. He was accused of several charges, including treason – and faces the death penalty. HRW called the charges “fabricated.”

In January a prominent media owner and critic of President Hassan was abducted in Kenya. After her release she reported that the people who abducted her had repeatedly asked for her passwords. “I am sure that the reason for abduction was to get access to my social media,” she said.

HRW also criticized Tanzania’s electoral commission for its lack of independence, and condemned the limitations on press freedom in the country.

Internet shutdown during last elections

According to Access Now, Tanzania has imposed internet shutdowns in the past as well: including during elections in 2020. Since May 2025, access to the platform X has been blocked in the country. In October the live-streaming features on TikTok and Instagram were also blocked.

In its statement last week, Access Now stressed the importance of the internet and digital communications tools, which allow people to exercise their right to freedom of expression and gain access to important – sometimes life-saving – information. They also “play a critical role in enhancing participatory governance,” the organization wrote.

“Digital platforms enable public discourse about election processes and political candidates, allowing voters to hold governments accountable,” wrote Access Now, adding that internet access also makes it possible to document human rights abuses. (js)

New York: Complaint challenges "omnipresent" police surveillance

2025-11-03T08:05:00+01:00

Residents backed by a civil rights group have filed a complaint against the New York Police Department’s surveillance network. The department’s practices turn millions of city residents into suspects, the plaintiffs argue.

The two plaintiffs have surveillance cameras pointed directly into the windows of their home. (Source: IMAGO / Dreamstime)

The Surveillance Technology Oversight Project (STOP), a civil rights organization, is backing a lawsuit against the city of New York. The suit, filed last week by two New Yorkers, charges the New York Police Department (NYPD) with unconstitutionally surveilling the city’s residents. The plaintiffs call on the court to impose limits on the department’s practices.

In the complaint the plaintiffs argue that anyone who moves around New York City is watched by the police: “Nearly everywhere. Nearly all the time.” This is made possible by the NYPD’s Domain Awareness System (DAS), which is at the center of the lawsuit. The system, developed in collaboration with Microsoft, was first launched in 2012 – and has been continuously expanded since then.

Comprehensive surveillance

STOP has published a report on DAS to coincide with the lawsuit. The report describes the system as a large surveillance dragnet that links together more than 80,000 cameras operated by the NYPD, plus other privately operated cameras, to monitor public space in the city. Footage taken by drones and helicopters is also fed into the system. Gun shot-detecting technology and license plate readers are integrated as well, as are 911 call records – even records of calls to the city’s 311 information hotline are retained. All this information, including biometric identifiers is linked to numerous databases and shared with other government and law enforcement agencies.

Using algorithms to analyze the data, DAS can produce reports on individuals that include detailed information about their physical appearance, automobile registration, and even, in some cases, their social media accounts. Every NYPD officer has access to all this information through their department-issued smartphone, aggregated and made available in a single application – which the complaint calls “an open invitation for abuse.” As the complaint also points out, the data collected in DAS is retained indefinitely.

“The NYPD’s mass surveillance isn’t just unconstitutional, it’s anti-democratic.” Albert Fox Cahn, Surveillance Technology Oversight Project

Some of these details first came to light in earlier court proceedings. The authors of the STOP report condemn the fact that the DAS surveillance initiative was built largely in secret. As the complaint filed last week argues, the city of New York has spent more than $3 billion on various surveillance technologies – without being able to provide evidence that these tools have actually helped to reduce crime.

Police cameras outside their window

The complaint was filed by Pamela Wridt and Robert Sauve, who live in the borough of Brooklyn. According to STOP, and as detailed in the court filing, NYPD surveillance cameras are installed directly outside of their home and pointed into the windows of their living room and bedroom. The two plaintiffs have covered their windows with foil to block the cameras’ view.

This form of surveillance has impacted the couple in many different ways. It has “robbed them of their sense of privacy and peace” and “diminished their property’s value,” STOP reports. Because of the cameras’ presence, the Wridt and Sauve no longer use their front yard – or even open their blinds or windows. They have been subjected to “emotional and physical harm.” According to the complaint, the surveillance has also undermined what was once a sense of trust and community on their block.

Pamela Wridt said in a statement: “I feel constantly watched by a state-sanctioned peeping Tom, able to look into our bedroom and living room windows at any time.”

The presence of city-wide surveillance has also led the plaintiffs to change their behavior when they are in public. This, according to the complaint, applies to people throughout the city: People change their usual commutes to avoid license plate scanners. They hesitate before taking part in public gatherings. These changes in behavior are some of the “chilling effects” that are frequently mentioned in discussions about surveillance measures and are among the negative consequences that critics warn about.

Plaintiffs allege violation of constitution

Wridt and Sauve regard the NYPD surveillance as a violation of their rights as guaranteed by the First and Fourth Amendments of the US Constitution. The First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech. The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and requires a warrant for such searches based on probable cause.

In the complaint the plaintiffs argue that the DAS surveillance tool allows police officers to monitor any person at will, without obtaining a warrant. This applies to every individual who lives in New York or visits the city: “Everyone – even those never suspected of any crime – is drawn into this web of surveillance” and treated like a criminal suspect. Surveillance in the city is so pervasive that it is “virtually impossible to avoid.” The complaint warns further that marginalized groups are disproportionately targeted.

O. Andrew F. Wilson of ECBAWN, a law firm representing the plaintiffs, said in a statement: “The NYPD should be required to obtain a warrant before deploying these powerful tools against the public.” Wilson continued: “Protecting safety should never come at the expense of our constitutional rights and the basic expectation that our private lives remain private.”

Albert Fox Cahn, founder of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project, added: “The NYPD’s mass surveillance isn’t just unconstitutional, it’s anti-democratic.”

Court asked to curtail surveillance

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit have asked the court to declare the city’s surveillance practices unconstitutional in their current form. Their other requests include that police must be required to obtain a warrant in order to conduct searches in its databases. The city must also develop guidelines for the system and, for instance, maintain an access log. The suit also calls for the city to delete all DAS data after 90 days and to strictly limit the transfer of data to other agencies. Finally, Pamela Wridt and Robert Sauve seek damages to compensate them for the violation of their rights.

The NYPD has not responded to requests for comment from US media. (js)

Brazil: Rainforest cleared for illegal cattle ranches

2025-10-30T16:06:00+01:00

Illegal cattle ranching is destroying the Amazon rainforest in Brazil. Small-scale farmers and indigenous communities also suffer.

HRW calls on EU states to enforce a planned regulation on deforestation-free products. (Source: IMAGO / Pond5 Images)

In the Brazilian state of Pará, illegal cattle ranches are destroying rainforest and depriving indigenous communities of their livelihood. A new report from Human Rights Watch (HRW) details the abuses. HRW calls on the Brazilian government to take action.

As an important carbon pool, the Amazon rainforest plays a crucial role for the global climate. It is considered one of the so-called “tipping elements” that, if lost, could push the world’s climate out of equilibrium. The rainforest is also key to global biodiversity. Two-thirds of the Amazon rainforest is located in Brazil – where it is also home to many indigenous communities.

As detailed in a new HRW report, “Tainted,” several Brazilian governments have made commitments to protect the rainforest – and yet over the past four decades “the Amazon rainforest has substantially shrunk.” The main culprit is cattle ranching: “Since the 1980s, most of the deforested land has been turned into pasture. Today, more than 90 percent of deforestation is illegal under Brazilian law.”

According to HRW, deforestation has also had grave consequences for the rights and livelihoods of those who live in the rainforest lawfully. This is particularly evident in the state of Pará, which has seen extensive deforestation and an expansion of grazing lands. The capital of the state, Belém, will host the UN climate conference COP30 in November. Participating countries will meet to decide on measures to combat human-caused climate change.

Cattle ranchers occupy illegal land

In 2024 and 2025, HRW investigated illegal ranches in two locations in the state: in the indigenous region of Cachoeira Seca and in Terra Nossa, a sustainable development settlement.

According to the report, cattle ranchers have repeatedly encroached on these territories, clearing vegetation, setting fires, and registering fraudulent land claims to set up illegal cattle ranches. This violates the rights of the territories’ lawful residents to housing, land, and culture.

One village chief from Cachoeira Seca told HRW: “The forest is our home, from which we take our painting, handicraft, food.” She and her people, she said, “don’t feel safe at home because of the invaders who are destroying our forest.”

According to the report, the Brazilian federal government is legally obligated to remove non-indigenous people from the territory – but is not meeting its obligations. Cachoeira Seca lost to 1,400 hectares to deforestation in 2024 – the largest deforested area in an indigenous territory in the Brazilian Amazon that year.

Pastureland pushes out small-scale farmers

The Terra Nossa settlement was established in 2006 with the goal of protecting the forested region while also providing landless peasants with land. The farmers would be allowed to farm their own plot of land, harvest fruit and nuts from the rainforest, and sell their products in local markets. The settlement covers an area of approximately 150,000 hectares, 80 percent of which was originally rainforest.

In 2016, the Brazilian agency responsible for land reform determined that almost 80 percent of the settlement was illegally occupied – this included both designated forest reserve and land allotted to lawful residents. HRW condemns the agency’s failure to remove the illegal occupiers. Instead, the agency is even considering a proposal to shrink the settlement and reclassify some of the land. If accepted, HRW reports, the proposal “would pave the way for landgrabbers to seek regularization of their illegal land holdings.”

In Terra Nossa, illegal settlers often set fires to clear the forest before spreading grass seeds on the ground by plane. They then set up fences and bring in cattle to graze on the newly-cleared land. Any remaining trees are cut down. Because the fires sometimes spread to small-scale farmers’ fields, many have lost their livelihoods. Since 2016, more than 28,000 hectares have been burned.

“The worst thing is fire,” one farmer told HRW. “Everything we planted, the fire destroyed.” Another farmer told the organization that fire had destroyed all his nut trees – in their place, there were now 100 head of cattle. According to the report, by 2023, 45 percent of the settlement had been transformed into pastureland.

Attacks and killings

HRW also reports that people involved in illegal activities have violently attacked residents of Terra Nossa after the residents denounced their actions. One farmer said that some residents had even been killed. Other residents report being threatened by police after protesting the theft of their land. In 2019 HRW published a report on violence and killings in Terra Nossa – most of these crimes have still not been resolved.

Though people in Cachoeira Seca and Terra Nossa are legally entitled to inhabit and use the land, their access is limited by those involved in the illegal land seizures. In some cases, lawful residents are denied access entirely. This, according to HRW, is made possible by the authorities’ ongoing failure to put a stop to the land theft. HRW argues that “the landgrabbers’ actions amount to a forced eviction” of the territories’ lawful residents, while the government’s failure to act falls short of Brazil’s human rights obligations.

Livestock supply chains

Although the cattle-raising operations investigated by HRW are illegal under Brazilian law – making the sale of the cattle illegal as well – in several instances the state agency in charge of animal health authorized the transport of cattle raised inside the protected areas to other ranches located elsewhere. These intermediaries then sell the cattle to large slaughterhouses. This multi-step process acts as a way to systematically conceal the illegal origins of the cattle, HRW says.

According to HRW, illegally raised livestock is also sold to direct suppliers of the world’s largest meat producer, JBS. It’s difficult to prove definitively whether the illegally raised cattle actually wind up in JBS slaughterhouses, because cattle in Brazil cannot be individually traced – only “batches” are documented. But in analyzing records of these batches as they passed from illegal ranches to JBS suppliers and from JBS suppliers to slaughterhouses, HRW found instances where “the sex and age of the animals” seemed to overlap – making it possible that JBS did obtain cattle raised illegally.

The report notes that JBS doesn’t track its indirect suppliers. The company therefore cannot guarantee that no illegally raised beef finds its way into its supply chain.

It’s possible that beef and leather from illegal farms is also exported to the EU: Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, Spain, and Sweden all imported beef from places where the JBS slaughterhouses investigated by HRW are located. Italy also imports leather.

Years of criticism

JBS has long been the focus of criticism. Last month Greenpeace reported on how illegally raised cattle make it into the supply chain – the organization calls the practice “cattle laundering” – and alleges that JBS profits from it.

In 2020, Amnesty International also accused the company of selling beef from cattle that had grazed illegally in protected areas of the Amazon rainforest.

Call for transparent supply chains

Luciana Téllez Chavez, senior environment and human rights researcher at HRW, said in a statement: “JBS still does not have a system to track its indirect suppliers of cattle, despite pledging it would implement one as early as 2011.”

In a letter to HRW, the company pledged to require its direct suppliers to provide information on their indirect suppliers by January 2026. HRW raised concerns about the pledge, however, noting that it is unclear how the company will verify its suppliers’ claims. The organization calls on JBS to take measures to end any land fraud, illegal deforestation, and human rights abuses to which the company may have contributed.

The state government of Pará has also announced that it would be implementing a system for tracing individual cattle by 2026. State officials also claim to no longer issue transport permits for cattle raised inside protected areas. The Brazilian government plans to introduce its own system for tracing individual cows, but only by 2032. HRW fears that such a long delay in implementing the national system could slow progress, since illegal cattle-trading stretches across state borders.

Recommendations for Brazil and the EU

HRW calls on the Brazilian government to close illegal ranches. Those responsible for unlawfully occupying and exploiting the land must be made to pay damages.

The organization also calls on EU countries to enforce the EU’s regulation on deforestation-free products. Under this regulation, the sale of cattle products would be banned in the EU if the products came from regions that had been deforested since 2020. Enforcement is set to start on December 30, 2025 – but lawmakers are currently discussing a postponement.

Téllez Chavez said in a statement: “Tackling deforestation and human rights abuses embedded in cattle supply chains is a shared responsibility between sellers and buyers.” She continued: “Brazil and the EU should work together to protect the rainforest and uphold the rights of communities that depend on it.” (js)

Afghanistan: Internet shutdowns had far-ranging impact

2025-10-30T08:00:00+01:00

Last month’s telecommunications blackouts in Afghanistan had impacts on medical care, humanitarian aid, women’s rights, and people’s daily lives. A report by UN analysts details the damage caused.

Internet and telephone connections were disabled throughout Afghanistan for 48 hours starting on September 29. (Source: IMAGO / Anadolu Agency)

The shutdown of internet and telephone services in Afghanistan further exacerbated what is already a difficult situation for the country’s population. The UN Human Rights Office (OHCHR) and UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) have issued a report detailing the impacts of the blackout. Access to medical care was limited in many cases – and discrimination against women and girls increased.

In mid-September the Taliban began to cut off internet access in individual provinces. The series of isolated blackouts culminated in a nationwide interruption of internet and telephone services that began on September 29 and continued for 48 hours. The Taliban have not provided an official explanation for this shutdown – but experts like those at NetBlocks, an organization that tracks internet shutdowns worldwide, identified signs of an intentional interruption of service. International diplomats also attributed the telecommunications blackout to an order issued by Taliban leader Haibatullah Akhundzada.

The nationwide interruption of telecommunications services had a significant human rights impact on the population, the OHCHR and UNAMA report. In the wake of the 48-hour shutdown, the groups conducted more than 100 interviews across the country.

Communications cut

Some of the interviewees reported feeling stress, helplessness, or fear at not being able to contact their family or friends. No communication was possible, whether routine or urgent.

Emergency services could only be reached in person. One interviewee reported that there was a fire in their neighborhood – but the family whose home was in danger couldn’t contact the fire department. “With no communication services, people had to walk to police checkpoints to report emergencies,” the person said.

Other people interviewed spoke of delays in receiving medical care. One man was experiencing chest pains and set out for the hospital without being able to make an appointment beforehand. When he arrived, the hospital staff were having to check patients in manually on account of the lack of internet. He had to wait several hours for treatment.

Several medical professionals reported that some hospitals were overcrowded because people were arriving without appointments. Some patients had to be sent home without receiving treatment. Other hospitals, however, saw a “sharp drop in patients,” which staff attributed to the fact that no one could call an ambulance.

Avoidable deaths

Medical workers even reported preventable deaths that resulted from the communications cut. One hospital, in Laghman province, ran out of important medical supplies. Normally in such cases the hospital would request an emergency resupply from the provincial authority – but without phone or internet it was impossible to make contact. The hospital was also unable to call for a replacement ambulance when its own broke down – and when a pregnant woman urgently needed to be transferred to the provincial hospital, there was no way to transport her. According to the report, “the woman’s condition deteriorated, and her baby died.”

One nurse called the situation “devastating”: “I am trained to save lives, but without communication, I was feeling helpless. There was very little I could do.”

The report mentions another pregnant woman who was unable to go to the hospital because she couldn’t contact a “male guardian” to escort her. Normally women in Afghanistan must be accompanied by a man in public. In some provinces this applies only when women travel more than 78 kilometers from their home – in others it applies practically every time a woman leaves the house.

No online classes

Since returning to power in 2021, the Taliban have severely curtailed women’s rights. According to the UN, these discriminatory restrictions were made even worse by the internet and telephone blackout. In order to circumvent the ban on education, for example, many Afghan women have started taking classes online – but these classes could not take place during the blackout.

One woman described her situation: “Our online learning lessons were suspended for two to three days. I can simply say that those were very difficult days and nights for us.” The woman feared being pulled back to the “stone age.”

With few jobs available to them, many women earn a living selling goods online. One woman said: “The two-day nationwide internet blackout had a significant negative impact on our operations.”

No reporting

According to the report, the interruption of telecommunications services had negative impacts on a wide range of businesses and professions: from banks and farmers to rickshaw drivers and tailors – and of course local internet providers.

Online media outlets also had to cease operations. One journalist stressed that the internet shutdown had limited press freedom, acting “as a form of censorship.” The lack of information about the internet shutdown also led to the spread of rumors and false information, the report notes.

Another journalist encountered difficulties after being assigned to report from a region affected by the earthquake that struck on September 1. “When the internet and mobile services went down, our reports were delayed for several days,” he said.

Humanitarian aid was also held up as a result of the communications blackout, the UN reports. Assistance for the region affected by the earthquake was impacted, as was aid for Afghans who were recently deported from Pakistan. Humanitarian workers had to manually register aid recipients and could not distribute any monetary assistance because they had run out of cash and it wasn’t possible to transfer money electronically.

One aid worker reported encountering cases that needed immediate attention – but, because of the shutdown, she and her colleagues were unable to respond.

Even the Taliban authorities were affected: law enforcement had to communicate via radio and government offices were unable to process passport applications.

Criticism of internet shutdowns

The authors of the UN report stress that many areas of daily life in Afghanistan are heavily dependent on telecommunications channels. They write: “Afghans, already facing significant challenges in their daily lives, should not be subjected to imposed communications cuts which negatively impact their daily lives and ability to exercise their basic human rights.”

UN human rights advocates have criticized internet shutdowns in the past, citing the “dramatic real-life effects of shutdowns on the lives and human rights of millions of people.” Only “very rarely” can these measures be considered a proportional response. The UN recommends that, as a general rule, states should refrain from imposing internet shutdowns. (js)

Austrian privacy group files criminal complaint against Clearview

2025-10-29T07:48:00+01:00

Noyb has filed a criminal complaint against Clearview AI. The controversial company’s practices are “clearly illegal,” the group says.

Some of the rulings against Clearview by EU data protection authorities had been prompted by Noyb complaints. (Source: IMAGO / Dreamstime)

The Austrian privacy group Noyb has filed a criminal complaint against Clearview AI. Several EU countries have imposed fines on the controversial US company for data privacy violations – but Clearview has ignored the rulings.

Noyb announced on Tuesday that it had filed a complaint with the Austrian public prosecutor, naming the company and its leadership. In taking this particular form of legal action, the organization hopes that the company’s executives can be held personally liable and made to face potential jail time if they travel to Europe.

Based in the US, Clearview AI scrapes the internet for photos of people and has built a massive facial recognition database. According to the company, the database currently contains more than 60 billion images.

Max Schrems of Noyb said in a statement: “Facial recognition technology is extremely invasive. It allows for mass surveillance and immediate identification of millions of people. Clearview AI amassed a global database of photos and biometric data, which makes it possible to identify people within seconds. Such power is extremely concerning and undermines the idea of a free society, where surveillance is the exception instead of the rule.”

Company works under the radar

The company’s activities were first brought to light by a New York Times investigation in 2020. At the time, the list of clients using Clearview’s facial recognition software reportedly included not only government agencies but also some private companies. A report by Buzzfeed published that same year found that more than 200 companies had used Clearview, including Walmart and the National Basketball Association (NBA).

Clearview now claims to license access to its database only to law enforcement agencies. The company has also repeatedly stressed that it has no customers in the EU and does not market its product in the bloc – even if agencies in EU member countries may have used the tool in the past, at least on a trial basis.

Data protection authorities take action

Because Clearview collects the data of European citizens, data protection authorities in several EU member states have investigated the company. These national regulators have identified violations of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), and in some cases have imposed financial penalties.

France’s data watchdog CNIL hit Clearview with a €20 million fine in 2022. The authority ruled that Clearview had processed biometric data without a legal basis, making its use of facial recognition unlawful. Clearview also failed to obtain the consent of the people whose data it had processed.

Biometric data is particularly sensitive because it allows for clear identification of individuals. The CNIL stressed in its decision that internet users do not expect that photos posted of them online will be exploited for the purpose of building a facial recognition database marketed to government agencies and used for the aims of law enforcement.

After the French authority issued its decision, however, it became clear that Clearview would not be cooperating. CNIL ordered the company to delete any data collected from persons “on French territory.” The company did not comply, leading the authority to impose an additional fine of €5.2 million in May 2023.

More GDPR fines

Around the time of the French decision, other EU data regulators also took action. In March 2022 the Italian data protection imposed its own €20 million fine. The authority in Greece imposed a fine in the same amount.

The British regulator, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), imposed a fine of £7.5 million (€8.6 million) in May 2022 and ordered the company to delete the data of British citizens. The ICO had first threatened a fine of roughly €20 million. Though the UK is no longer part of the EU, European data protection rules still apply under the UK GDPR.

Most recently, in fall 2024, the Dutch DPA also ruled against the company ordering Clearview to pay €30.5 million for having “seriously violated” the GDPR.

In announcing the fine, the Dutch DPA wrote that the company “should never have built” its database in the first place. Aleid Wolfsen, chairman of the Dutch regulator, said at the time: “Facial recognition is a highly intrusive technology that you cannot simply unleash on anyone in the world.” Any person whose photo was posted on the internet could end up in the database and be subject to tracking, Wolfsen said.

Other data protection authorities – including the Austrian regulator DSB and former Hamburg Commissioner for Data Protection Johannes Caspar – determined that the company had violated the GDPR, but did not impose a fine.

Clearview ignores rulings

The various fines leveled against Clearview for GDPR violations now add up to roughly €100 million. According to an April report by the news site Solomon, the company has not paid a single one of these fines. One of the biggest challenges for enforcement is that Clearview has no office or representative in the EU – which itself represents a violation of the GDPR, given that the company processes EU citizens’ data.

According to the April report, the Greek and Italian data protection authorities attempted to serve notice of the fines to the company through their consulates – but without success.

Earlier this month, in response to a query from Posteo, the Dutch data protection authority confirmed that Clearview had not paid its fine and had not filed an appeal of the ruling, which has now gone into effect. A spokesperson for the regulator admitted that, because Clearview is headquartered outside the EU and does not recognize the jurisdiction of the EU authorities, the options for enforcement provided under European law are quite limited.

Call for public prosecutor to intervene

Noyb criticized the company for ignoring EU authorities – and fundamental rights in general. Only in the UK did the company seek to appeal the ICO’s decision. Clearview was able to avoid a fine for the time being, but earlier this month a court sided with the British regulator and ruled that it did in fact have jurisdiction over the controversial company. The final ruling on the case is still pending.

In filing a criminal complaint, Noyb hopes to prompt the Austrian public prosecutor to intervene. The organization stated in a press release that the GDPR allows EU member states to consider imposing criminal penalties for violations – and pointed out that Austria had in fact implemented such a provision in its own national data protection law. “In contrast to GDPR violations, criminal violations also allow actions to be taken against managers,” Noyb wrote. The prosecutor is empowered “to use the full range of criminal procedures, including EU-wide actions.”

Max Schrems of Noyb said in a statement: “We even run cross-border criminal procedures for stolen bikes, so we hope that the public prosecutor also takes action when the personal data of billions of people was stolen.” (js)

Poland: Prime Minister accuses former PiS government of spying on his family

2025-10-28T16:44:00+01:00

Poland’s prime minister has come forward to reveal that his family was spied on using Pegasus. The spying may be linked to the surveillance of their attorney.

Pegasus was reportedly used to spy on nearly 600 people on Poland. (Photo: Donald Tusk) (Source: IMAGO / NurPhoto)

Poland’s prime minister Donald Tusk has revealed that his wife and daughter were spied on using Pegasus. The Polish prosecutor general’s office has brought charges against a former official in connection with the use of the controversial spyware.

Tusk posted on social media last week to announce revelations that the former Law and Justice (PiS) government had used Pegasus spyware to target Tusk’s wife Małgorzata and his daughter Katarzyna Tusk-Cudna. In the post he wondered aloud whether his grandchildren had also been targeted in the operation.

Media had previously reported that the Warsaw district prosecutor had granted Tusk’s wife and daughter official victim status in the ongoing investigation into spyware use. The prosecutor general is currently investigating allegations that illegal surveillance of opposition figures took place under the PiS government, which left power in 2023. Małgorzata Tusk is set to be questioned in connection with the case; Katarzyna Tusk-Cudna has reportedly been questioned already.

The prosecutor general’s investigation is running parallel to a parliamentary inquiry. The parliamentary commission is tasked with determining whether the PiS government used Pegasus to spy on political opponents, members of the press, and activists.

Use against opposition leaders

PiS party leader Jarosław Kacyński called Tusk’s assertion “nonsense.” He has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing by his party with respect to Pegasus.

Polish Interior Minister Marcin Kierwiński however said that this latest development contradicts PiS’s claim that Pegasus was used against criminals. “No, it was a tool of systematic warfare against the opposition,” Kierwiński said.

Investigators must now determine whether Małgorzata Tusk and Katarzyna Tusk-Cudna were deliberately targeted with spyware. According to news reports, their communications may have been intercepted as a result of their being in contact with another target of Pegasus surveillance. This may have been Roman Giertych, who was spied on in 2019 when he was working as a lawyer for the Tusk family. Giertych currently serves as an MP in Tusk’s Civic Coalition party.

PiS politicians have said that the surveillance of Giertych was legal and was part of an investigation into alleged financial fraud. The charges in that case were dropped this year. Giertych has told media that the surveillance was intended to gather information on people who were seen at the time as important members of the political opposition.

Charges brought

The Polish prosecutor general’s office announced on Wednesday that it had brought charges against the former deputy head of the Central Anti-Corruption Bureau. The former official, who under Polish privacy law can be named only as Daniel K., is accused of passing material to Bogdan Święczkowski, then the national prosecutor. The material had been collected as part of the surveillance of the lawyer Giertych – some of it was protected under attorney-client privilege. According to media reports, some of the material was also connected to the family of Prime Minister Tusk.

K. has reportedly been questioned in the case, but has not admitted to wrongdoing. If convicted, he faces up to three years in prison.

Święczkowski now serves as chief justice of the Constitutional Tribunal. In September, the Polish justice minister sought to have his immunity from prosecution lifted, as well as that of another state prosecutor.

Spyware in Poland

There are several known cases of surveillance being carried out under the PiS government: in 2022, cybersecurity experts demonstrated that the smartphone belonging to former opposition leader and current MEP Krzysztof Brejza was infiltrated by Pegasus ahead of the 2019 election. At the time, Brejza was leading the opposing coalition’s campaign. A prosecutor and mayor were also targeted.

What is Pegasus?

According to a justice ministry report, between 2017 and 2022 Pegasus was used to spy on nearly 600 people. At the time the report was released, then-Justice Minister Adam Bodnar said that the complete list of surveillance targets contained “many more well-known people” than had previously been made public.

In fall 2023 the Polish Senate came to the conclusion that the purchase of the surveillance software was illegal. The Senate also concluded that the use of Pegasus against opposition candidates rendered the 2019 elections unfair.

Indictment brought for Pegasus purchase

The purchase of the surveillance software has since become a case for the Polish prosecutor general’s office. Last year the prosecutor general announced charges against former deputy justice minister Michał Woś. Woś is accused of having transferred 25 million zloty (roughly €6 million) from a justice ministry fund for the Central Anti-Corruption Bureau’s purchase of Pegasus – the transfer allegedly violated the law.

In June 2024, the Sejm, as the lower house of Polish parliament is known, stripped the former deputy justice minister and current opposition lawmaker of his immunity, clearing the way for charges to be brought. Last week the prosecutor general’s office formally submitted its 248-page indictment to the court. The indictment details the prosecutor general’s plans to present more than 500 pieces of evidence and call more than 30 witnesses. If convicted, Woś faces up to ten years in prison.

Woś has consistently denied the charges. According to news reports, last week he called himself a victim of “political repression” and insisted that the purchase of Pegasus “was fully legal.” His former boss admitted last month to playing a key role in the purchase of the surveillance software.

Justice Minister Waldemar Żurek said that the indictment shows that “no public officials [are] exempt from responsibility.” (js)

Ethiopia suspends Deutsche Welle correspondents

2025-10-28T07:55:00+01:00

Ethiopia has ordered local correspondents for Deutsche Welle to suspend journalistic activities. Human rights groups report an increase in media repression in the country.

NGOs warn of a crackdown on independent voices in the run-up to elections scheduled for next year. (Source: IMAGO / photothek)

The Ethiopian Media Authority has suspended all nine local correspondents for Deutsche Welle. The German international broadcaster has condemned the suspensions – and criticizes what it calls a “further deterioration of the media climate” in the East African country.

As Deutsche Welle reported on Friday, the Ethiopian Media Authority sent a letter last week demanding the “temporary” suspension of DW’s correspondents – they were forced to cease all journalistic activities.

The regulator accuses Deutsche Welle of violating the government’s “media proclamations,” including “regulations against hate speech and the dissemination of false information.” Deutsche Welle stresses that the letter from the Ethiopian Media Authority is vaguely worded – it makes no concrete allegations and provides no details about specific violations allegedly resulting from Deutsche Welle’s reporting.

The broadcaster is calling on the Media Authority to “provide detailed clarification as to which reports have allegedly breached” the country’s media regulations. Deutsche Welle also demands that the regulator “immediately lift the suspension” of its journalists.

Staff in Germany to continue programming

Deutsche Welle Director General Barbara Messing expressed concern over the restrictions on reporting in Ethiopia. In a statement, she pointed to the discontinuation of Voice of America’s language services earlier this year – now that the US international news network has drastically reduced its programming, Deutsche Welle “offers the most widely accessed Amharic language program by an international media outlet in Ethiopia.”

Messing continued: “Millions of Ethiopians continue to rely on us to provide them with access to independent information. We fully expect that our colleagues will be able to resume their work immediately and without restriction.”

The local correspondents in Ethiopia have suspended work for the time being. For now, Amharic-language programming will be continued by Deutsche Welle editorial staff based in Bonn and elsewhere.

Accusation of censorship

Angela Quintal from the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) called the suspension of Deutsche Welle’s journalists “an outrageous act of censorship and intimidation.” Ethiopian authorities, she said, “are weaponizing media laws to silence independent reporting and control the narrative. The government must immediately lift the suspension, stop harassing journalists, and respect the public’s right to information.”

Deutsche Welle reportsthat the Ethiopian authorities have repeatedly accused the broadcaster of false reporting. The most prominent accusation came after the 2005 parliamentary elections. That year, violence erupted in the weeks after the elections when the government stopped the tallying of votes and declared itself the winner – at least 46 people were killed.

According to Deutsche Welle, a commission charged with looking into the government’s allegations “did not yield any proof of misreporting.”

New parliamentary elections in Ethiopia are scheduled for June 2026. DW calls the suspension of its journalists part of a general worsening of the media climate in the country in advance of the elections.

Crackdown on journalists

In recent months there have been several reports of journalists facing intimidation and arrest. In May the CPJ reported on the arrest of seven journalists – including Abebe Fikir from the weekly newspaper The Reporter. According to the CPJ, Abebe had been seeking comment from city officials in Addis Ababa on a story when the police accused him of filming without permission – he denies the allegation. Two days after he was arrested, he was released on bail.

Laetetia Bader of Human Rights Watch (HRW) said in a statement: “The Ethiopian authorities’ renewed efforts to muzzle independent reporting are all about preventing public scrutiny of the government.”

According to HRW, since August, Ethiopian security forces have arbitrarily detained several media workers. Journalist Yonas Amare was abducted from his home by masked gunmen. The police denied having arrested him – his whereabouts were unknown for eight days, until finally he was released. HRW condemns Amare’s arrest, arguing that it constitutes an enforced disappearance under international law and must be investigated.

The organization also reports on the arrest of Khadar Mohamed Ismail, a reporter for a state-owned television station in the Somali region. According to HRW, Khadar was arrested after posting a video on social media that featured people complaining about the regional government.

In some cases journalists have been arrested and detained without contact to the outside world, HRW reports. The authorities’ actions renew “concerns about media freedom in Ethiopia” – especially with regard to next year’s elections.

Increase in threats

HRW has documented an increase in government threats to journalists and publications since the start of this year. A much-criticized set of changes to the country’s media law has made the situation even worse, according to the rights group. Among the changes is the shifting of responsibilities from the board of the Media Authority to the director general, who is appointed by the prime minister. The amendments also repeal a measure prohibiting board members from being affiliated with a political party. The changes to the law increase “opportunities for political interference,” HRW argues. The Media Authority – which ordered the suspensions at Deutsche Welle – has the power to impose sanctions on media outlets and revoke their licenses.

HRW also criticizes the vague allegations brought by police against journalists. These allegations are based on overly broad definitions of hate speech and disinformation, the group says. There have even been charges of terrorism leveled at journalists because of their reporting.

Since 2020, when civil war broke out in the Tigray region, “press freedom in Ethiopia has significantly declined,” Deutsche Welle writes. A cease fire agreement was reached in 2022, but this year has seen rising tensions.

On the Index of Press Freedom maintained by Reporters without Borders, Ethiopia is ranked 145th out of 180 countries. (js)

Brazil approves exploratory oil drilling near mouth of the Amazon

2025-10-23T08:04:00+02:00

Petrobras will be permitted to search for oil near the mouth of the Amazon River. Environmental groups say granting the license amounts to sabotaging the world climate conference.

Environmentalists have long criticized efforts to drill for oil near the Amazon. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

Brazil’s environmental agency IBAMA has granted a license to the state-run oil company Petrobras to conduct exploratory drilling near the mouth of the Amazon. The agency and the company announced the granting of the license on Monday. Environmental groups call the decision disastrous and have already announced plans to challenge it in court.

Petrobras said in a press release that the ship that will carry out the drilling is already on site. The exploratory drilling is set to start immediately and is expected to continue for a period of five months. The goal of the survey, according to the company, “is to gather detailed geological information and assess whether the area contains oil and gas” on an economically viable scale. During the exploratory phase, no oil will be extracted commercially.

The exploratory drilling will take place in the Foz do Amazonas Basin, which lies roughly 500 kilometers from the mouth of the Amazon off the coast of the state of Amapá. The oil company reportedly spent years trying to obtain the license – in 2023 the environmental agency rejected its application.

Warning of oil contamination

Environmental activists have long criticized the plans. They fear that oil leaks or chemical pollutants could disturb the sensitive ecosystem. The Amazon rainforest is an important carbon pool and plays a crucial role for the global climate. It is considered one of the so-called “tipping elements” that, if lost, could push the world’s climate out of equilibrium. The Amazon region is also one of the most biodiverse regions in the world. Ocean currents could bring oil contamination into the Amazon River. This could also endanger the livelihoods of coastal communities.

According to Greenpeace, the Foz do Amazonas Basin is also home to a large coral reef system that is of “vital ecological importance for the Atlantic Ocean.”

Climate conference in November

The organization also condemns the granting of the drilling license in light of the fact that the UN climate conference, COP30, is set to begin in November in the city of Belém, located in the Amazon region. Countries participating in the conference will meet to decide on measures to combat human-caused climate change – one such measure being the transition away from fossil fuels like oil and natural gas.

Mariana Andrade from Greenpeace Brazil said in a statement: “While the world looks to the Amazon for solutions to the climate crisis, we see IBAMA granting Petrobras permission to drill for oil in the very heart of the planet.” The decision to drill for more oil “goes against Brazil’s own commitments to an energy transition,” Greenpeace said in a press release. Andrade added: “There is no possible energy transition when its foundation is destruction.”

“Sabotaging” COP30

Observatório do Clima, a coalition of Brazilian organizations, accused the government of sabotaging the UN climate conference by granting the drilling license. The decision is “disastrous,” the group wrote, “and undermines the climate leadership claimed by [Brazilian] President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.”

In a press release, the Observatório do Clima wrote that ecosystems like the Amazon that are critical to the planet must be protected. Rather than expanding oil and gas production, what is needed are “exclusion zones” to protect these critical ecosystems. Because of its significance for the climate and for biodiversity, “the Amazon must be one of these zones, both for onshore and offshore exploration.”

The group stressed that the plan also runs counter to the consensus view among scientists that no new fossil fuel production project can be approved if global warming is to be kept at 1.5˚ Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

Carlos Nobre, Co-chair of the Science Panel for the Amazon, said in a statement: "The Amazon is very close to the tipping point, which will be irreversibly reached if global warming hits 2° Celsius and deforestation exceeds 20 percent. In addition to zeroing all deforestation, degradation, and fire in the Amazon, it becomes urgent to reduce all fossil fuel emissions. There is no justification for any new oil exploration. On the contrary, quickly abandoning current fossil fuels in exploration is essential.”

Criticism of licensing process

Daniela Jerez, legal counsel for Greenpeace Brazil, criticized the licensing process for the drilling project, stating that it showed procedural flaws: “By law, a license can only be granted when there is clear evidence that the company is capable of preventing and responding to the risks involved – yet the emergency plans presented during the licensing process are insufficient and fail to demonstrate such capacity. Moreover, there was no adequate assessment of the impacts on indigenous peoples, nor free, prior, and informed consultation. These flaws render the license invalid and subject to judicial challenge.”

Reuters reported last month that Petrobras failed one part of the emergency test required to obtain its drilling license. As a result the company had to resubmit its animal-rescue plan. In its press release on Monday, the company stated that it had met all the Brazilian environmental agency’s requirements.

The Observatório do Clima immediately announced plans to take legal action, stating in its press release that “civil society organizations and social movements will go to court to denounce the illegalities and technical failures in the licensing process.”

Lula’s promise

Brazil’s president Lula da Silva defended the oil drilling on economic grounds. He told the BBC in September: “Brazil is a country that has oil. And possibly we have oil in the Equatorial Margin, and we are making surveys. We’re following the law strictly.”

Last year the AP wrote that COP30 will “serve as a test for Lula’s commitment to preserving the Amazon.” The Brazilian president promised to protect the rainforest when he was elected for a third term in 2022. Under his predecessor, Jair Bolsonaro, destruction of the Amazon had accelerated.

The AP reported that deforestation has in fact slowed under Lula. But, the wire service wrote, he has also lent his support to oil exploration at the mouth of the Amazon River and to the construction of a highway that runs through the rainforest between Manaus and Porto Velho.

Several infrastructure projects connected to COP30 have drawn criticism, including upgrades to the nearby Port of Outeiro, which will serve as a docking point for cruise ships. The construction of another highway was also intensely criticized: tens of thousands of acres of protected rainforest were cleared to build a road that would make travel to the global climate conference easier for participants.

Another source of controversy has been the construction of artificial trees made of steel in Belém, with fake branches holding pots of hanging plants. A city official admitted that the structures are designed to provide shade – there isn’t enough good soil in the city to plant real trees. Observers fear that after the climate conference is over, the city will have ended up with fewer trees than it had before. (js)

Saudi Arabia: 300 executions so far in 2025

2025-10-22T07:52:00+02:00

The number of people executed this year in Saudi Arabia continues to climb. The victims include two people who were minors at the time of their alleged offense.

Starting last year, observers have documented a sharp rise in executions in Saudi Arabia. (Source: IMAGO / ITAR-TASS)

So far this year in Saudi Arabia, 300 people have been executed. Human Rights Watch (HRW) reports that the authorities are carrying out executions at an “unprecedented rate.”

Abdullah al-Derazi was put to death on Monday, HRW reports – he was the 300th person put to death by the state this year. He was a member of the Shia Muslim minority, which according to HRW has long faced discrimination in Saudi Arabia. Al-Derazi was arrested in 2014 after reportedly taking part in a demonstration against the government’s treatment of Shia Muslims. He was beaten “severely” at the time of his arrest. He was just 17 years old at the time.

While in prison he was tortured both physically and psychologically and forced to sign a false confession. According to UN human rights experts, he was made to confess to membership in a terrorist group.

The Specialized Criminal Court responsible for terrorism offenses sentenced al-Derazi to death in 2018. In 2023, the Saudi Supreme Court upheld the sentence.

“Horrific Milestones”

Joey Shea of HRW said in a statement: “With the execution of Abdullah al-Derazi, Saudi authorities reached two horrific milestones: 300 executions in the first 10 months of 2025 and the second execution of a person accused of committing crimes as a child.” These executions, Shea said, “should shatter any remaining doubts globally about Saudi Arabia’s dire human rights record.”

In August, Saudi authorities executed Jalal al-Labbad. He too had been arrested, in 2017, for taking part in demonstrations – he was 15 years old at the time.

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child prohibits sentencing individuals to death who at the time of their alleged crime were younger than 18 years old. Saudi Arabia has ratified the convention. Organizations like HRW and Amnesty International oppose the death penalty in all circumstances as a cruel and inhumane form of punishment.

Arbitrary detentions

According to HRW, Saudi courts have sentenced at least six more children to death. In December 2024 a UN working group concluded that Abdullah al-Derazi, Jalal al-Labbad, and several more young men had been arbitrarily detained.

After the execution of Jalal al-Labbad, UN human rights experts had again called for Saudi authorities to halt all planned executions of individuals who had been sentenced for alleged crimes committed when they were minors. They also called for a general moratorium on executions as a first step toward abolishing the death penalty.

Criticism of trials

In July, human rights organizations drew attention to the high number of executions in Saudi Arabia in the first half of this year – and warned that there could be a new high for executions in the country this year. Amnesty International documented at least 345 executions in the country in all of 2024.

Human Rights Watch wrote in August that it was “highly unlikely that any of those executed in 2025 received a fair trial.” Human rights organizations have repeatedly drawn attention to abuses in the Saudi justice system which violate the right to due process and a fair trial. According to Amnesty, when people in the country are sentenced to death it is frequently for alleged terrorism offenses. The NGO views these sentences as a form of political repression, with those who voice their opinion often being charged with “terrorism.” The Specialized Criminal Court is used as an instrument to silence critics, Amnesty argues. UN experts have also criticized the overly broad definition of terrorism in Saudi laws, warning that it can be interpreted to include critical views of the government.

A large number of people have also been killed in connection with drug-related offenses: as of October it was at least 198 individuals. Under international law, capital punishment cannot be used for such offenses. In 2021 Saudi Arabia announced a moratorium on executions for drug-related offenses – but this was abruptly lifted in November 2022.

Journalist executed

On June 14, journalist Turki al-Jasser was put to death. According to Reporters without Borders (RSF), he was arrested in 2018 and sentenced to death for alleged terrorism and high treason. Al-Jasser had reported on women’s rights issues, among other topics. The authorities had also accused him of running an anonymous account on Twitter (now X) linking members of the royal family to alleged corruption and human rights abuses. Human rights groups fear that al-Jasser was sentenced to death in order to suppress dissenting views.

Turki al-Jasser was the first journalist to have been executed since Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman came to power in 2015. HRW stresses that all executions must be approved by the Saudi king or crown prince.

According to Amnesty International, Saudi Arabia had the third-highest number of executions last year of all countries in the world – behind only China and Iran. In Iran this year there has also been a large number of executions. (js)

US court prohibits NSO attacks on WhatsApp

2025-10-21T17:09:00+02:00

A US court has issued a permanent injunction prohibiting the spyware developer NSO Group from targeting WhatsApp users. WhatsApp sees the ruling as setting an important precedent.

WhatsApp first filed suit against NSO in 2019 in response to its targeting of users. (Source: IMAGO / SOPA Images)

The spyware company NSO Group cannot target WhatsApp and its users, a US court ruled on Friday. Judge Phyllis Hamilton also significantly reduced the amount of damages that the company must pay to WhatsApp.

Hamilton ruled in December 2024 that NSO was responsible for attacks on 1,400 WhatsApp users that took place in 2019. In May a jury decided that NSO had to pay more than $167 million in damages to WhatsApp.

The spyware developer appealed the ruling, however, asking either that the penalty be drastically reduced or that there be a new trial. WhatsApp likewise filed a motion asking for a court order “to prevent NSO from ever targeting WhatsApp again.”

In her decision, Judge Hamilton granted both motions. She imposed a permanent injunction prohibiting NSO from hacking WhatsApp and its users – but reduced the penalty owed by NSO.

Ongoing risk

Judge Hamilton pointed out in her ruling that in testimony given in 2024, an NSO executive admitted that the company’s Pegasus spyware was still capable of obtaining “unlimited access to targets’ mobile devices.” When asked if the company continued to work around WhatsApp’s security measures, the NSO executive answered: “This is our business.”

What is Pegasus?

WhatsApp argued in response that without a permanent injunction NSO would be “like a safecracker who still has all his tools.” What’s more, WhatsApp argued, NSO still has an economic incentive to continue targeting WhatsApp. This has been clearly established, WhatsApp argued: in the past, NSO has not been deterred by WhatsApp’s security measures and has continually found new ways to circumvent them.

Judge Hamilton ruled that other statements made by NSO also lead to the conclusion that the company poses an ongoing risk to WhatsApp. NSO argued in court filings that an injunction “would put NSO’s entire enterprise at risk” and “force NSO out of business.” Because of this ongoing risk of attacks, which have already caused “irreparable harm,” the judge granted WhatsApp’s motion.

“Additional win” for WhatsApp

Head of WhatsApp Will Cathcart wrote on X: “Today’s ruling bans spyware maker NSO from ever targeting WhatsApp and our global users again.” The ruling, Cathcart wrote, “sets an important precedent that there are serious consequences to attacking an American company.”

John Scott-Railton of the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab called the ruling a “big additional win for WhatsApp.” Citizen Lab has repeatedly uncovered attacks by Pegasus and helped WhatsApp in 2019 to identify and notify some of the targeted users.

Significantly reduced financial penalty

The judge however also granted NSO’s motion to reduce the amount of damages: instead of the more than $167 million in damages that a jury had found the company liable for, NSO must now pay only about $4 million to WhatsApp. Hamilton based her decision on her view that “there have simply not yet been enough cases involving unlawful electronic surveillance in the smartphone era” to conclude that NSO’s conduct was “particularly egregious.” The new amount is the highest allowable under standards for determining the appropriate amount of punitive damages established by previous case law. Hamilton noted however that other courts may rule differently in the future.

An NSO spokesperson told the Courthouse News Service that the company welcomes the decision to reduce the damages – but said the remaining sum was still “disproportionately high.” The company told Reuters that it would review the decision and “determine its next steps accordingly.”

Years-long legal battle

Meta (then Facebook) and its WhatsApp subsidiary first filed the lawsuit against NSO in 2019 after detecting Pegasus attacks on 1,400 users of the messaging app. NSO had exploited a security flaw in the messaging app’s call feature to plant its controversial spyware in the targets’ smartphones. The device receiving the call was compromised even if the user did not accept the call. The victims included journalists, lawyers, dissidents, human rights activists, diplomats, and government officials.

NSO tried several times to have the case dismissed. But multiple courts and finally even the US Supreme Court rejected the Israeli company’s motions. The US Justice Department also filed a brief in support of allowing WhatsApp’s case to go forward.

Over the course of the years-long legal proceedings, NSO has admitted that its targeting of users does in fact function as WhatsApp has described. The court ruled in December 2024 that NSO was responsible for the attacks and violated US laws like the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, as well as WhatsApp’s terms of service. (js)

Member of European Parliament files criminal complaint after spyware attack

2025-10-20T08:01:00+02:00

Member of European Parliament Daniel Freund was the target of a spyware attack in 2024. Now he has filed a criminal complaint – naming Viktor Orbán.

Green MEP Freund was sent a manipulated link in 2024 – but did not open it. (Source: IMAGO / Martin Bertrand)

Member of European Parliament Daniel Freund (Green Party) and the Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte (Society for Civil Rights – GFF) have filed a criminal complaint in Germany in response to an alleged spyware attack. The complaint names Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán and another party listed as Unknown, the GFF announced last week.

In filing the complaint, Freund and the GFF are asking the state prosecutor’s offices in Cologne and Krefeld to launch an investigation and determine who was behind the spyware attack on Freund. The complainants said they have reason to suspect that those responsible for the attack may have violated German confidentiality laws. The GFF stated further that digital espionage is a severe violation of privacy and infringes on fundamental rights protecting confidentiality and the integrity of digital systems.

The attack was attempted in May 2024, according to the GFF – shortly before European elections. Freund received a fraudulent email with a link purporting to lead to a Ukrainian student organization’s website. The link was manipulated, however: had Freund opened it, spyware made by Candiru would have infiltrated his device.

Freund suspects Hungary

Freund immediately brought attention to the attack, telling Politico at the time that the email’s sender claimed to be a Ukrainian student who was organizing a seminar on her country’s chances of being admitted into the EU. The email used the name of a real student – but when Politico reached the student for comment, she denied sending it. Even at the time, Freund suspected that Hungary might be responsible for the attack. Earlier that year, spyware attacks on other MEPs had come to light.

In announcing the complaint last week Freund said that IT experts at the EU Parliament had come to the conclusion that the Hungarian government could be behind the attack. Freund said in a statement: “This comes as no surprise: Orbán despises democracy and the rule of law. If the suspicion is confirmed, it would be an outrageous attack on the European Parliament. In Europe, no one should have to fear being spied on for defending democratic values.”

The Green MEP is a strong critic of the Hungarian prime minister Orbán. He regularly points out corruption in the country and is “vocal on transparency and integrity issues,” as Politico has reported. Freund also successfully worked to freeze more than half of the EU funds allotted for Hungary. Orbán has singled out Freund for verbal attacks in the past, according to the GFF.

Journalists and politicians spied on

Hungary is known to use spyware: in 2021, as part of the Pegasus project, it came to light that journalists, opposition politicians, and businesspeople in the country had been spied on.

The government ultimately admitted to have purchased Pegasus spyware from NSO Group – but insisted that all its surveillance activities were legal. This claim is contradicted by the assessment of the Pegasus committee in the European Parliament: “The use of Pegasus in Hungary appears to be part of a calculated and strategic campaign to destroy media freedom and freedom of expression by the government.”

Cybersecurity researchers at the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab also named Hungary as a customer of Candiru in 2021. According to Citizen Lab, the company’s spyware can target and surveil personal devices. According to a recent investigation, Hungary likely continues to use spyware made by the Israeli company, which has since changed its name to Saito Tech.

US sanctions

The US imposed sanctions on the company in 2021. That same year Microsoft identified at least 100 people who had been spied on with Candiru spyware – including “politicians, human rights activists, journalists, academics, embassy workers, and political dissidents.” The spyware has reportedly been used in Spain as well to spy on Catalonian separatists.

The GFF warns that spyware allows attackers to penetrate deeply into their targets’ private lives – and into their political activity, social engagement, or journalistic work. In Daniel Freund’s case, an attacker could potentially gain access to conversations with Hungarian government critics that he has had over the course of his work as an MEP. The attacks would not only violate the victim’s fundamental rights as an individual, but also endanger civil society, freedom of the press, and democracy as a whole.

Franziska Görlitz, jurist and case coordinator at the GFF, said in a statement: “If authoritarian states can attack their critics in Germany with spyware, simple as that, then that is unacceptable.” She called on the German government to take action: “The state must effectively protect all of us from spyware.”

The GFF is calling for a functioning “weak spot management system”: under such a system, the government would be required to inform software developers about vulnerabilities in their products. The organization notes that in the past governments have knowingly left these issues unaddressed in order to exploit the weaknesses for their own surveillance purposes – but other actors can abuse these backdoors as well. Spyware developers like Candiru and NSO, for example, use such vulnerabilities to install their spying tools on devices undetected. (js)

California: Police must disclose use of AI to write police reports

2025-10-15T08:04:00+02:00

A new law in California requires police officers to review and sign off on reports that are written with the help of so-called AI.

Civil liberties groups have criticized Axon’s Draft One software in particular, which is used by police in California and elsewhere. (Source: IMAGO / Imagn Images)

Police officers in California will have to disclose the use of so-called artificial intelligence (AI) to write police reports. The change comes as part of a new law signed by Governor Gavin Newsom last week.

The law, SB 524, mandates that if officers use AI tools to draft a police report – or if the report was written entirely by AI – then there must be a clear indication of this on each page of the report. The specific programs used must also be named. Officers are required to review the text, verify that all facts included therein are correct – and confirm by signing the report.

An additional provision in the law requires police departments to retain the first draft of any report generated with the help of AI tools for as long as the official report is retained. Police must also keep a record of who used the tools.

Under the new law, California will prohibit companies who market such programs from sharing, selling, or otherwise using information provided by law enforcement. During debates over the bill, advocates raised concerns that the companies could use sensitive data to “train” their systems’ algorithms. In a hearing on the bill, members of the Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection in the California State Assembly pointed out the risk that footage taken from body cameras worn by police officers could be used to train facial recognition technology or other surveillance tools.

The bill was proposed earlier this year and passed by the legislature in September. Last week Governor Newsom signed the bill into law – it goes into force on January 1st, 2026.

Critics and supporters

The Police Officers Research Association of California (PORAC), a nonprofit representing California law enforcement, opposed the law and criticized the requirement to disclose the use of AI, arguing that it could “stigmatize” officers’ work by making the reports seem less credible.

The California Public Defenders Association, on the other hand, sponsored the bill. The group told state assemblymembers that police reports “form the very basis of virtually every criminal prosecution.” Because of this it is “crucial that reports be accurate and complete.” The use of AT tools, however, carries the risk that inaccurate or outright false information may be included in the reports. “AI can be a very powerful and dangerous tool,” the group argued – there must be transparency surrounding its use.

Civil liberties groups criticize Axon software

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a civil liberties group, also supported the bill, calling it “necessary.” According to the organization, the use of AI tools to draft police reports is becoming ever more widespread in the US.

The EFF points out several risks. For example, these programs are designed to generate police reports using audio taken from body-worn cameras – but they don’t take the video footage into account. This means that important context from a situation might be omitted, like sarcasm or the use of culturally-specific vocabulary.

According to the EFF, the most common program used by police is Draft One, sold by Axon, a vendor known for supplying law enforcement agencies with body cameras and Tasers. The company markets its product primarily as a time-saving tool, a way to reduce the amount of paperwork officers have to do. Police departments in several US states are reportedly testing the product or already using it. Shortly after Draft One was introduced last year, the EFF warned that the software can misrepresent what is said in a police interaction. The group now accuses the company of deliberately designing the tool not to be transparent.

Over the summer, the EFF conducted a review of public records as well as Axon user manuals and marketing materials. In a report on its findings, the group noted that when officers are producing their official report, they are asked to copy and paste the text of the draft report generated by Draft One. They then have the option of making further changes to the text – but the program does not save the first draft. In its investigation, the EFF found that Axon has admitted to designing the program this way deliberately, so as not to “create more disclosure headaches” for law enforcement agencies.

As the EFF points out, the program’s design makes it impossible to determine which parts of a police report are generated automatically and which are written by a human being. If a report were found to contain inaccuracies or outright lies, an officer could attempt to blame the software – and there would be no way to establish who was actually responsible.

In September the EFF noted that Draft One would not be compliant with the new California law and that, if the law was passed, Axon would have to redesign its program. The organization meanwhile argues that police shouldn’t be using such tools in the first place – a view that is shared by the American Civil Liberties Union .

Similar law passed in Utah

There is no common set of rules governing the use of such programs by police departments in the US. Earlier this year in Utah, however, a law was passed that requires officers to disclose the use of AI and to review reports. It went into force in May.

Since last year, New Hampshire has required agencies to at least include a disclosure labelling AI generated documents that have not been reviewed by a human staffer.

And, as the EFF has reported, in King County in Washington state, which contains Seattle, police are not allowed to use this new technology to write their reports. (js)

Data stolen from 5.7 million Qantas customers

2025-10-14T08:09:00+02:00

Australian airline Qantas has confirmed the scope of a recent data theft. Millions of people were affected.

The hackers responsible for the breach have already published the data, according to reports. (Source: Qantas)

Hackers have stolen the personal data of 5.7 million customers of the Australian airline Qantas. The company confirmed the extent of the breach on Sunday.

Qantas first announced the data breach this summer. At the time the airline reported that the compromised system held data belonging to a total of six million people – but was unable to specify precisely how many people had been affected. Now the company has confirmed that the data of 5.7 million customers was stolen.

In most cases the data consisted of customers’ names, email addresses, and frequent flyer information. Some customers’ mailing addresses, dates of birth, and telephone numbers were also stolen, as well as information like their gender and meal preferences.

Scammers can use such data for phishing campaigns or to commit identity theft.

Data published

According to Qantas, the criminal group responsible for the theft has now published the customer data online. Investigations are currently underway to determine what exactly was released.

The airline stressed that neither credit card numbers nor passport information were compromised in the data breach. The company stated in Sunday’s announcement that it continues to work with authorities like the Australian Cyber Security Centre and the Australian Federal Police.

In June, Qantas noticed “unusual activity” on a third-party platform used by a Qantas call center. In July the airline announced that it had suffered a data breach, but offered few specifics. According to more recent news reports, the data was stolen as part of a larger attack on databases operated by the company Salesforce. At least 39 companies were affected, including other large corporations like Adidas, Ikea, KFC, and the Marriott hotel chain. The individual companies all received ransom demands, as did Salesforce.

The group of criminals believed to be behind the data theft and extortion campaign is known to employ so-called social engineering tactics. The purpose of such tactics is to manipulate individuals and, for instance, trick them into giving up sensitive information.

Data theft by phone call

Cybersecurity experts at Google reported on this group and its activities in June. According to Google, the hackers’ strategy is to call employees of a given company and present themselves as IT support workers in the hopes of gaining access to the company’s IT network. Instead of exploiting weak points in a company’s software, the group tricks its employees into providing login credentials or granting access to internal systems.

According to Australian media, when going after Qantas, the hackers set their sights on a call center in the Philippines.

Airlines targeted by criminal groups

Shortly before Qantas announced the data breach this summer, the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) warned of an increase in the number of attacks on the airline industry. The FBI also reported that a criminal group was using social engineering to deceive airline employees and gain access to internal systems. Data breaches at other airlines have also come to light this year – though whether the attacks are related is unclear.

In June, Canadian airline WestJet announced an incident targeting its IT systems. Last month the company announced that customers’ names and contact details were stolen, as well as “information and documents” related to their travel plans. According to information submitted to legal authorities, the airline believes that a total of 1.2 million people were impacted.

Hackers also stole customer data from European airlines KLM und Air France. As with the Qantas attack, the companies noticed “unusual activity” on an external customer service platform. The airlines informed their customers that full names and contact details were compromised, as were membership numbers and tier level information for the airlines’ frequent flyer programs.

Last year, Qantas had to apologize to travelers after discovering a glitch in its app. The issue allowed members of the frequent flyer program to view other customers’ names and booking details. (js)

Texas: Abortion prompts license plate reader search

2025-10-09T08:05:00+02:00

Police in Texas used license plate readers to search for a woman who had an abortion. They considered bringing charges.

The search first came to light in May – at the time, police denied having investigated the woman as a criminal suspect. (Source: IMAGO / Imagn Images)

In May a Texas sheriff’s office used a network of license plate readers to search for a woman because she had had an abortion. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and 404 Media have been following the case. Civil liberties advocates have long warned that surveillance technology could be used for this purpose.

The EFF and 404 Media reviewed police records and court documents showing that in May detectives from the Johnson County Sheriff’s Office went to the woman’s house after receiving a tip from her partner that she had had an abortion two weeks earlier. According to the EFF and 404 Media’s reporting, the lead detective in the case stated in a sworn affidavit that, based on information given by the woman’s partner, the police opened a “death investigation case” with the woman as a possible suspect. The woman’s partner provided police with evidence, including a package allegedly containing abortion pills.

After going to the woman’s house and not finding her there, investigators searched for her car in a country-wide network of license plate readers operated by the company Flock Safety. At the time the network had more than 83,000 cameras. The company sells access to this network to local law enforcement agencies. The sheriff’s office provided a reason for their search query: “had an abortion, search for female.” The search turned up hits in Dallas, where the woman was staying – though as 404 Media reported in May, the sheriff’s office stated that Flock “was not responsible for ultimately finding her.”

According to 404 Media and the EFF, the same day that the sheriff’s office searched the Flock database, officers also contacted the district attorney’s office to discuss potentially charging the woman with a crime for having an abortion – only to be informed that under the law the state could not bring charges.

Violent partner arrested

A few days later the woman appeared at the Johnson County Sheriff’s Office. A detective on the case believed that she had come “to tell her side of the story about the non-viable fetus.” As the EFF and 404 Media report, officers initially questioned her about the abortion and reviewed text messages on her cell phone. The woman then told them that after she had the abortion there had been an argument with her partner, during which he had brutally attacked her with a gun and forced her to “beg for [her] life.” The partner was subsequently arrested and charged with assault; his case is pending.

404 Media first reported on this case in May. Journalists for the site had obtained datasets of searches made using the Flock system and, after seeing the Texas search query that mentioned abortion, decided to investigate further. When the Supreme Court issued a decision in 2022 ending the constitutional right to abortion, civil liberties advocates warned that surveillance technology could be used to track people seeking access to reproductive healthcare. In the wake of the 2022 Supreme Court ruling, 19 US states have limited or banned abortion, including Texas. Under the state’s “Heartbeat Act” and related legislation, terminating a pregnancy is prohibited in nearly all cases. Doctors who perform such procedures face criminal prosecution and potential civil penalties, though women who choose to terminate their pregnancies do not.

In May, Johnson County Sheriff Adam King spoke to journalists and denied that his office was searching for the woman specifically because she had had an abortion. Rather it was because the woman’s family was worried about her, King said. He also claimed that the woman was not the subject of a criminal investigation – and told media that his office had searched for her only out of concern “for her safety.” The reporting published this week, based on records obtained from the sheriff’s office, contradicts this version of events.

Report written retroactively

The records also show that a week after the first 404 Media article appeared, the sheriff’s office produced a separate document claiming retroactively that the search was conducted out of concern for the woman’s safety. By the time this “supplemental report” was created, the woman’s partner had been arrested by police – and the lead detective in the case had stated the grounds for the search in a sworn affidavit.

Rin Alajaji at the EFF told 404 Media that the sheriff’s office and Flock Safety have spent months insisting that officers were simply searching for a missing person – and have even accused journalists of spreading misinformation. “Now we have the official records, and they prove the exact opposite: Texas deputies did investigate this woman’s abortion as a ‘death investigation,’ they did use Flock’s ALPR [Automated License Plate Reader] network to track her down, and they did consult prosecutors about charging her.”

Alajaji continued: “When a single search can access more than 83,000 cameras across nearly the entire country, the potential for abuse is enormous.”

Neither the Johnson County Sheriff’s Office nor Flock Safety responded to requests for comment from 404 Media about this latest article. The case shows that the company “ultimately may not know what its customers are using the technology for,” 404 Media noted. After the story was first reported in May, the company repeated the sheriff’s office’s version of events on several occasions.

Mass surveillance

Organizations like the EFF and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have repeatedly criticized Flock. They accuse the company of building the infrastructure for a dangerous nationwide mass surveillance system. Border control and immigration enforcement agencies have also reportedly used data gathered by Flock, prompting more criticism.

License plate readers are advertised as tools to help find missing persons and stolen cars, the EFF notes – but instead, “they’ve become a dragnet that allows enforcement to track anyone, anywhere, for any reason.”

In the past, critical reporting has prompted Flock to introduce new measures to prevent abuse of their license plate readers. These include requiring officers to provide a reason for their searches. But the EFF calls these measures “cosmetic at best.” They can be circumvented, the EFF says. Meanwhile, “the fundamental architecture that enabled the abuse remains unchanged.”

Ranking members of the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability in the US House of Representatives launched an investigation into Flock in August and requested information and documents from the company. The congressmen are asking for a list of all searches connected to abortions or immigration agencies. It is unclear if the company has complied with the request. (js)

European Parliament members criticize funding of spyware firms

2025-10-08T08:00:00+02:00

Members of European Parliament have expressed criticism after revelations that EU subsidies flowed to controversial spyware firms. They demand a detailed accounting from the European Commission.

Multiple cases of spyware abuse have come to light in recent years, including within the EU’s borders. (Source: IMAGO / dts Nachrichtenagentur)

More than three dozen members of European Parliament demand an explanation from the European Commission on how much spyware companies have benefitted from EU subsidies. New investigations reveal that EU funds have flowed to commercial spyware firms.

A total of 39 MEPs from four parties have signed a letter to senior EU commissioners. In the letter, published last week by German MEP Hannah Neumann (Greens/EFA), the lawmakers express their concern over revelations that “European Union subsidies, alongside national taxpayer funds, have directly financed companies implicated in the development, deployment, and export of spyware.”

The letter is addressed to Henna Virkkunen, Executive Vice-President for Tech Sovereignty, Security, and Democracy; Michael McGrath, Commissioner for Democracy, Justice, the Rule of Law, and Consumer Protection; and Piotr Serafin, Commissioner for Budget, Anti-Fraud, and Public Administration.

The MEPs refer in their letter to an investigation by the news site Follow the Money showing that several public entities including the European Defense Fund, a state-owned bank in Italy, and an arm of the Spanish science ministry all used public funds to back spyware companies. In some cases the funding amounted to millions of euros – but it is unclear, according to the report, whether the money was used specifically for the development of spyware.

Money for controversial firms

According to the investigation, the EU’s research program Horizon 2020 allocated €1.74 million to two projects involving the company Innova. Innova reportedly supplies surveillance technology to Italian law enforcement.

The French company Nexa Technologies reportedly received €60,000 from the European Commission in 2015. At the time the company was part of the Intellexa Alliance. The United States imposed sanctions on the related Intellexa Consortium in 2023 and 2024 for its role in developing and marketing Predator spyware. Predator is at the center of the Greek spying scandal, and has reportedly been exported to other countries as well.

Still more companies in the industry have received funding, according to the investigation. In their letter the MEPs write that firms like Intellexa, Cy4Gate, Verint, and Cognyte have benefitted from public funding – in some cases from EU programs. Tools developed by these companies “have been linked to unlawful surveillance of journalists, human rights defenders, and political actors in the EU, as well as in third countries with dreadful human rights records,” the MEPs write.

The recent revelations raise “serious questions about the governance, transparency, and accountability of the Union’s funding mechanisms,” the letter continues. Given numerous scandals in EU member states, “it is deeply troubling that the Union is directly or indirectly enabling tools that erode democracy, fundamental rights, and the rule of law.”

Questions for the Commission

The MEPs are demanding answers from the Commission regarding, among other things, how the Commission verifies the “integrity, ownership structures, and human rights compliance of companies that receive EU funds.” They also ask if the Commission received any warnings or risk assessments before funds were granted to the companies named in the letter – and “if so, why were they disregarded?”

The signatories to the letter ask the Commission to reveal how much money has gone to spyware firms – and to provide the European Parliament with the contracts detailing the terms of such funding. Suppliers of surveillance software must be excluded from EU funding instruments in the future, the MEPs demand.

They also call on the Commission to follow up on the recommendations made by the PEGA inquiry committee. The committee was formed in 2022 after cases came to light in Poland, Hungary, and elsewhere of journalists and opposition leaders being targeted with spyware. The committee concluded its work in 2023 and recommended strict regulations on the sale and use of spyware. The committee also recommended implementing “more rigorous control mechanisms” to ensure that EU research funds do not finance spyware.

Lawmakers and security experts have repeatedly criticized the European Commission’s failure to act on the recommendations by taking concrete measures. In June, spyware was again the focus of debate in the European Parliament, and MEPs again called on the Commission and on member states to act.

Expert warns of “spyware crisis”

Just this year, another case of spyware abuse came to light in the EU: activists and journalists in Italy were targeted using Paragon Solutions’ Graphite spyware. Italian authorities were responsible for using spyware on activists – it’s still unclear however who led the spying on journalists.

Paragon, which was founded in Israel and is now owned by a US firm, likely also benefitted from EU funds: last week the Belgian news site Apache reported that in 2020 the European Investment Fund (EIF) provided capital for Paragon through an Israeli venture capital fund. An EIF spokesperson confirmed the investment. It’s unclear how much money was invested in Paragon specifically.

Rebecca White from the Amnesty Security Lab, which has uncovered multiple cases of spyware abuse, told the Register that the surveillance industry was “under-regulated and thriving.” She criticized the European Commission for remaining silent, and called the latest revelations alarming. These revelations, White said, “suggest that not only is the EU failing to put out the fire, they’re fanning the flames.” The Commission, she said, “can no longer wash its hands of Europe’s complicity in the spyware crisis, which is fueling human rights abuses across the world.”

The 39 MEPs write in their letter: “Citizens of the Union have the right to know whether their taxes are being used to finance technologies that endanger their fundamental rights.” The signatories demand the full cooperation of the Commission “in ensuring accountability and restoring public trust.” (js)

US: Journalist deported to El Salvador

2025-10-07T08:02:00+02:00

The US government has deported journalist Mario Guevara. He was arrested in June while covering a protest.

The reporter lived in the US for more than 20 years and had a valid work permit. (Source: Mario Guevara News/Facebook)

Journalist Mario Guevara was deported from the United States to El Salvador on Friday. He had been detained by US immigration authorities for more than 100 days prior to his removal. Journalist organizations and civil rights groups see the case as another sign of the worsening state of press freedom under the Trump administration.

According to news reports, Guevara was flown to El Salvador on Friday and released upon arrival. “I feel sad, but I also feel happy to be in my homeland,” he said.

Guevara, who reports in Spanish, had become known primarily for his live-streamed coverage of raids by US immigration authorities. He has received a Southeast Regional Emmy Award for his work. He came to the US from El Salvador in 2004, lived in Atlanta, Georgia and had a valid work permit. Before starting his own digital media company last year, he worked for Mundo Hispánico – now known as MundoNow – the largest independent Spanish-language news outlet in the US.

Guevara was arrested in June by police in Atlanta while reporting on a “No Kings” protest against the Trump administration. According to media reports, he was accused of standing in the roadway, among other charges. Though these charges were later dropped, he continued to be held in detention by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which claimed Guevara was in the country illegally. Guevara’s attorney said that he had received a work permit after his immigration case was administratively closed more than ten years ago.

NGOs voice sharp criticism

Katherine Jacobsen of the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) said in a statement: “Make no mistake, this is not a simple immigration case as authorities would have the public believe. Guevara was first detained in retaliation for his reporting and throughout his prolonged detention the government argued that he was being held because his live-streaming activity posed a danger to law enforcement activity.” Jacobsen called the deportation “shameful.”

Clayton Weimers, executive director of the US chapter of Reporters without Borders (RSF), also condemned the government’s actions and said that Guevara had been detained because of his work as a journalist. His deportation “is an outrageous miscarriage of justice and a devastating blow to American press freedom,” Weimers said. He views the administration’s actions as part of an attempt to intimidate international media and discourage critical coverage. Weimers added: “Deporting journalists is what authoritarian countries do, and it should never happen in the country of the First Amendment.” The First Amendment to the US constitution guarantees freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

Several press freedom and civil rights organizations had called for Guevara’s release. They warned that the case “sends a chilling message to all journalists, citizens, and residents who record law enforcement, report on government activities, and seek to report the truth.” The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) provided legal representation for Guevara, and groups including RSF, the CPJ, and the Freedom of the Press Foundation petitioned the court on Guevara’s behalf. Despite the groups’ efforts, last week a court denied a request for a stay of the removal order.

Mario Guevara’s son Oscar said in a statement released by the ACLU: “Words cannot begin to describe the loss and devastation my family feels.” Oscar Guevara described being in “shock and disbelief” that the US government would punish his father “for simply doing his life’s work of journalism.”

RSF also expressed concern for Guevara’s safety in El Salvador – warning that the Salvadoran government is escalating its persecution of media outlets and journalists.

Attacks on members of the press

The CPJ said in a statement that Guevara’s case is the first of its kind that the organization has ever documented in the US. Meanwhile the group is monitoring other instances of retaliation against journalists. Last week it reported on the case of an Ohio journalist who was convicted of “failure to disperse” and ordered to pay a $50 fine after reporting on a protest. As the Guardian noted: “Charges like this have historically been unusual, given the necessity for reporters to be physically present while covering demonstrations.”

Katherine Jacobsen of the CPJ told the paper: “This is not something that we usually see in this country. Other journalists in Chicago and Los Angeles have been assaulted by law enforcement while covering protests or being in immigration court. This is not normal and should be of great concern.”

During protests in Los Angeles in July reporters were sprayed with tear gas and struck by rubber bullets. And last week in a New York court building a reporter was injured by ICE agents.

Decline in press freedom

Journalist organizations and groups advocating for freedom of the press warn that the overall state of press freedom has grown worse since Donald Trump’s return to office. The US president has sued media organizations and threatened to revoke broadcast licenses. Public broadcasters have had their funding revoked. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which helps provide funding for local public broadcasters throughout the US, has announced plans to cease operations by January 31, 2026.

The administration also recently announced plans to impose fixed time limits on press visas. The proposal would limit visas to a fixed term of 240 days – under the current “duration of status” system, visas are usually valid for several years. Last month, a coalition of press freedom groups and professional organizations called on the government to abandon the plans. They warned that the proposed rules “would subject journalists’ reporting to continuous government scrutiny.” Fear of getting their visa renewal application denied could pressure journalists to self-censor. (js)

Afghanistan largely back online

2025-10-03T08:56:00+02:00

Internet and telephone connections were down in Afghanistan for 48 hours. There is still no official explanation for the outage.

The disruption had far-reaching impacts on public life – banks were closed and some shops were unable to open. (Source: IMAGO / Xinhua)

Internet and telephone services in Afghanistan have been largely restored as of Wednesday afternoon. The country was cut off from communications for 48 hours.

NetBlocks reported on Thursday that there had been a “partial restoration” of internet connectivity in the country. On Monday the organization had confirmed that Afghanistan was under a complete internet blackout.

Landline telephone service and the mobile phone network were also disrupted, according to NetBlocks. Afghanistan’s telecommunications services reportedly rely on the national fiberoptic network, which is operated by the public utility Afghan Telecom. NetBlocks told media earlier this week that a disruption of this infrastructure necessarily impacts landline and mobile service as well.

The precise reason for the blackout remains unclear. On Monday the AFP news agency, citing an unnamed government source, reported that the Taliban had ordered the shutdown to continue “until further notice.” Just hours before the internet was shut off on Monday the Afghan broadcaster ToloNews wrote in a post on X that a shutdown was imminent. According to media reports, the Taliban has still not provided an official explanation.

Signs point to intentional service cut

Reuters on Thursday cited an unnamed source in the Taliban’s information department who claimed that technical issues were behind the outage. This runs counter to the assessment made by experts at NetBlocks, who see signs of an intentional disruption. The organization also reports that the Taliban had been experimenting “with various censorship mechanisms” in the weeks leading up to the shutdown, which likewise contradicts claims of technical problems.

The BBC reported on Wednesday, citing a source close to the government, that the internet had been restored “by order of the Taliban prime minister.”

A group of international diplomats attributed the interruption of services to an order issued by Taliban leader Haibatullah Akhundzada, writes the New York Times. The decree reportedly criticized the spread of “immoral content” online.

Internet shut down in several provinces

For weeks leading up to the nationwide blackout the internet had been disconnected in several provinces. A Taliban spokesperson from Balkh province confirmed in mid-September that the Taliban leadership had ordered the shutdown. Experts expressed concern that the measure was intended to suppress critical content and head off potential protests.

After the internet stopped working across the country on Monday, human rights organizations warned of the consequences for the roughly 43 million people living in Afghanistan.

Felicia Anthonio, Global #KeepItOn Campaign Manager at AccessNow, told Posteo: “Internet access is not a luxury.” The internet ensures access to education and health services, said Anthonio, and facilitates the exercise of a wide range of human rights.

Concern for women and girls

Experts warned in particular of the consequences for women and girls, whose rights the Taliban have severely curtailed since retaking power in 2021. In order to circumvent restrictions on women’s education, some women and girls in Afghanistan have begun taking online courses. One lecturer told Human Rights Watch (HRW) on Monday that only a fraction of the students who were enrolled in his course were able to attend class this week. HRW warns that women and girls are becoming further isolated.

Media outlets and NGOs reported during the blackout this week that they were unable to reach staff in Afghanistan. Flights in and out of Kabul were grounded. In some provinces all banks were closed on Tuesday. Shop owners and delivery workers told media they could no longer work. The New York Times spoke to the brother of a man suffering a medical emergency. Doctors treating the man had recommended immediate surgery, but because of the communications blackout it was difficult to obtain funds from relatives – and the hospital insisted on payment in advance.

The United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) warned on Tuesday of a worsening of the humanitarian and economic crises in the country and expressed concerns about further restrictions on freedom of expression. The UN mission also noted that telecommunications are essential during natural disasters – Afghanistan was struck by several earthquakes last month.

“I’m breathing again”

According to news reports, people in Kabul were celebrating on Wednesday evening when internet and telephone connections were restored. One young woman who is studying online told the Guardian: “I can’t tell you how relieved I am. I’m breathing again. Online classes are the only hope left for Afghan girls.”

A shop owner said of the last two days, “It felt like we had gone back centuries.”

When the Taliban first ruled Afghanistan, from 1996 to 2001, internet access was limited, in part as a result of years of war that had destroyed the country’s phone network. The Taliban formally banned the internet in 2001. After retaking power in August 2021, the hardline Islamists periodically shut down the internet in Kabul, reportedly to prevent protests. In 2022 and 2024 there were also periodic restrictions.

According to the New York Times, the Taliban also block certain websites. Nevertheless, the internet “has remained central to the daily lives of millions” of Afghans. Senior officials have a presence on social media and many government employees use WhatsApp, the Times reports.

Last week a spokesperson for the so-called Ministry of Virtue and Vice told reporters for German broadcaster ARD of plans to intensely filter internet content in the future, and to prevent access to social media. (js)

Poland: Ex-justice minister admits to key role in purchase of Pegasus

2025-10-02T08:02:00+02:00

Poland’s former justice minister was forced to testify before the Pegasus commission in parliament. He admitted to playing a key role in the purchase of the spyware.

After failing to respond to summons to testify on eight different occasions, Ziobro (left) was brought before the commission on Monday by police. (Source: IMAGO / newspix)

Former Polish justice minister Zbigniew Ziobro was detained by police on Monday and brought before a parliamentary commission. The commission is investigating whether the Law and Justice (PiS)-led government that was voted out of office in 2023 used Pegasus surveillance software to spy on political opponents.

Ziobro served as justice minister from 2015 to 2023 under two successive PiS governments. In that time he also held the role of prosecutor general. The two positions are not separate in Poland.

The investigatory commission had reportedly summoned the former minister to testify on eight separate occasions over a period of more than a year. He never appeared, citing among other reasons his treatment for a medical condition. In January the commission obtained a court order compelling Ziobro to appear – but on that occasion Ziobro arrived late for the hearing and did not testify. In September, a court again ordered that he be brought before the commission.

Ziobro claims key role

On Monday, Ziobro was detained by police at the airport immediately after landing in Warsaw and brought before the commission.

In the nearly eight-hour hearing, Ziobro reportedly confirmed that he had played a key role in the purchasing of Pegasus spyware – and was “proud” of having done so. He defended the decision to transfer 25 million Polish zloty (roughly €6 million) from a justice ministry fund to the Central Anticorruption Bureau to cover the cost of the purchase.

What is Pegasus?

Pegasus is a form of surveillance software developed by NSO Group, an Israeli company. The spyware can take complete control of an infiltrated device. It can activate a smartphone’s camera and microphone or copy all data saved on the phone. Infiltrators using Pegasus can access location data and view passwords. The surveillance software has come in for criticism for years and has been linked to human rights abuses.

Ziobro’s former deputy, Michał Woś, was charged in September 2024 in connection with his having approved the purchase in 2017 – the prosecutor general’s office alleges the purchase was illegal. Woś disputes the charges.

Ziobro said before the commission on Monday that while Woś officially approved the purchase of the spyware, it was he, Ziobro, who had suggested using money from the justice ministry fund.

The former justice minister said further that to his knowledge Pegasus had been used in investigations targeting two politicians with connections to the ruling Civic Coalition party. According to Polish public broadcaster TVP World, these cases involved charges of financial fraud and corruption. The charges against one of the two politicians mentioned by Ziobro were dropped earlier this year. The other case involved a former Polish transportation minister – last month a Warsaw court dismissed charges against him.

Opposition leaders spied on

The current government under Prime Minister Donald Tusk accuses the PiS government of having used Pegasus to spy on political opponents. Cybersecurity experts at Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto were able to prove, years ago, that the smartphone belonging to Krzysztof Brejza, a former opposition leader, was infiltrated by Pegasus in the lead-up to the 2019 election. At the time, Brejza was leading the opposing coalition’s campaign.

Citizen Lab was also able to show that lawyer Roman Giertych was spied on in 2019. Tusk was a client of Giertych’s when his Civic Coalition party was in opposition. A prosecutor who criticized the PiS government’s judicial reform initiatives was also spied on.

In the fall of 2023 the Polish Senate concluded that the purchase of the spyware was illegal. The Senate also found that the 2019 elections were unfair, given the use of Pegasus against opposition leaders.

Nearly 600 people surveilled

Last year, the current government convened the Pegasus commission in the lower house of parliament (Sejm). The commission is charged with determining who was responsible for the purchase of Pegasus and other similar spying tools – and whether the surveillance measures that were undertaken using these tools were legal.

According to a preliminary report released by the Justice Ministry last year, the PiS government used Pegasus to spy on nearly 600 people between 2017 and 2022. Adam Bodnar, who served as justice minister until July, explained at the time of the report’s release that court authorizations had evidently been obtained in individual cases where surveillance was used. In Bodnar’s judgement, however, the courts were not fully informed about the use of Pegasus.

Former justice minister Ziobro stated on Monday that the Pegasus investigatory commission was illegal. He and other PiS politicians have made this claim repeatedly, invoking Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal (Trybunał Konstytucyjny), which ruled last year that the commission was unconstitutional. For its part, the current ruling coalition does not acknowledge the legitimacy of the tribunal – claiming it was unlawfully stacked with allied judges by the PiS government. Zbigniew Ziobro was considered a leading force behind the controversial judicial reforms instituted by the former government.

Members of the investigatory commission stated on Monday that Ziobro’s case would be referred to the prosecutor general’s office. Prosecutors would determine whether the role the former justice minister played in the purchase of Pegasus spyware amounted to a criminal offense. (js)

Nationwide internet shutdown in Afghanistan

2025-10-01T08:02:00+02:00

Millions of Afghans have been cut off from the internet. Telephone service has also been disrupted. The shutdown has reportedly been ordered by the Taliban.

According to news reports, the shutdown is set to continue “until further notice.” (Source: IMAGO / Middle East Images)

Internet and telephone connections stopped working across Afghanistan on Monday. The blackout comes two weeks after the Taliban shut down the internet in six provinces. Critics warn of consequences for the population at large.

On Monday NetBlocks reported that there had been a “collapse in internet access” in Afghanistan. Other observers also confirmed the blackout.

Telephone and cellular connections are also reportedly down. According to reports, telecommunications services in Afghanistan rely primarily on the national fiberoptic network, which is operated by Afghan Telecom, a public company. NetBlocks told media that a disruption of this infrastructure necessarily leads to an interruption of landline and mobile telephone service.

As the AFP wire service reports, citing an unnamed government source, the Taliban have ordered the shutdown to continue “until further notice.” The government has yet to issue an official explanation.

Cut off from contact

Media outlets and NGOs report that they can no longer contact their employees working in Afghanistan. A UN source told the Guardian that operations in the country are “severely impacted,” with staffers having to rely on radio communications.

Felicia Anthonio, Global #KeepItOn Campaign Manager at the human rights organization AccessNow, said in response to an inquiry from Posteo: “By imposing a nationwide internet blackout across Afghanistan, the Taliban is tightening its control over information flow and deliberately shutting down one of the remaining lifelines for the people of Afghanistan.”

According to the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), a UN agency, in 2023 around 18 percent of the Afghan population used the internet. Statistics reported elsewhere indicate that at the start of 2025 around 30 percent of the 43 million people living in Afghanistan had access to the internet.

Hints of looming shutdown

German broadcaster ARD reports that senior Taliban officials had suggested in recent days that a countrywide communications blackout might be in the offing. The shutdown apparently follows a decree by Taliban Supreme Leader Haibatullah Akhundzada criticizing the spread of allegedly “immoral content” online.

Felicia Anthonio criticized this justification and told Posteo that the measure was actually “an attempt to silence dissent, restrict communication, and shield human rights abuses from public scrutiny.”

Anthonio continued: “Internet access is not a luxury. For millions in Afghanistan, it is a lifeline.” The internet enables education and health services, said Anthonio, and facilitates the exercise of a wide range of human rights. It also empowers communities, expands opportunities, and connects Afghans to the outside world. “For women, girls, journalists, and marginalized communities, already pushed to the margins by Taliban policies, connectivity is often the only way to participate in society,” Anthonio said.

Warning of consequences

For weeks the internet has been shut down in several provinces throughout the country. An official spokesperson from Balkh province confirmed earlier this month that the Taliban leader had ordered the blackout. At the time experts expressed concern that the real purpose of the measure was to suppress critical content and head off potential protests. Beh Lih Yi of the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) called the move “an unprecedented escalation of censorship.”

Other experts warned of negative consequences for the Afghan economy, which is already in crisis. The measure will impact bank transactions and administration, experts said – but above all it will impact women and girls. Since retaking power in 2021 the Taliban have massively restricted the rights of women and girls. To circumvent restrictions on education, some Afghan girls have begun taking classes online.

Impacts on daily life

After an internet shutdown was imposed in six provinces in mid-September, the Guardian and the Afghan exile news outlet Zan Times reported on its impact on women and girls. One 17-year-old told the outlets that online courses were her “only source of hope.” For girls, the loss of the internet “severs their last connection to the outside world.” Another woman told the BBC that she had hoped to be able to finish her studies online and look for work. “Our last hope was online learning,” the woman said. “Now [even] that dream has been destroyed.”

The New York Times reports that although the Taliban have imposed limited shutdowns in the past and blocked individual websites, the internet “has remained central to the daily lives of millions” of Afghans. Senior officials have a presence on social media platforms and many government employees use WhatsApp, according to the Times. As of Monday, officials had not responded to journalists’ inquiries.

The BBC reported on Tuesday that air traffic in Kabul was fully stalled. In some provinces, all the banks were closed. One shopkeeper in Kabul told the AFP news agency that without phones or the internet residents of the city were “blind.”

When the Taliban first ruled Afghanistan, from 1996 to 2001, internet access was limited, in part as a result of years of war that had destroyed the country’s phone network. The Taliban officially banned the internet in 2001. After retaking power in August 2021 the Islamists periodically shut down the internet in Kabul, reportedly to prevent protests.

Commenting on the full blackout imposed on Monday, Felicia Anthonio said: “Sadly, this move follows a familiar pattern in the authoritarian playbook, where authorities are increasingly normalizing the use of internet shutdowns to deny people their human rights.”

The United Nations Assistant Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) on Tuesday urged the Taliban to restore internet and phone access. The mission warned that the blackout could exacerbate the humanitarian crisis in the country. UNAMA also noted that telecommunications are essential during natural disasters – Afghanistan was struck by several earthquakes last month. (js)

Iran: More than 1,000 executions in 2025 so far

2025-09-30T08:03:00+02:00

Iran has executed a record number of people so far this year. A substantial number of people have been killed for drug-related offenses.

For years Iran has carried out more executions than nearly every other country in the world. (Source: IMAGO / Le Pictorium)

So far this year more than 1,000 people have been executed in Iran. Human rights groups and the UN Human Rights Office have documented the killings – and are demanding a moratorium on executions.

As Amnesty International reported on Friday, less than nine months into 2025, more people have been executed in Iran so far than were put to death in all of 2024. Last year, according to the organization, at least 972 people were killed by the state.

This year’s figure is the highest that Amnesty has documented in at least 15 years. The NGO Iran Human Rights has corroborated the death toll – and calls it the highest in 30-plus years.

Over the course of this year the UN Human Rights Office (ONHCR) has repeatedly drawn attention to the sharp rise in executions in Iran. On Monday UN experts reported that they too had documented at least 1,000 executions this year – and assume the actual number to be much higher. The experts reported that in the past few weeks Iran has executed several people per day, stating that “Iran appears to be conducting executions at an industrial scale that defies all accepted standards of human rights protection.”

Heba Morayef, Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa at Amnesty, said in a statement: “The ongoing escalation of executions in Iran has reached horrific proportions as the Iranian authorities continue to systematically weaponize the death penalty as a tool of repression and to quash dissent while displaying a chilling assault on the right to life.”

State repression

Amnesty noted on Friday that since the beginning of the government-critical Woman Life Freedom protests in 2022, the authorities in Iran have increasingly used the death penalty “as a tool of state repression and to crush dissent.”

The country-wide demonstrations were sparked by the death of Jina Mahsa Amini, a young Kurdish woman who died in custody following her arrest by the morality police. In the three years since, several people have been sentenced to death in connection with the protests – and many of these sentences have since been carried out. According to Human Rights Watch (HRW), in June and again in early September the authorities executed two men who had participated in the protests – both men were reportedly tortured to extract confessions. According to HRW, at least twelve people have been put to death in connection with the protests.

As Amnesty International reports, the number of executions in connection with drug-related offenses has also risen sharply. At least 499 people have been put to death for such offenses, according to the UN. Human rights groups have repeatedly criticized Iran’s practice of punishing these offenses with the death penalty – the practice violates international law.

Following June’s military conflict with Israel, the authorities have also begun handing down death sentences under the pretense of national security. Senior officials have even called for “expedited trials and executions” in such cases. Since mid-June at least ten men have been executed on politically-motivated charges, “including at least eight who were accused of espionage for Israel,” Amnesty reports.

The Iranian parliament has also passed a law that would allow the imposition of the death penalty for convictions on vaguely worded national security charges. The bill must still be approved by Iran’s Guardian Council, according to Amnesty.

Heba Morayef said: “The death penalty is abhorrent in all circumstances and deploying it on a large scale following routinely grossly unfair trials compounds the injustice.”

Vague charges

Amnesty’s research has “consistently shown” that Iran’s Revolutionary Courts are not independent, the organization reported. Defendants face “grossly unfair” trials and are convicted of “overly broad and vaguely defined” charges like “enmity against God,” “corruption on earth,” and “armed rebellion against the state.” The courts often hand out harsh sentences – including the death penalty.

Amnesty cited the case of Babak Shahbazi, who was executed on September 17 after being convicted of alleged espionage by a Revolutionary Court in May. Shahbazi’s trial was “grossly unfair,” said Amnesty – despite his reports of being subjected to torture and other ill-treatment, the authorities never investigated. Other human rights organizations condemned the court’s actions, saying that Shahbazi had been convicted on the basis of confessions extracted through torture.

Female activists face execution

Amnesty also criticized the disproportionate use of the death penalty against members of minority groups. Two Kurdish women, Pakhshan Azizi and Verisheh Moradi, currently face execution.

Azizi is a humanitarian aid worker. Among other activities, she worked at an aid organization that provided assistance to women and girls who had been displaced by the armed group known as the Islamic State. In July 2024 she was sentenced to death for alleged “armed rebellion against the state” and “membership in opposition groups.” The Iranian Supreme Court upheld her conviction in January of this year.

This ruling drew widespread condemnation from Iranian artists, writers, and journalists. UN experts responded as well, stating that “Ms. Azizi’s arrest and sentencing appear to be solely related to her legitimate work as a social worker, including her support for refugees in Iraq and Syria.” The experts also cited reports that Azizi had been subjected to “severe psychological and physical torture” in prison.

Verisheh Moradi is a Kurdish activist and a member of the East Kurdistan Free Woman Society. She was sentenced to death in November 2024 – she too was accused of “armed rebellion against the state.” Observers have reported that Moradi has been forced to spend several months in solitary confinement. Both women have also reportedly been denied access to lawyers.

Calls for a moratorium

Amnesty once again urged Iranian authorities to impose a moratorium on executions. This would be a first step toward abolishing the death penalty – the UN Human Rights Office has demanded the same. Amnesty also calls on the international community to put pressure on Iranian authorities “to immediately halt all planned executions, quash all death sentences, and impose an official moratorium on all executions.” The UN experts issued a similar plea: “The international community cannot remain silent in the face of such systematic violations of the right to life.”

Amnesty went further, calling for countries to exercise universal jurisdiction “over all officials reasonably suspected of criminal responsibility for crimes under international law and other grave violations of human rights.”

In January the European Parliament adopted a resolution opposing the death penalty in Iran and calling for a moratorium. (js)

More than 140 environmental defenders killed worldwide last year

2025-09-18T08:03:00+02:00

142 environmental defenders were killed worldwide in 2024. Guatemala saw a sharp rise in killings.

Most of the victims were members of indigenous communities or small-scale farmers. (Source: IMAGO / Anadolu Agency)

Worldwide last year at least 142 environmental defenders were killed. The figure comes from the annual report published Wednesday by the human rights organization Global Witness. Most of the cases documented by the NGO were in Latin America.

The organization believes the actual number to be higher, given that many killings go unreported. In addition to the 142 killings, Global Witness documented four cases of victims who have been missing for at least six months.

Laura Furones, lead author of the report, said in a statement: “Year after year, land and environmental defenders – those protecting our forests, rivers, and lands across the world – continue to be met with unspeakable violence. They are being hunted, harassed, and killed – not for breaking laws, but for defending life itself.”

Colombia the deadliest country

According to the report, Latin America is the most dangerous region for environmental defenders: 82 percent of all murders documented by Global Witness this year occurred in the region – a total of 117. For the third year in a row, Colombia was the deadliest country, with 48 people killed. In its previous report, covering the year 2023, Global Witness documented 79 killings of environmental defenders in Colombia, the highest number of killings in a single country since the organization began keeping track in 2012.

Many of the deaths in Colombia occurred in connection with land disputes. At least 19 of those killed in 2024 were members of indigenous communities. Indigenous people were the victims in roughly a third of cases worldwide, despite the fact that they make up only about six percent of the global population.

The report notes that the country did see a drop in the number of deadly reprisals this year. Local human rights organization Programa Somos Defensores warns however that the statistical decline “does not equate to an overall decrease in violence.” Many regions that were formally controlled by the FARC guerrilla group are now in the hands of organized crime. Drug trafficking and illegal mining pose harms to regions that are rich in biodiversity and home to indigenous communities. Members of those communities have fought back, seeking to prevent damage to the environment. Coca cultivation and armed conflict have had a negative impact in places like the Cauca region.

One Colombian environmental defender who is living under state protection stressed that most activists don’t choose their role voluntarily. “We are defenders because our homes, land, communities, and lives are under threat,” he said.

In Guatemala, 20 activists were killed – a sharp rise compared to 2023, when Global Witness documented four murders in the country. This is the highest number of killings per capita of any country worldwide. In January 2024, a new president, Bernardo Arévalo, took office in the Central American country, pledging to fight inequality and corruption. Despite Arévalo’s more inclusive agenda, 2024 saw a sharp increase in attacks. As the report notes, “A spike in violence against defenders is not uncommon following election swings.”

At least 18 environmental defenders were killed in Mexico, and at least 12 in Brazil.

Difficulty accessing information in Asia and Africa

Global Witness documented seven murders in the Philippines – the highest number in any Asian country. Activists in the Philippines also face abduction and criminalization. Repression often takes the form of a tactic known as red-tagging, with defenders falsely accused of being “communists” or “terrorists.”

Five killings were documented in both Honduras and Indonesia. In the Democratic Republic of Congo there were four murders, according to the report. Global Witness cautions that in Asia and Africa in particular, many cases go unreported and it can be difficult to access information.

Dangerous engagement

It can be equally difficult to prove a direct link between the murder of an environmental defender and specific economic interests. In some cases, however, Global Witness was able to draw a connection: according to the report, mining and other extractive business interests were behind the deaths of at least 29 activists. Eight murders could be tied to logging, and four to agribusiness.

In a few cases, it was also possible to identify the perpetrators, with the highest number of murders (42) carried out by organized crime groups. Private security guards and private military actors were responsible for 17 killings, while in 13 cases hitmen were hired.

Even though the total number of killings documented by Global Witness was lower in 2024 compared to 2023 (falling from 196 to 142), repression continues to rise, according to the report. Many defenders face threats or sexual violence, while others are accused of terrorism or tax evasion in an attempt to criminalize their activism. The organization notes that even in the US, UK, Australia, and EU, environmental activists are increasingly receiving “harsh and disproportionately lengthy sentences.”

Rachel Cox of Global Witness said in a statement: “States across the world are weaponizing their legal systems to silence those speaking out in defense of our planet.” At the same time, Cox said, “governments are failing to hold those responsible for defender attacks to account.”

Calls for better protections

Laura Furones, lead author of the report, said: “Standing up to injustice should never be a death sentence. It is critical that governments and companies turn the tide to uphold defenders’ rights and protect them rather than persecute them.”

Global Witness calls on governments to strengthen the rights of environmental defenders, for example by protecting land and environmental rights. States must stop criminalizing activists, and environmental defenders who face threats must be given state protection. Moreover, attacks must be documented and investigated in a transparent fashion.

The group also urges governments to protect and strengthen existing laws, rather than watering them down. The report cites as an example the recent discussions aimed at weakening the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive.

Global Witness has published its annual report documenting the killings of environmental defenders since 2012. In that time, the organization has documented a total of 2,253 murders worldwide, with the highest number occurring in Colombia (509). In Brazil, 413 activists were killed in this period, in the Philippines, 306, and in Mexico, 222. (js)

UK: MI5 admits to unlawfully spying on journalist

2025-09-17T08:02:00+02:00

The British domestic security service MI5 has admitted to violating a journalist’s rights to privacy and free expression. The journalist demands more answers.

Last year a court ruled that police in Northern Ireland had unlawfully spied on two investigative journalists. (Source: IMAGO / Dreamstime)

The British domestic security service MI5 unlawfully obtained the communications data of Irish journalist Vincent Kearney. The security service has now admitted to the unlawful surveillance, prompted by an ongoing investigation. Kearney’s name had turned up last year in a different case.

According to news reports, the security service’s admission was submitted in writing to Kearney and his former employer the BBC shortly before a hearing of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal on Monday.

The tribunal is responsible for hearing complaints relating to surveillance operations. Currently the court is examining the potentially unlawful police surveillance of reporters in Northern Ireland.

According to reports, the security service admitted to obtaining Kearney’s communications data in two separate instances in 2006 and 2009. This type of data reveals the “who, when, and where” of a person’s communications, making it possible to identify who a person’s contacts are and when and where they are in touch with them.

At the time the surveillance operation was being carried out, Kearney was a correspondent for the BBC reporting on domestic politics in Northern Ireland. He currently works for Irish public broadcaster RTÉ News.

Breach of human rights convention

Jude Bunting, the lawyer representing Kearney and the BBC, said at the hearing before the Investigatory Powers Tribunal that MI5 had “accepted” that it had breached Kearney’s right to respect for private and family life as well as his right to freedom of expression as enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights.

Bunting went on to say: “This appears to be the first time in any tribunal proceedings in which MI5 publicly accept interference with a journalist’s communications data, and also publicly accept that they acted unlawfully in doing so.”

London’s Metropolitan Police also reportedly admitted to obtaining and storing Kearney’s communications data, and to passing the data on to another police force. This was done in connection with an investigation into the murder of a police officer in 2009 and again as part of an inquiry into an alleged leak in the office of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland in 2012.

Kearney had been investigating the Police Ombudsman’s office at the time, looking into allegations that the office was not operating independently and was failing to properly investigate complaints against police. Kearney’s reporting featured in a BBC documentary that aired in 2011.

Demands for more answers

Last year the journalist expressed concern that police in Northern Ireland had tried to identify his sources. Acting on Kearney’s concerns, the BBC asked its lawyers to write to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal.

Responding on Monday to the British security service’s admission, Kearney said the revelation was “deeply concerning” both for himself and other journalists. “I am keen to establish as much detail as possible about the nature of these two instances of unlawful intrusion, and whether MI5 illegally gathered information about my mobile phone communications on other occasions.” The BBC’s legal team will continue to make further inquiries, Kearney added.

A spokesperson for the BBC commented: “MI5’s admission that it illegally obtained communications data of a BBC journalist is a matter of grave concern. It raises serious and important questions that we will continue to pursue.”

Protection of sources “not a luxury”

Patrick Corrigan, Northern Ireland Director at Amnesty International, called the revelations “profoundly alarming.” Corrigan said in a statement: “A journalist’s right to protect their sources is not a luxury, it is the bedrock of a free and fearless press. This is not just about one journalist, it is about the public’s right to know the truth.” He demanded full transparency and “genuine accountability.”

Police in Northern Ireland illegally spied on journalists

Indications that surveillance efforts had been directed against former BBC correspondent Kearney first emerged from a separate case last year: in December, the Investigatory Powers Tribunal ruled that police in Northern Ireland had illegally spied on journalists Trevor Birney and Barry McCaffrey. Reporters without Borders called the ruling a “landmark case for press freedom.”

Birney and McCaffrey produced the 2017 documentary “No Stone Unturned” about an event known as the Loughinisland massacre: in 1994, members of a Unionist paramilitary group murdered six Catholics in a bar in Loughinisland. According to the filmmakers’ investigation, after the crime, police protected the murderers – to this day no one has been prosecuted.

In 2018 the two journalists were arrested and their homes were searched on suspicion that they had stolen police records. This was declared illegal in 2019 – the journalists received a settlement.

That same year, Birney and McCaffrey filed a complaint with the Investigatory Powers Tribunal accusing the police of repeatedly attempting to identify their sources. The police claimed that the surveillance operation was directed at the Police Ombudsman’s office and was based on the suspicion that an official there was leaking internal documents. The court rejected this claim.

More journalists potentially targeted

In last year’s case it also emerged that London’s Metropolitan Police had requested McCaffrey’s phone records in 2012 – it was in this connection that Kearney’s name had turned up. There were also indications that still more journalists had been spied on.

After last year’s ruling, Birney and McCaffrey demanded a public inquiry. Commenting on the revelations at Monday’s hearing, Birney said: “We welcome what MI5 have done here in finally coming clean, but this is only the tip of the iceberg, and the question now is how much of the iceberg are we actually going to see.” (js)

Afghanistan: Taliban crack down on women working for UN

2025-09-16T08:04:00+02:00

The Taliban government is preventing female staffers at UN agencies in Afghanistan from accessing their workplaces. The restrictions have reportedly kept female aid workers from traveling to regions affected by last month’s earthquake.

Afghan women are no longer permitted to work in most fields. (Archival image) (Source: IMAGO / UPI Photo)

The Taliban government has begun enforcing restrictions on women working for UN agencies. The move risks disrupting the delivery of lifesaving assistance to hundreds of thousands of people suffering in the aftermath of last month’s earthquake, the UN warned last week.

As the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) reported last week, as of September 7 Afghan security forces have begun barring female staff members from entering UN compounds in the capital city of Kabul. The restriction was subsequently extended to offices in other cities as well.

In Kabul, Herat, and Mazar-i-Sharif, the Taliban have posted security forces at the entrances to UN offices to enforce the ban.

The Afghan authorities’ ban on women working for UN agencies in the country was actually first imposed in 2023 – prompting international condemnation at the time. According to UNAMA, however, the UN was able to make arrangements with the Taliban to ensure that around the country aid could continue to be delivered “by women, for women.”

In January of this year the Taliban threatened to shut down foreign and domestic NGOs if they continued to employ women. The government had first imposed a ban on the groups employing female staffers in 2022.

Earthquake victims in need of aid

As UNAMA announced last week, it has also received reports of female staffers being prevented from traveling to field locations. As a result, these staffers have been unable to provide aid to women and girls affected by the severe earthquake that struck on August 31, leveling entire villages.

According to the UN, the earthquake and its aftershocks have caused the deaths of more than 2,000 people; more than 3,400 have been injured. At least 6,700 houses were destroyed or severely damaged. Hundreds of thousands of people in affected regions in the eastern part of the country need assistance. Meanwhile there have been reports that, because of a prohibition on physical contact between unrelated men and women, male rescue workers have declined to offer assistance to women injured in the quake, instead waiting until female rescuers arrived. At least one hospital in the region lacks any female staffers.

The Taliban government has barred women from enrolling in medical education – and in some provinces women cannot be treated by male healthcare workers. Human Rights Watch warns that in the foreseeable future Afghanistan will face a shortage of female workers in the medical field.

UNAMA calls this latest crackdown “a breach of international rules on the privileges and immunities of United Nations personnel.” The UN mission calls for the government to lift restrictions.

Support centers closed

The crackdown has also impacted the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR). As the agency announced last week, it was forced to temporarily close several support centers in Afghanistan. The centers are set up to register and provide emergency assistance to people crossing into the country from Pakistan.

Arafat Jamal, UNHCR Representative to Afghanistan, said in a statement: “All of us at the United Nations are suffering from a reinforcement of the ban on females working with us. We are simply unable to operate without females.” Jamal went on to explain that the registration process in the support centers would be “entirely impossible without Afghan female workers,” given that more than half of those returning are women.

The UNHCR official stressed that the decision to close the centers was not intended “to punish anyone or to make a statement, but simply demonstrates that we cannot work without female workers in certain circumstances.”

Pakistan carries out deportations

According to the UN, since the beginning of this year more than 2.6 million people have returned to Afghanistan from neighboring countries, above all Pakistan and Iran – “many not by choice,” said UNHCR. Human rights organizations warn that those returning include people who had fled fearing persecution by the Taliban.

According to media reports, Pakistani authorities have also detained more than 600 Afghans who had been accepted into a program granting them German residency. Of the more than 600 Afghans detained, more than 200 have already been deported. The group includes individuals who worked for the German army or other institutions in Afghanistan prior to the Taliban’s takeover – and at least one journalist who had been accepted into the German residency program has reportedly been deported as well.

According to UN statistics, in the first week of September alone nearly 100,000 people crossed into Afghanistan from Pakistan. The influx puts further strain on the humanitarian system in Afghanistan – and comes as the country is already in the midst of a humanitarian crisis. The UN Refugee Agency now warns of a “crisis within a crisis.” There are even reports of people who returned from Pakistan only to lose their home again in last month’s earthquake.

Referring to the Taliban government’s crackdown on UN female staffers, UNAMA said the move was “particularly concerning in view of continuing restrictions on the rights of Afghan women and girls.”

Since returning to power four years ago, the Taliban have intensified their repression of the Afghan population – and have severely limited the rights of women and girls in particular. According to the UN, since August 2021 nearly one hundred laws and edicts have been passed with this aim in mind. As UN Women, the UN gender equality agency, wrote last month: “In four years, not a single one” of these edicts has been overturned. (js)

Roll-out of new EU border control system set for October

2025-09-11T17:00:00+02:00

The EU will soon begin collecting biometric data from non-EU citizens traveling to the bloc for short stays. The system has been in the planning for years.

The timeline for implementation of the Entry/Exit System has been pushed back several times already. According to news reports, France, Germany, and the Netherlands weren’t prepared for the most recent planned start. (Source: IMAGO / W2Art)

When traveling to the EU in the future, non-EU citizens will have to submit to having their fingerprints and photo taken. Step-by-step implementation of the Entry/Exit System (EES) is set to begin on October 12. The European Commission announced the start date in late July. The EU hopes that the system will lead to a quicker border control process and help prevent so-called “irregular migration.” For years there have been concerns about the implications for fundamental rights.

The EES was developed by the EU to register travelers from countries outside of the bloc. Specifically this means people who plan to stay in the EU for a maximum of 90 days within any 180-day period (“short stay”) – regardless of whether they need a visa for entry or not. Nationals of Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland are exempted from the registration requirements – these countries will also use the EES. The system was developed by the European Union Agency for the Operational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security, and Justice (eu-LISA).

When the system goes into effect, travelers entering the EU will have to allow certain data to be collected. While border officials will be involved in the data collection in some cases, self-service terminals will also be in use. Member states also have the option of using apps that allow travelers to enter the necessary data before their planned travel. The EU border agency Frontex has already developed a prototype for such an app that can be integrated by member states into their own national systems.

Specifically, the EES will save the fingerprints and biometric facial images of travelers. Information included in travel documents, like name, date of birth, and time and place of departure and arrival, will also be stored. The system will also keep records of whether a traveler has been refused entry in the past. Children under 12 years of age will not be required to provide their fingerprints. According to the European Commission, implementing the system means that biometric data will be collected at the EU’s external borders in a systematic fashion for the first time.

Saved for three years

Each person’s data will be placed in an individual file and saved for a period of three years. That period will be extended to five years for “overstayers,” that is, travelers who have exceeded the term of their authorized stay. The basis for the measure is an EU regulation passed in 2017. The measure is part of the EU’s so-called Smart Borders package.

The European Commission has now set October 12 as the start date for the roll-out of the EES. The system will be implemented gradually over a period of six months at the external borders of 29 European countries. These countries include Germany, France, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, and Austria. Initially not all travelers will have to register their biometric data in the EES: the phased roll-out calls for 10 percent of crossings to be registered in the system by day 30 – a goal that was originally meant to be reached on day one. The new plan also allows for implementation to be temporarily paused if technical problems lead to excessive wait times at the borders. Negotiating teams from the European Parliament and member states reached an agreement in May on the new phased implementation plan. The system is supposed to be in full operation by April 2026.

Given earlier postponements, however, it’s not clear whether the latest start date will be met. In April, Assita Kanko (ECR, Belgium), rapporteur for the European Parliament, expressed her regrets “that eight years after the adoption of the Regulation, the system is still not operational.”

Identifying “overstayers”

The EU hopes that implementing the EES will help usher in a modern border management system – largely replacing the classic system of stamping passports. The EU regards the collection of biometric data as a way to help prevent the use of false identities. The authorities will also be able to more easily identify people who have exceeded the term of their authorized stay in the EU, or who have already been denied entry – this will help prevent “irregular migration.”

So-called “overstayers” will automatically be placed on a list generated by the EES. The list will be made available to the relevant authorities in each EU country to allow them to take “appropriate measures.”

There are also plans for interoperability with other existing and planned EU databases. The EES is meant to share data with the Visa Information System (VIS), which countries in the Schengen area have used to exchange visa data since 2011.

Criticism and concerns

The EES has been the target of criticism for years. Shortly after the measure was adopted in 2017, the German Datenschutzkonferenz (Data Protection Conference – DSK), which represents the federal data protection commissioner and the independent data protection authorities of the individual German states, criticized aspects of the system relating to data storage. According to the DSK, the plan for the EES to store data gathered in the context of border entry without cause, on a long-term basis, and in a centralized location, is not legally justifiable.

A 2017 analysis commissioned by the Green Party faction in the European Parliament also criticized the three-year period for data storage.

The European Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) is currently investigating the implications of the EES for fundamental rights.

Reached by Posteo for comment, a spokesperson for the FRA said, “There are many fundamental rights challenges that result from collecting, storing, and processing biometric data in large-scale IT-systems.” These challenges begin with the potential that people might be treated disrespectfully when required to have their fingerprints taken. There is also the risk of discrimination – for instance, “it is well known that biometric processing that does not work well with people of color.”

“When it comes to data storage,” the FRA spokesperson said, “there can be difficulties in challenging wrong information and in correcting or deleting inaccurate data. Then there is the risk of unlawful use and sharing of personal data with third parties.”

Intelligence agencies granted access

The EES is the focus of a recent paper published by the Deutsche Institut für Menschenrechte (German Institute of Human Rights – DIMR). The DIMR is Germany’s independent human rights institution and operates in accordance with the Paris Principles. The paper points out provisions in the underlying EU law that allow national authorities to gain access to the EES for the purpose of preventing, detecting, or investigating terrorist offenses or serious criminal offenses. According to the law, any national authority seeking access must submit an application to a designated “central access point.” The law allows for the central access point and the authority requesting access to be part of the same organization – but despite this apparent overlap, the central access point is nevertheless supposed to exercise its authority “fully independently,” according to the law.

In Germany, a 2023 law designates the authorities that may access EES data. These include the Federal Police (Bundespolizei), Federal Criminal Police Office (Bundeskriminalamt), the various state police offices, and the Customs Investigation Bureau and its subordinate Customs Investigation Offices. Germany’s main domestic and foreign intelligence agencies, as well as the military’s domestic intelligence agency, can also gain access “for purposes of preventing, detecting, and investigating terrorist offenses or other serious criminal offenses.” (The language of the German law reflects that of the EU law.)

Then-Federal Data Protection Commissioner Ulrich Kleber expressed concerns at the time of the law’s passage about the provisions granting access to intelligence services.

In its paper, the DIMR concludes that the EES raises “grave fundamental and human rights concerns.” Use of the system brings the risk of violating the rights to privacy and data protection, to respect for private and family life, and to effective legal representation. The institute questions the proportionality of the data processing and of the provisions granting access to national authorities – and warns that the use of algorithms to process biometric data could promote “discrimination against certain groups of people.” (js)

Egypt: Dozens arrested for TikTok videos

2025-09-11T08:01:00+02:00

In Egypt a rising number of people have been arrested in recent months for posting videos online. Many of those detained are women.

Women who post content online have been targeted by the authorities for years, one Egyptian organization reports. (Source: IMAGO / SOPA Images)

Since July authorities in Egypt have carried out a mass arrest campaign targeting people who post videos on social media. Many women are among the detainees – some have millions of followers online. Human Rights Watch (HRW) on Wednesday issued a news release calling attention to the arrests and warning that the authorities are violating the right to freedom of expression.

According to official statements, the authorities arrested or prosecuted at least 29 people for their online content between late July and late August. As HRW reports, at least 19 women and one child are among those arrested. Citing “credible media and human rights reports,” the organization believes there may be an additional eight cases not mentioned by official sources.

According to HRW, the authorities have brought charges for vague offenses like violating “public morals,” “undermining family values,” or even “money laundering.” The charges stem from videos that the authorities regard as “indecent.”

TikTok ban threatened

Most of those arrested are TikTok users. In August a member of the Telecommunications Committee in Egypt’s House of Representatives threatened the platform with a ban if it failed to eliminate certain content. Citing one example of content viewed as objectionable by the government, the dpa wire service reported in August on a user who was accused of defaming religion in videos posted to Facebook and YouTube. He was sentenced to six months in prison and a fine.

Amr Magdi of Human Rights Watch said in a statement: “Egyptian authorities’ campaign against online content creators seems intended to quell the last vestige of space for free expression in the country. This is part of the government’s relentless attempt to criminalize all forms of expression that do not conform with its political or social views.”

The organization cites the case of a 16-year-old girl who was arrested and held for four days in July. She was accused of posting allegedly “indecent” videos of herself dancing. In August she was reportedly sentenced to two years in prison by a juvenile court.

Another example is that of a young woman who posted videos on TikTok under the name Suzy El Ordoneya. More than 9 million people follow her account. She was placed in pre-trial detention on August 4, and on August 20 her detention was extended. She is charged with posting “indecent” videos and with “money laundering.” According to HRW, in some of her videos she discussed social issues, in others she danced or sang.

Reuters reported on Suzy El Ordoneya’s case in August, noting that in some videos the young woman called attention to social stigmas around mental disability. According to news reports, she has been sentenced to jail time because of her videos in the past as well.

Before her arrest in August, Suzy El Ordoneya gave an interview with a podcaster. Discussing what she would do if she had a lot of money at her disposal, she said she would help her parents and her sister. Shortly after the interview, the podcaster was also arrested, Reuters reports.

Belly dancers arrested

Human Rights Watch’s report documents still more cases, including those of four belly dancers who were arrested for posting videos of themselves dancing. A tattoo artist was also arrested: he is charged with posting videos that show him tattooing women – an activity that “contradicts societal traditions,” according to the authorities.

In another case an individual was arrested whom the authorities characterize as “a man mispresenting [sic] as a woman.” This claim is “frequently used against proscribed gender non-conforming appearances,” HRW reports. The individual was charged with publishing “indecent” videos.

Law on cybercrime

HRW reports that those arrested face charges under a 2018 law on cybercrime. Under a provision of the law, someone convicted of violating “public morals” or “family principles or values in Egyptian society” can be sentenced to up to three years in prison and can face steep fines. This law has been used repeatedly in recent years to criminalize free expression.

The most recent arrests have coincided with a campaign in pro-government media accusing influencers of “morality” violations and “money laundering,” HRW reports. In addition, a group of lawyers recently filed complaints with the public prosecutor against ten people, eight of whom were women. Under Egyptian law, citizens can file complaints directly with the public prosecutor if they deem that an alleged offense endangers public safety or morals.

HRW writes that the government’s actions violate the right to privacy and freedom of expression. The right to nondiscrimination has also been violated, given that women and girls have been targeted because of their clothing or their choice to engage in acts like dancing. The organization demands that the authorities “drop abusive prosecutions and cease using vague morality charges to quell online expression.”

A pattern of arrests

In August, the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights (EIPR), an Egypt-based rights group, also called on the Egyptian Interior Ministry and the public prosecution to stop prosecuting people who post content online on the basis of “vague, morally and socially biased charges” like “violating Egyptian family values.” Lobna Darwish, a lawyer for the EIPR, told media that the cybercrime law was so broadly worded that content “that would not be out of place on mainstream TV” had led to arrests.

The organization described an “aggressive campaign” that first began in 2020. Since that time the EIPR has documented similar charges against more than 150 people in 109 separate cases – though the actual number is likely much higher, the group cautions.

In the beginning the campaign largely targeted women who posted videos on TikTok and who largely came from modest socio-economic backgrounds. Now however the authorities have started pursuing other users, for example those who express unsanctioned religious views. Certain male users have also been targeted, “either because of their homosexuality or perceived homosexuality.”

The Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights reports that in the wake of the arrests, users are increasingly reporting other users to prosecutors for material “that does not constitute any crime.” (js)

Nepal lifts social media ban after protests

2025-09-10T08:03:00+02:00

A shut down imposed on several online platforms in Nepal was lifted after massive protests. Demonstrations continue despite the ban’s reversal – many protesters have died.

It is mostly young people who have taken to the streets. Their dissatisfaction is fueled in part by the economic situation in the country. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

After intense protests involving clashes with security forces that have left at least 19 people dead, the Nepalese government on Tuesday lifted a previously imposed social media ban. Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli has stepped down amid the ongoing protests.

Last Thursday the government of the south Asian country blocked access to a total of 26 platforms. Among them were Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram, YouTube, and WeChat. LinkedIn, Pinterest, Reddit, and Signal were also inaccessible, according to reports.

As of Tuesday morning all these platforms were back online, the New York Times reported. Minister for Communication and Information Technology Prithvi Subba Gurung told the paper: “To address the demands raised by Gen Z, a social media ban will be lifted.”

The ban came after the government imposed new registration requirements, mandating that platforms register for a license in the country and appoint a local representative. The government issued companies an ultimatum, giving them seven days to comply – but only five platforms did, among them TikTok and Viber. The rest were shut down when the ban went into effect last Thursday.

“Gen Z protests”

On Monday large protests erupted in Kathmandu and other cities. Tens of thousands of people, most of them reportedly teenagers or young adults, took to the streets, prompting local media to dub the demonstrations “Gen Z protests.”

As the New York Times reports, another driver of the protests, in addition to the social media ban, was the economic situation in the country, which is home to around 30 million people. The unemployment rate is especially high among young Nepalese, the paper reports. There has also been mounting anger over “what many Nepalese see as the government’s failure to aggressively pursue high-profile corruption cases.” Additional anger has focused on the children of politicians who are seen as flaunting their luxurious lifestyles, which remain out of reach for many Nepalese. With discontent building up over the years, last week’s social media ban proved to be the last straw.

Protesters criticized the ban, viewing it as a restriction on freedom of expression and as state censorship. Social media platforms are also essential means of communication, not least for the many Nepalese who live abroad and send money home. Platforms like WhatsApp also play a vital role for many companies. Nayana Prakash at the Chatham House research institute in London told the New York Times that governments often failed to grasp that “cutting off these social media tools is also cutting off employment.”

Protesters killed and injured

According to observers, the protests that erupted on Monday are the largest in decades. They reportedly escalated after demonstrators occupied a security post near the parliament building in the capital. The police responded by firing tear gas, water cannons, rubber bullets, and even live ammunition into the crowd. At least 19 people were killed, and hundreds were reportedly injured.

The UN Human Rights Office (UNHCR) wrote on Monday in response to the violence: “We are shocked by the killings and injury of protestors in Nepal today and urge a prompt and transparent investigation.” The rights to peaceful assembly and freedom of expression must be respected, the UNHCR added. “Nepal enjoys a lively democracy and active civic space, and dialogue is the best means to address young people’s concerns.”

Amnesty International also criticized the actions of security forces and called for “immediate de-escalation.”

Curfew imposed

In order to put a halt to further protests, the government imposed a curfew for Kathmandu – but protests continued on Tuesday. Demonstrators have reportedly set fire to the Parliament and Supreme Court buildings as well as to politicians’ homes.

Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli announced his resignation on Tuesday. In a statement, Oli said his government was “not negative towards the demands raised” by the protesters and that he was “deeply saddened” by Monday’s incidents. Several politicians resigned ahead of Oli on Monday, among them Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak.

According to observers, a certain amount of room for free expression has remained in Nepal in recent years, even as many other south Asian countries have limited freedom of expression. Critics however have long accused Prime Minister Oli of seeking to exert stronger control. Human Rights Watch (HRW) wrote on Tuesday that the government has “a record of silencing online speech” and has “sought to prosecute journalists over online content.” Proposed legislation could limit free expression even further.

Nor is this the first time that social media platforms have been blocked in Nepal. In November 2023 TikTok was banned for allegedly disrupting “social harmony.” Nine months later the ban was lifted – but only after the platform registered with the government.

In July the messaging service Telegram was blocked. Access Now criticized the decision, stating that there was no clear legal basis for it.

And earlier this year, in March, a proposed law to regulate social media drew criticism.
NGOs expressed concerns that the broadly written and vague provisions in the draft legislation could be used as a pretext to target human rights activists, journalists, and critics of the government. While the bill is still being debated, the Supreme Court recently decided that platforms that are used to disseminate falsified content must register with the government. In imposing the since-rescinded social media ban, the government invoked the Supreme Court’s decision. (js)

Amazon region: Calls for better protection of journalists

2025-09-09T08:09:00+02:00

Physical attacks and financial insecurity: the work of journalists in the Amazon region is difficult and dangerous. Reporters without Borders demands protective measures.

The Amazon region is one of the most dangerous in the country for Brazilian journalists. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

Journalists working in the Amazon region are confronted with an array of difficulties. Reporters without Borders (RSF) warns that because of these difficulties, the public learns little about what happens in the region. RSF calls for efforts to protect journalists to be included among the climate commitments discussed in advance of this year’s COP30.

Journalists in the Amazon region face threats and physical attacks, RSF reports. To make matters worse, local media outlets often have few resources to work with. The spread of disinformation further exacerbates the problem, making the work of journalists even more difficult. All these factors combine to make it harder for journalists to inform the public about goings-on in the Amazon.

As an important carbon pool, the Amazon rainforest is crucial for the earth’s climate. It is considered one of the so-called “tipping elements” that could push the world’s climate out of equilibrium. The rain forest is also key to global biodiversity. This year the UN’s COP30 climate conference will take place from November 10-21 in the city of Belém in the Brazilian Amazon.

Artur Romeu of RSF said in a statement: “COP30 is nearly here and the international community must recognize that the safety of Amazonian journalists and the sustainability of local media are vital climate commitments. Without independent journalism, there is no effective monitoring of environmental policies and no transparency regarding the impacts of the crisis. Strengthening journalism in the Amazon must be part of the multilateral climate and the environmental agenda.”

Surveillance and physical attacks

The organization describes how journalists who report in the Amazon frequently have to pass armed checkpoints when traveling from place to place. These are operated both by official authorities and by criminal groups. According to RSF, journalists passing through such checkpoints must often submit to cell phone searches. “This intimidation often restricts coverage in border regions and riverside communities,” RSF writes.

Brazil’s Amazon region is also one of the most dangerous places in the country for journalists: Between July 2022 and July 2023, RSF documented 66 attacks on journalists in the region.

The 2022 murder of British journalist Dom Philipps and Brazilian indigenous expert Bruno Pereira drew international attention. RSF condemns the authorities’ failure to put anyone on trial for the crime, despite the indictments of those suspected to be responsible.

The situation is also dangerous in those regions of the Amazon rain forest that lie in other countries. RSF reports for example that the environmental journalist Manuel Calloquispe received death threats in August after investigating the illegal Peruvian gold-mining city of La Pampa. In Colombia a radio reporter survived an attack in July – after being shot four times. And in Ecuador a journalist for a local TV station reported that two attackers had attempted to kill him in his newsroom.

RSF has also reported on past instances of journalists being targeted by lawsuits because of their reporting. These legal challenges, combined with the threats of violence, can sometimes lead to self-censorship, when journalists, fearing for their safety or their livelihoods, decline to report on certain topics.

Financial insecurity

Structural conditions like financial insecurity are another factor making the work of journalists in the Amazon more difficult. RSF gives one example of a Colombian radio station that refuses advertising from agrochemical companies in order to preserve its editorial independence. Reporting trips in the Amazon region are expensive, however, and the decision to forego this source of funding has consequences, limiting the station’s reach. Small media outlets in particular frequently struggle with a lack of resources. But because large media organizations sometimes fail to devote much attention to events in the Amazon, the task of reporting them often falls to smaller outlets.

RSF warns that the “unstable economic situation threatens not only the continuity of Amazonian journalism but society’s ability to closely follow the impacts of the climate crisis in one of the planet’s most strategic regions for environmental protection.”

Disinformation poses yet another problem for journalists, frequently aiming to drown out negative reporting and suppress critical voices. In Colombia, for example, mining companies often pay small news outlets to broadcast scripted press conferences that purport to be unbiased news. In Brazil, meanwhile, RSF reports on the spread of narratives that seek to minimize the harm of mercury poisoning in the region’s rivers, a consequence of illegal gold mining.

Press freedom as a part of environmental protection

In the lead-up to COP30 it is “more urgent than ever,” RSF writes, for governments “to make the protection of information a cornerstone of the fight against climate change.”

In June, RSF, UNESCO, Greenpeace France, the Pulitzer Center, Climate Action Against Disinformation, and the Forum on Information and Democracy called on the international community to protect journalism, “a vital pillar in the fight against climate change and the preservation of biodiversity.” The groups’ statement stressed the challenges faced by journalists who investigate environmental harm and are being “censored, threatened, obstructed, and even killed.”

The groups called for enhanced frameworks for cooperation among states to allow for a rapid and coordinated response to serious attacks against journalists. They also demanded “the recognition of the right to reliable and independent information as a fundamental component of environmental protection.” (js)

US immigration agency reactivates contract with controversial spyware company

2025-09-05T09:10:00+02:00

The US government has lifted a hold on a contract between Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the spyware maker Paragon. The move has drawn criticism.

Critics warn that “these tools were designed for dictatorships.” (Source: MAGO / Newscom World)

US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) will soon be able to use products made by the controversial spyware company Paragon Solutions. The contract the agency entered into with the company last year was reactivated in August after having been put on hold by the Biden administration. Experts have expressed concern.

As stated in procurement records available on a publicly accessible US government database, the stop work order issued by the Biden administration was lifted last week. Neither ICE nor Paragon have responded to questions from several media outlets.

ICE first signed the agreement with Paragon in September 2024. According to the procurement records, the company would receive $2 million to provide “a fully configured proprietary solution including license, hardware, warranty, maintenance, and training.” The documents don’t specify which product the government is purchasing – but US media assume that it is the company’s Graphite spyware.

Order prohibiting commercial spyware

This assumption is based in part on the Biden administration’s decision to place a hold on the contract in October 2024 in the wake of critical reporting. The Department of Homeland Security – ICE’s parent agency – explained at the time that a review was necessary to ensure that the contract complied with a Biden directive pertaining to the use of spyware.

The executive order signed by Joe Biden in March 2023 prohibits US government agencies from using commercial spyware tools “that pose significant counterintelligence or security risks to the US government or significant risks of improper use by a foreign government or foreign person, including to target Americans or enable human rights abuses.” The order does outline possible exceptions, however, for example for test purposes.

The contract between ICE and Paragon drew criticism when it was first signed last year. Human Rights Watch (HRW) pointed to its prior concerns about ICE’s abuse of people trying to cross the border between Mexico and the US – and its surveillance of border communities, journalists, lawyers, and activists. “Giving ICE access to spyware risks exacerbating these problems,” the organization wrote.

Paragon was founded in Israel, though according to media reports it was recently acquired by a US corporation. The company is known primarily for its Graphite spyware. The tool is able to infiltrate individuals’ devices without their knowledge; once attackers have access, they can read the targeted individuals’ messages and access stored data.

Spyware maker seeks to project positive image

Paragon has tried to set itself apart from other spyware makers like NSO Group that have repeatedly been linked to human rights abuses. The company has claimed publicly that it only does business with democratic countries. But in the estimation of cybersecurity experts at the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab, which has uncovered numerous instances of spyware abuse, this claim is pure marketing. It is addressed primarily at the US government, which in the past has imposed sanctions on spyware makers.

According to cybersecurity experts, Paragon is trying to create the impression that abuse is only to be feared in authoritarian states. But its claims don’t bear up to closer scrutiny.

Surveillance of activists and journalists

WhatsApp announced in January of this year that 90 users of its messaging service had been targeted with Graphite. Shortly after the announcement it became clear that activists and journalists in Italy were among those targeted.

The Italian government ultimately admitted to using Graphite spyware against activists involved with the sea rescue organization Mediterranea Saving Humans – but denied surveilling journalists. Paragon said that it had cancelled its contract with Italy.

The news site TechCrunch writes that the reactivation of its contract with ICE now poses an “ethical dilemma” for Paragon: the company must now decide whether it wants to continue its relationship with the agency, which since Donald Trump entered office has carried out mass deportations and is already using a wide variety of surveillance technologies. ICE’s aggressive raids have drawn intense criticism.

Concerns about spyware in ICE’s hands

Meanwhile there is growing concern about potential use of the spyware by the immigration agency. Democratic Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon told the Washington Post: “ICE is already shredding due process and ruining lives in its rush to lock up kids, cooks, and firefighters who pose no threat to anyone. I’m extremely concerned about how ICE will use Paragon’s spyware to further trample on the rights of Americans and anyone who Donald Trump labels as an enemy.”

John Scott-Railton at Citizen Lab told media that such tools “were designed for dictatorships, not democracies built on liberty and protection of individual rights.” In a series of posts on Bluesky, Scott-Railton added, “Highly invasive mercenary spyware is a power abuse machine” and incompatible with the constitutional rights and freedoms of people in the US.

Michel De Dora at Access Now, speaking to the Post, warned that Paragon’s technology has already been used against activists and dissidents, adding, “Americans should be deeply concerned about how the administration could use this new tool for the purposes of domestic repression.”

Nadine Farid Johnson at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University said in a statement: “Spyware like Paragon’s Graphite poses a profound threat to free speech and privacy.” Johnson also expressed the fear that the “quiet lifting of the stop work order” could mean that “parts of the executive branch are acting without adherence to the government’s own vetting requirements.” She called on the US Congress to step in. (js)

Lawsuit: Google must bar stolen nude photos from search results

2025-09-04T12:38:00+02:00

A new lawsuit seeks to require Google to ensure that illegally distributed private images do not appear in search results. The organization HateAid has backed the lawsuit, which was filed by a victim.

According to HateAid, the case breaks new legal ground. (Source: IMAGO / SOPA Images)

With support from the human rights organization HateAid, a woman has filed a lawsuit against Google in a Munich court. Intimate photos of the claimant that were published without her consent are accessible through the company’s search engine. She seeks a ruling that forces Google to stop displaying images reported by her in search results, as well as identical or substantially similar images.

HateAid is using the pseudonym Laura for the claimant. According to the organization, Laura googled herself in 2023 – and what she found turned her life upside down: intimate photos of her and her husband appeared in the search results.

The images had been stolen from her private cloud account, along with a copy of her identity card. Without her knowledge or consent, the content was published on pornographic websites, together with her real name.

Google only removes reported URLs

Laura turned to HateAid for help: Over a year and a half, the organization reported roughly 2,000 Google search results and requested that they be removed. As HateAid wrote on Tuesday, Google “generally complied” with the requests and delisted the reported URLs. Nevertheless, because the images continue to be re-uploaded, they continue to appear in search results to this day.

HateAid repeatedly asked the company to stop displaying identical and substantially similar images in its search results. Ultimately, in an out-of-court procedure, lawyers representing Laura formally demanded that the company comply – but Google refused. Now HateAid’s client has filed suit.

Lawsuit invokes GDPR

The lawsuit asks the court to require Google to permanently bar the reported images, as well as identical or substantially similar images, from appearing in Google Search. Not only should the previously reported URLs be delisted, any new URLs containing the photos should also be barred from appearing, without the claimant needing to report them.

The lawsuit invokes the “right to be forgotten” enshrined in the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Even though Google does not host the images, the company still helps disseminate them through its search function. Because the images constitute personal data under the GDPR, Google is bound by the regulation – so the lawsuit argues.

Frank Bräutigam, legal expert for the German broadcaster ARD, commented: “The question to be settled in this case is: how far does this ‘right to be forgotten’ extend? Does it also encompass the deletion of links with photos identical or substantially similar to those that have already been reported? Does Google have to search for and delete them on its own initiative? This is uncharted legal territory.”

HateAid characterizes the illegal dissemination of intimate images as “image-based sexual abuse.” Google, the group says, “bears partial responsibility for the mass dissemination of the private images” because the search engine “makes them accessible to a wide public and profits from the traffic.”

Franziska Benning, head of legal at HateAid, said in a statement: “The role of search engines in the spread of image-based sexual abuse should not be underestimated. All too often, they are the very reason that stolen or falsified images can be found. In effect, they make money from the suffering of victims. Because such cases are becoming increasingly more frequent, it is in all our interests to have the responsibility of Google clarified in court.” The group is also calling for lawmakers to close loopholes allowing those who commit this form of sexual abuse to evade responsibility.

Victims forced to change place of residence

HateAid also calls attention to the severe consequences suffered by victims of such abuse. Judith Strieder of HateAid victim support said in a statement: “The psychological burden on victims can be devastating. Control over the most private and intimate images is lost in an instant. Often forever. Many are in shock and are left feeling powerless and exposed. For victims, there is a life before and after. It will never be undone.”

In the present case, personal acquaintances and coworkers of the claimant stumbled on the images on Google. Afterwards she felt compelled to switch jobs and change her place of residence.

In December the German magazine Der Spiegel reported extensively on Laura’s case and the consequences she has suffered. She told the magazine at the time: “To see these photos on the internet, against my will and with my name attached – it felt almost like rape.” She had even received phone calls from unknown men while at work, she said. According to Der Spiegel’s reporting, fake images of Laura generated by so-called artificial intelligence are also being disseminated. Both she and her husband have at times had thoughts of suicide and have gone through week-long stretches of being unable to work.

A Google spokesperson told the dpa wire service that the fight against the dissemination of such images is “a complex challenge that is and will remain a priority for Google Search.” Because of this, the spokesperson said, Google has developed a number of safeguards with which to respond to reports of this kind. “We understand that it is very debilitating when content is shared online without permission,” said the Google spokesperson.

Criticism of Google

HateAid reports however that even if some URLs are blocked, the images keep popping up in search results after being re-uploaded onto other websites – and then have to be reported again. This could potentially go on forever. For the most part the images are hosted on lesser-known websites abroad that list no legal notices or contact information. Contacting these platforms individually would be useless, HateAid says. Only through Google searches does the material reach a mass public.

“We are convinced that a giant corporation like Google has the technological and economic capability to find images and videos of this kind and remove them from search results,” HateAid writes. “Our impression, however, is that the will is lacking.”

Current case law relating to the “right to be forgotten” has clarified only the requirement that specific content be permanently deleted. There is still no legal precedent mandating a review of substantially similar content. In HateAid’s view, however, a judicial review that takes this fundamental right into account should find that victims are entitled to have content of this kind permanently kept out of search results. This is a landmark case, the organization says. (dpa / js)

Iran: Number of executions continues to rise

2025-09-02T08:05:00+02:00

More than 800 people have been executed in Iran so far this year. Human rights groups demand a moratorium on executions.

For years Iran has executed more people annually than nearly every other country in the world. (Source: IMAGO / Le Pictorium)

So far this year at least 841 people have been executed in Iran. The UN Human Rights Office (OHCHR) issued a statement last Friday calling attention to the continued rise in executions. Iran uses the death penalty “as a tool of state intimidation,” the OHCHR said.

According to statistics gathered by the OHCHR, in July alone, Iran executed 110 people. This is more than double the total number of individuals executed in July of 2024.

The latest UN figures reflect the period from the beginning of the year to August 28. “The high number of executions indicates a systematic pattern of using [the] death penalty as a tool of state intimidation,” the OHCHR writes. Ethnic minorities and migrants are disproportionately targeted.

The OHCHR had already observed a sharp rise in executions in the first half of this year: at least 612 people were put to death in the country in the first six months of 2025 – less than half the number for the same period last year, when the authorities carried out at least 297 death sentences. According to Amnesty International, at least 972 people were executed in Iran in all of 2024.

Drug-related offenses and dissenting views

In July the UN Human Rights Office noted that many of the individuals put to death in Iran had been sentenced for drug-related offenses. According to the Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA), in August eighty-seven people were executed for such offenses. Human rights groups have repeatedly criticized Iran’s practice of punishing this type of offense with the death penalty – the practice violates international law.

The OHCHR also condemned the execution of individuals on the basis of broadly written and vague charges like “enmity against God” and “corruption on earth.” These charges “are often used by the authorities to silence dissent,” the OHCHR wrote. In many cases people were sentenced to death in trials that were held behind closed doors and “failed to meet due process and fair trial guarantees,” said UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk.

In recent months other human rights organizations have also called attention to the rising number of executions. One group, Iran Human Rights, has issued several reports on group executions in Iranian prisons. According to HRANA, nine more people were sentenced to death in August.

In July Amnesty International published its own report on the rise in executions. According to Amnesty, that month two political dissidents were executed in secret – neither they nor their families were given advance notice. Behrouz Ehsani and Mehdi Hassani were convicted and sentenced in unfair trails – the proceedings lasted only five minutes and the defendants “were not allowed to speak in their own defense.”

More individuals face execution

According to the UN Human Rights Office, eleven people are currently facing “imminent” execution after being convicted on politically motivated charges. Five of them were condemned in connection with the protests against the regime that broke out in response to the death of Mahsa Amini, a young Kurdish woman, in 2022. Iranian authorities have already carried out at least eleven death sentences in connection with the protests.

The other six individuals facing imminent execution are charged with “armed rebellion.” In July Amnesty International warned that Kurdish activists Pakhshan Azizi and Warisha Moradi were also facing execution – they too were charged with “armed rebellion.” According to Human Rights Watch, Azizi was denied access to a lawyer for months after her arrest. Moradi meanwhile had to spend five months in solitary confinement. During her trial neither Moradi nor her lawyers were allowed to present a defense.

Amnesty International reported in July on a new wave of mass arrests following the brief war with Israel in June. The arrests were accompanied by “official orders to expedite trials and executions.” State media have also called for a repetition of the 1988 mass executions of political prisoners. That year, thousands of political prisoners all over the country were executed on the orders of Ayatollah Khomeini – even today, the exact number of victims is unknown.

Even those who do not face the death penalty in Iran can still be subject to cruel punishments after unfair trials: in July, Amnesty reported that Iranian authorities used a guillotine machine to amputate the fingers of three men. “Amputation constitutes torture, which is a crime under international law,” Amnesty wrote, adding that the confessions on which the men’s convictions were based had also been extracted through torture. In addition, one of the men had been denied access to a lawyer.

Renewed calls for a moratorium

UN Human Rights Chief Volker Türk repeated on Friday his demand that Iran impose a moratorium on executions as a step toward abolishing the death penalty. Earlier this year Türk said: “We oppose the death penalty under all circumstances. It is incompatible with the fundamental right to life and raises the unacceptable risk of executing innocent people. And, to be clear, it can never be imposed for conduct that is protected under international human rights law.”

In May Human Rights Watch also called on the international community to put pressure on Iran to prevent any further executions. (js)

Greenpeace finds microplastics in Geneva air

2025-08-14T08:23:00+02:00

People breathe in microplastic particles on a daily basis. An experiment conducted by Greenpeace measured airborne microplastic levels in Geneva – where representatives of the United Nations are currently negotiating a global plastics treaty.

Over an eight-hour period, Greenpeace collected particles in the air, both indoors and outdoors. (Source: Marc Meier / Greenpeace)

An experiment by the environmental organization Greenpeace has found microplastics in the air in Geneva. People breathe these particles into their lungs – with potentially negative health consequences. The Swiss city is currently hosting negotiations for a global plastics agreement.

Greenpeace’s experiment detected the presence of 165 airborne particles, of which 12 were confirmed microplastics. These included polyester, nylon, polyethylene, vinyl copolymers, and cellulose acetate. These are commonly found in clothing, packaging, and furniture.

For the experiment, a Greenpeace “citizen researcher” wore an air quality monitor for an eight-hour period and collected particles from the air in various locations throughout Geneva. The monitor sampled a total volume of 1.7 cubic meters of air – according to the organization, over an eight-hour period, a person will typically breathe in almost twice that amount.

As detailed in the report, “Living in Plastic Air,” the researcher spent most of the eight-hour period indoors: at Greenpeace Switzerland’s headquarters, on public transit, in a café and restaurant, in shops, and in a co-working space. Air samples were also taken outdoors as the researcher moved between spaces. After the experiment, filters used in the air quality monitor were examined by the Greenpeace International Science Unit at the University of Exeter. The organization only included in its findings particles that were larger than 10 micrometers – but, according to Greenpeace, scientists believe that smaller microplastic particles are present in the air in even greater quantities. These smaller particles can penetrate deep into the lungs.

Greenpeace found that the results of its own experiment were consistent with other studies on the presence of microplastics in the air.

Plastic in the air we breathe

The environmental group intended for the experiment to show that on any given day, people in the city are exposed to microplastics – and breathe these particles in. Plastic has become a part of people’s everyday lives, the organization writes in its report – but a large part of that plastic is used only once and then thrown away. This discarded plastic slowly breaks down into small particles – microplastics – that make their way into ecosystems like rivers and oceans. People ingest microplastics through the food chain, but they also breathe them in. According to Greenpeace, research into the health effects of inhaled particles is still in its early stages, but early findings suggest links between airborne microplastics and respiratory diseases, among other health risks.

In addition to the lungs, microplastics have been detected in human blood, brain tissue, and placentas.

Joëlle Hérin of Greenpeace Switzerland said in a statement: “We are breathing in plastic, and it’s getting into our lungs. That should be a wake-up call for any government serious about public health and planetary survival.”

Negotiations for a global plastics treaty

It was not by chance that Greenpeace chose Geneva as the site of its experiment: the city is hosting the latest round of negotiations for a global plastics treaty.

In March 2022 UN member states agreed to come up with a joint resolution to curb plastics, and set a deadline for wrapping up negotiations: end-of-year 2024. The fifth round of negotiations last December in Busan, South Korea should have been the last – but the talks failed. A new, purportedly final round of negotiations began in Geneva on August 5.

Greenpeace has renewed its demand for a binding agreement that would decrease plastic production by at least 75 percent by 2040. The organization warns that the petrochemical industry continues to push to expand plastics production, so that without countermeasures production could triple by 2060.

The central sticking point in negotiations last year was a proposed cap on plastic production. A coalition of more than one hundred countries supported the proposal, while oil-producing nations like China, Saudi Arabia, and Russia opposed it. Most plastic is produced with oil.

At the UN Ocean Conference in June, 95 countries restated their commitment to ending plastic pollution.

Sticking points

The negotiations are supposed to conclude on August 14, but so far there has been no sign of consensus: according to the latest reports, there are still many sticking points – with limits on new plastic production being one of them. Oil-producing countries continue to block such limits.

On Tuesday EU representatives reasserted their aim to get a binding agreement.

Environmental groups warn against a “dubious compromise”

At the start of negotiations, Florian Titze of WWF Deutschland said in a statement: “The High Ambition Coalition must finally achieve a breakthrough in Geneva. They must not accept a lowest common denominator agreement. A dubious compromise would be a free pass for decades more unchecked plastic pollution and not a real solution to the problem. What is needed is clear resistance to the obstructionists, to the fossil fuel lobby, and to the abuse of the principle of consensus, so that the agreement doesn’t get watered down.”

Normally all countries involved in negotiations must agree to a proposal for it to be included in the deal. The WWF however pointed to the possibility of passing the agreement by majority vote: “The countries could and must exhaust all available possibilities in order to achieve a strong result. In many areas of international relations under the United Nations, reaching agreement by majority vote is not only allowed, but routine. With regard to the plastics agreement as well, this possibility is allowed under procedural rules. All that is lacking so far is the political will to make use of this option.”

In July Greenpeace again drew attention to the fact that plastic consumes fossil resources and endangers health. The organization refers to the present situation as a “plastics crisis,” for which recycling is merely a “pseudo-solution.” Worldwide only 9 percent of plastics are actually recycled – hence the need for caps on production, Greenpeace argues.

Moritz Jäger-Roschko, an expert on plastic and recycling management at Greenpeace, said in a statement last month: “Behind the obvious waste issues caused by plastic lies a host of additional harms. Plastic inflames the climate crisis and threatens ecosystems. The risks to our health haven’t even been fully studied.”

Joëlle Hérin of Greenpeace Switzerland echoed this sense of urgency: “We need political courage. Every year we delay means more plastic in the air, water, and our bodies. The science is clear: the time to act is now. We need a strong Global Plastics Treaty that cuts plastic production at the source, or it will fail.” (js)

Customer data stolen from KLM and Air France

2025-08-13T08:01:00+02:00

Hackers have extracted customer data from KLM and Air France – including customers’ names and contact information.

A similar incident affected the Australian airline Qantas last month – the airline has since become aware of attempts to defraud customers. (Source: IMAGO / ANP)

Hackers have stolen data from customers of the European airlines KLM and Air France. The companies are warning customers to be on the lookout for potential phishing attempts.

As the airlines announced last week, “unusual activity” was noticed on an external platform that both companies use for their customer service. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines and Air France are both part of the Air France-KLM Group.

Several media outlets report that customers have received notices informing them of the breach. The airlines are reportedly telling customers that the attackers were able to access personal data like first and last names and contact details. Membership numbers and tier level information for the airlines’ frequent flyer programs were also taken – as were “the subject line of service request emails.”

Scammers can use such data for phishing attempts or to commit identity theft. The airlines recommend that customers be particularly cautious when receiving unexpected messages or phone calls – especially if they are asked for personal data or urged to take action. It is unclear how many people were affected by the data breach.

Payment information not affected

According to the airlines, no passport or credit card details were stolen. Booking information and frequent flyer miles were likewise unaffected by the breach.

After the attack was detected, the airlines took immediate countermeasures, they said. The breach has also been reported to the Dutch and French data protection authorities.

Qantas warns of fraud attempts

The incident is similar to a recent attack on the Australian airline Qantas. In that attack as well, hackers were able to extract customer data from a third-party platform used by Qantas customer service. Following the July attack, Qantas announced that customers’ names, dates of birth, email addresses and telephone numbers had been compromised – as had membership numbers for the airline’s frequent flyer program.

Soon after the initial announcement, Qantas added that data revealing customers’ addresses had also been stolen – both residential and business addresses as well as the addresses of hotels to which customers’ misplaced baggage was to be forwarded. In a few cases, the hackers were even able to access customers’ meal requests.

The company reported that the compromised systems contained the personal data of roughly six million people.

Last week, Qantas announced that it had already observed attempts to defraud customers. The company warned that customers should exercise caution if contacted by someone claiming to be the airline.

Customer data stolen from Canadian airline

Several airlines have announced attacks on their IT systems this summer. One of them, Hawaiian Airlines, has provided no details on the attack – it’s unclear whether customer data was stolen.

In July the Canadian airline WestJet announced that it too had experienced an attack that caused disruptions to its website and mobile app. The company has since been able to determine that unknown actors stole “some personal and travel-related data” – the company did not specify further what this data was, but did state that customers’ passwords and credit and debit card information were not compromised. According to media reports, Canada’s privacy commissioner is investigating the breach.

In June the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) warned of a rise in attacks on the airline industry. According to the FBI, some of the incidents were the work of a criminal group that relies on so-called “social engineering techniques” to deceive airline employees and gain access to IT systems. Whether the group was responsible for the recent data breaches is unclear. (js)

UK: Police use facial recognition to search state databases

2025-08-12T14:57:00+02:00

British police are using facial recognition to search databases containing the photos of roughly 150 million people. Advocacy groups say there is no legal basis for the searches.

The groups plan to take legal action. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

Police in the UK are using facial recognition technology to search the national passport and immigration databases – and are doing so with increasing frequency. Privacy International and Big Brother Watch are calling attention to the searches, arguing there is no clear legal basis for the police’s actions. The groups demand a moratorium on what they call a “historic breach of the right to privacy.”

The organizations report that there has been a sharp rise in facial recognition searches in the past five years. Their findings are based on information from the British Home Office, obtained through freedom of information requests. The information reveals that since 2020, 31 different police forces have searched the British passport database using facial recognition. In 2020, only two searches were carried out – but by 2023 the number of searches had gone up to 417. In the first ten months of 2024, 377 more facial recognition searches had been made.

In January 2024, the human rights organization Liberty Investigates, working in tandem with the Telegraph newspaper, revealed that British police forces were comparing photos against the national passport database. According to the investigation, the police began searching the database in 2019 – London’s Metropolitan Police had the highest number of searches in 2023.

According to Privacy International and Big Brother Watch, there are more than 58 million searchable photographs in the British passport database. Silkie Carlo, head of Big Brother Watch, criticized the government for having “taken all of our passport photos and secretly turned them into mugshots to build a giant, Orwellian police database without the public’s knowledge or consent.” The practice, Carlo said, “has led to repeated, unjustified, and ongoing intrusions on the entire population’s privacy.”

Extensive immigration database

The groups also report an increase in police searches of the national immigration database. This database holds approximately 92 million photos taken from visa and other databases. It also includes photos taken from applications for the EU Settlement Scheme – a program meant to provide right of residence to EU citizens who lived in Great Britain prior to the implementation of Brexit.

Home Office data show that in 2023 the police searched the immigration database 16 times using facial recognition. In 2024 this number rose to 102. Between January and mid-May 2025 there were 34 searches.

The groups point out that there is no clear legal basis for using facial recognition technology to search the two databases. There are also “no public policies meaningfully constraining such use”: police can search the databases without reasonable suspicion that the person they are seeking has committed a crime. As such, the searches are not even limited to serious offenses. In legal correspondence, the Home Office informed the NGOs that it is “working toward introducing a policy.”

The groups stress that neither Parliament nor the public were informed that the police would be searching these databases with facial recognition.

Criticism of “covert” use

Nuno Guerreiro de Sousa of Privacy International said in a statement: “The police have been covertly running facial recognition searches on the faces of tens of millions [of] British citizens and anyone with a migration status in the UK, and the government has facilitated this unchecked use of surveillance powers, without any safeguards or public debate.”

De Sousa continued: “The principle of ”https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peelian_principles" target="_blank">"policing by consent" is hollowed out when the government can bypass the will of the people and parliamentary scrutiny, granting the police sweeping, authoritarian powers without any transparency or accountability."

British law enforcement agencies can already use facial recognition to search the Police National Database (PND). According to Privacy International and Big Brother Watch, the PND holds approximately 20 million photos of people who have been arrested or are “of police interest” – though many of those included in the database “have never been convicted of any crime.” The High Court ruled in 2012 that storing such photos is unlawful.

The groups warn that with additional access to the passport and immigration databases, the police can even attempt to identify people who are currently unknown to them.

Facial recognition technology processes biometric data – a category of data considered especially sensitive, because it “can be used to uniquely identify individuals.” Privacy International and Big Brother Watch point out that it is because of the sensitivity of this type of data that there is no population-wide DNA or fingerprint database. The groups also warn that because facial recognition technology is less precise, it is prone to making false matches – something that has already occurred in the UK.

The European Court of Human Rights ruled in 2008 that the English police may not hold on to DNA samples of individuals who were arrested but never charged with a crime (or whose charges were later dropped). Privacy International and Big Brother Watch argue that this ruling “effectively strikes out the possibility of the state building a national biometric database without a specific legal framework.”

“National scandal”

Several politicians are also criticizing the actions of the Home Office and the police. Conservative MP David Davis told Big Brother Watch and Privacy International: “The Home Office has secretly created a biometric digital identity system by the backdoor.” The practice is reminiscent of earlier, “failed attempts to introduce national ID cards and build a DNA database,” Davis said. “This is an utterly improper misuse of our personal data that nobody gave permission for,” he continued. “It frankly deserves to be struck down.”

Labor politician Shami Chakrabarti said in a statement: “For the Home Office to have converted millions of innocent people’s passport photos into a police facial recognition database is bad enough for our freedoms. That the last government allowed this without public debate, let alone parliamentary authority, is a national scandal. The risk of discrimination, misidentification, and abuse is vast.” Chakrabarti called on the current government to act with urgency “so that the courts don’t have to.”

Privacy International and Big Brother Watch have threatened the Home Office with legal action. They demand an immediate moratorium on facial recognition searches in the passport and immigration databases. (js)

Urban planners criticize ubiquitous surveillance in New York City

2025-08-11T08:04:00+02:00

Surveillance technology is growing increasingly pervasive throughout New York City. A new report by urban planners and civil liberties advocates raises concerns.

The New York City Police Department has direct access to around 15,000 cameras – and also uses facial recognition technology. (Source: IMAGO / Depositphotos)

Facial recognition, license plate readers, and drones: people in New York City are subjected to pervasive surveillance in public spaces. A new report from the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project examines the trend. The authors warn that the expanded use of surveillance threatens civil liberties and exacerbates inequities.

Published last week, the report, “A People’s Handbook of Surveillance,” was authored by researchers at the Morgan State University School of Architecture and Planning in Baltimore and the Dalhousie University School of Planning in Nova Scotia in collaboration with the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project (S.T.O.P.), a New York-based civil liberties organization.

In the report the authors provide an overview of the different surveillance technologies used in New York City. They point to the many ways people are tracked when moving around the city – for instance, when using public transit – in an effort to raise awareness of these pervasive surveillance practices. The handbook is directed at city residents and, in particular, at urban planners, suggesting approaches that respect the rights of the population when designing urban environments.

Private and city-run cameras

According to the report, both city agencies and private companies deploy surveillance technologies in New York. These include security or CCTV cameras, which are nearly ubiquitous in the city. They are used to monitor businesses, but also places like parks. Even pedestrian traffic counters can be equipped with cameras.

Because the cameras often look similar, it can be difficult to determine whether they are run by the New York City Police Department (NYPD) or a private company. According to the report, the NYPD operates or has access to more than 15,000 cameras in the city. Between 2017 and 2021, the NYPD also used facial recognition technology in 22,000 known cases.

Lisa Berglund at Morgan State University said in a statement: “New Yorkers can’t walk down the block without being filmed by numerous cameras, many with facial recognition.”

Neighborhoods with higher proportions of non-white residents have higher concentrations of CCTV cameras, according to research cited in the report. This is cause for concern, because it can amplify existing inequities. According to statistics, black New Yorkers are twice as likely to be stopped by police than white residents.

But different types of cameras also come into use: many New Yorkers install doorbell cameras in their homes. Some of these devices automatically begin recording as soon as the built-in motion detector registers activity. Law enforcement is also able to access this video footage. The cameras thus “effectively turn residents into watchers for the police.”

Drones and gunshot detection

The NYPD also operates drones – and has already used them to monitor protests. License plate readers, another form of surveillance technology, are installed throughout the city. Law enforcement uses these devices for investigatory purposes, but they are also used to collect tolls and manage traffic. The report’s authors warn that the technology can be used to track people’s movements. This could allow private or public actors to draw conclusions about a person’s visits to sensitive locations like reproductive health clinics or places of worship.

Acoustic detection technology is another surveillance tool being deployed in public spaces. The system known as ShotSpotter is supposed to detect gunshots and alert the police. Sensors connected to the system are mounted on structures like lampposts. The sensors are more likely to be installed in neighborhoods that already have a heavy police presence. Last year, both the New York City comptroller and a group of US senators criticized the system, which is used in other US cities as well, for its high inaccuracy rate.

The S.T.O.P. handbook also raises concerns about vehicle noise cameras that have been installed to detect excessive vehicle noise. The authors point out that because the technology is still quite new in New York, “the threats they pose are not yet well-defined” – but are comparable with other surveillance technologies. They could for example lead to more frequent police interactions in neighborhoods that are home to marginalized groups.

Data collectors

According to the report, anyone who moves around New York City leaves behind a record of their movements. Public transportation offers one example. Subway and bus riders must now use the contactless OMNY system to pay the fare. The system keeps a record of when and where they used their credit card – and in this way their movements can be tracked. In the privacy policy posted on its website, the company that operates the system offers little information on how it uses the data it collects and how long it stores it.

“New Yorkers can’t walk down the block without being filmed by numerous cameras, many with facial recognition.” Lisa Berglund, Morgan State University

Data is also collected from people who use Citi Bike, the city’s official bikeshare program, which is operated by the rideshare company Lyft. The program has already experienced one data breach in the past, when the personal data of more than a thousand users was stolen.

Unequal effects

The authors of the report write that everyone in New York City is affected by these surveillance measures and the associated risks. For members of marginalized groups, however, these risks are even greater. Facial recognition technology, for example, is known to function less well when seeking to identify people with darker skin. In the US, this has already led to several cases of innocent people being arrested.

License plate readers can also make misidentifications. Factors like bad weather or the presence of dirt or mud on a plate can reduce the readers’ accuracy. Mistakes can lead to police stops and searches. For groups that are frequently subject to police violence, a misidentification can be dangerous.

Another issue, in the researchers’ view, is the distribution of surveillance technology in New York. For example, police use crime statistics to determine where to install security cameras or ShotSpotter sensors. The choice often falls on neighborhoods with higher proportions of non-white residents, places that already have a heavy police presence. The use of new technologies subjects these neighborhoods to even more intense surveillance.

This approach comes with the risk of distorting statistics: if for example ShotSpotter is deployed in places that are already tightly surveilled, and then detects gunshots – whether accurately or no – the incidents it has flagged will be reflected in future statistics, which may potentially be used to justify the installation of even more surveillance technology. The authors warn of a “feedback loop.”

They also warn of a “nationwide surveillance apparatus” deployed by US immigration agencies to track down undocumented immigrants. While New York is among the US cities that limit their cooperation with the federal agencies that enforce immigration law, these agencies can still gain access to data from license plate readers.

The increasing use of surveillance technology in public spaces also has a negative impact on freedom of expression and freedom of assembly, the authors write. Spaces that are often the sites of demonstrations are also under surveillance. This could lead to “people being less civically engaged” – which poses a danger to democracy and civil rights.

Lack of transparency

The authors criticize the lack of transparency and oversight. Though New York has passed the Public Oversight of Surveillance Technology (POST) Act, which requires the NYPD to publish information on its use of surveillance technologies, the law lacks an enforcement mechanism. Meanwhile the NYPD has repeatedly failed to adhere to the law’s provisions. The report calls for policymakers to take action and pass clear rules governing the use of surveillance technology.

The authors also appeal to urban planners to reconsider what data they really need to collect. Data increasingly plays a role in such decisions as where to put a new bus stop or park. But in incorporating data into their work, planners must bear in mind ways to protect the rights of those who may be affected. It’s important, for example, to include the public in decision-making about the use of new technologies. Planners and designers should be transparent about which data are collected and how they are being used – and should also bear in mind that not every challenge needs to be addressed with technology.

Eleni Manis of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project said in a statement: “We’re calling on urban planners to make smart decisions when it comes to so-called smart cities. In the algorithmic age, you simply cannot ignore the growing threat that surveillance technology poses to city residents, from location tracking on mass transit to cameras on every corner.” (js)

Italy: Online clothing brand Shein fined for misleading environmental claims

2025-08-06T08:10:00+02:00

The online retailer Shein will have to pay a million-euro fine in Italy after making misleading claims about the sustainability of its products.

In July France imposed a €40 million fine on the retailer. (Source: IMAGO / W2Art)

The Italian Competition Authority (AGCM) has imposed a fine of €1 million on the online fashion retailer Shein. The company made misleading – and in some cases false – statements about the environmental impact of its products, the authority announced on Monday.

The AGCM objected to statements made on Shein’s Italian website and on “other promotional and/or informational online pages.” In some cases the claims were “vague” or “generic,” in others “misleading” or “omissive.” Shein also made statements about the “design of a circular system,” or the recyclability of its products, that according to the authority were either outright false or, at the very least, confusing.

False claims

The authority also pointed to claims the company made in promoting its “evoluSHEIN by Design” product line. Based on these claims, customers could be made to believe that the clothing in this collection is made exclusively from sustainable materials and is completely recyclable. But, the AGCM said, “given the fibers used and current recycling systems,” these claims “[do] not reflect reality.”

The Italian regulator also criticized the company’s pledge to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 25 percent by 2030 and to reach net zero emissions by 2050. These statements are presented “in a vague and generic way” – and would seem to be contradicted by the fact that Shein’s greenhouse gas emissions actually rose in 2023 and 2024.

The official target of the fine was the company Infinite Styles Services Co., with headquarters in Dublin. The company runs the European websites of the Shein brand, which was founded in China and has since moved its headquarters to Singapore.

Heightened duty of care

The Italian regulator stressed that Shein has a “heightened duty of care” because it operates in the “disposable fashion” sector – also known as the fast fashion or ultra-fast fashion sector.

Reuters quotes a statement issued by the company claiming that the language the regulator objected to has now been revised.

Just last month, the French antitrust agency imposed a fine of €40 million on the company. The French regulator’s main charge was that the retailer had used misleading discounts to deceive customers – but the agency also criticized the company for failing to back up the environmental claims on its website.

Dangerous chemicals used in clothing

Environmental organizations have long criticized Shein and similar low-cost clothing makers. In 2022 Greenpeace investigated clothing sold by the online retailer and found dangerous chemicals present in quantities that exceeded EU legal limits. For example, the organization found high levels of formaldehyde, a cancer-causing agent, in children’s clothing. Shoes were found to contain phthalates, a class of substances used as plasticizers which according to the German Environmental Protection Agency can harm human health by interfering with the body’s hormonal activity.

According to Greenpeace, the workers who produce and deliver these products bear the brunt of the harm from the use of these chemicals. Union officials also criticize the generally bad working conditions in production centers.

In its report on Shein’s products, Greenpeace explained that the substances used to make the clothing find their way into the environment through wastewater and through the air. They pollute rivers and pose a danger to people in the countries where production centers are located.

Shein and similar online retailers are also criticized for producing “disposable” clothing. The products have a short lifespan and quickly end up in the trash – many of the materials used to make the clothing are either difficult to recycle or not recyclable at all. Ökotest magazine, which tested a range of Shein products, used the term “single-use textiles.”

In the past Greenpeace has accused Shein of Greenwashing – i.e., promoting its products with unsupported claims about their environmental friendliness.

An earlier investigation by the organization showed that after their brief period of use, large amounts of cheap clothing made by (ultra) fast fashion brands end up in landfills in Africa, where they are burned. The microplastic fibers that get released in the process have already been detected in the human body – and are also harmful for the environment.

The French Senate recently voted to approve a new bill that would regulate the fast fashion industry. The legislation would impose a per product tax on retailers with a low “eco-score.” It would also ban advertisements for fast fashion products. The bill must pass through additional legislative stages before it becomes law. (js)

Germany: Hamburg Police to train algorithms with videocamera footage

2025-08-05T08:07:00+02:00

Police in Hamburg are currently testing algorithms that are meant to identify suspicious behavior. A new plan soon to go into effect would train the algorithms using video footage taken in public spaces.

Hamburg police launched a pilot program for the use of “intelligent” video surveillance on Hansaplatz (pictured) in 2023. (Source: IMAGO / Schöning)

Police in Hamburg plan to use video footage taken in public spaces to train algorithms. The technology is currently in its second test phase – but the latest plans have raised questions.

As several German media outlets reported last week, video footage taken from cameras on Hachmannplatz and Hansaplatz, two public squares located near Hamburg’s central train station, is slated to be used to train the software. Both squares are already under video surveillance at certain times of day.

The police first tested this so-called “intelligent” video surveillance on Hansaplatz in 2023. The program connects some of the cameras with software that analyzes the footage. Hamburg police told Posteo at the time that the software in question was meant to recognize “atypical patterns of movement.” These included “lying down, falling, tumbling, kicking, punching, shoving, [and] jostling” – as well as “aggressive” or “defensive” stances.

The images taken from the connected cameras were analyzed “live” by the program’s algorithms. The police stressed that no facial recognition technology was used and that the age, sex, and ethnicity of individuals captured on tape were not determined. The software purportedly transformed the people captured on the footage into “stick figures.” If one of the defined scenarios was identified, an image of the situation was sent to the nearby police station, where officers evaluated it and, if necessary, intervened.

Second test phase

From the standpoint of the Hamburg police, the first pilot program was successful – and in September 2024 the department launched a two-year follow-up. Its stated goal is “to adapt the software to certain features of the Hamburg environment using local data and to further increase the quality of detection.” As the Hamburger Abendblatt reports, the public squares where the test program is taking place already display signs alerting passersby to the use of video surveillance. Footage taken in the squares has not yet been used to train the algorithms – but this is set to change, “probably as early as September.”

A spokesperson for the Hamburg police said, in response to an inquiry from Posteo: “With regard to the further development of intelligent video surveillance we are currently in the final planning stage and conducting relevant consultations,” including with the Hamburg Commissioner for Data Protection (HmbDfDI). Whether the project will in fact start on September 1, as planned, will be determined “in the coming weeks.”

A spokesperson for Hamburg Commissioner for Data Protection Thomas Fuchs told Posteo that to date the system’s tools have been based on training data taken from Mannheim, where the software is also being tested. In 2024 the police announced plans to train the system using the data of citizens in Hamburg as well. What this means in concrete terms, the spokesperson said, is that footage of people passing through Hansaplatz could be stored and used for AI training.

Fraunhofer Institute to train algorithms

German broadcaster NDR reports, citing the police, that some footage taken for training purposes could be saved for as long as a year, until August 2026. Speaking to Posteo, the police gave no indication as to how long this training data will be saved or what kind of footage specifically is supposed to be used for the purpose. The police will “give extensive information at the appropriate time” regarding the exact scope and specific start time, the spokesperson told Posteo.

The spokesperson also pointed to the Hamburg Senate’s response to an official request for information (“Kleine Anfrage” or “minor interpellation”) made by Deniz Celik, a member of the Hamburg state parliament (Left Party), in January of this year. The Senate’s response states that “excerpts from video data taken and stored in Hamburg” are to be made available to the Fraunhofer Institute for Optronics, System Technologies, and Image Exploitation (IOSB) for the purpose of training the institute’s algorithms. The Fraunhofer IOSB develops the software used by police.

The Hamburg Law on Police Data Processing (Gesetz über die Datenverarbeitung der Polizei) was amended in January to include guidelines on the “Training and Testing of Learning IT Systems.” The spokesperson for the Hamburg Data Protection Commissioner told Posteo that these provisions provide the legal framework for the planned initiative.

Unanswered questions

The spokesperson said the commissioner’s office was still waiting for the police to send substantive documentation. Based on the documents that the HmbBfDI has seen so far, the office cannot assess the project’s compliance with data protection law, the spokesperson said. It remains unclear which types of footage will be saved and for how long, who will have access to this data, and when the footage will be deleted. The data watchdog expects the police to give precise details relating to the retention period and the criteria for the “few suitable video sequences” that are to be saved, the spokesperson said. Generally speaking, footage is only supposed to be stored for as long as it is necessary to complete a given task.

The Hamburger Abendblatt cites a statement made by the Hamburg Senate in response to the latest activities report submitted by the data protection commissioner. In the statement, the Senate announced: “As currently planned the use of video footage for the training of AI systems […] on Hansaplatz and Hachmannplatz is planned for late summer/fall 2025 at the earliest. All necessary documents will be made available to the HmbBfDI in a timely fashion before implementation.”

Speaking to the Abendblatt, Fuchs said of the still missing specifics: “A month before launch, it’s starting to get a bit annoying.”

The spokesperson for the HmbBfDI told Posteo that the data protection commissioner is assuming that the training won’t start until the questions that remain unanswered are resolved.

Misidentifications draw criticism

But critics have also questioned the reliability of the system being tested in Hamburg. The German newspaper taz reports that the first test phase in Hamburg led to only a single criminal case – but to several false alarms.

Matthias Marx, spokesperson for the Chaos Computer Club (CCC), told the paper: “The system can’t do what it promises to do. It can’t cleanly distinguish hugs from a fistfight.” Marx criticized the police for purchasing the system from the Fraunhofer Institute even though problems were apparent during an initial test in Mannheim.

The system currently being tested in Hamburg has been in use in Mannheim on a trial basis since 2018. Stefan Brink, at the time the Baden-Württemberg Commissioner for Data Protection, saw a benefit to the technology from a data protection standpoint, given that only suspicious footage was reviewed, as opposed to a blanket analysis of all footage. But there have been repeated reports of misidentification. The Mannheim pilot project was renewed in 2023 and is set to continue into 2026.

Marx told the taz: “On a fundamental level, surveillance is not a suitable means for solving social problems.” The use of the system in Hamburg will exacerbate the situation, Marx said. People will adjust their behavior and criminal activity will move elsewhere. Speaking at the start of the first test phase on Hansaplatz in 2023, Marx had criticized what he called an attempt to solve social problems with technology rather than investing in education and street-level outreach.

Celik, the Hamburg member of parliament, also said at the time that there was reason to suspect that the purpose of establishing a surveillance network was above all to drive off homeless people and narcotics users. He called the measure a type of “behavioral surveillance” that his faction in parliament firmly rejected. (js)

Germany: Police in Baden-Württemberg will be able to use Palantir

2025-07-31T08:11:00+02:00

Police in Baden-Württemberg will soon be able to deploy a controversial data analytics platform. The issue had been a point of contention within the ruling coalition, but the parties have now reached an agreement.

Palantir is already in use in other German states. (Source: IMAGO / Depositphotos)

Police in the German state of Baden-Württemberg will soon become the latest state-level force to have access to the Gotham analytics software sold by the US-based company Palantir. Conflict arose within the state coalition government after the interior ministry licensed the software despite a lack of legal basis for its use. The conflict has now been resolved, according to media reports – but Palantir remains highly controversial.

As the German broadcaster SWR reported on Tuesday, the heads of the two parties that share power in Baden-Württemberg, the Green Party and the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), agreed to a compromise. This clears the way for changes to be made to the police powers law authorizing use of the software, the dpa wire service reported.

The Gotham platform can link together various police databases and automatically analyze their contents. Critics point out however that the software is a “black box” – how it functions is not clearly known. What’s more, there is currently no legal basis for the use of Palantir software in Baden-Württemberg. As was recently revealed, this lack of legal basis did not stop the CDU-led interior ministry from signing a five-year contract with the US supplier valued at roughly €25 million. The interior ministry justified the step by arguing that the offering price for the software was set to expire – the contract would have been twice as expensive if signed at a later date.

The Greens were initially critical of the contract. Oliver Hildenbrand, a member of Green party faction in the state parliament, told SWR earlier this month: “We have no agreement with regard to the use of this Gotham software made by the Palantir company.” Hildenbrand criticized the company itself and spoke in favor of finding a German or European-made alternative.

Tighter oversight planned

The compromise reported this week places the software under the oversight of the parliamentary oversight committee that also oversees the state domestic intelligence agency, according to SWR. The committee will monitor whether and in what way the Palantir software is being used by police.

The agreement also places limits on the use of the software – though the details of these restrictions are still unclear. According to SWR’s reporting, the coalition also agreed not to renew the state’s contract with Palantir – instead the product is to be replaced with European-made software. The Baden-Württemberg interior ministry had cited the lack of European alternatives as justification for licensing the US company’s software.

Criticism of “horse trading”

According to SWR, the Greens made it clear to their CDU coalition partners that the Palantir issue could only be resolved if the CDU went along with a proposed expansion of the Black Forest National Park. The coalition has now reached agreement on this issue as well. Sascha Binder of the opposition Social Democratic Party (SPD) voiced criticism: “The Greens are engaging in political horse trading – saying, in essence: give us the national park and we’ll forget about all that stuff we said yesterday.” Not until January at the earliest would legislation authorizing the use of the software be passed, Binder said. The police and taxpayers will bear the cost.

The Chaos Computer Club (CCC), a civil society group, has demanded that the state government drop its plans. Stefan Leibfarth from the CCC’s Stuttgart chapter told SWR earlier this month: “The benefit is unproven, the intrusions on basic rights are massive and neither the company nor the software itself are trustworthy.”

Legal challenge filed in Bavaria

The Palantir platform is already in use in several German states. In Bavaria, for example, it powers a system known as VeRA (“Verfahrensübergreifendes Recherche- und Analysesystem” – Comprehensive Research and Analysis System). Last week the Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte (Society for Civil Rights – GFF), with the support of the CCC and others, filed a legal challenge contesting the constitutionality of the Bavarian police powers law that authorizes the software’s use. The group argues that the extensive data analysis violates the right to informational self-determination and the right to privacy in telecommunications.

CCC spokesperson Constanze Kurz said in connection with the legal challenge: “Palantir’s dragnet-style manhunt sweeps up an enormous amount of people. It brings together data that were previously kept separate and intended for very different purposes. For that reason alone, automated mass-scale analysis must not be a part of everyday police work.”

Speaking to SWR, Tobias Keber, Baden-Württemberg’s commissioner for data protection, also voiced criticism, calling the software a “highly invasive instrument.” Said Keber: “People who are completely uninvolved could potentially get swept up in the data analysis.”

In response to an inquiry from Posteo, the GFF said it was monitoring the legislative process in Baden-Württemberg and evaluating potential legal steps in the event a measure does go into effect.

Additional legal challenges

The organization is also challenging state laws authorizing automated data analysis in North Rhine-Westphalia and Hessen. Police in these states also use Palantir software.

The US-based company has for years been the focus of criticism – in part because of its founder Peter Thiel. Thiel has repeatedly voiced anti-democratic opinions and counts among the supporters of Donald Trump – whom he has publicly and financially supported since 2016 – and his vice president J.D. Vance.

But the company is also controversial because of its connections to US intelligence agencies and its partnerships with US immigration authorities. In 2020, Amnesty International wrote that there was a “high risk” that Palantir was “contributing to human rights violations of asylum-seekers and migrants.” Since the current US administration took power, the company has entered into new contracts with US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Federal use to come?

Yet another German state, Saxony-Anhalt, is currently planning to make the software available to police. There is also an ongoing debate in Germany about using the controversial analytics software at the federal level: Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt (CSU) is currently considering whether to pursue the step. A ministry spokesperson, responding to an inquiry from Stern magazine, confirmed that Palantir is “the object of considerations that are still ongoing” – no conclusion has yet been reached. Another spokesperson for the ministry told the dpa that “various options” were being considered. The ministry was looking into using software available on the market as well as “utilizing individual modular services.” Dobrindt’s predecessor Nancy Faeser (SPD) opposed the use of Palantir.

Johannes Schätzl, a member of the SPD faction in German parliament, voiced criticism: “Palantir is not a neutral IT service provider, it is a company with deep connections to US intelligence services and clear geopolitical interests.” He firmly opposed the use of Palantir by German security services, Schätzl told Stern. MP Konstantin von Notz of the Green Party also told Stern that a partnership with companies like Palantir was out of the question.

While the German police union spoke out in favor of the use of Palantir, the domestic policy spokesperson for the Left Party faction, Clara Bünger, warned: “Palantir software brings with it the threat of a blanket attack on the privacy of millions of people in Germany. Data that was originally collected for entirely different purposes would be automatically amalgamated, analyzed, and made available to the police for dragnet-style investigations without effective oversight, without transparency, and without protections to mitigate against mistakes.” (dpa / js)

Iran: Alarming number of executions in 2025

2025-07-30T08:09:00+02:00

The first six months of 2025 have seen a “worrying surge in executions,” reports the UN Human Rights Office. People have been sentenced to death on the basis of vague charges.

Human rights groups condemn a recent intensification of repressive measures in the country. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press)

At least 612 people were executed in Iran in the first six months of this year. UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk called the situation disturbing and urged the Iranian authorities to impose an immediate moratorium on new executions.

The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCR) announced on Mondaythat in the first half of 2025, there were more than twice as many executions in Iran as in the same time frame last year, when Iranian authorities carried out at least 297 executions. In total, 2024 saw at least 972 people executed in Iran, according to Amnesty International.

Members of minority groups are disproportionately represented among the victims of state executions, the UN Human Rights Office reports. More than 40 percent of those executed this year had been convicted of drug-related offenses. Human rights groups have repeatedly condemned Iran’s practice of punishing these offenses with the death penalty – the practice violates international law.

According to the UN Human Rights Office, people were also executed on the basis of broadly written and vague charges like “enmity against God” and “corruption on earth.” These charges are often used by the Iranian authorities to silence dissenting views, the UNHCR said.

Those executed were condemned to death in trials that took place behind closed doors and “failed to meet due process and fair trial guarantees,” said High Commissioner Türk. For years human rights organizations have raised concerns about the Iranian government’s systemic practice of executing people who were convicted in unfair trials.

Executions last weekend

As Amnesty International reports, over the weekend the political dissidents Behrouz Ehsani and Mehdi Hassani were executed in secret at Ghezel Hesar prison – neither their families nor the victims themselves were given advance notice.

Ehsani and Hassani had been convicted in an unfair trial of charges including “armed rebellion against the state” and “corruption on earth.” Amnesty reports that they were denied access to attorneys, and that the trial lasted only five minutes. The men were not even allowed to speak in their own defense. As evidence the court relied on forced “confessions” obtained through beatings – according to Amnesty, however, the men denied all charges.

More executions planned

Kristine Beckerle of Amnesty International said in a statement that the Iranian authorities had recently “intensified” their repressive measures. The death penalty is used to “spread fear among the population,” Beckerle said.

Amnesty warned that the authorities could soon execute more people who face the death penalty after being convicted on politically motivated charges. In the wake of the twelve-day war with Israel in June, the organization has observed a new wave of mass arrests as well as “official orders to expedite trials and executions.”

State media have also called for a repetition of the 1988 mass executions of political prisoners, Amnesty reports. That year, thousands of political prisoners all over the country were executed on the orders of Ayatollah Khomeini – even today, the exact number of victims is unknown.

Amnesty International has documented 19 cases of individuals being sentenced to death on the basis of politically motivated charges. These people now face execution. Among them are the Kurdish activists Pakhshan Azizi and Warisha Moradi as well as the women’s rights activist Sharifeh Mohammedi.

At least nine people face execution in connection with the Woman, Life, Freedom protests. In June, yet another demonstrator was killed – according to Amnesty, the state has carried out at least eleven death sentences against protesters.

The UN Human Rights Office also warned of the Iranian government’s plans to pass a law that redefines the charge of “collaboration with hostile states” to include actions like “online communication” and “collaborating with foreign media.” The charge is punishable by the death penalty.

Demands for a moratorium

Kristine Beckerle said: “Amnesty International renews its call on Iranian authorities to immediately halt all planned executions and establish an official moratorium on all executions with a view to completely abolishing the use of the death penalty.”

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk said earlier this year: “We oppose the death penalty under all circumstances. It is incompatible with the fundamental right to life and raises the unacceptable risk of executing innocent people.” Türk added on Monday: “Instead of accelerating executions, I urge Iran join the worldwide movement abolishing capital punishment, starting with a moratorium on all executions.” (js)

Latin America: 13 journalists murdered so far in 2025

2025-07-29T08:07:00+02:00

Already this year, more journalists have been murdered in Latin America than in all of 2024. Reporters without Borders calls the killings part of an “alarming increase in deadly violence” in the region.

RSF calls on governments to take measures to stem the violence. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

So far this year at least 13 journalists have been killed in Latin America – more than were killed in all of 2024. Reporters without Borders (RSF) reports that in every case the journalists were likely killed because of their work.

According to RSF, Mexico is once again the most dangerous country in the region for journalists – eight members of the press have been killed there so far this year. RSF has also documented two murders in Peru and one each in Colombia, Guatemala, and Ecuador.

Most of the victims worked for small local media organizations, RSF reports. Some had been receiving threats before they were killed – two of the victims were even under state protection.

Anja Osterhaus, director of RSF’s German chapter, said in a statement: “The rise in deadly violence in these Latin American countries is alarming. Sincere political will is needed to finally put an end to this spiral of violence. The crimes must also be investigated in thorough and independent fashion. They must not under any circumstances go unpunished.”

Eight journalists killed in Mexico

RSF notes critically that despite commitments from Mexico’s president Claudia Sheinbaum to defend press freedom, the country has still seen more journalists murdered than any other in Latin America.

On January 17, journalist Calletano de Jesús Guerrero was murdered in Teoloyucan in the state of Mexico – despite having been under police protection since 2014. He had worked for the news site Global México, which reports primarily on national politics. According to RSF, Calletano de Jesús Guerrero, who was 59 years old, had received multiple threats. Days before he was murdered, his house was attacked.

In March the journalist Kristian Uriel Zavala Martínez was murdered. RSF reports that he had received threats for years – he too had been in a federal protection program for journalists. Also in March, Raúl Irán Villarreal Belmont was abducted and shot. He had received multiple threats as a result of his reporting.

Both journalists had investigated state violence, corruption, and disappearances. Days before his murder, Villarreal Belmont had reported on a case of fraud allegedly involving a local businessman and a government official.

Threats and attacks

José Carlos González Herrera also reported on local politics and security. The 39-year-old was shot in mid-May in central Acapulco, in the state of Guerrero. Two years earlier, according to RSF, he had survived an attack that he blamed on organized crime.

In July alone, according to RSF, the murders of three Mexican journalists were reported – on three consecutive days. One of them was investigative journalist Melvin García, whose body was found on the island of Cozumel in the state of Quintana Roo. According to reports, he had only recently returned to the island – threats he received in connection with a book he wrote had forced him to leave. In the book he linked a former governor of Quintana Roo to a 1999 femicide.

The term femicide is used to characterize the killing of women or girls because of their sex: according to official statistics, in 2024 3,427 women were killed in Mexico – of these killings, at least 829 were classified as femicides. According to Amnesty International, many of these cases are not sufficiently investigated.

Lack of protections

Reporters without Borders also condemns a rise in structural violence in Peru directed against local journalists in particular. In January, journalist Gastón Medina Sotomayor was shot in front of his home. He was the founder of Cadena Sur TV, a regional broadcaster with a large audience, according to RSF. As a presenter for the station, the journalist had reported on corruption and voiced criticism of local authorities.

Gastón Medina Sotomayor had repeatedly received threats in response to his reporting: in one instance, he was sent a funeral floral arrangement; in another, a stick of dynamite was left outside his TV station. RSF condemns the authorities’ response, reporting that although they knew of these threats, they failed to provide appropriate protections for the journalist.

In May, Peruvian radio journalist Raúl Celis López was shot. He had reported on environmental destruction and illegal trafficking in the Peruvian Amazon.

The work of journalists in Colombia, Guatemala, and Ecuador is also dangerous, RSF reports. In January, renowned radio reporter Óscar Gómez Agudelo was murdered in Colombia. Another radio reporter survived a murder attempt on July 5.

In Guatemala in March, Ismael Alonzo González, who had been investigating local criminal groups, was shot outside his home. And in Ecuador, also in March, Patricio Ernesto Aguilar Vásquez, editor-in-chief of the news site El Libertador, was killed – he was shot nearly 30 times. He too had received multiple threats owing to his reporting on violence in the region. RSF reports that journalists in the country, fearing for their safety, often practice self-censorship or go into exile.

The organization criticizes Guatemalan president Bernardo Arévalo, writing that despite his efforts to defend press freedom in the country, journalists who report on corruption and organized crime must still contend with violence. In both Peru and Ecuador, state protection programs for journalists suffer from a lack of funding.

Failure to investigate

When journalists are killed in Latin American countries, the murders are not always investigated, RSF reports. Murders and other violent crimes often go unsolved. This impunity, says RSF, perpetuates “a climate of fear that hinders journalists’ ability to cover the news.”

On the latest Index of Press Freedom published by RSF, Ecuador is ranked 94th out of 180 countries. Colombia is ranked 115th, Mexico 124th, Peru 130th, and Guatemala 138th. (js)

Germany: Legal challenge alleges unconstitutional data analysis by Bavarian police

2025-07-24T16:13:00+02:00

Civil liberties advocates have challenged a law authorizing police in Bavaria to conduct automated data analysis. The analysis relies on controversial software made by Palantir.

The GFF has had prior success challenging laws governing automated data analysis in other German states. (Source: IMAGO / Pond5 Images)

The Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte (Society for Civil Rights – GFF) on Wednesday filed a court challenge alleging that certain provisions in the Bavarian Polizeiaufgabengesetz (BayPAG), a law defining the powers of the Bavarian police, are unconstitutional. The lawsuit focuses on police powers related to so-called data mining, for which the police rely on software sold by the controversial US-based company Palantir. Bavarian lawmakers have exceeded the limits for data analysis drawn by the Federal Constitutional Court, the GFF argues.

Bavarian police use a system called VeRA (“Verfahrensübergreifendes Recherche- und Analysesystem” – Comprehensive Research and Analysis System) that is based on Palantir’s Gotham platform. The software can link various police databases and automatically analyze their contents. The GFF argues that VeRA analyzes massive quantities of data and, in some instances, draws links to people who have no connection with any crime.

The GFF takes the view that this form of extensive data analysis violates the right to informational self-determination and the right to privacy in telecommunications. Citizens’ data is analyzed covertly – those impacted are made aware neither of the analysis itself nor of the surveillance measures that might be taken based on the results. The way the law is currently written, police in Bavaria may use VeRA not only for major crimes, but also before a threat is even present. Effective controls are lacking, the GFF argues.

The group criticizes the lack of clear limits on the use of analysis software. There are also no protections in place to mitigate against errors the software might make – even though algorithms often have discriminatory impacts.

Court should establish limits

The goal of the complaint lodged with the Federal Constitutional Court is therefore to have the court establish clear limits for the use of data mining software by law enforcement.

The GFF has had past success challenging police laws in Hessen and Hamburg: in 2023 the Federal Constitutional Court imposed tight limits on the use of automated data analysis by police. The group now argues that Bavarian lawmakers have not kept within these limits.

The Chaos Computer Club (CCC), a German civil society group, is also party to the legal challenge. CCC spokesperson Constanze Kurz said in a statement: “Palantir’s dragnet-style manhunt sweeps up an enormous amount of people. It brings together data that were previously kept separate and intended for very different purposes. For that reason alone, automated mass-scale analysis must not be a part of everyday police work.” Kurz also criticized the use of VeRA in so far as it makes the police dependent on controversial US-based company Palantir.

A total of eight co-complainants are party to the lawsuit, including a criminal defense attorney, several activists, and members of the Greuther Fürth soccer club’s Fanhilfe, an organization that provides legal aid for club supporters.

Johannes König of the “NoBayPAG” coalition, which organizes demonstrations opposing the Bavarian police powers law, is one of the co-complainants. He said: “As if the Bavarian police powers law weren’t authoritarian enough, the state government is now relying on surveillance software made by right-wing ideologue Peter Thiel. Karlsruhe,” seat of the Federal Constitutional Court, “must stop this latest development.”

Criticism of US-based company

Palantir has drawn criticism in part because of its founder, Peter Thiel, who has repeatedly voiced anti-democratic opinions and is a supporter of US president Donald Trump and his vice president J.D. Vance.

But the company is also controversial because of its connections to US intelligence agencies and its partnerships with US immigration authorities. In 2020, Amnesty International raised concerns that there was a “high risk” that Palantir was “contributing to human rights violations of asylum-seekers and migrants.” Since the current administration took power, the company has entered into new contracts with US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Tests using actual personal data

The Bavarian Landeskriminalamt (State Office of Criminal Investigations) drew criticism in 2022 when it signed a contract with Palantir.

In November 2023 an investigation by Bayrischer Rundfunk found that the police had already tested the VeRA system – and used actual personal data for the purpose. In response, Bavarian commissioner for data protection Thomas Petri intervened and criticized the lack of legal basis for the tests.

“Thanks to this software, anyone who reports something to the police, is the victim of a crime, or is simply in the wrong place at the wrong time can come under police scrutiny.” Franziska Görlitz, jurist at the GFF

It wasn’t until July 2024 that the Bavarian state parliament passed legislation revising the police powers law. At the time the GFF announced that it was weighing a legal response.

The Social Democratic Party (SPD) faction in the Bavarian state parliament also considered filing a legal challenge. Bavarian state representative and SPD member Horst Arnold spoke out against the law, raising concerns that even data relating to individuals whose jobs involve handling confidential material, like lawyers and journalists, could be fed into the analysis software. Because of this, Arnold argued, the standard of proportionality was not met. Speaking to Posteo, Arnold said at the time that the law authorizing use of the VeRA software was “clearly unconstitutional.”

Use not limited to serious crimes

Both the police and the interior ministry in Bavaria have repeatedly stressed that in using VeRA the police were focusing on terrorism, organized crime, and other serious crimes. Journalists at WDR, NDR, and the Süddeutsche Zeitung however were able to examine all the instances in which VeRA was used between September 2024, when the system was first introduced, and May 19, 2025. Their investigation found that while the system was in fact used for major inquiries, it was also used for other purposes, for example to investigate crimes that fall under the category of “property offenses.”

Petri, the Bavarian commissioner for data protection, told media: “What is problematic about VeRA is that this software subjects a massive number of people to police data analysis who have done absolutely nothing to give the police cause to investigate them.”

Palantir software used in other German states

In other German states as well, the use of Palantir software has come under scrutiny. Currently the issue is at the center of a conflict within the governing coalition in Baden-Württemberg. Members of the Green party, which is part of the coalition, have criticized the government for signing a contract with the company in March, despite what they say is a lack of a clear legal basis for data analysis. The contract must be reviewed, the Greens urge.

Bavaria’s agreement with Palantir has prompted ongoing debate over the use of the software at the federal level. The state of Hessen meanwhile has used Palantir since 2017. According to German media, the Hessian system is used up to 15,000 times per year.

The GFF is pursuing a separate constitutional challenge against provisions of the police powers law in North Rhine-Westphalia, where the authorities also use Palantir software. (js)

Greenpeace: German plastic production consumes millions of tons of fossil fuels

2025-07-23T08:04:00+02:00

In Germany alone, plastic production consumes millions of tons of oil and gas. The manufacturing process also involves dangerous chemicals, according to a new report from Greenpeace.

Greenpeace criticizes the production cycle for plastics in Germany, calling it largely inefficient. The amount of new plastic produced vastly exceeds the amount that is recycled. (Source: IMAGO / photothek)

Plastic consumes fossil fuels and endangers human health: in a new report, the environmental organization Greenpeace highlights the problems associated with synthetic materials – and renews the demand for a global agreement to reduce plastic production.

According to the report, “Plastikkollaps,” published on Friday, since the 1950s more than 12 billion tons of plastic have been manufactured worldwide. That adds up to around 1.5 tons of plastic for every person now living.

Around 9 billion tons of this material is still around, Greenpeace reports. It is either sitting in landfills or scattered throughout the environment, both on land and in the oceans. Meanwhile, ever more plastic is being produced: this year, an additional 516 million tons will likely be manufactured, Greenpeace estimates. Observers predict that the annual total could rise to 1.2 billion tons by 2060.

Largest plastic producer in Europe

Germany is the largest producer of plastic in Europe, according to Greenpeace: in 2023, 8.8 million tons of plastic were produced from fossil raw materials. Recycled and so-called bio-based materials accounted for less than one fifth of total production. At 30 percent, packaging material comprises the largest share of plastics processed in Germany – most of these products wind up in the trash after just a few days.

Plastic is primarily produced using non-renewable resources – according to the report, in Germany alone almost 9 million tons of oil and gas are used for this purpose annually. Greenpeace estimates that if these resources were used for energy production, they would yield roughly 100 billion kilowatt hours (kWh). Because plastic also requires additional energy to produce, German plastic manufacturing in 2023 consumed the equivalent of 138 billion kWh of energy – an amount that would have covered the heating needs of around 13 million households. This estimate does not take into account the additional energy required for further processing, transportation, and recycling.

Widespread use of plastic also generates a large amount of waste: in 2023, total plastic waste in Germany amounted to 5.9 million tons, according to Greenpeace. Only around one third of this waste gets recycled. The majority, around 61 percent, is incinerated – for years, in Germany and around the world, the rate of plastic that gets recycled has held steady. In 2023, an additional 700,000 tons of German plastic waste was exported – with the Netherlands, Malaysia, and Turkey being the chief importers.

Plastic waste exported

Exported waste often becomes an environmental problem for the countries that import it. In many cases, waste that isn’t properly recycled is either burned or illegally disposed of in the environment.

Past investigations by Greenpeace have tracked plastic waste shipments from Germany to destinations in Turkey and Malaysia. In Turkey, the waste found its way into irregular dump sites on roadsides, in fields, and near rivers. Some of it was simply burned – thereby endangering people and the environment. The smoke and particulate matter produced by burning plastic contain substances that are harmful to human health – some are carcinogenic. The waste also polluted waterways and thus endangered entire ecosystems.

Plastic as a health risk

In this latest report, Greenpeace writes that plastic poses a danger not only to the environment and the climate, but also to human health. More than 16,000 chemicals are either used in the production of plastics or are contained in the products themselves. Around 4,000 of these are considered harmful; only around 200 are held to be innocuous. As for the other 66 percent, their effects on the environment and on human health haven’t been sufficiently studied.

Moritz Jäger-Roschko, an expert on plastic and recycling management at Greenpeace, said in a statement: “Behind the obvious waste issues caused by plastic lies a host of additional harms. Plastic inflames the climate crisis and threatens ecosystems. The risks to our health haven’t even been studied to the full extent.”

Harmful chemicals in plastic could for example be a factor contributing to developmental disorders, cancer, infertility, and cardiovascular disease.

In many cases the use of products like paint or tires releases so-called microplastics, which have been shown to be present in the blood, brains, lungs – even placentas. Microplastics find their way into the body in various ways – by being ingested in food, absorbed through the skin, or inhaled into the lungs.

Greenpeace calls the present situation a “plastics crisis” for which recycling is merely a “pseudo-solution.” Worldwide only 9 percent of plastics are actually recycled, according to the organization.

United Nations to negotiate plastics agreement

Greenpeace is therefore demanding a global agreement aimed at reducing plastic production. In August, members of the United Nations will meet in Geneva to continue talks meant to result in such an agreement.

Said Moritz Jäger-Roschko: “We need an ambitious and binding plastics agreement that significantly lowers the amount of plastic produced worldwide. Plastic is a global problem and it demands a global response. For this reason the negotiations in Geneva are a historic opportunity to dam the plastic flood.”

More than 70 government representatives and delegations from more than 160 countries are set to travel to Geneva. This is expected to be the final round of negotiations. UN member states agreed in March 2022 to come up with a joint resolution to curb plastics by the end of 2024 – but the fifth round of negotiations in Busan, South Korea in December failed to produce an agreement.

The main point of contention in Busan was a proposed upper limit on plastic production. A coalition of more than 100 countries supported such a limit, among them Mexico, Panama, Rwanda, and the European Union’s member states. These countries also spoke out in favor of regulations on the use of dangerous chemicals in plastic production.

They were opposed however by oil-producing countries like China, Saudi Arabia, and Russia. These states voiced vehement opposition to production limits – and instead called for the agreement to focus on efficient waste management.

The draft text agreed to last year will serve as the basis for the resumption of negotiations. All participating countries must agree to a proposition for its inclusion in the agreement.

Calls to significantly lower production

For this latest round of negotiations, Greenpeace has called for a concrete goal of lowering global plastic production by 75 percent by 2040. Plastic products must also be designed to be longer lasting and reparable. Finally, the organization calls for bans on single-use plastic, and for mandatory multi-use provisions for all packaging.

Several more organizations are also urging the finalization of a UN plastics agreement. The Swiss environmental group OceanCare warns that to fail to impose binding measures that halt the increase in plastic production is to risk catastrophe – for the ocean, for human health, and for the world’s climate goals.

Fabienne McLellan, Chief Executive Officer of OceanCare, said in a statement: “The majority of UN member states must now show backbone – there cannot be any horse trading aimed at satisfying the lowest common denominator. If there’s no alternative, forcing a vote should also be considered. We expect nothing less than an ambitious agreement – an agreement with teeth.”

At the UN Ocean Conference in June, 95 countries restated their commitment to ending plastic pollution.

Florian Titze of WWF Deutschland commented: “This affirmation is a wake-up call for the sluggish UN negotiations for a global plastics agreement and sends a clear signal: the majority of countries in the world want to work together to end the plastics crisis. But this too is clear: what is sketched out here is a good starting point, but at the same time it is the absolute minimum for what must be done to effectively fight plastic pollution. An effective agreement must go beyond vague wishes and the principle of voluntary action and include a set of specific, binding measures, including a global ban on harmful synthetic materials and chemicals.”

The coalition Exit Plastic, of which Greenpeace is a member, also appeals to countries to put forward a strong agreement. (js)

US police to receive direct access to doorbell camera videos

2025-07-22T08:01:00+02:00

Police in the US will once again be able to access video footage from Ring doorbell cameras without a court order. Last year this access was limited.

Ring and its surveillance cameras have for years been the focus of criticism. In 2020 the company even announced plans for a home surveillance drone. (Source: Ring)

Law enforcement agencies in the US will again receive direct access to footage taken by doorbell cameras sold by the company Ring. Ring’s parent company, Amazon, had limited this access just last year. Civil liberties groups are sharply criticizing the reversal.

Ring markets various networked surveillance devices and alarm systems, including doorbell cameras. As US media report, law enforcement agencies in the country will now again be given the option to contact users directly in order to request access to footage. The move comes as part of a partnership, announced in April, between the company and Axon.

Axon is a prominent seller of body cameras and of the electroshock pistols known under the brand name Taser. Last year Axon acquired Fusus, a company that >allows police to gain access to private surveillance cameras.

As part of the new partnership, Axon will be incorporating a Community Request feature into Axon Evidence, an evidence management system used by police. The tool enables police to ask all Ring users within a specifically defined area for access to footage from their cameras – for instance, as part of an investigation into a crime committed in the area. The users themselves decide whether to provide access or not – if they agree, footage is sent to the authorities. According to Axon, the law enforcement agency making the request is not told which users refused to allow access.

Tool discontinued in 2024

In the past, Ring had offered law enforcement agencies a similar tool in its own Neighbors app. In January of last year however the company discontinued the feature – and announced that going forward the authorities would only be able to access footage after obtaining a warrant. Critics had warned repeatedly that Ring’s practices were a threat to privacy and contributed to the expansion of a system of ubiquitous police surveillance. Following last year’s announcement, observers noted that, contrary to the company’s claims, in certain instances the police could still gain access to footage without obtaining a warrant.

It is not yet clear whether the tool will again be made available in the Neighbors app.

In a press release, Axon did not provide a date for when the Community Request tool will be available in its Axon Evidence platform. The tech news site the Verge however reports that Ring has already resumed its former practice of allowing police to request video from users.

Return of company’s founder

Business Insider reports that Axon is also developing a tool that will allow law enforcement agencies to livestream video from Ring cameras with users’ consent.

The site attributes the recent reversals to the return of Ring founder Jamie Siminoff, who in April took a position at Amazon overseeing Ring and related companies. According to internal emails, Siminoff has restored the company’s original motto, “Make neighborhoods safer.”

In returning, Siminoff replaced former head Liz Hamren, who had tried to change the company’s image. Under her leadership, the controversial tool allowing law enforcement to request video footage was discontinued.

Years of criticism

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a civil liberties group, greeted last year’s move, claiming it as a “victory in a long fight.” Now the organization, responding to Ring’s announced partnership with Axon, has called the joint initiative a bad decision for Ring and for the public. Ring, the group writes, “is rolling back many of the reforms it’s made in the last few years by easing police access to footage from millions of homes.” In so doing, the company is threatening civil liberties and becoming an instrument of mass surveillance.

Following reports by Business Insider that company founder Siminoff has committed to incorporating so-called artificial intelligence (AI) in the company’s operations, the EFF now fears that tools like facial recognition could be integrated into Ring cameras.

For years the organization has voiced concern that doorbell cameras are being used to form surveillance networks that cover entire neighborhoods. The EFF has also criticized past instances in which Ring has provided law enforcement agencies with footage without the users’ consent and without a warrant.

Police in the US have already attempted to use Ring cameras to monitor protests, the EFF has reported. The group fears that in the future the authorities could use footage to find people targeted by US immigration agents.

In 2023, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed a complaint against Ring and reached a $5.6 million settlement. The FTC had charged Ring with failing to implement appropriate security protections, thereby allowing attackers to gain access to its cameras. Ring employees also reportedly had access to users’ footage. (js)

Afghanistan: UN demands end to misogynistic policies

2025-07-09T08:07:00+02:00

The United Nations has passed a resolution criticizing the Taliban’s misogynistic policies.

Nearly four years have passed since the Taliban returned to power in Afghanistan – in that time the human rights situation in the country has worsened. (Source: IMAGO / Newscom World)

The United Nations (UN) has passed a resolution calling on the Taliban to end its repressive policies. The resolution expresses particular alarm at the “systematic oppression” of women and girls.

The formal text was adopted by the UN General Assembly on Monday with 116 votes in favor. Two countries, the United States and Israel, voted against the resolution. Twelve countries abstained, including Russia, China, India, Iran, and Belarus. Just days before the resolution passed, Russia had officially recognized the Taliban government – becoming the first country in the world to do so.

The Taliban regained power in Afghanistan in August 2021. This latest resolution calls attention to the numerous crises that the country has faced since then. With it the UN expresses “serious concern” about the “grave, worsening, widespread and systematic oppression of all women and girls in Afghanistan by the Taliban.” The text describes the establishment of a system of discrimination that disregards human rights and excludes women and girls.

In passing the resolution the UN reminds the government of Afghanistan of its obligations under international law – and “stresses the need to ensure respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.”

Women’s rights sharply curtailed

Since August 2021 the Taliban has placed stark limits on the rights of women and girls. Human Rights Watch has called the situation in the country “the world’s most serious women’s rights crisis.”

The UN’s Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Afghanistan, Richard Bennet, wrote in a report published in February that the Taliban had implemented a “deeply misogynistic system” that is “unparalleled in any other country.” In Bennett’s estimation, the measures imposed by the Taliban could amount to crimes against humanity.

Women and girls in Afghanistan have lost access to education beyond primary school and can no longer practice many professions. According to the latest UN statistics, nearly 80 percent of all Afghan women aged 18-29 are excluded from education, employment, or training. Women in the country are also banned from working for UN agencies and NGOs.

Women are absent from national and local government as well, according to the UN. As such they are deprived of the opportunity to help shape the laws that affect their lives.

Far-reaching intrusions into women’s lives

The Taliban has banned women from playing sports or visiting parks and imposed a strict dress code. Freedom of movement has also been limited – women are no longer permitted to leave the house or to travel without a male chaperone.

In Afghanistan, even women’s voices are now considered “intimate” – and may not be heard outside the home. The Taliban has gone so far as to decree that new houses must not include windows that look onto “places usually used by women.” These places include courtyards and kitchens, according to the Afghan government.

The UN resolution urges the Taliban to “swiftly reverse” such policies.

Elsewhere the resolution expresses concern about the activities of terrorist groups in Afghanistan, and also calls attention to the country’s “dire economic situation” and its ongoing humanitarian crisis – both of which have a disproportionate impact on women and girls.

Women forced to return

The UN reports that the systems in place to deliver humanitarian aid in Afghanistan are under increasing strain. Large numbers of people are returning to the country after having fled to neighboring countries like Pakistan or Iran. Last week the UN’s refugee agency UNHCR reported that this year more than 1.4 million people have returned to Afghanistan, whether voluntarily or against their will. More than one million of these are returning from Iran. On July 1 alone the UNHCR recorded more than 43,000 people crossing the border.

On Monday the Guardian reported that thousands of unaccompanied women were among those forced to return after Iran ordered all undocumented Afghans to leave the country. These women are now forced to live under an “increasingly repressive regime,” the Guardian reports. Women who violate the Taliban’s rules risk being flogged in public as punishment.

No help

Returning without a male chaperone is itself a violation of the Taliban’s laws. As the Guardian reports, the Taliban claims to provide temporary shelter and transport assistance to women in such a situation, but women interviewed by the paper said they had received no help. One woman, the mother of a newborn, reported that she was denied food and shelter because she was not accompanied by a man.

A 40-year-old widow who was forced to return to Afghanistan with her children told journalists that the Iranian authorities hadn’t even given her time to pack. En route to the border, she was forced to pay high prices for food and water. Women reported being loaded onto buses and driven to the Afghanistan border. In the buses “they are subjected to verbal abuse” and pressured to pay bribes “for basic services.”

The UN has echoed reports of people being compelled to return to Afghanistan against their will. As a result of the influx, thousands of families are in urgent need of food and shelter.

The resolution passed on Monday urges donor countries to “reconsider any decisions that may lead to reductions” in financial assistance – any decisions should take “potential adverse humanitarian consequences” into account. The resolution also expresses concern about reprisals, arbitrary detentions, and executions.

Resolutions passed by the UN General Assembly are not legally binding, but are instead viewed as formal recommendations.

In the past the UN Security Council has also condemned the Taliban’s curtailing of women’s rights. A resolution that was unanimously adopted in 2023 calls for the Taliban to repeal all laws limiting the rights of women and girls. The resolution demands the “full, equal, meaningful and safe participation of women and girls in Afghanistan.” (js)

Saudi Arabia: High number of executions in first half of 2025

2025-07-08T08:18:00+02:00

Saudi Arabia has carried out a significant number of executions in the first half of this year, reports Amnesty International. In many cases, drug-related offenses are punishable by death.

This year alone, 118 people were executed in Saudi Arabia for drug-related offenses. (Source: IMAGO / NurPhoto)

So far this year, 180 people have been executed in Saudi Arabia. A new report published on Monday by Amnesty International documents the country’s use of the death penalty. Foreign nationals have been put to death in disproportionately high numbers.

Amnesty has documented 1,816 executions in Saudi Arabia over the past ten years (January 2014 to June 2025). For the report published on Monday, the organization took into account only official numbers published by the state news agency. Amnesty assumes that the actual number of executions is higher.

Of those put to death, nearly one in three were executed for solely drug-related offenses. These offenses “may not be punished by death under international human rights law and standards,” said Amnesty.

In January 2021 Saudi Arabia imposed a moratorium on executions for drug-related crimes – but in November 2022 the moratorium was abruptly lifted. Since then more than 262 people have been killed for such offenses.

Last year Amnesty documented 122 executions for drug-related offenses – a record high. The total number of executions in 2024 was the highest in 30 years, at 345.

More than one execution per day

Kristine Beckerle, Amnesty’s deputy regional director for the Middle East and North Africa, said in a statement: “Saudi Arabia’s relentless and ruthless use of the death penalty after grossly unfair trials not only demonstrates a chilling disregard for human life; its application for drug-related offenses is also an egregious violation of international law and standards.”

In just the first six months of 2025, 180 people have been put to death, according to Amnesty. In June alone, there were 46 executions – averaging more than one per day. Of those killed in June, 37 were executed for drug-related offenses. 34 of the victims were foreign nationals.

Amnesty reports that foreigners are being executed for drug-related offenses at a “startling rate.” Of the 597 people who have been put to death for such offenses over the past ten years, nearly three out of every four have been foreign nationals. These individuals have come from countries like Pakistan, Syria, Jordan, Yemen, Egypt, Nigeria, Somalia, and Ethiopia. It is particularly difficult for foreigners to receive a fair trial in Saudi Arabia, Amnesty reports. Amnesty documented several cases in which the accused were unable to afford a lawyer. Though a public defender could be appointed in such instances, some were made to stand trial without any legal representation whatsoever.

According to Amnesty, dozens of foreign nationals are currently facing execution in Saudi Arabia.

Kristine Beckerle commented: “We are witnessing a truly horrifying trend, with foreign nationals being put to death at a startling rate for crimes that should never carry the death penalty. This report exposes the dark and deadly reality behind the progressive image that the authorities attempt to project globally.”

Saudi Arabia’s crown prince Mohammed bin Salman has repeatedly promised that the kingdom would limit its use of the death penalty. Bin Salman was named prime minister in 2022 by his ailing father, King Salman. Since that time he has been considered the de facto ruler of the country. Amnesty reports that despite bin Salman’s promises, judges are not showing leniency but rather are “exercising their discretion to increase the severity of punishments and impose death sentences.” These sentences, moreover, are often handed down on the basis of “confessions” that have been extracted through torture.

According to Amnesty’s report, many of those who are put to death in the country are charged with alleged terrorism – with members of the country’s Shia minority disproportionately affected. Though the Shia minority makes up only about 12 percent of the country’s population, nearly 42 percent of those executed for terrorism offenses in the past ten years have been Shiites. Amnesty sees political repression at work – the charge of “terrorism” is often used to quash dissent.

Journalist executed

The journalist Turki al-Jasser was among those executed last month. According to Reporters without Borders (RSF), al-Jasser was arrested in 2018 and convicted on charges of alleged terrorism and high treason. The journalist had reported on women’s rights issues, among other topics. The authorities had also accused him of running an anonymous account on Twitter (now X) which linked members of the Saudi royal family to alleged corruption and human rights abuses.

“The death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhuman, and degrading punishment. It should not be used under any circumstances.” Kristine Beckerle, Amnesty International

According to RSF, Turki al-Jasser is the first journalist to be executed since Mohammed bin Salman came to power in 2015.

Minors sentenced to death

According to the Amnesty report, seven young men are currently facing execution who were underage at the time of their alleged crimes – some were only 12 years old at the time of their alleged offense. Imposing the death penalty on persons who were under 18 at the time of their criminal activity is “absolutely prohibited under international human rights law,” Amnesty writes.

Said Kristine Beckerle: “The death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhuman, and degrading punishment. It should not be used under any circumstances.”

Amnesty calls on Saudi Arabia to impose a moratorium on executions, effective immediately, pending the full abolition of the death penalty in the country. The kingdom must change its laws, repealing the death penalty and commuting all death sentences, Amnesty urges. The organization also calls on the international community to pressure Saudi Arabia to put a halt to further executions.

More executions worldwide

In 2024, the number of confirmed executions worldwide rose for the fourth-straight year, according to Amnesty International’s annual report on the death penalty, published in April. The organization documented 1,518 executions in 15 countries. In addition to the official numbers, there is believed to be a large unofficial tally, since many countries do not disclose execution figures – including China, where more people are believed to be executed than in any other country.

Most of the executions Amnesty documented in 2024 were carried out in just three countries: Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq. (js)

Rights groups demand release of Cambodian environmental activists

2025-07-07T08:06:00+02:00

Human rights groups demand the release of five Cambodian environmental activists. The activists’ imprisonment stems from their peaceful defense of the environment, the groups say.

Members of Mother Nature Cambodia at a protest in 2022. (Source: Mother Nature Cambodia)

Several organizations are demanding the immediate release of five Cambodian environmental activists. July 2 was the one-year anniversary of their imprisonment. The groups argue that they were sent to prison because of their activism.

The activists are members of the environmental organization Mother Nature Cambodia, which works to oppose the destruction of the environment in the country. The group helps raise awareness through videos posted on social media and leads protests against the exploitation of resources. Last year a total of ten members of the group were sentenced to six years in prison for allegedly “plotting against the government.” Three of the accused were also found guilty of “insulting the king.” The extra charge added two years to their sentence, bringing the total to eight years behind bars.

Only five of the ten defendants faced trial in person last year. Four others were tried in absentia. The fifth, Spanish citizen Alejandro Gonzalez-Davidson, was likewise found guilty. One of the organization’s co-founders, he was deported by the authorities in 2015 and banned from re-entering the country.

In a statement published last Wednesday to mark the one-year anniversary of the activists’ conviction, Human Rights Watch (HRW) called the accusations against them “baseless.” The charges stemmed from their peaceful environmental activism, the group said.

Bryony Lau, deputy Asia director at HRW, said: “The baseless and harsh sentences imposed on the Mother Nature activists one year ago demonstrate the Cambodian government’s utter disregard for the country’s environment.” Lau called on the government to throw out the convictions and release the activists immediately.

On April 30, Cambodia’s Supreme Court upheld the activists’ convictions and rejected their request to be released on bail.

Curtailed rights

The five imprisoned activists – Ly Chandaravuth, Phuon Keoraksmey, Long Kunthea, Thun Ratha, and Yim Leanghy – are between 24 and 35 years old. According to HRW, they have been incarcerated separately, in prisons located far away from their families. The Cambodian human rights organization LICADHO characterized the government’s choice to imprison the activists in remote locations as cruel and unusual punishment.

The NGO Civicus demanded last Wednesday that the Cambodian authorities release the activists. Their release should be immediate and unconditional, the group urged. Civicus called the arrest and conviction of the activists an attempt “to stifle their rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.” These are rights the government is obliged to protect under the terms of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Cambodia has ratified. Cambodian authorities must stop criminalizing activism, Civicus said.

The Right Livelihood Foundation supports the calls for the activists’ release. Mother Nature Cambodia was chosen to receive the Right Livelihood Award in 2023 for its environmental work. The award has been called the alternative Nobel Prize.

Founded in 2012, Mother Nature Cambodia’s work includes successfully preventing the construction of a dam that threatened an indigenous community. It has also advocated against sand mining and deforestation. In 2017 the government revoked the group’s official status as a nongovernmental organization. In awarding the prize to Mother Nature Cambodia in 2023, the Right Livelihood Foundation cited its fearless continued work for the environment despite “harassment and constant threat of arrest.”

Criticism from UN human rights experts

The verdict against the activists drew sharp criticism when it was announced last year. Montse Ferrer of Amnesty International called the court’s decision a “crushing blow to Cambodia’s civil society.” The verdict, Ferrer said, was “yet another sign that Cambodia’s government has no intention of protecting the right to freedom of peaceful assembly.”

Human rights experts at the United Nations said that the trial of the activists failed to meet Cambodian or international human rights law standards. The convictions were part of an ongoing attempt by the state to crack down on dissenting views, the experts wrote. “This ruling will have a chilling effect on human rights defenders across the country,” they warned.

According to the Right Livelihood Foundation, since 2015 at least 13 Mother Nature activists have been imprisoned; dozens more have been arrested.

Actions against journalists

As Human Rights Watch reports, in the year since the Mother Nature activists were convicted and sent to prison, the authorities have also increasingly targeted environmental journalists for their reporting.

In January of this year British reporter Gerry Flynn was refused entry into the country after leaving for a brief vacation. He was told that he had been banned indefinitely. Flynn had been living and working in Cambodia for five years and was reportedly in possession of a valid visa.

The journalist had recently appeared in a France24 documentary that investigated projects claiming to offset carbon dioxide emissions. Companies pay large sums to protect forests in Cambodia – but according to researchers, these forests are being destroyed on a massive scale. The Cambodian Ministry of Environment dismissed the findings as “fake news.”

In May, another journalist, Uk Mao, was arrested. After nine days in police custody he was released on bail. According to his wife, prior to his arrest he had been questioned by military police in connection with his research into deforestation. HRW reports that Mao “continues to face several serious charges stemming from both his environmental reporting and public commentary.”

Activists and journalists in Cambodia are also frequently threatened and attacked by people involved in illegal logging.

Demands to stop harassment

Mary Lawlor, the UN’s special rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, drew attention to the cases pending against Mao and called for an end to the harassment of activists who are uncovering illegal logging and deforestation.

Bryony Lau of HRW said in a statement: “The Cambodian government’s targeting of environmental activists and journalists is disastrous. Imprisoning, deporting, or forcing into hiding those still willing to risk their lives and livelihoods to protect Cambodia’s environment can only lead to long-term harm for Cambodia’s people.”

Between 2001 and 2024, Cambodia lost almost 3 million hectares of forest, according to Global Forest Watch. Illegal logging plays a large role in the destruction. Much of the wood is sold for furniture production, and the land is in part converted into farmland for growing crops in monocultures.

Corruption is another problem. There have been reports of government officials who are charged with protecting the forest taking bribes – in return, they turn a blind eye to illegal logging. (js)

Customer data stolen from Qantas airline

2025-07-03T08:04:00+02:00

Hackers have extracted customer data from the Australian airline Qantas. Up to 6 million people are reportedly affected.

The FBI recently warned that hackers have been deliberately targeting airlines. (Source: Qantas)

Hackers have stolen personal data from customers of the Australian airline Qantas – millions of people could be affected.

As the airline announced on Tuesday (local time), “unusual activity” was observed on a third-party platform used by a Qantas call center. The airline took “immediate steps” to stop the attack. So far the company has been able to confirm that unknown actors stole data including customers’ names, dates of birth, email addresses, and telephone numbers. Membership numbers for members of the airline’s frequent flyer program were also stolen.

Scammers can use this type of data for phishing campaigns or to commit identity theft.

According to the airline, financial data like credit card information was not stored on the system that was compromised, nor were customers’ passport details. Log in information for the frequent flyer program was not stolen.

Full extent of attack unclear

Qantas reports that it is still seeking to determine the full extent of the data breach. The company assumes that a “significant” number of customers have been affected. In a press release, the company stated that data belonging to a total of six million people was stored on the system that was compromised.

The airline announced that it had alerted the relevant agencies, including the Australian Information Commissioner and the Australian Federal Police. The company is also working with independent cybersecurity experts. Affected customers are being notified.

The company stresses that the incident has not affected operations. Those who have upcoming travel with Qantas do not need to take any action.

FBI warns of attacks

The attack on the Qantas call center occurred just days after the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) warned of a rise in attacks on the airline industry. According to the FBI, a criminal group known as Scattered Spider is behind the recent attacks. The group relies on “social engineering techniques” to deceive airline employees and gain access to IT systems. It is unclear as yet whether the group is also responsible for the data theft at Qantas.

The hackers are however believed to be responsible for recent attacks on the US-based Hawaiian Airlines and WestJet, a Canadian airline.

Other airlines affected

Hawaiian Airlines announced last week that it had been the victim of an attack. It is unclear whether customer data was stolen; the airline has provided no details.

The Canadian airline WestJet has likewise provided no information on a potential data breach after a mid-June attack that led to disruptions to the company’s website and mobile app. On June 18 the company announced that it was still investigating the scope of the incident. The company was also working with law enforcement, the press release said.

Prior to these attacks on the airline sector, the group is believed to have targeted other industries. According to the BBC, the group is the focus of an investigation into a series of cyberattacks on British retailers like Marks & Spencer and Co-op. The attacks caused weeks of disruption, including the suspension of online orders. The data of customers and employees was also stolen – according to the BBC, millions of people were impacted. (js)

US immigration agency is using mobile facial recognition

2025-07-02T13:58:00+02:00

US immigration agents have access to a smartphone app with facial recognition tools. Critics warn of false matches.

The agency has been ordered to carry out mass arrests. (Source: IMAGO / NurPhoto)

US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents have been given a facial recognition app to use on their smartphones. The app compares photos to images stored on government databases. 404 Media has published a report revealing the agency’s use of the tool.

According to internal emails seen by 404 Media, the Mobile Fortify App makes it possible to review both facial images and fingerprints directly from an agent’s phone. No additional device is needed to capture and analyze the biometric data.

As 404 Media reports, all agents in ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations division were instructed in the use of the app. This unit is the part of ICE that is “specifically focused on deporting people.” The tool is intended to help agents identify “unknown subjects.”

According to the report, the emails to ICE agents contained a reminder “that the fingerprint matching is currently the most accurate biometric indicator available” in the app.

Arresting the wrong people

Nathan Freed Wessler of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) told 404 Media: “Face recognition technology is notoriously unreliable, frequently generating false matches and resulting in a number of known wrongful arrests across the country. Immigration agents relying on this technology to try to identify people on the street is a recipe for disaster.”

According to the report, the app compares facial images against several government databases. One such database is connected to the Traveler Verification Service used by Customs and Border Patrol (CBP). The system uses facial recognition technology to verify the identity of individuals entering the US. In airports, for example, travelers are photographed – the system then compares this photo with the photo in their passport or visa, or with photos taken at previous border crossings.

404 Media writes that the case “shows how biometric systems built for one reason can be repurposed for another.” Critics have long warned that the technology can be repurposed in this way.

The ACLU’s Nathan Freed Wessler noted that the US Congress “has never authorized” ICE’s parent agency, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), to use facial recognition technology for this purpose. The agency, Wessler said, “should shut this dangerous experiment down.”

The app also has access to the DHS’s Automated Biometric identification System, allowing agents to conduct fingerprint matches, 404 Media reports. According to the DHS, this is a centralized system for biometric data for purposes including “immigration and border management,” “law enforcement,” and “national security.”

ICE did not respond to a request for comment from 404 Media. CBP declined to comment.

Additional surveillance technology

The smartphone app is just one example of the use of surveillance technology by ICE. According to 404 Media, the agency also has contracts worth more than $3 million with Clearview AI, a controversial purveyor of facial recognition tools.

The agency has also expanded its partnership with another controversial company, Palantir. The company is reportedly developing a platform called ImmigrationOS that is meant to make “deportation logistics” more efficient. Among other functions, the tool is meant it easier for the agency to determine which individuals have overstayed their US visas.

Ramped-up actions against immigrants

US President Donald Trump declared during his campaign that he would carry out mass deportations of undocumented immigrants. As a result, ICE’s activities have been under special focus since Trump took office. In May the administration ordered the agency to arrest 3,000 people per day – if met, such a quota would mean more than one million arrests per year.

Raids conducted by the agency in Los Angeles led to large protests in the city in June – Trump responded by deploying soldiers from the National Guard and the Marines.

Meanwhile the raids have continued. According to the Washington Post, they have concentrated in many places on employees of small businesses like car washes. The agricultural sector is also a target: Reuters reports that fruit and vegetables are often harvested by undocumented immigrants. In California, some produce has gone unharvested – because farm workers have either been detained or have stayed away from work out of fear of arrest.

Last week, six Republican members of the California state legislature sent a letter to President Trump. They reported that fear had spread even among immigrants with valid legal status. ICE’s actions, they wrote, are causing a labor shortage – they urged the agency to focus on arresting criminals.

While the administration claims to be targeting criminal immigrants, the government’s own statistics fail to support this claim. According to an analysis by CBS News, arrests of immigrants without prior convictions have risen sharply since May. Most of those detained were arrested on civil immigration charges – only 8 percent of those arrested had previously been convicted of violent crimes. (js)

China introduces state internet ID

2025-07-01T13:58:00+02:00

Chinese internet users are being asked to use a state ID to log in to web platforms. Critics worry about expanded censorship.

According to reports, criticism of the internet ID that appeared on Chinese websites last year has simply been deleted. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press)

In mid-July China will introduce a personal digital identification number. Internet users will be able to use the ID to log in websites. Critics fear the system will make it even easier for the state to practice censorship. Observers also cast doubt on whether the measure is truly voluntary, as the government claims.

According to media reports, the new internet identification number (internet ID) will go into effect on July 15. The Management Regulation on National Network Identity Authentication Public Service, as the legislation implementing the measure is called, was first proposed last year and has since been finalized.

As CNN reports, there was criticism of the plans during the customary public consultation period. But the final law is largely unchanged.

The measure calls for users to register for a personal internet ID through a system developed by the state. Earlier this year, the human rights organizations Article 19 and Chinese Human Rights Defenders (CHRD) published an analysis of the new law showing that in order to register, users will need to present their personal identification card. They must also identify themselves using facial recognition. After registering, they receive a “web number” and a “web certificate” that they can then use to log in to online platforms.

Internet users in China already have to register using their mobile phone number, which is linked to their personal ID. Currently however this verification is conducted by the platforms themselves rather than being carried out by a state entity.

User surveillance

Xiao Qiang, who studies internet freedom at the University of California, Berkeley, spoke to CNN and criticized the new state-run system: “This is a state-led, unified identity system capable of real-time monitoring and blocking of users.” In Xiao’s assessment, the measure will erect “an infrastructure of digital totalitarianism.” He warned that in the future it will be much easier for the government to simply remove users from several platforms simultaneously.

Article 19 and CHRD also warn that the internet ID will make it easier for the authorities to monitor users’ activity across several platforms. Particularly for journalists, activists, and lawyers who voice criticism of the government, the situation could grow even worse – which could also lead to a rise in self-censorship.

In an article for Zeit Online published last year, Chinese journalist Franka Lu explained that currently, if a user is blocked from one platform, they will often simply switch to another. It’s also possible for a blocked user to log in to a platform using someone else’s mobile phone number. The new internet ID, Lu wrote, will close remaining loopholes that make it possible to voice criticism online.

Responding to the pending implementation of the new internet ID, Shane Yi of CHRD said in a statment: “Internet users across China already endure heavy censorship and control by the government. The new internet ID regulations escalate Beijing’s attack on free speech, putting human rights defenders, journalists, lawyers, and anyone who questions authority at even greater risk.”

Cybersecurity concerns

The Chinese government’s censorship and control over the internet is already comprehensive. The “cybersecurity law” that was passed in 2017 imposed a real-name requirement mandating that users log in to platforms under their real name.

The new internet ID expands this requirement even further, according to CHRD and Article 19. Each user’s internet ID is connected to their personal ID number, facial profile, and additional personal data. This data is stored on centralized state servers, making it easy for users to be identified and tracked.

In advertising the new measure, the authorities have argued that the internet ID improves data protections. Article 19 and CHRD note however that centralized storage of data raises cybersecurity questions – the state servers could be the target of cyberattacks.

Haochen Sun, law professor at the University of Hong Kong, told CNN that a centralized, nationwide platform is “an attractive target for hackers or hostile foreign actors.”

Will the ID remain voluntary?

Critics have also raised doubts as to whether the internet ID is truly voluntary, as the authorities have claimed. Public and private web platforms have already been encouraged to adopt the ID, according to reports. Article 19 and CHRD fear that users could ultimately be forced to use the new system – in order to access government services, for instance.

In 2024, before the official start date for implementation of the internet ID had been set, numerous platforms began testing the new system. According to Article 19, these included ten public service platforms and more than 70 commercial applications. Among the early adopters were major apps like WeChat, the social media platform Xiaohongshu (known outside of China as RedNote), and the online marketplace Taobao, by Alibaba.

The independent research group China Media Project reports that state media barely mention that the internet ID is voluntary. The government’s actions suggest that the ID may only temporarily remain non-compulsory – especially since plans for a central registry of internet users have been in development for years.

The China Media Project also expressed concern that the new ID could act as an “internet kill switch,” allowing the authorities “to bar citizens from accessing the internet” by blocking their internet ID.

Article 19 and CHRD argue that the plan is not in line with international human rights norms. In particular, the measure violates the right to freedom of speech and the right to privacy. The groups demand that the Chinese government repeal the regulations.

Michael Caster of Article 19 said in a statement: “Anonymity provides for the privacy and security fundamental to exercising the freedom of opinion and expression.”

Criticism deleted

The draft legislation drew criticism when it was announced last year – including from Chinese commentators. Law professor Lao Dongyan publicly criticized the measure, saying that the government’s intention was to track users’ online activity. After she wrote her post, her account on the platform Weibo was blocked – search terms related to the topic were also blocked. According to Article 19, critical comments from other experts were also deleted.

As CNN now reports, when the finalized version of the law was published, there was hardly any criticism from Chinese sources to be found online. Xiao Qiang in Berkeley said that between the announcement of a new measure and its implementation, the authorities often allow a certain amount of time to pass, giving the criticism time to die down. This is done intentionally – and, from the authorities’ standpoint, has proven effective in the past. (js)

Austria: Using AI in asylum cases brings risks

2025-06-26T12:33:00+02:00

AI is already playing a role in the processing of asylum cases in Austria. Researchers at the University of Graz see more risks than benefits.

The authors of a new report also looked at what technologies might come into use in the future. (Source: IMAGO / CHROMORANGE)

Automated mobile phone analysis and translations: in Austria, so-called artificial intelligence is being used at various stages of the process of evaluating asylum claims. A paper published as part of the University of Graz’s A.I.SYL research project examines the use of the technology. According to the report, the use of additional tools in the future is conceivable.

The report, “Künstliche Intelligenz im Asylverfahren” (“Artificial Intelligence in Asylum Cases”), is the result of a year-long research effort and is meant to be of use to legal and social counseling groups. The authors of the report provide an overview of which tools are already in use in Austria and which, in their estimation, could come into use in the future.

The authors write that many tools promise the same benefits, such as making aspects of the process of assessing claims more efficient or lowering costs by doing away with expensive evaluations. But their verdict is clear: in every instance they investigated, the risks outweigh the benefits.

Controversial device analysis

Asylum seekers in Austria may for example be required to hand over their phones and submit to an analysis of the phones’ data. The purpose of this analysis is to determine a person’s identity, the circumstances of their flight, and the country responsible for processing their asylum claim, if this cannot be otherwise determined. According to the authors of the report, this measure has been legally regulated since 2018. Even at the time it was first implemented, the practice drew criticism from several observers.

Software is used to analyze the device and the result is evaluated by a police officer. Incoming and outgoing calls stored in the phone’s records are among the data that are processed. The country codes of the phone’s contacts may allow evaluators to determine a person’s country of origin and the route they took when fleeing. Apps and the usernames a person uses may also give clues as to the person’s identity and nationality. According to the Austrian Ministry of the Interior, photo data and system settings are also analyzed.

The authors of the report see this practice as a severe breach of asylum seekers’ fundamental rights to privacy and data protection. Mobile phones frequently store a large quantity of private information. In analyzing these devices, no distinction is made between various types of data, meaning that private photos and dating profiles can also be included in the analysis. It can also be difficult to connect the data to a particular individual – due to the circumstances of their travel or displacement, people frequently share devices; a single device may be used by several different people.

Experiences from Germany have also shown that the method is not very reliable, the researchers note. In 2023, the German Federal Office for Migration and Refugees declared the practice unlawful. In Austria, meanwhile, there are also plans to establish a legal basis for allowing AI to analyze photos.

Translation tools can make mistakes

The authors also cast a critical eye on the automated translation tools used by Austria’s Federal Office for Immigration and Asylum (BFA). The tools are used to assess the trustworthiness of a candidate for asylum and whether they are in danger of persecution in their home country. There are also reports of Frontex – the European Union’s border patrol agency – and Austrian border patrol agents using such tools to communicate with refugees. Counseling organizations also use them.

The authors found that there is always a risk of mistranslation, even when dealing with languages for which the tools have a large database to draw on. For less common languages, translations are less reliable, because the programs are only “trained” on a limited database. Unlike human interpreters, translation programs do not factor in context – the software doesn’t ask follow-up questions, but merely delivers the most likely translation. In this way, translation errors find their way into communications between officials and asylum seekers and into translated documents. For this reason, a human review is necessary.

The BFA also uses external AI systems to “identify relevant sources, produce working translations and process texts.” According to the Interior Ministry, the programs used include Perplexity and Copilot. These programs are trained on large quantities of data to enable them to summarize texts. The authors of the report explain however that these systems are “not fact checkers” – in fact, they can hallucinate and generate false information.

While these tools make it possible to reduce the time outlay required for manual research, they can make mistakes. What’s more, the systems are trained on data sets that contain social and historical prejudices and can exacerbate patterns of discrimination.

Systems are a “black box”

Another problem is that it is often impossible to understand or explain why the systems generated the results that they did. In asylum cases, however, the evidence has to be weighed in a logical and transparent manner, otherwise the principle of equal treatment is violated, the authors warn.

They see additional risks in the use of automated facial recognition, which is another tool employed to verify individuals’ identity. The use of such technology is a severe breach of the rights to data protection and privacy. If biometric data is collected under coercion, this could even be a violation of human dignity. The technology can also lead to discrimination, because it works less well in identifying people with darker skin tones – and in general also works less well with women than with men.

The reform of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) will lead to expanded use of facial recognition technology. The fingerprints of asylum seekers are already stored in the central Eurodac database – but now facial images will also be stored.

Plans for dialect recognition

Automated dialect recognition systems are not yet in use in Austria – though the current government has plans for introducing them. These tools are used to determine an asylum seeker’s country of origin by means of a speech sample.

The danger with such systems is that they may incorrectly identify the language or dialect spoken by an individual – and that the individual’s application might even be denied as a result of this misidentification. Linguists criticize the notion that people speak clearly distinguishable languages and dialects that can easily be ascribed to specific geographic regions or territories. The authors also point out that dialect recognition systems, like automated translation programs, are limited by the quality of the database they draw on.

In Germany so-called dialect recognition is already in use. The human rights organization Amnesty International has voiced criticism, pointing out that the program has never been evaluated by independent experts. According to the University of Graz’s paper, the European asylum agency also plans to make these tools available throughout the EU.

No positive assessment

In their research for the A.I.SYL project, the authors of the report consulted numerous sources, including a response from the Ministry of the Interior, interviews with experts, existing research and case law, and media reports. In their view, none of the tools used in processing asylum cases can, without restrictions, help shape the asylum process “in a way that is more fair and in line with human rights.” In particular, the tools used for determining asylum seekers’ identities or countries of origin are either too prone to error or represent too great a breach of privacy to allow for a positive assessment.

Co-author Laura Jung warned that asylum seekers could become “guinea pigs.” Tools are tested out on them that Austrian citizens “just wouldn’t accept.”

At the same time, the use of such applications could further increase. The Ministry of the Interior is currently developing its own chatbot and is working on a tool (“OSIF-Tool”) to prepare, contextualize, and sort information. In the authors’ estimation, such a tool would fall into the high-risk category laid out in the EU’s AI act. Also of concern is that in the future, so-called AI could be used as a lie detector – which would likewise qualify as high-risk. (js)

Further mass layoffs at US international news network

2025-06-24T09:51:00+02:00

Hundreds of employees have been terminated at the US international news organization Voice of America. The network’s operations have already been drastically reduced.

According to reports, the administration is already planning to cut more positions. (Source: IMAGO / Matrix Images)

Last Friday hundreds of employees were laid off at the international news network Voice of America (VOA). Observers worry about the future of the network.

Kari Lake, a senior advisor at the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM), announced this latest wave of layoffs on X. USAGM oversees federally-funded international news networks like Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), and Radio Free Asia (RFA).

According to Lake’s announcement, a total of 639 employees at USAGM and Voice of America received termination notices. The New York Times reports that the vast majority of the terminations – more than 600 – affected employees at the news network, both journalists and support staff.

Those targeted by the cuts were put on paid leave until September 1, at which point their employment will officially end. Lake said in her announcement that with these latest cuts, a total of around 1,400 positions had been eliminated at the agency she oversees and its affiliated news networks. According to the New York Times, fewer than 200 staffers now remain at Voice of America.

Future in question

Reuters reports that the latest wave of layoffs “likely marks an end to VOA.”

Patsy Widakuswara, former White House bureau chief for the network, announced on LinkedIn over the weekend that she was among those who had received a termination notice. She and other reporters issued a statement saying that the latest round of layoffs “spells the death of 83 years of independent journalism that upholds US ideals of democracy and freedom around the world.” Widakuswara and her colleagues called for the US Congress to step in and show support for Voice of America.

Voice of America was founded in 1942, during the Second World War, to counter Nazi propaganda. Based in Washington, D.C., the network broadcasts news in other countries – including many where press freedom is limited – and until this year could be heard in 49 languages. The New York Times, citing court documents, reports that VOA now offers programming in only four languages.

NPR reports that the director of the international news network, Michael Abramowitz, wrote a letter to his colleagues stating that because of the administration’s actions the network can no longer fulfill its “congressionally mandated role to provide objective news to closed societies and other places around the world.” Abramowitz remains on administrative leave but as yet has not been laid off.

Funding cuts and firings

In March US President Donald Trump signed an executive order instructing USAGM and other agencies to reduce “their statutory functions and associated personnel.” Following the order, the administration cut funding and placed staffers on leave. The administration’s actions were sharply criticized.

In May nearly 600 Voice of America employees were terminated. Many of those targeted in that month’s round of firings were employed as contractors, making it easier to terminate their employment with only a few days’ notice.

Among those affected were journalists whose US visas were tied to their employment at Voice of America. Several observers warned that if these journalists were forced to return to their home countries, they would face imprisonment because of their work.

Planning still more cuts

Earlier this month the New York Times reported on the administration’s plans to let go nearly all remaining Voice of America employees. According to the Times, senior advisor Kari Lake informed the US Congress of these plans, which would leave only 18 positions at VOA.

In her letter to Congress, Lake claimed that the plans would satisfy the administration’s legal requirements with regard to the network. As the Times reports, the government is required by law to keep the network in operation – “but there is no minimum number of required employees.”

Trump has verbally attacked Voice of America in the past, dating back to his first term in office. In March the White House went so far as to accuse the network of spreading “radical propaganda” at the expense of US taxpayers.

According to media reports, several lawsuits have been filed challenging the cuts.

Since beginning his second term in office, the US president has taken action against the media on several fronts. One such action has been to exclude major news agencies from the White House press pool. (js)

Germany: Civil rights group files suit challenging police phone search

2025-06-23T12:05:00+02:00

The Society for Civil Rights has joined a journalist whose phone was confiscated and searched by the police to file a lawsuit challenging the action. The organization sees no legal basis for the search.

The GFF argues that personal information saved on individuals’ phones must be considered categorically privileged and confidential. (Source: IMAGO / Silas Stein)

The Society for Civil Rights (Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte – GFF) has filed a lawsuit with the Bamberg Landgericht (district court) in Bavaria challenging the legality of the comprehensive data analysis conducted on a journalist’s phone after its seizure by police. The GFF argues that this practice is without sufficient legal basis. The journalist’s personal rights were also violated, the suit alleges. The group is seeking a sweeping judgement that will put a stop to the practice in the future.

The case arose out of an incident that occurred in September 2023: the claimant, Hendrik Torner, attended a demonstration in Bamberg led by the climate change activist group Letzte Generation (Last Generation). According to the GFF, Torner is an early career journalist and planned to write an article about the demonstration for a trade union newspaper.

After the demonstration was over, he witnessed an encounter between the police and three demonstrators. Using the voice memo feature on his phone, he recorded the statements of the police officers involved.

The officers then arrested Torner, alleging that his recording of the officers’ speech was unlawful, and confiscated his phone. After seizing the device, the police used software manufactured by the company Cellebrite to access and analyze “highly sensitive data” stored on it – including private photos and chat messages. According to the GFF, the police then used the information they had obtained to put together a comprehensive report on the claimant’s political activities and his membership in left-oriented political groups.

Abuse of privacy

The organization argues that there was no discernible connection between the phone search and the specific criminal charge of which Torner was accused. The analysis of Torner’s phone was therefore “plainly not justifiable on the basis of being for investigatory purposes.”

Torner said in a statement: “The practically baseless search of my personal phone by the police came as a shock to me and those around me: It is a massive abuse of my privacy and of the freedom of the press.”

A lower court in Bamberg approved of the seizure – the challenge filed by Torner and the GFF is a response to that lower court decision. Reporters without Borders has also joined the suit. The GFF seeks in the first instance to have the police’s actions against Torner declared disproportionate in his particular case. The police created a comprehensive political profile of Torner that goes far beyond the specific criminal charge against him, the claimants argue. In the course of creating this profile, the police analyzed and saved a large amount of sensitive personal data.

GFF criticizes lack of legal basis

But the organization views the problem as one that goes beyond Torner’s individual case. The group reports that on a daily basis, mobile phones are confiscated and searched for law enforcement purposes. A simple initial suspicion is considered sufficient grounds for carrying out such a search. But, the GFF argues, there is currently no legal justification for the search and analysis of confiscated smartphones that is consistent with the German constitution and EU law.

According to the GFF, this type of search is currently justified under a provision in the German code of criminal procedure governing the seizure and confiscation of objects for evidentiary purposes, even though this provision includes no explicit guidelines on the permissibility or the extent of the search. A legal basis that defines the scope of this type of data analysis is therefore lacking, the group argues.

While it is true that seizure of property by the police requires a court order, these orders regularly fail to state anything regarding the data analysis that subsequently ensues. It is left to the police to decide which data they will access and analyze.

“People have to be able to trust that their most intimate data is categorically protected, and that the state can access it only in exceptional cases and subject to strict rules.” Davy Wang, jurist and legal coordinator at the Society for Civil Rights

Once a phone has been unlocked, the authorities have access to any and all information stored on it – including intimate and confidential content. The GFF warns of a high potential for abuse: there is a risk that the police, unconnected to the actual reason for the device’s seizure, will get an in-depth look into core areas of the device’s owner’s personal life and exploit these findings for other purposes. This, the group argues, is a severe infringement on digital privacy and a violation of the German law guaranteeing the confidentiality and integrity of information technology systems.

If the government is allowed sweeping access to sensitive data, this could work to discourage people from engaging in civil society, politics, or journalistic endeavors, the GFF warns.

Davy Wang, jurist and legal coordinator at the GFF, said in a statement: “Gaining access to all the data stored on confiscated phones allows the police to get an in-depth look into the personal lives of those affected – but there is no clear legal basis for such an intervention. People have to be able to trust that their most intimate data is categorically protected, and that the state can access it only in exceptional cases and subject to strict rules.”

Aiming for a broadly applicable ruling

According to the GFF, in a country that operates under the rule of law, the permissibility and scope of such a severe infringement on a fundamental right must be defined by the legislature and limited to appropriate cases. Protective legal measures are also needed to prevent intimate personal information from being gathered or analyzed. Such measures are currently lacking, the group says, as is a requirement that a court define in advance the nature, scope, and limits of each individual instance of data analysis. To leave these decisions to the police and state prosecutors “is incompatible with the principles of the rule of law and democracy.”

For this reason, the goal of the lawsuit is to have this argument confirmed by the court – and to win a decision that will have broad applicability.

The GFF stresses that in every instance personal data stored on a phone must be considered categorically privileged and confidential. Only in exceptional cases, and in accordance with strict rules, should the state be allowed to access such data.

In the past the organization has filed similar lawsuits challenging state searches of cell phones. The group successfully challenged the practice as conducted by the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF) – in February 2023 the Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht) declared it unlawful. The decision confirmed a previous ruling by the Berlin Administrative Court.

The GFF also challenged a new provision introduced into German immigration law in 2024 that, according to the GFF, grants migration authorities unlimited access to all of an asylum seeker’s devices for the purpose of determining the asylum seeker’s identity and nationality. This, too, is unconstitutional, the organization argues. (js)

Cambodia: Authorities urged to investigate attempted shooting of journalists

2025-06-18T10:24:00+02:00

After an attack on two environmental journalists in Cambodia, Reporters without Borders calls for a thorough investigation. The work of reporters in the country is growing ever more dangerous, the organization says.

In December 2024 a Cambodian environmental journalist was murdered. (Source: Christian Pirkl – CC BY-SA 4.0)

Earlier this month an attempt was made on the lives of journalists Thlang Tao and Hang Chenda. Reporters without Borders (RSF) calls on the authorities to conduct a thorough investigation into the attack and to ensure that those responsible be made to stand trial. The organization characterizes the attack as an attempted murder – and sees it as a further escalation of violence against environmental journalists in the country. There have been several attacks in recent months.

The two journalists, who work for the online news outlet Norkor Achhariyak, were reporting in the province of Stung Treng. On June 5 they were traveling home by motorbike when they were shot at from the side of the road. Both escaped without injury.

Thlang Tao and Hang Chenda had been investigating illegal logging activities in the Prey Lang Wildlife Sanctuary. As the English-language Cambodian news site Kiripost reports, in the course of their reporting they had repeatedly informed environmental officials about illegal timber transportation, urging the authorities to conduct an inspection.

Kiripost reports further that the police have since arrested two suspects in the attempted shooting.

Journalist fears for his safety

Speaking to RSF, Thlang Tao voiced criticism of the authorities. He said he was asked to sign a document with a fingerprint without learning its contents. The authorities also claimed that the assailants only fired into the air – but according to Thlang Tao, he and his colleague were chased for “nearly a kilometer” and only narrowly avoided being shot.

“I am very worried for my life and for the safety of my family,” Thlang Tao said.

Sun Landy of the Cambodian Human Rights and Development Association, speaking to Kiripost, expressed deep concern over the violence and threats journalists face. Landy urged the authorities to prioritize journalists’ safety, “highlighting journalists’ role in preventing environmental issues, particularly on forestry crimes,” Kiripost reports.

Nop Vy, the head of the Cambodian Journalists Alliance Association (CamboJA), told the site of the problems faced by journalists in the country, and particularly by environmental journalists. Those involved in illegal logging activity view journalists as “adversaries.” Nop Vy called for “strict adherence to legal procedures” to prevent future attacks. He also warned journalists “to be more cautious by thoroughly studying and analyzing reporting locations.”

Worsening state of press freedom

Cédric Alviani of RSF likewise stressed that this latest attack on Thlang Tao and Hang Chenda “illustrates the climate of violence that prevails in Cambodia towards journalists covering environmental issues.” RSF calls on Cambodian authorities to investigate the case – and to end their own “campaign of repression against the independent press, which fuels acts of violence against journalists.”

According to RSF, the country’s democratic transition in the late 1980s “allowed the emergence of a thriving media sector.” But in 2017 former prime minister Hun Sen began a “ruthless war” on press freedom. In his last years in office, the increasingly authoritarian prime minister shut down numerous news outlet, including the independent Voice of Democracy, which was forced to close in 2023. Hun Sen’s son, Hun Manet, who has ruled the country since 2023, has followed a similar course.

According to RSF, radio broadcasters and papers in the country “generally toe the government line.” Independent reporting comes primarily from Cambodian media broadcasting from abroad. Many topics are off-limits for reporters, including corruption and illegal logging.

The country is currently ranked 161st of 180 countries on RSF’s Index of Press Freedom. Cambodia fell ten spots from last year, a decline that RSF attributes to the worsening security situation for journalists in the country.

Dangerous work

The work of environmental journalists is particularly dangerous, according to RSF. In December 2024 the reporter Chhoeung Chheng was shot after investigating illegal logging in a wildlife sanctuary. He died from his injuries three days later. According to media reports, the man who shot Chheng was involved in illegal logging and was photographed by the reporter while transporting timber – in May a court sentenced him to 12 years in prison.

In May the journalist Uk Mao was detained by authorities for several days. The authorities reportedly gave no cause for the arrest. According to RSF, Uk Mao faces around 15 complaints connected to his investigations into deforestation.

In January the British reporter Gerry Flynn was denied entry into the country after leaving for a brief vacation. He was informed that he had been banned indefinitely. Flynn had worked in Cambodia for five years and was reportedly in possession of a valid visa.

In February Flynn told RSF: “Based on information from immigration officials this appears to be a crude retaliation for my journalistic work.”

Shortly before he was turned away at the border the journalist had appeared in a France24 documentary that looked into projects purporting to offset carbon dioxide emissions. Companies pay large sums to protect forests in Cambodia – but according to researchers, these forests are being destroyed on a massive scale. The Cambodian Ministry of Environment dismissed the findings as “fake news.” According to RSF, activists interviewed for the documentary were arrested and later released on the condition that they not work with foreign journalists in the future.

Large-scale deforestation

Cambodia lost nearly 3 million hectares of forest between 2001 and 2024, according to data published by Global Forest Watch. Illegal logging plays a large role in the destruction. The wood is sold for furniture production, among other uses, and the land is in part converted into farmland for growing crops in monocultures.

Corruption is another problem. There have been reports of government officials who are charged with protecting the forest taking bribes – in return, they turn a blind eye to illegal logging. (js)

Citizen Lab confirms spyware attack on journalists

2025-06-18T08:01:00+02:00

Cybersecurity experts have confirmed spyware attacks on two European journalists. The attacks came from the same source.

The Italian government has admitted to using spyware against activists – but denies using it against journalists. Ciro Pellegrino (pictured) is one of the journalists targeted. (Screenshot: fanpage.it)

Two European journalists were spied on using Paragon Solutions’ Graphite spyware. Cybersecurity experts at the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab have now confirmed the attacks. They warn of a spyware crisis in Europe.

As Citizen Lab’s researchers report, a “prominent European journalist” who wishes to remain anonymous was targeted. The journalist’s devices were compromised in January and February.

In April the journalist was notified of an attack by Apple and turned to Citizen Lab for help. Since November 2021, Apple has informed users when it discovers indications of spyware attacks against them.

Italian journalist Ciro Pellegrino also received such a notification in April and soon afterwards announced publicly that he had been targeted. Pellegrino works for the Italian news site Fanpage and runs the site’s Naples news room. Citizen Lab now confirms that Paragon’s spyware was used in the attack on Pellegrino.

In both cases the attacks took advantage of a security vulnerability in a previous version of Apple’s iMessage messaging app. Neither journalist was aware of the attack at the time. Apple mitigated this vulnerability with its iOS 18.3.1 update. The attacks previously investigated by Citizen Lab were directed at Android devices.

Another Italian journalist affected

Another spyware target, Fanpage’s editor-in-chief Francesco Cancellato, was informed by WhatsApp of an attack on his smartphone. In January the company informed 90 users in more than two dozen countries that they had been targeted using Graphite. Researchers at Citizen Lab continue to investigate Cancellato’s case.

Graphite enables attackers to gain complete access to a device and, for example, to read a user’s text messages. Paragon Solutions, which developed the software, claims to sell it only to government agencies. The company has claimed publicly that it does not do business with non-democratic countries – a promise Citizen Lab describes as “marketing.”

The attacks on Pellegrino and the anonymous European journalist came from the same Paragon client, according to Citizen Lab’s analysis. The client’s identity is still unknown. In their report, Citizen Lab’s researchers write that the fact that two Fanpage journalists were targeted suggests that the news organization was deliberately singled out.

The report also warns of a “spyware crisis” in Europe. The cases that have come to light raise the question of which Paragon customer was responsible for the attack and what legal authority – if any – they had to order it.

Government spied on activists

In Italy several other instances have come to light in which Graphite was used to spy on individuals. The Italian government used the surveillance software to spy on two activists at the sea rescue organization Mediterranea Saving Humans. This was confirmed in a report published earlier this month following an investigation by the parliamentary committee responsible for overseeing the intelligence agencies, COPASIR.

According to the report, both the foreign intelligence agency AISE as well as the domestic intelligence agency AISI had contracts with Paragon. The activists were targeted in connection with investigations into alleged “facilitation of illegal immigration” – the NGO rescues immigrants who become stranded in the Mediterranean. The report found that the investigation was lawful.

COPASIR did not find evidence of the surveillance of Mattia Ferrari, a priest who works as a chaplain for Mediterranea Saving Humans.

The report did however find evidence that David Yambio, founder of the organization Refugees in Libya, was spied on. In Yambio’s case, Paragon spyware was not used.

Demands for clarification

In its report, COPASIR found no evidence that Italian authorities were behind the targeting of Fanpage editor-in-chief Francesco Cancellato.

Elina Castillo Jiménez of Amnesty International said in response to the latest Citizen Lab report: “The discovery that Paragon’s highly invasive Graphite spyware has been unlawfully used against yet another journalist in Italy, Ciro Pellegrino – adding to a list of other targets – confirms the rampant widening and systemic pattern of spyware abuse in Italy, and elsewhere in Europe.” Jiménez called on the Italian authorities to disclose all details in order to clear up remaining questions.

She continued: “When governments fail to respond adequately to credible allegations of surveillance abuse, they send a dangerous message that impunity is the norm.”

Anthony Bellanger of the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) said in a statement that the use of spyware against journalists is “designed to intimidate” them. “The IFJ calls on prosecutors to investigate and ascertain the facts.” The organization has supported the legal action taken by local organizations representing Italian journalists.

Vittorio di Trapani, president of the Italian journalists’ union FNSI, told the AP: “It is unacceptable in a democratic country that journalists are spied on without knowing the reason.” Di Trapani called on the EU to intervene.

On Monday a debate was held in the European Parliament on the “illegal use of spyware.” Several MEPs voiced criticism of the EU’s failure to respond adequately to abuses. (js)

English court warns attorneys against using fake AI-generated material

2025-06-17T11:00:00+02:00

Lawyers who use false AI-generated material in court cases face “severe sanctions” – a recent ruling by an English court stresses the risks.

In its ruling, the High Court refers to recent cases in which plainly false material generated by AI was cited as evidence. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

The High Court of Justice in London warns that lawyers face severe consequences for presenting false information generated by so-called artificial intelligence (AI) in court. The ruling comes in response to two recent cases.

The High Court is the court of first instance for all major civil law cases in England and Wales. Prominent cases argued before the court in recent years include the legal tug of war over the extradition of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, the UK’s controversial deportation agreement with Rwanda, and Prince Harry’s suit against British tabloids.

In a ruling issued on June 6 the president of the King’s Bench division of the court, Victoria Sharp, and a second judge, Jeremy Johnson, addressed two cases recently tried before the court in which lawyers presented evidence generated or believed to have been generated by so-called AI. The evidence in question was false. In issuing a ruling that addressed both cases in tandem, Judge Sharp drew on the court’s powers to “regulate its own procedures and to enforce duties that lawyers owe.” The New York Times reports that the court rarely exercises such powers.

Not suitable for research

In the decision, Judge Sharp writes that the technology “carries with it risks as well as opportunities.” Tools like ChatGPT, however, “are not capable of conducting reliable legal research.”

Judge Sharp writes further that the tools “can produce apparently coherent and plausible responses to prompts” – but these responses “may turn out to be entirely incorrect.” The technology may for example make untrue assertions or cite non-existent sources. It’s also possible for AI tools to refer to a genuine source but to fabricate quotes that are not found in that source.

Sharp states in her ruling that lawyers who use AI tools despite these risks have a “professional duty” to verify the accuracy of the information thus obtained. Without this verification the answers cannot be used in their work, such as advising clients or arguing cases before a court. Lawyers must cite authoritative sources, like the government’s database of legislation.

Sharp points out that judges have already received guidance on the use of artificial intelligence – guidance that is just as relevant for lawyers. In addition to warnings about the need to check AI-generated responses for false information, the guidance also warns that confidential information must not be entered into publicly available tools.

Sharp writes: “There are serious implications for the administration of justice and public confidence in the justice system if artificial intelligence is misused.” She calls on those in leadership roles in the legal profession to take urgent measures to ensure that everyone who provides legal services “understands and complies with their professional and ethical obligations and their duties to the court if using artificial intelligence.”

Recent cases from England

The ruling refers to two recent cases heard before the court. In one, the plaintiff asked for millions of pounds in damages from two banks. In written arguments submitted to the court, the claimant and his lawyer included 45 citations – 18 of which referred to nonexistent cases. Other cases cited in the filing did exist, but the quotations ascribed to them did not.

The plaintiff admitted to using publicly available AI tools for his research. His lawyer confessed to have compiled this evidence without verifying it before sending to the court.

In another case a man sued the London Borough of Haringey for its refusal to provide emergency accommodation after he was evicted from his home. In documents submitted to the court, the claimant’s legal representative cited five cases. When attorneys for the defense tried to look the cases up, they found that none of them existed. They also noticed that certain passages in the filing used American English spelling, rather than British English, sparking further suspicion that AI had been used.

The lawyers for the defense made an application for a wasted costs order. The court found that the plaintiff’s lawyers had been “improper and unreasonable and negligent.”

The attorney responsible for the false citations told the court that she had not used AI tools in her research and that she was aware that artificial intelligence “is not a reliable source.” She did however conduct internet searches, and in doing so may have reviewed AI-generated summaries without realizing what they were. She also informed the court of a separate case in which she submitted false material citing non-existent rulings.

The lawyers responsible for the false citations in the two cases were referred to professional regulators. The regulators will now decide on further disciplinary steps.

Consequences potentially severe

Judge Sharp warns in her ruling that lawyers who give false evidence must reckon with “severe sanctions.” In addition to referral to the relevant regulatory authority, such actions could also lead to charges of contempt of court. In especially heinous cases, lawyers could even be charged with perverting the course of justice – the maximum penalty for which is life imprisonment.

Ian Jeffery of the Law Society, a professional association, told the Guardian that the ruling “lays bare the dangers of using AI in legal work.” He added that the use of such tools is increasing – but that, given the risk of false results, AI-generated results need to be reviewed by lawyers for accuracy.

The cases highlighted by the High Court are not the first in which AI-produced mistakes have come to light. The court cites a 2023 case before an appellate court. The appellant was challenging a tax penalty and cited nine previous decisions by that same court – none of which were real. At first the appellant claimed she had received help from a friend who worked in a law office. Finally she told the court that it was “possible” she had used AI tools. She did not appear to see the impropriety of her actions, however, telling the court that “she couldn’t see that it made any difference,” as there had to be other rulings that supported her argument. Her appeal was denied.

In another case from the US, two lawyers cited non-existent judgments. When the opposing lawyer was unable to find the rulings, the lawyers were asked to present them. Instead of searching for them, the lawyers simply asked ChatGPT to summarize the cited cases. The presiding judge noted that these summaries showed “stylistic and reasoning flaws that do not generally appear in decisions issued by United States Courts of Appeals.” The judge imposed a $5,000 fine on each of the two lawyers responsible, and on the law firm that employed them. (js)

Uganda: Dating apps become digital traps

2025-05-28T08:04:00+02:00

Human rights groups have documented the negative effects that a controversial anti-LGBTQ+ law has had on sexual minorities in Uganda. Online platforms can also pose risks.

The law has drawn international protests, like this one in London (image). Uganda’s Constitutional Court largely upheld the law in 2024. (Source: IMAGO / Avalon.red)

It has been two years since a harsh law aimed at sexual minorities was enacted in Uganda. Human rights groups have observed increasing discrimination and violence against lesbians and gays. Dating apps have even been used to entrap and extort people.

In a report published on Monday, Human Rights Watch (HRW) details how the increasingly authoritarian government of President Yoweri Museveni, who has been in power since 1986, has “ramped up crackdowns and discrimination” against LGBTQ+ people in recent years. These repressive measures culminated in the passage in May 2023 of the Anti-Homosexuality Act, “one of the world’s harshest” anti-LGBTQ+ laws.

What does LGBTQ+ stand for?

The abbreviation stands for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer/Questioning, with the “+” representing other, as yet undefined identities and orientations. Collectively, the abbreviation refers to sexual identities and orientations that differ from female, male, and heterosexual norms.

Oryem Nyeko of HRW criticized the Ugandan government’s “willful decision to legislate hate” against LGBTQ+ people.

Under the law, anyone convicted of committing “the offense of homosexuality” faces a sentence of life imprisonment. Certain cases even allow for the death penalty – though the country has not carried out any death sentences since 2005, according to observers.

The law drew sharp criticism when it was enacted in 2023. Ugandan activists moved to challenge the legislation in court – but the Constitutional Court largely upheld the law. The court did however strike down certain provisions, such as the obligation to report alleged acts of homosexuality.

Digital traps

HRW has documented arbitrary arrests and physical attacks since the law went into effect. Individuals who use dating apps have even been lured into traps online.

Access Now likewise reports that law enforcement officials and police informants have carried out a form of “digital entrapment,” sometimes using fake profiles on dating apps for the purpose. They contact targeted individuals and attempt to induce them to send romantic messages or incriminating photos. These are then used as proof of alleged violations of the law.

The Human Rights Awareness and Promotion Forum, a Ugandan organization, has documented more than 1,000 of these cases since May 2023. Access Now investigated some of the cases – all led to arbitrary arrests or criminal charges.

Access Now describes one case involving an individual who met someone on a dating app. When the individual went to meet the other person, the police were waiting. The individual was charged with sending “lewd and offensive messages.”

In another case an individual was contacted by someone on social media and exchanged several messages with this person before they agreed to meet. When they did meet, however, the person turned out to be a military officer. The officer detained the individual and handed them over to the police. The police held them for several days and subjected them to an invasive examination. The individual was charged with “attempted homosexuality.”

Human Rights Watch describes a case in which a police officer was in touch with a gay man on the dating app Grindr. When the two met in person, the police officer arrested the man. Only after paying a bribe was the man released.

Access Now and HRW describe several other cases in which individuals agreed to meet someone they met online only to have the police show up at the meetings and arrest them. Some were forced to hand over their cell phones and provide their passwords. In some cases the police used access to individuals’ phones to secure additional evidence of allegedly illegal activity. In one case described by Access Now, the police revealed the victim’s sexual orientation to all of the contacts saved in their phone.

Homophobic hate speech

HRW has also documented the way in which government agencies and politicians in Uganda have directed hateful rhetoric towards LGBTQ+ people online and in the media. This was at its most acute in the months immediately preceding and following the law’s passage in 2023. Since the law was enacted, an increase in physical attacks has also been observed. The authorities have also raided the offices of NGOs and suspended their operations.

HRW has documented numerous cases of online threats against LGBTQ+ individuals – including death threats. Some individuals were threatened with being publicly outed. Others had their personal information published against their will (doxxing) – and were then targeted with harassment and abuse.

Victims speaking to HRW also related experiences of being lured into traps – and not just over dating apps. One night the head of an organization that provides shelter for homeless LGBTQ+ people received a phone call from a woman asking for help. When he arrived at the place the woman had asked to meet, he saw a group of men beating a man who worked for another LGBTQ+ rights organization. The men then turned and started attacking the man’s car.

Some of the victims HRW spoke to reported instances of abuse to the police. But HRW reports that the police have largely failed to respond. Instead, officers harass the victims, extort them or detain them. Sometimes victims are obliged to pay the officers in order to secure their release.

Repeal of law demanded

Both HRW and Access Now demand that the Ugandan government repeal the anti-LGBTQ+ law. Consensual same-sex relationships must be decriminalized, the groups urge – and sections of the penal code enacted in 1950 under British colonial rule must be changed. The authorities must also stop using and disseminating hate speech themselves. And perpetrators must be held to account for physical attacks and other forms of harassment.

The groups also call for digital platforms to work together with organizations that advocate for LGBTQ+ rights. Employees must be trained to be able to identify hate speech in a Ugandan context. (js)

New Orleans: Police secretly used facial recognition

2025-05-22T08:06:00+02:00

Police in New Orleans secretly used a privately operated camera network equipped with real-time facial recognition technology, according to a new report. The police department has launched an internal investigation.

More than 200 cameras city-wide are reportedly equipped with facial recognition. (Source: IMAGO / Depositphotos)

Police in New Orleans had access to a network of surveillance cameras running real-time facial recognition technology – without disclosing its use. A new investigation by the Washington Post brings the arrangement to light. The cameras are operated by a private organization. Police use of the technology could potentially have violated a city ordinance.

As the Post reports, New Orleans police officers used live facial recognition over a period of two years. The use of the technology led to dozens of arrests, according to court records and police reports reviewed by the Post.

The cameras are operated by Project NOLA, a nonprofit organization founded by a former police officer. Local business owners install the cameras in their stores or bars, or connect existing cameras to the nonprofit’s network. There are reportedly more than 200 of these cameras throughout the city of New Orleans, including in the French Quarter entertainment district. Project NOLA claims that its network has access to 5,000 cameras in the city – but says that most are not equipped with the advanced surveillance technology.

The facial recognition system used by the organization automatically scans every person captured by the cameras and matches their likeness against a database of wanted suspects in real-time. The database is compiled by Project NOLA and includes about 30,000 people, according to the group’s founder, Bryan Lagarde. Lagarde claims that the police cannot add or remove people to the list and cannot search for specific people. The list is partly compiled using mug shots, which in the United States are often publicly available.

App notifies police in real time

If the software finds a wanted individual, a smartphone app sends a notification to police officers alerting them of the suspect’s name and the location where they were sighted. The organization has no contract with the city of New Orleans – it worked directly with individual police officers. It is unclear how many officers downloaded the app and made use of the facial recognition technology.

New Orleans police told the Post that they have launched an investigation in order to answer this question. The inquiry will also seek to determine how many people were arrested as a result of the technology’s use, and how many false matches were made.

Police Superintendant Anne Kirkpatrick told the Post that as of last month, officers have been prohibited from using the Project NOLA app. Officers’ use of the app had come to light during an internal review – and was identified as a potential problem.

Rules governing the use of facial recognition

The police will also be reviewing the basic question of whether the use of the app violated the law. There is in fact a city council ordinance governing the use of facial recognition by New Orleans police.

This ordinance, passed in 2022, limits the use of the technology to “searches for specific suspects” in violent crime investigations, the Post reports. If the police want to match a person’s face against a database, the ordinance requires that they send a photo to a “fusion center” in the state capital, Baton Rouge, where multiple agencies collaborate on investigations.

“There,” the Post writes, “examiners trained in identifying faces use AI software to compare the image with a database of photos and only return a ‘match’ if at least two examiners agree.” The city council must also be informed of these requests.

The city council passed this ordinance in part to prevent wrongful arrests. There have been multiple reports in the US of people being falsely identified by the technology and wrongfully detained as a result. In some cases the police could easily have established the suspects’ innocence by checking their alibis or looking at certain physical characteristics. Similar cases have been reported in the UK as well.

As the Post reports, some city officials do not regard police officers’ actions as having violated the ordinance. They argue that because the city has no contract with Project NOLA, police “are merely receiving tips from an outside group that is performing facial recognition scans on its own.”

But according to the Post’s reporting, many police officers, rather than merely receive tips, actively reached out to Project NOLA for help. Officers also made use of the technology in investigations involving non-violent crimes. “Little about this arrangement resembles the process described in the city council ordinance,” the Post writes.

Nathan Freed Wessler of the American Civil Liberties Organization told the paper, “This is the facial recognition technology nightmare scenario that we have been worried about.”

Not an isolated case

The New Orleans case highlights the challenges of regulating the technology. The Post reports that four US states, Maryland, Montana, Vermont, and Virginia have barred law enforcement agencies from using live facial recognition, as have several cities. But just last year the paper reported on the difficulties involved in enforcing such bans. Police departments in San Francisco and Austin, for example, are not permitted to use the technology – but to circumvent this prohibition, they simply asked other law enforcement agencies to conduct facial recognition searches for them.

Human rights and civil liberties organizations have long demanded a ban on the state use of facial recognition. Among other concerns, the groups warn that the rising prevalence of surveillance cameras in public spaces makes it easier to keep tabs on where people go, whom they meet with, and what they do. (js)

British Ministry of Justice admits to data breach

2025-05-21T08:03:00+02:00

Personal data was stolen from an agency of the British Ministry of Justice. Experts regard the data as highly sensitive – and warn of possible misuse.

A group representing the legal profession demands that the ministry inform victims of the breach. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

Applicants for legal aid or advice in the UK have had their personal data stolen in a cyberattack. Media report that the theft affects hundreds of thousands of people. The data stolen include applicants’ criminal histories. A criminal gang is believed to be responsible for the attack.

As the British Ministry of Justice announced on Monday, the attack targeted the IT systems of the Legal Aid Agency and was discovered on April 23. The agency is part of the Ministry of Justice and provides civil and criminal legal aid as well as legal advice in England and Wales.

On May 16 the agency discovered that the scope of the breach was far greater than initially thought. A “significant amount” of personal data was accessed and downloaded. The victims include potentially anyone who has applied for legal aid through the agency’s digital services since 2010 – or had an application filed in their name.

According to the Ministry of Justice, the stolen data include applicants’ addresses, dates of birth, and national ID numbers. Criminal histories were also accessed, as was information on employment status and financial data such as debts and payments.

A large number of potential victims

The ministry did not specify the number of victims, but the Guardian reports that hundreds of thousands were affected. The tech news site the Register, citing publicly available Ministry of Justice data, reports that between April 2023 and March 2024 alone nearly 390,000 applications for aid were submitted.

At first the Ministry of Justice and the Legal Aid Agency believed that only certain data, such as data from legal firms, were accessed in the breach. They have now been forced to admit that the unknown actors behind the attack also gained access to applicant data.

The head of the Legal Aid Agency, Jane Harbottle, apologized on Monday for the breach: “I understand this news will be shocking and upsetting for people and I am extremely sorry this has happened.” The agency’s online services will taken be temporarily offline, Harbottle said.

The BBC reports that the breach affected all of the Legal Aid Agency’s areas of responsibility. In addition to providing civil and criminal legal aid, the agency also covers the cost of services like family mediation. Some of those impacted by the data theft include victims of domestic violence and those at risk of forced marriage.

Warning of blackmail attempts

The Ministry of Justice warned potential victims to be on the alert. Those affected should exercise caution when receiving messages or phone calls from unknown persons – and should not give out any personal information.

Lawyers interviewed by the Guardian warned that the stolen data included highly sensitive information – and could potentially be used for blackmail attempts.

Attorney Helen Morris told the paper that even people who were questioned by police but never charged could be affected if an application for aid was made in their name. Information relating to such incidents could now become public.

The Law Society, a trade group that represents lawyers in England and Wales, called on the Legal Aid Agency to notify everyone whose data was stolen. The agency is currently working with the National Crime Agency and National Cyber Security Centre. The Information Commissioner’s Office, the UK’s data protection authority, has also been alerted.

Ministry said to have known about vulnerabilities

According to the Guardian, UK authorities assume that a criminal gang was behind the attacks – they do not believe a state actor was responsible. The Guardian’s report raises the question of whether the security of the agency’s IT systems had been neglected.

The paper reports that the Law Society urged the government to invest in the Legal Aid Agency’s digital system, saying it was “too fragile to cope.” Last year the group criticized the agency’s “antiquated IT systems,” calling them “evidence of the long-term neglect of our justice system.”

The Guardian also cites an anonymous source at the Ministry of Justice, who told the paper that “neglect and mismanagement” by the previous government had made the data breach possible. According to the source, the former government “knew about the vulnerabilities of the Legal Aid Agency digital systems, but did not act.” (js)

US: Hundreds of Voice of America employees fired

2025-05-20T14:36:00+02:00

Hundreds of employees of the US-run international news outlet Voice of America have been terminated. The firings reportedly targeted journalists above all, as well as some administrative staffers.

The government has put the building in Washington, D.C. that houses VOA’s offices up for sale. (Source: IMAGO / Light Studio Agency)

The US government last week fired hundreds of journalists and other staff working for its international broadcaster Voice of America. Many will have to leave the US – and return to countries where they are at risk of persecution. Reporters without Borders condemns the move.

Nearly 600 employees have reportedly received termination notices. As the New York Times reports, many of them were working for the federally funded broadcaster as contractors, which made it easier to fire them. Their contracts will end on May 30.

Most of the employees fired were journalists, but some administrative staffers were also let go.

According to media reports, Michael Abramowitz, Voice of America’s Director, wrote in an internal email that some of the staffers who were fired come from countries with repressive governments that persecute journalists.

Journalists under threat

The news site Politico reports that around 50 of the terminated employees were in the US on visas that were tied to their employment at Voice of America. After their contract ends, they will have 30 days to leave the country – or find another agency to sponsor their visa.

Reporters without Borders (RSF) warned that because of their work, these journalists face imprisonment – or worse – in their home countries. The organization is “outraged” by the terminations.

Voice of America was founded in 1942, during the Second World War, as a way of countering Nazi propaganda. Based in Washington, D.C., the organization broadcasts news in other countries and could be heard until recently in 48 languages.

The network is overseen by the US Agency for Global Media, which also oversees other US-funded international broadcasters like Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and Radio Free Asia. The agency distributes funding allocated by the US Congress to the broadcasters.

Funding cuts

In March the administration of President Donald Trump announced plans to cut funding for international broadcasters. After the announcement, nearly all of Voice of America’s employees were placed on administrative leave. They were instructed to remain available during working hours – but could no longer enter the building or access internal systems. The administration’s actions were sharply criticized.

Voice of America employees, their unions, and RSF filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration in March. On April 22, they won an initial victory in court: the presiding judge ordered the administration to reverse its shutdown of the news networks and allow all employees and outside contractors to return to their jobs. Voice of America was set to resume operations.

The court also ruled that money approved by Congress for other organizations overseen by the US Agency for Global Media, like Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, had to be disbursed.

On May 3rd, employees of Voice of America were informed that they could return to work. But that same day an appellate court granted a stay on parts of the lower court’s decision reinstating Voice of America’s employees.

RSF announced plans to appeal. Clayton Weimers, head of RSF’s North American chapter, issued a statement in response to last week’s dismissals: “While VOA employees await the decision of the en banc review in the appeals court,” Weimers wrote, the Trump administration has “taken advantage of the slow pace of the proceedings to force through a mass termination, causing irreparable damage.”

Limited operations

According to the New York Times, Voice of America remains largely shuttered. Programming in Persian and Mandarin has been restored, but the network’s English-language website has not been updated since March 15. The administration also put the Washington building that houses the broadcaster’s offices up for sale last Thursday.

During his first term in office, Trump levelled verbal attacks against Voice of America. In March of this year the White House even accused the network of spreading “radical propaganda” at the expense of US taxpayers.

Since beginning his second term, the US president has taken action against the media on several fronts. One such move has been to exclude reporters for major news agencies from the White House press pool.

RSF has criticized the new administration for its open hostility to the press and its systematic efforts to oppose critical reporting and unfavorable media outlets. (js)

NSO must pay $167 million in damages for spyware attacks

2025-05-12T12:20:00+02:00

NSO Group, developer of Pegasus spyware, must pay a nine-figure penalty to WhatsApp. The tech company had sued the spyware developer after attacks on more than a thousand WhatsApp users.

Many of the people targeted in 2019 lived in Mexico, but there were also victims in the EU. (Source: IMAGO / SOPA Images)

The Israeli spyware company NSO Group must pay more than $167 million to WhatsApp. A California jury ruled on the damages last Tuesday. The lawsuit was filed in response to the use of NSO’s Pegasus spyware to target 1,400 WhatsApp users in 2019. WhatsApp is already planning additional steps in the case – and NSO could appeal.

Judge Phyllis Hamilton had ruled in December that NSO bears responsibility for the attacks. All that remained was for the court to decide on the amount of damages.

The jury decided that NSO must pay $167.25 million in punitive damages to the Meta subsidiary. NGO must also pay compensatory damages in the amount of $444,719.

WhatsApp’s lawyers had asked the court for an unspecified amount in punitive damages as well as more than $444,000 in compensatory damages – the latter to cover costs that WhatsApp had incurred in 2019 when the company discovered and countered the Pegasus attacks.

Journalists and dissidents spied on

In the 2019 attacks, NSO exploited a security flaw in the messaging app’s call feature to plant its controversial Pegasus spyware in the targets’ smartphones. The attackers were able to infiltrate the targeted devices even if the users didn’t answer the calls. The 1,400 victims included journalists, lawyers, dissidents, human rights activists, diplomats, and government officials.

Meta (then Facebook) and WhatsApp responded by suing NSO in the fall of that same year. Over the course of the years-long case, NSO admitted that the specifics of the attack were exactly as WhatsApp had described them. In December 2024, the court found that NSO was responsible for the attacks and had violated US laws, including the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, as well as WhatsApp’s terms of use.

“Enormous victory”

WhatsApp called the jury’s decision an “important step forward.” The company published a statement, writing that this is “the first victory against the development and use of illegal spyware that threatens the safety and privacy of everyone.” The damages awarded by the court will serve as a deterrent to the “malicious” spyware industry.

Natalia Krapiva of Access Now said in a statement: “Today’s verdict against NSO is an enormous victory for digital rights and for victims of Pegasus spyware around the world.” Krapiva called for other companies whose infrastructure and users had been targeted by spyware to consider taking similar legal steps.

John Scott-Railton of Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto also cheered the decision. Citizen Lab has uncovered the use of Pegasus in multiple cases and helped WhatsApp in 2019 to identify and notify some of the victims. Many other cases came to light because WhatsApp took this step, the cybersecurity expert argued.

Scott-Railton wrote on social media: “After years of every trick and delay tactic it only took a California jury a day of deliberation to see the heart of the matter. NSO makes millions hacking mostly American tech companies . . . so that dictators can hack dissidents. Their conduct deserves to be punished.”

NSO tried to claim immunity

NSO tried repeatedly to have the case dismissed. The company argued that it only sold law enforcement technology to government agencies – and should therefore, as a representative of foreign governments, enjoy immunity under US law. Two separate courts rejected this claimbefore the case reached the US Supreme Court in 2023. But the top court turned away NSO’s appeal, allowing the lawsuit to finally go ahead.

In her ruling in December Judge Hamilton noted that NSO had repeatedly failed to comply with court orders to produce relevant evidence. The judge also found fault with NSO’s arguments in hearings that preceded the jury trial. The company, she wrote, “cannot claim, on the one hand, that its intent is to help its clients fight terrorism and child exploitation, and on the other hand say that it has nothing to do with what its client does with the technology.”

What is Pegasus?

Nevertheless, cybersecurity expert Scott-Railton pointed out that a few details did come to light during the trial. NSO admitted, for example, that clients in Mexico, Saudi Arabia, and Uzbekistan, among other countries, were responsible for the attacks on WhatsApp users in 2019.

It was also revealed that the largest number of victims lived in Mexico. But targets in Bahrain, Morocco, Spain, and the Netherlands – and many more countries – were also attacked.

WhatsApp also announced that during court proceedings NSO had to admit to spending several million dollars a year to develop covert methods for installing Pegasus. WhatsApp has already published some transcripts from the trial – more are expected to follow.

WhatsApp to donate money

The links between NSO’s Pegasus spyware and human rights violations have long been established. In November 2021 the US government – under then-President Joe Biden – imposed sanctions on the company.

NSO has told US media that it is considering filing an appeal.

The case isn’t over for WhatsApp, either: NSO stated at trial that its financial situation made it incapable of paying punitive damages. In a post following the verdict, WhatsApp wrote that it had “a long road ahead to collect awarded damages from NSO” – but that it planned to do so. “Ultimately, we would like to make a donation to digital rights organizations.”

The company added: “Our next step is to secure a court order to prevent NSO from ever targeting WhatsApp again.” (js)

Afghanistan: Women report floggings

2025-05-07T08:16:00+02:00

The Taliban uses public lashings as a form of punishment. Women report being forced to confess to alleged crimes.

UN experts criticize the use of corporal punishment by the Taliban. (Screenshot: IMAGO / Xinhua)

Hundreds of women have been publicly flogged since the Taliban returned to power in Afghanistan, the Guardian reports. The paper spoke to three victims about what they experienced and the lingering consequences they have suffered.

In August 2021, the Taliban regained power in Afghanistan. Since then the humanitarian situation and the human rights situation in the country have worsened. The rights of women and girls in particular have been severely curtailed. Women and girls no longer have access to education beyond the sixth grade and can no longer practice many professions. They are not permitted to play sports or visit parks. The Taliban regard women’s voices as “intimate,” and by law they are not allowed to be heard outside the home.

As the Guardian reports, citing court records and media reports, since 2021 more than 1,000 people have been publicly flogged – including at least 200 women. The actual number is probably much higher, the paper notes.

Those whipped include women who were accused of “moral crimes” – for example, leaving the house without a male relative to act as guardian. Three victims spoke with the Guardian and the Afghan news agency Zan Times. They report being forced to confess to these alleged crimes before being punished.

Detained for renting a sewing machine

A 38-year-old woman who works as a tailor told the Guardian that she had been arrested twice in the past two years by the Taliban’s so-called “morality police.” The first time was for renting a sewing machine from a man she isn’t related to – she spent four nights in jail.

The second arrest came after she was seen charging her phone in a café. She was wearing a long coat and a large shawl – but officers from the morality police asked her why she wasn’t veiled and why she was in a café without a guardian. She explained that because of a recent earthquake she had no power at home. Two days later she was arrested – and had to spend time in solitary confinement.

She faced a Taliban court without a lawyer and was sentenced to 25 lashes. She told the Guardian that her friends treat her differently now because “they’d been told lies about what happened.”

Trip to the hospital

A 22-year-old woman told reporters that last year, when she was very sick, her mother asked her cousin to drive her to the hospital. On the way they were stopped by Taliban officials who beat her cousin and took her to a detention center. She was then interrogated about their relationship. Before a Taliban court she was forced to falsely confess to being in a relationship with her cousin.

She said: “They made me confess, in front of my mother, my uncles, that I had done something wrong. I didn’t want to say it. But they hit me, threatened my cousin. I was terrified.” She was sentenced to 30 lashes and her cousin to 70.

After the public flogging she had to leave her village, she said, because people there believed the accusations and treated her differently because of it.

An 18-year-old woman told a similar story: two years ago, when she was 16, she was traveling with her cousin to buy sewing supplies for her mother when the two of them were stopped. She had to spend two months in prison and was sentenced to 39 lashes. Her cousin was also flogged.

After the flogging, she said, “They kept us for another week. They said we couldn’t leave until the wounds healed. They didn’t want anyone to see what they had done.” When she was released, she was told she was not allowed to leave the country. Taliban officials threatened her: “’You’re being watched.’”

UN experts condemn floggings

Last month, experts at the UN, including Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Afghanistan Richard Bennet, urged the Taliban to “immediately halt all inhumane punishments.” This includes capital and corporal punishment. The experts published their statement after the Taliban carried out four public executions in a single day.

“We condemn these public executions, which constitute a violation of international law and an attack on human dignity,” the experts said. The practice “creates a climate of fear and intimidation.”

The UN experts also expressed “grave concern” about the Taliban’s use of corporal punishment, a violation of international human rights law. Lashings are the most common form of such punishment. These penalties are often imposed for alleged “crimes” like “illicit relationships.”

According to the UN, since the beginning of 2025, at least 169 men and 44 women have been flogged.

The experts criticized the justice system under the Taliban, writing that it “lacked the necessary independence and procedural safeguards.” They also expressed concern about human rights abuses in Afghanistan, including the “institutionalized oppression of women and girls.”

UN Special Rapporteur Bennett, in a February report on the human rights situation in Afghanistan, wrote that the Taliban had implemented a “deeply misogynistic system” that is “unparalleled in any other country.” In Bennett’s estimation, the measures imposed by the Taliban could amount to crimes against humanity.

In January, Karim A.A. Khan, prosecutor for the International Criminal Court in the Hague, issued arrest warrants for two Taliban leaders. According to Khan, there are reasonable grounds to believe that the two men “bear criminal responsibility for the crime against humanity of persecution on gender grounds.” (js)

Italy: Another journalist learns of spyware attack

2025-05-06T16:31:00+02:00

Journalist Ciro Pellegrino was targeted by spyware, according to a notification he received from Apple. His boss was the target of a previous attack.

Since the beginning of this year, Italy has been embroiled in a spyware scandal – but the government denies having spied on journalists. (Screenshot: fanpage.it)

The Italian journalist Ciro Pellegrino received a notification alerting him to a spyware attack on his phone. Several attacks of this kind have come to light in recent months in Italy.

In an article published last week, the journalist reports that he received an email from Apple informing him of the attack. Since November 2021 the company has alerted its users when it discovers indications of spyware attacks against them. As Pellegrino reports, the notification he received stated that other users had also been notified.

Apple’s notification also stated that the attack was probably directed at Pellegrino in particular: “This attack is likely targeting you specifically because of who you are or what you do.” The notification contained an admonition: “Apple has high confidence in this warning – please take it seriously.”

Editor and editor-in-chief attacked

Pellegrino works for the Italian news site Fanpage, which last year exposed the use of fascist chants and slogans by members of the youth organization of the ruling Fratelli d’Italia party.

The site’s editor-in-chief, Francesco Cancellato, came forward in February to announce that his phone had been targeted. The month before, WhatsApp had informed 90 users in more than two dozen countries that their smartphones had been attacked by Paragon Solutions’ Graphite spyware.

Graphite makes it possible for attackers to gain total access to a device. They can read a person’s text messages and view other sensitive information. The software’s developer, Paragon Solutions, claims to sell it only to government agencies.

It is still unclear whether this particular form of spyware was also used against Pellegrino. As the Guardian reports, the journalist has asked cybersecurity researchers at the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab for help. Citizen Lab confirmed the attack on Fanpage’s editor-in-chief Cancellato in March.

Activists targeted

Citizen Lab also found evidence of attacks against activists: according to its findings, Graphite was used against the founders of the NGO Mediterranea Saving Humans, Luca Casarini and Dr. Giuseppe “Beppe” Caccia. Their organization rescues refugees who become stranded in the Mediterranean.

Father Mattia Ferrari, a priest who works with the sea rescue organization and was a personal friend of the late Pope Francis, was also attacked. In its March report, Citizen Lab was not able to provide any information on the type of spyware used against him. It is also unclear which type of spyware was used in the case of activist David Yambio. Yambio, like Pellegrino, was notified of an attack by Apple.

Casarini, Caccia, Ferrari, and Yambio voiced their suspicion in March that they were targeted because of their humanitarian work and their criticism of Italy’s migration policies.

The Italian government at first denied responsibility for the attacks. In late March, however, in testimony before the intelligence oversight committee in parliament (Copasir), Italian Undersecretary of State Alfredo Mantovano admitted to the use of spyware against Mediterranea Saving Humans – while continuing to deny responsibility for the attack on Fanpage’s editor-in-chief. The committee’s investigation continues; according to media reports, a report on its findings is expected soon.

Intelligence agency used spyware

Undersecretary Mantovano told the committee in March that Italy’s foreign intelligence agency, AISE, had used the spyware against the NGO. The organization was designated a “danger to national security” as part of a “preventive investigation into illegal immigration.” In response, Mediterranea Saving Humans stated that there was no justification for the use of spyware to target its members.

In a statement, the NGO conjectured that the intelligence agency may have been searching for something else, such as details pertaining to rescued individuals who intended to testify before the International Criminal Court as witnesses to the torture of refugees in Libya.

Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s government has come under fire for its agreements with the government in Tripoli. Critics accuse Italy of being complicit in the abuse of migrants in Libya. In January the Italian government released Osama Almasri Najim, head of Libya’s judicial police – this even though the International Criminal Court had issued a warrant for his arrest on suspicion of war crimes.

Ciro Pellegrino, the journalist, has also been critical of the Meloni government, the Guardian reports. He told the paper that he thought the notification from Apple was a joke at first. “It’s a horrible feeling,” he said.

In his article for Fanpage he criticized the fact that although the parliamentary commission has heard testimony from many parties, there have been few answers to date. Journalists in Italy enjoy special protections from wiretapping measures, Pellegrino writes. He and his colleagues demand answers; they want to know who is responsible for the surveillance.

Reporters without Borders on Monday called on the Italian authorities to fully investigate the targeting of Pellegrino and Cancellato.

John Scott-Railton of Citizen Lab wrote on social media that it was “time for transparency from the Italian government.” Because Italy is a known Paragon customer, Scott-Railton wrote, logs that Paragon keeps should be able to quickly answer the question of whether Italy was responsible for the targeting of Pellegrino. (js)

Reporters without Borders: Global state of press freedom reaches historic low

2025-05-05T08:02:00+02:00

The state of press freedom worldwide grew even worse in the past year. In only seven countries can the situation be considered “good,” according to Reporters without Borders.

Economic pressure is a “leading factor” weighing on media outlets, says RSF. (Source: IMAGO / Schöning)

The global state of press freedom has reached a historic low. The World Index of Press Freedom published last Friday by Reporters without Borders (RSF) reflects the decline. The index presents a comparative assessment of conditions for journalists and media outlets in 180 countries.

In 90 of 180 countries assessed, RSF classifies the situation for members of the press as either “difficult” or “very serious.” Only in seven countries is the situation “good.” All seven are in Europe: Norway occupies the top spot on the index, followed by Estonia, the Netherlands, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, and Ireland. Journalists in these countries benefit from stable democratic structures and societies that place a high value on independent media. The leading countries also feature strong legal protections ensuring freedom of the press.

Anja Osterhaus, director of RSF Germany, said in a statement: “More than half of the world’s population now lives in countries where we classify the state of press freedom as very serious.”

The organization attributes the poor situation in many countries to the lack of global stability and to rising authoritarianism. But economic pressure is also weighing on many media outlets. Throughout the world, journalists and news rooms “are caught between preserving their editorial independence and ensuring their economic survival.”

Financially starved

For media outlets in 160 out of 180 countries assessed in the 2025 index, financial stability is attainable only “with difficulty” – or “not at all.” In 46 countries, media ownership is concentrated in the hands of just a few individuals or entities. In Russia (ranked 171st), for example, the media landscape is controlled entirely by the Kremlin and oligarchs with close ties to the state.

In many countries, media outlets are reliant on state advertising. In Hungary (68th), the government actively controls journalistic work by withholding advertising from outlets critical of its policies, RSF reports.

Said Osterhaus: “Independent journalism is a thorn in the side of autocrats. This has consequences for its ability to survive economically. If media outlets are financially starved, who will uncover false information, disinformation, and propaganda? Alongside our daily fight for the safety of journalists, we therefore also advocate for a strengthening of the economic foundations of journalism.”

The Americas are one of many regions where journalists are under pressure. Last year the state of press freedom got worse in more than half of the countries in the region. In 12 of 28 countries, the situation is now “difficult” or “very serious.”

The largest decline in the region was suffered by Argentina, which is now ranked 87th (compared to 66th last year). The highest-ranked countries in the Americas are Trinidad and Tobago (19th) and Canada (21st).

US government hostile to the press

The US fell two places from last year’s ranking and are now ranked 57th. The new administration under President Donald Trump is openly hostile to the press and is systematically cracking down on critical reporting and unfavorable media, RSF reports. In the lead up to last year’s election, Trump verbally attacked journalists and threatened them in numerous instances.

Published annually, the Index of Press Freedom is based on information gathered in the previous calendar year. In certain cases, however, RSF also considers developments that arise after the reporting year.

Since Donald Trump assumed office, his administration has taken actions like excluding large wire services from the White House press pool.

The administration has also tried to cut funding for international broadcasters like Voice of America and Radio Free Asia. A court has since ruled that the administration must continue to fund Voice of America. Last Tuesday, a different court decided that funding approved by the US Congress for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty must also be disbursed.

RSF warns that if the broadcasters are shuttered, more than 400 million people worldwide could lose access to reliable information.

Withheld funding, real consequences

Media outlets in Eastern Europe and Central Asia are feeling the effects of the US government’s decision to cut funding for the US Agency for International Development (USAID), RSF reports. In Ukraine (ranked 62nd), roughly 90 percent of outlets are reliant on financial assistance that to this point has come primarily from the US. Opposite these news organizations are well-funded Russian state media that distribute Kremlin propaganda.

Compared with the rest of the world, journalists in Europe enjoy the most freedom to carry out their work. Poland rose to place 31 on the list (from place 47 last year). RSF attributes the rise to an improved climate for journalism that has taken hold in the year since the former ruling party PiS was voted out of office.

But there are still problems in Europe. RSF reports that public media in Slovakia (ranked 38th) are experiencing an existential crisis: last year, the government passed a law eliminating the broadcaster RTVS and replacing it with a new state-run outlet.

According to RSF, press freedom in Greece has been experiencing a “systemic crisis” since 2021: the EU country is ranked 89th, falling one place from its position last year.

Situation in Germany slightly worse

By international standards, Germany remains in a good position – but the country still faces clear challenges, RSF reports. Germany fell one place in this year’s index and is now ranked 11th.

RSF notes that many journalists in the country operate in an increasingly hostile work environment. Journalists who cover right-wing extremist groups and parties like the AfD are particularly at risk. They report threats, insults, and a fear of physical violence.

In 2024, RSF documented 89 attacks on journalists and news organizations in Germany. The economic situation for media outlets in the country has also noticeably worsened in recent years.

Decline in sub-Saharan Africa

In sub-Saharan Africa, conditions for the press have significantly worsened. In 80 percent of countries in the region, including Sudan (ranked 156th) and Mali (119th), the economic situation has deteriorated. News organizations in the region have been forced to practice self-censorship, cease operations, or go into exile. Dozens of radio stations in the Democratic Republic of Congo (133th) were forced to close, and journalists forced to flee, as a result of the conflict in the country.

In the Asia-Pacific region, RSF’s indicators show that conditions deteriorated in 17 of 32 countries assessed. In 13 countries in the region, the situation for press freedom is “very serious.” Hong Kong (140th), where the controversial National Security Law has since been expanded, now joins this category.

In Southeast Asia, Indonesia fell 16 places, to 127th, and Cambodia fell ten, to 161st – in both countries, indicators of journalists’ safety in particular have grown worse.

After the resignation of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina last year, Bangladesh has risen to place 149. RSF had ranked Hasina one of the “biggest enemies of press freedom” worldwide.

The work of journalists in Mexico (124th) is especially dangerous. More journalists were killed in the country last year than in any other, apart from those whose territory includes active war zones. The most deadly conflict for journalists in 2024 was the war in Gaza.

Bringing up the rear: China, North Korea, and Eritrea

China fell to the third-worst spot on the index. At least 113 journalists are reportedly imprisoned there – more than in any other country in the world.

Bringing up the rear are North Korea and Eritrea, ranked 179th and 180th, respectively.

RSF has published its World Index of Press Freedom since 2002, comparing conditions for journalists and news organizations in 180 countries. The index is based on indicators in the categories of political context, legal framework, economic context, sociocultural context, and safety. (js)

Malware attack on exile Uyghurs discovered

2025-04-30T08:08:00+02:00

Cybersecurity researchers have documented malware attacks on exile Uyghurs. Actors close to the Chinese government are suspected to be behind the attacks.

Western intelligence agencies have also warned of spyware attacks on Uyghur and Tibetan activists. (Source: IMAGO / Steinach)

Members of the World Uyghur Congress (WUC) were targets of an attack aimed at delivering malware. Researchers at the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab have documented the attempt in a new report. Working in collaboration with a research collective of international media organizations, they have identified at least 19 people who were targeted.

The WUC, based in Munich, is the world’s largest organization of exile Uyghurs. Its members advocate for human rights in their home region of Xinjiang in China and also represent the interests of Uyghurs in dealings with other organizations and governments.

As researchers from Citizen Lab reported on Monday, WUC members received notifications from Google in early March warning them that their accounts were the target of a cyberattack. After receiving the notifications, they reached out to reporters and to Citizen Lab. While the investigation was ongoing, several members received emails that were flagged as spam. Because of the warning they had received from Google, they were on the alert and noticed the messages.

Suspicious emails, manipulated software

The emails came from someone claiming to be from one of the WUC’s partner organizations. Recipients were asked to download a software program and test it. According to Citizen Lab, the program was an altered version of a legitimate text editor program for Windows that supports the Uyghur language. As detailed in the report, the software had a backdoor built into it.

The malware was not especially sophisticated, Citizen Lab reports. Still, it would have enabled attackers to steal data from an infected computer.

Investigators determined that activities related to the attack began as far back as May 2024. “Although the malware itself was not particularly advanced, the delivery of the malware was extremely well customized to reach the target population,” Citizen Lab writes in the report. The attackers clearly knew their targets well.

Actors with connections to the Chinese government are believed to have been behind the attack. The tactic of manipulating websites and software used by marginalized groups to target those same groups has been observed before.

Oppressed minority

The Uyghurs are a Turkic-speaking, overwhelmingly Muslim ethnic group who live primarily in the Chinese region of Xinjiang, where they face government oppression. The state uses technology to keep the Uyghur population under mass surveillance. Human rights groups and journalists have also documented cases of forced labor and torture in specially-built camps. The UN accuses China of committing “serious human rights violations” in the region.

Uyghurs outside of China too have at times faced repressive measures. The World Uyghur Congress is one of the main targets, according to Citizen Lab. The Chinese government has designated it a terrorist and separatist organization, and for more than a decade, members have been the targets of cyberattacks.

Citizen Lab’s report is part of an international investigation that documents the death threats and online attacks faced by exile Uyghurs, Tibetans, and natives of Hong Kong. Journalists working on the project have documented over 100 cases from more than 20 countries – 19 victims reported cyberattacks like those described by Citizen Lab.

Experts at Google, when contacted by journalists, confirmed that the attack was likely directed by actors with close links to China.

In Citizen Lab’s assessment, the current case “demonstrates the ability of state and state-affiliated actors to reach across borders and target an ethnic minority repressed both at home and abroad.” Human rights advocates, journalists, and members of civil society living in exile are especially at risk of being targeted.

Given this danger, Citizen Lab calls on the governments of countries that are home to exile communities to offer protection and support.

This most recent documented attack is not an isolated case. In early April, Britain’s National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), working in tandem with other intelligence agencies, issued a public warning about two spyware variants. “Moonshine” spyware for Android was first discovered by Citizen Lab in 2019. The UK intelligence agency also warned of a variant called “Badbazaar.”

According to the NCSC, the two spyware variants are used to spy on NGOs, activists, and journalists whose work involves Tibetan rights, Taiwanese independence, or the oppression of Uyghurs. They can be disguised as smartphone apps tailored to appeal to the targets – for example by being offered in their native language or advertising content related to regions like Tibet or Xinjiang. (js)

EU reviewing Hungarian facial recognition plans

2025-04-29T08:05:00+02:00

The EU is reportedly “assessing” whether Hungary is in violation of the bloc’s AI law. The country plans to surveil Pride events.

In March Hungary passed legislation banning Pride events – and announced that police would use facial recognition to identify violators. The ban has drawn protests, like this one in Budapest. (Source: IMAGO / NurPhoto)

The European Commission is investigating whether Hungary’s plan to use facial recognition technology at Pride parades is compatible with EU law, Politico reports. Police in Hungary are poised to begin using facial recognition to identify participants at such gatherings in the future.

According to Politico’s report, Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier has confirmed that an assessment is underway. The review will determine whether Hungary’s plans are permissible under the EU’s Artificial Intelligence Act, which came into force in February.

In March the Hungarian government passed a law making it illegal to organize or attend gatherings that violate the country’s controversial “child protection” law. That law prohibits making information about non-heterosexual lifestyles available to minors. According to observers, the law passed in March is aimed primarily at Budapest Pride.

The event will celebrate its 30th anniversary this year. As with other Pride events around the world, participants gather to celebrate the LBGTQ+ community and to demonstrate in support of equal rights. The organizers of Budapest Pride have said the event will take place in June as planned.

What does LGBTQ+ stand for?

Under the new law, participation in such gatherings can be punished with a fine of up to 200,000 Hungarian forints (about €500). The authorities are also permitted to use facial recognition technology to identify participants.

Real-time facial recognition?

As Politico reports, one focus of the European Commission’s review is whether the Hungarian law allows for identification via real-time facial recognition. This is largely prohibited under the EU law – though there are exceptions for severe crimes like murder or terrorism.

Italian MEP Brando Benifei was an architect of the AI Act and is co-chair of a group in the European Parliament charged with implementing the law. He told Politico: “Hungary’s amended law appears to enable the use of real-time biometric surveillance at Pride events, which is an application clearly falling under the AI Act’s prohibitions.”

In March, Benifei told Euronews that Hungary’s plan violates the law. He also told the site that he believed the law was incompatible with the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

Benifei at the time urged the Commission to look into the matter.

Criticism of loopholes

According to Politico, the Hungarian law is the first test of the new EU rules, which critics believe have too many loopholes.

Ádám Remport at the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union opposes the Hungarian law, but told Politico that the government could circumvent European restrictions on the use of facial recognition by following a procedure that would identify people not in real time, but with a time lag. Under the AI Act, this is considered a “high-risk” application – but is still permitted.

Remport explained that the police send footage taken by cameras in public locations to the Hungarian Institute for Forensic Sciences, “which does the actual facial recognition.” Because of this added step, the government could argue that the system should not be classified as real-time facial recognition. Remport told Politico: "We are now seeing the concrete consequences of what happens when we succeed in watering down certain regulations.

Regnier, the Commission spokesperson, told Politico that even in the case described by Remport, the Hungarian authorities would still have to follow “strict regulatory requirements,” including seeking approval from a judge.

Changing the constitution

A spokesperson for the Hungarian government told Politico that Hungary “believes all is in line with our constitution and EU law.”

Hungary amended its constitution in April to bolster the legal basis for the law banning Pride parades. The current constitution was adopted in 2011.

The passage of the law in March drew criticism for its ban on gatherings and plans for the use of facial recognition. Amnesty International called the legislation a “full-frontal attack” on the LGBTQ+ community. The organizers of Budapest Pride said the law was an attempt by the government to “restrict peaceful protests with a critical voice by targeting a minority.”

Legal expert Laura Caroli, who helped draft the AI law, also said in March that the use of facial recognition during such events was “actively prohibited by the EU AI Act.”

The Hungarian Helsinki Committee, a Hungarian human rights organization, said that the change to the law violates several fundamental rights, including the right to personal data protection, freedom of assembly, and the prohibition on discrimination. The organization also believes that the government’s plans violate the EU’s Fundamental Rights Charter.

German MEP Daniel Freund described the law as worrying and told the news site Euractiv: “Abolishing the right to assembly and enforcing this measure with facial recognition software – what sounds like something out of Russia or China – is happening in an EU member state.” Freund added that Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán “no longer even pretends to uphold democratic values.”

The AI Act does call for violators to be fined, but leaves it to member states to actually impose the fines. Commission spokesperson Regnier told Politico however that the Commission “will not hesitate to take action, where appropriate.” (js)

Meta: Users can object to data being used for training purposes

2025-04-24T14:55:00+02:00

Meta plans to begin using EU user data to train its AI technology. Hamburg’s commissioner for data protection advises users who want to object to do so now.

Last year Meta postponed implementation of the new policy in the EU after facing criticism. (Source: IMAGO / SOPA Images)

Starting May 27, Meta will use EU user data to train its proprietary artificial intelligence (AI) programs. The company has begun informing its users of the change. Those who don’t want their data to be used for this purpose must take action now and object, advises Hamburg’s commissioner for data protection.

The company introduced a feature called “Meta AI” in the EU last month, a chatbot with which users on Meta’s platforms can interact. The tool can generate text for posts, among other functions. In order to teach the software that powers the feature language proficiency, it is “trained” with large quantities of data – like text written by human users.

Meta is currently informing European users by email of its intent to use publicly accessible posts and comments by adult users for these training purposes. The email informs each user that the company’s data processing will include all public information that they have shared since creating their account. The company will also be utilizing users’ interactions with Meta AI.

Public posts will be processed

In a recent post, Hamburg Commissioner for Data Protection Thomas Fuchs advises users that they must decide now whether to allow their data to be processed for this purpose – and take action if necessary. The post stresses that all publicly available content could be processed, not just new content: “This applies not only to the future, but also to all data from the past.” Anyone who doesn’t want their content to be used must object by no later than May 26, otherwise, on May 27, Meta will begin using the data for training purposes.

After this date, it will still be possible for users to object – but this will only apply to future posts. The commissioner’s post stresses that once data has been used for training purposes, it is “irrevocably incorporated into AI models” – the action cannot be reversed.

The data to be processed includes public posts, comments, photos, and photo captions. According to the commissioner, the data will be used not only for training the Meta AI assistant but other systems as well, such as the Llama language model on which the assistant is based.

As the commissioner explains, public posts are those whose visibility “has not been restricted by the user’s settings.” Meta has said that private messages will not be used for training purposes.

The Bavarian state commissioner for data protection sees several risks inherent in this form of data processing. Users might not know exactly what they posted years ago. Especially given the metadata embedded in many photos, they could have revealed more about themselves than they are currently aware – and all this information could now be used to train so-called AI.

Opt-out possible

Users can object to the use of their data on Facebook and Instagram by filling out a form. Users must be logged in to access the form. App users can also opt out directly in the app.

The form contains an optional field asking for a reason – it’s not necessary to fill this out, however. Those who object using the form will receive an immediate notification on the site. Meta will also send an email confirming that it has received the user’s opt-out request and that it will not use their data for the future development and improvement of generative AI models.

Users with multiple accounts must object for each separate account. If the accounts are connected through Meta’s Accounts Center tool, opting out once is sufficient.

Commissioner Fuchs of Hamburg warns users to be aware that the objection only applies to data posted by the users themselves. If others have posted photos of a user and have not objected to the processing of their data, Meta can still use this content. Fuchs recommends that users ask others to either object to the data processing or delete the content in question.

Meta initially delayed plans

Meta had originally planned to begin training its algorithms with European users’ posts last summer. The plan was delayed however after the Irish data protection authority, its lead regulator, sought to clarify the legality of the measure.

Commissioner Fuchs stated at the time that Europe’s data protection authorities would clarify whether Meta could claim a “legitimate interest” as a legal basis for the data processing.

In a blog post published last week, Meta explained that the company had worked together with the Irish regulator. The company also regards an opinion by the European Data Protection Board as having “affirmed” the company’s original approach.

There has been criticism, however. The Austrian data protection advocacy group Noyb argued last week that because Meta does not ask users to consent to its use of their data, the company is in violation of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

Last year Noyb wrote that Meta must ask users for their consent before processing their data – and filed eleven complaints with European data protection authorities.

Consumer protection groups also criticized Meta at the time, citing among other concerns the cumbersome opt-out process. (js)

Tunisia: Decades-long prison sentences for opposition leaders and human rights activists

2025-04-23T08:05:00+02:00

In Tunisia a group of 40 opposition figures, activists, and journalists have been sentenced to lengthy prison terms of up to 66 years. Human rights groups say the sentences are intended to silence critics.

HRW has called it the largest wave of repression in Tunisia since the democratic reforms of 2011. The trial has sparked protests (pictured). (Source: IMAGO / NurPhoto)

Last weekend a Tunisian court sentenced 40 people to lengthy prison terms. Those sentenced include prominent opposition leaders as well as journalists, and were found guilty on charges of conspiracy and terrorism. Human rights groups call the charges baseless and say the trial was politically motivated.

According to media reports, the 40 defendants were sentenced to prison terms of between 13 and 66 years. The defendants, including human rights activists, lawyers, and businessmen, were found guilty of conspiring against state security. The trial was held in a court specializing in terrorism cases.

Some of those sentenced have already spent more than two years in pre-trial detention. Others had fled abroad and were tried in absentia.

Members of the National Salvation Front (NSF), a coalition of opposition groups, were among those sentenced, including NSF leader Ahmed Nejib Chebbi.

According to Amnesty International, prominent human rights activists like Kamel Jendoubi were also among those sentenced. As president of the independent electoral commission, Jendoubi helped organize democratic elections in Tunisia in October 2011. The former minister was among those sentenced in absentia. He told the AFP news agency: “This is not a judiciary ruling, but a political decree executed by judges under orders.”

Tunisian president issues accusations

The trial began in early March and was postponed several times. According to reports, some of the defendants were barred from appearing before the court in person. At subsequent sessions, some journalists and civil society observers were reportedly not allowed to attend.

As the AP reports, Tunisian president Kais Saied has called the defendants “traitors and terrorists,” while they accuse him of having staged a coup in 2021. That year Saied, who human rights groups say has grown increasingly authoritarian, dissolved parliament and removed Prime Minister Hichem Mechichi from his post. Later he dismissed other ministers as well.

Amnesty International called the sentences “an alarming sign of the extent to which the authorities will go in their clampdown on peaceful dissent.”

The verdict “illustrates the authorities’ complete disregard for Tunisia’s international human rights obligations and the rule of law,” said Amnesty’s Erika Guevara Rosas. “These individuals have been convicted solely for the peaceful exercise of their human rights.” The trial against them, she said, was “riddled with procedural violations” and “was based on unsubstantiated charges.” Guevara Rosas called on Tunisian authorities to “cease the targeting of political opponents, human rights defenders, and critics” – and to respect the rights to freedom of expression and association.

Largest wave of repression since 2011

Last week, Human Rights Watch (HRW) published a report arguing that the Tunisian authorities were increasingly resorting to arbitrary detention and politically motivated prosecution as a way of silencing critics. According to the report, as of January 2025 more than 50 people were detained in Tunisia “on political grounds or for exercising their rights” – including opposition figures, activists, journalists, human rights defenders, and ordinary social media users. Some detainees are facing the death penalty – though no executions have taken place in Tunisia since 1991, courts continue to hand out death sentences.

“Not since the 2011 revolution have Tunisian authorities unleashed such repression,” said HRW’s Bassam Khawaja. “President Kais Saied’s government has returned the country to an era of political prisoners, robbing Tunisians of hard-won civil liberties.”

According to HRW, President Saied’s most prominent opponents have been imprisoned. Lawyers and journalists have also been arrested for publicly criticizing the government and state authorities.

The Arab Spring, which began in Tunisia, led to the implementation of democratic reforms in the country. A diverse media landscape also emerged. But critics accuse Kais Saied, who has been in power since 2019, of leading the country back toward authoritarianism. Press freedom has worsened since Saied took office, according to Reporters without Borders.

Sentenced for voicing opinions

The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) reported earlier this year that the Tunisian government has repeatedly used a controversial cybercrime law to prosecute journalists. The law, known as Decree 54, sparked criticism when it was enacted in 2022. According to the CPJ, even critical posts on social media can lead to prison sentences.

Last week the European Commission proposed a list of countries to be designated as safe countries of origin – Tunisia is one of the countries on the list. Under the proposal, asylum applications from candidates from these countries would be subject to an accelerated examination procedure, based on the assumption that these applications “are likely to be unfounded.”

Last week, in announcing the publication of its report on arbitrary detentions in the country, HRW called on the EU and its member states to “publicly express concerns about the deteriorating human rights situation in Tunisia” – something they have largely failed to do up to this point, HRW said. The organization urged the bloc to review its cooperation with the country. (js)

Three US states seek to ban sale of location data

2025-04-17T14:37:00+02:00

Legislators in three US states want to better protect location data. Draft legislation would ban its sale and limit processing of the data beyond what is strictly necessary.

Civil liberties advocates have long warned of the risks of misuse stemming from commercially obtainable location data. (Source: IMAGO / Depositphotos)

The commercial trade in location data has repeatedly come under criticism. In the United States, three states are considering laws that would regulate the collection, processing, and sale of location data. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a digital rights organization, argues that much more needs to be done.

Many common smartphone apps, like weather or navigation apps, gather location data. This information makes it possible to put together very precise profiles of users’ movements, which in turn can be used to draw conclusions about their activities. Often this data winds up in the hands of commercial data brokers who sell it for profit.

The EFF warns that because the market in the US is unregulated, anyone can buy such data – and use it to keep tabs on people. Some law enforcement agencies in the US also make use of commercially available data.

Draft legislation in Illinois, California, and Massachusetts

As the organization reports, legislators in Illinois, California, and Massachusetts have proposed laws that would regulate the collection of location data – and ban its sale. The bills in Illinois and Massachusetts would also require that users explicitly consent to the processing of their data. These laws would prevent the use of user interfaces that were designed to influence users’ decisions. Each of the three bills also includes an opt-out provision.

The legislation would only permit location data to be processed if it is necessary for a “permissible purpose” – for example to fulfill an order. There are certain exceptions, for instance in the case of emergencies. Users must also be informed that their data is being collected.

The bills would classify all location data as sensitive – regardless of a person’s proximity to, for example, medical facilities.

The EFF explains that in writing such legislation it is important to define central terms clearly to prevent broad disparities in how the laws are interpreted. The organization praises this latest draft legislation for spelling out what is meant by “location information”: information derived from a device, with or without a user’s knowledge, that reveals the past or present geographic location of that user within the respective state. Such information could be gathered from technology like the GPS sensors in smartphones, for example.

The definitions in the bills differ in how precisely they define location information: in California the law specifies an area of five miles (eight kilometers), while in Massachusetts and Illinois the protected area is only 1,850 feet (560 meters).

No sale of data

The draft legislation would also ban the sale, lease, and sharing of location data with third-parties. A warrant would be required for government agencies, including law enforcement, seeking access to location data.

The EFF notes that the bills in Illinois and Massachusetts include provisions that would allow individuals to bring civil lawsuits against violators. The provisions set “a baseline amount of damages” to be paid to plaintiffs in successful suits.

Each of the bills in Illinois, California, and Massachusetts was introduced earlier this year and is still making its way through the legislative process. The EFF welcomes the efforts, but also stresses that more measures are needed. The group urges more states to introduce – and enact – similar legislation.

Last December a group of Democratic senators introduced a bill that would prohibit the sale of location data and health information by data brokers. As US media report, however, the bill was not passed by the last Congress and would now have to be reintroduced.

“Ticking time bomb”

Location data can be used to draw an intimate portrait of a person’s life. The New York Times for example demonstrated in a 2018 article how such data can be used to glean specific information about an individual.

The debate about location data in the US was given fresh urgency after the Supreme Court nullified the federal right to abortion in Summer 2022. The EFF and others warn that data could be used to identify people who have visited certain clinics or attended protests. This data “is a ticking time bomb,” EFF writes.

The US Federal Trade Commission has repeatedly taken action against data brokers to bar them from selling certain location data. The prohibition applies to data that could provide information about visits to “sensitive locations.” The agency includes under that definition places like hospitals and reproductive health clinics, religious organizations, and women’s shelters. The agency has criticized the sale of such data in the past, stating that it violates users’ privacy.

The discussion is not limited to the US, however. Last year a media investigation revealed that European users’ location data is also up for sale. This includes individuals who work in so-called security-related areas, such as intelligence agencies.

In response to the revelations, German politicians and MEPs demanded better protections for location data in EU law. (js)

Tibet: Arrests for phone content and online activity

2025-04-16T08:03:00+02:00

Over the past four years dozens of Tibetans have been arrested for keeping allegedly illegal content on their phones. According to Human Rights Watch, contacting people abroad can also incur punishment.

One police tactic is to stop people at checkpoints and force them to install a government app that can monitor the contents of their smartphone. (Source: IMAGO / Zoonar)

Since 2021, police in China have arrested dozens of people in Tibet for their smartphone and internet use. Those arrested are accused of having “banned content,” among other offenses, as detailed in a new report from Human Rights Watch (HRW).

According to the rights group, the full extent of the arrests and prosecutions is unknown. The alleged offenses are categorized as political – and Chinese authorities publish no statistics on political crimes. HRW has learned of more than 60 cases, however. For its investigation, the organization followed up on incidents that had been reported in Tibetan exile media and other outlets. HRW also interviewed people in Tibet, including a retired official familiar with the situation.

In many cases the authorities accused people they arrested of having “banned content” stored on their phones or of having shared it online. This content might include information on Tibetan religious figures – especially the exiled Dalai Lama, the head of Tibetan Buddhism. Because the authorities have banned many religious materials, many people rely on information available online.

Maya Wang of HRW said in a statement: “For Tibetans, simply using a cellphone has become dangerous, and everyday activities like posting a humorous video or contacting loved ones abroad can bring arrest, detention, and torture.” Wang continued: “Tibetans, particularly those living in remote areas, once celebrated the arrival of cellphones so they could stay in touch with friends and family, but their phones have effectively become government tracking devices.”

Birthday chat leads to arrest

As HRW reports, the authorities take a broad interpretation of applicable laws. In one case a man was arrested for setting up a group on the Chinese messaging app WeChat that celebrated the birthdays of Buddhist monks. The police said doing so “without permission” was illegal.

Other people have been arrested for publishing content online that the Chinese authorities have banned. This includes posts that the police judge to be promoting the use of the Tibetan language. Chinese government policy dictates that Mandarin, rather than Tibetan, be used as the language of instruction in primary schools in Tibet. Since 2020, several websites that published cultural information in Tibetan have been shut down.

According to HRW, the authorities have also arrested people “for using their electronic devices to contact people outside of China and for sharing information about Tibet abroad.” These people have been prosecuted and given lengthy prison sentences. In 2021, four monks in southwest Tibet were sentenced to up to 20 years in prison – their offense was to contact monks of their order living in Nepal.

Many Tibetans have relatives living abroad, HRW reports. For most Tibetans, traveling outside of China has been impossible since 2012 due to stricter regulations on the issuing of passports. Additional controls on internet use mean that their ability to maintain contact with loved ones abroad is now “extremely limited.”

Because of the tight controls on information coming out of the region, it is often unclear what has happened to individuals after their arrest by the authorities. There have been reports of imprisonment, abuse, and torture.

Wang of HRW said: “Tibetans have not only lost their rights to freely express themselves and to access information, but they are losing even their basic right to communicate with their loved ones.”

Increased surveillance

According to HRW, the arrests documented by the organization since 2021 coincide with an increase in state surveillance in Tibet. Police are carrying out inspections of cell phones, especially in the days leading up to important occasions like the anniversary of the 1959 Tibetan uprising. Officers either force people to unlock their phones or use devices that can automatically scan the phones’ data.

The first reports of large-scale phone searches appeared in mid-2021. At the time, 117 Tibetans were reportedly detained for several weeks for allegedly keeping illegal content on their phones.

Since then there have been repeated reports of phone searches. In 2022, for example, police conducted mass phone inspections while searching for people who had posted online about the demolition by local authorities of a giant Buddha statue. And in February 2024, when protests broke out against a dam and reports of mass arrests drew international attention, the authorities imposed an internet shutdown and monitored WeChat and TikTok accounts, seeking to identify those who had shared information about the protests.

Police in several Tibetan regions have also reportedly forced people to install a government app. The app’s stated purpose is to provide education about online fraud – but a technical analysis found that it can be used to spy on users. The app can access personal information, messages, and call histories. To activate the app users have to scan their ID card and face. Facial recognition software then compares the images and captures biometric data for a government database.

HRW also reports that in addition to Beijing’s internet surveillance, Tibetan authorities also offer cash rewards to those who inform on others. Rewards of up to RMB100,000 ($14,000) are offered for information on people whose online activity is judged to constitute a political offense.

The Chinese government has implemented similar measures in Xinjiang province in its efforts to spy on the Uyghur population there and cut off communication with the outside world.

The Tibet Autonomous Region came under the control of Beijing in 1951, under what is known as the Seventeen Point Agreement. Formally the agreement guarantees extensive autonomy and freedom of religion. The Tibetan government-in-exile based in India claims to be the legitimate government of the region.

According to reports, in recent years the Chinese government has continued to expand its surveillance capabilities in the region. There have also been reports of forced relocations.

HRW demands that the Chinese government respect Tibetans’ rights to privacy, freedom of expression, association, peaceful assembly, and religion. The group also calls on the government to grant independent observers access to the region in order to better investigate the human rights situation there.

Even outside of China, some Tibetans are the targets of surveillance measures. Last week the UK’s National Cyber Security Centre, working in collaboration with other intelligence agencies, issued a new advisory about two spyware variants. The spyware is being used to target NGOs, activists, and journalists whose work involves issues like the rights of Tibetans, the independence of Taiwan, or the repression of the Muslim Uyghur population in Xinjiang. (js)

Sudan: At least seven journalists killed since outbreak of war

2025-04-15T08:10:00+02:00

The war in Sudan has triggered a humanitarian crisis. Journalists are among those who have been killed and imprisoned.

According to the UN, more than 30 million people are reliant on humanitarian aid. (Source: IMAGO / Xinhua)

The war in Sudan has entered its third year. According to the UN, more than 18,000 people have been killed and millions more have been displaced. In a press release marking the second anniversary of the start of the war, Reporters without Borders reports that several journalists have also been killed.

Anja Osterhaus, director of the organization’s German chapter, said in a statement: “Shedding light on crimes requires the work of journalists. Members of the press must be able to work safely again throughout the country.”

According to Reporters without Borders, at least seven journalists have been killed since the start of the war. One of them was Halima Idris Salim from the independent television channel Sudan Bukra. Another was Khaled Balel, a journalist who also served as media director for the Sudanese Supreme Council for Media and Culture. According to Reporters without Borders, four of the murders have been attributed to the Rapid Support Forces. Unidentified armed groups were reportedly behind the other three killings.

Since the start of the war, 17 journalists have also been arbitrarily detained – both by the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces and by the regular army. Two journalists continue to be imprisoned. In October 2023, Hassan Hamed, a reporter working for the Arabic-language edition of the British news site the Independent, was arrested by government troops. In January 2024 the Rapid Support Forces also detained another journalist, Mamoun Hassan Hamid – his current whereabouts are unknown.

Threats and surveillance

As Reporters without Borders reports, at least four journalists have been injured. Others have been threatened and attacked.

15 journalists have been victims of online harassment campaigns. Foreign journalists reporting from Sudan have described a tight web of surveillance maintained by the Sudanese army. The army is responsible for issuing travel permits into the country.

One of the most dangerous regions for members of the press is North Darfur. People contacted by Reporters without Borders gave accounts of censorship, constant surveillance, threats against journalistic sources and internet blackouts. NGOs have long raised concerns over a lack of functioning internet and telephone service in Sudan, in part as a result of destroyed infrastructure. The disruption to communications networks makes delivering humanitarian aid more difficult.

One journalist told Reporters without Borders that the war had forced him and his colleagues to flee.

Two years of war

The background for the war is a power struggle between the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces and the Sudanese military. After the overthrow of long-reigning dictator Omar al-Bashir in 2019, the two groups worked together in 2021 to topple the transition government.

Sudan’s de facto ruler and army commander-in-chief General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan had promised to clear the way for a civilian government to assume power, but the parties involved in a framework agreement were not able to finalize the deal. According to observers, a plan to integrate the Rapid Support Forces into the military led to an escalation in tensions between General Burhan and the leader of the paramilitary group, General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti. On April 15, 2023, the first rounds of fighting broke out in the capital city of Khartoum.

Human rights organizations have accused both parties to the conflict of committing grave abuses, including deliberate targeting of civilians and medical and humanitarian facilities. Amnesty International declared in August 2023 that some of the abuses should be classified as war crimes.

Last week the organization reported on widespread sexual violence at the hands of the Rapid Support Forces. The intent of the violence, according to Amnesty, is “to humiliate, assert control and displace communities across the country.” The atrocities “amount to war crimes and possible crimes against humanity.”

Millions of people in need of aid

According to the UN, the war has triggered the largest humanitarian crisis in the world today. The UN believes that at least 18,800 people have been killed in the conflict to date, and more than 12 million have been displaced. More than 30 million people are in need of humanitarian aid – more than half the population.

Some regions of the country are experiencing famine. The UN fears that this could spread to other regions as well. Meanwhile, health organizations like Doctors without Borders and the International Rescue Committee (IRC) have complained of restrictions on the transport of humanitarian supplies and staff.

Claire San Filippo, Emergency Coordinator for Doctors without Borders, said in a statement: “Wherever you look in Sudan, you will find needs – overwhelming, urgent, and unmet. Millions are receiving almost no humanitarian assistance, medical facilities and staff remain under attack, and the global humanitarian system is failing to deliver even a fraction of what’s required.”

Aid organizations look ahead to the upcoming rainy season with concern. The IRC warned that important supply routes could be flooded, rendering entire regions inaccessible.

On April 15, representatives of several countries will be meeting in London to discuss the war in Sudan. The conference was organized by the UK, the EU, France, and Germany. Aid groups like Human Rights Watch call on leaders to work to protect civilians and aid workers. Restrictions on the delivery of humanitarian supplies must be lifted.

Mohamed Osman from Human Rights Watch said in a statement: “Global leaders have a chance to take firmer action to stop the warring sides from carrying out atrocities and allow aid to flow to those in dire need.” (js)

Court: White House must restore access for AP reporters

2025-04-10T15:07:00+02:00

The Associated Press wire service has won a legal battle challenging its exclusion from events at the White House. A court has ruled that the exclusion is unconstitutional.

The AP calls the ruling an important victory. (Source: IMAGO / dts Nachrichtenagentur)

The White House must restore access for reporters from the Associated Press (AP) wire service. A federal judge ruled on Tuesday that excluding the AP violates the US Constitution. The government has filed an appeal.

Since February 11, President Donald Trump’s administration has denied access to media events in the Oval Office and on board Air Force One, the president’s plane, to AP reporters. The move to exclude the wire service was a response to its decision to continue to use the name “Gulf of Mexico” to refer to the body of water known internationally by that name, rather than “Gulf of America,” as President Trump has decreed. The AP is considered one of the most important wire services internationally. Many other media organizations follow the AP stylebook on points of style and usage.

Violation of the First Amendment

The AP challenged the government’s decision in court, arguing that blocking its reporters violated the First Amendment to the US Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech and of the press.

Judge Trevor McFadden agreed with the AP’s argument and issued a preliminary injunction. In his decision, McFadden writes: “Under the First Amendment, if the Government opens its doors to some journalists – be it to the Oval Office, the East Room, or elsewhere – it cannot then shut those doors to other journalists because of their viewpoints.”

Access for the AP’s journalists was not immediately restored, however. The AP reports that shortly after the decision was issued, a reporter and a photographer were prevented from joining a motorcade with the White House press pool to report on Trump’s appearance before the National Republican Congressional Committee.

Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, did not respond to the AP’s request for comment on the decision. The AP had filed suit against Leavitt, White House chief of staff Susan Wiles, and deputy chief of staff Taylor Budowich.

AP spokesperson Lauren Easton said: “We are gratified by the court’s decision. Today’s ruling affirms the fundamental right of the press and public to speak freely without government retaliation.”

Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, called the ruling a “careful, well-reasoned opinion.” Said Jaffer: “As the Court says, the First Amendment bars the White House from excluding news organizations from the press pool based on their editorial judgments.” The institute had filed two amicus briefs in the case.

Reporters without Borders called on the administration to implement the ruling.

Injunction comes after earlier deferral

In an article covering the decision, the AP wrote that “Because of its wide reach, the AP has traditionally always been included in ‘pools’ for coverage of presidential events in places like the Oval Office and Air Force One.” The court’s decision, however, “does not necessarily herald a return to those days.”

This is because the court’s decision does not order the government to grant the AP permanent access to the Oval Office or other media events. It states only that the AP “cannot be treated worse” than comparable media organizations. The court also made clear that government officials could themselves decide which media outlets they granted interviews to and which questions they answered at press conferences.

In February, Judge McFadden, who was appointed by President Trump during his first term in office, had rejected the AP’s request to immediately restore its access and urged the administration to reconsider. Tuesday’s decision comes a little under two weeks after the AP’s chief White House correspondent testified before the court and described the negative impact that exclusion had had on the wire service’s coverage.

Actions against media

Since taking office on January 20th, Trump and his administration have taken an increasingly antagonistic stance against the media. After barring access to the AP, the administration also took control of the White House press pool. For decades the White House Correspondents’ Association (WHCA) had decided who was represented in the pool, selecting journalists on a rotating basis.

The WHCA was highly critical of the move. “In a free country, leaders must not be able to choose their own press corps,” wrote WHCA president Eugene Daniels. The measure put the independence of the press in the US in question, he said.

In his decision, Judge McFadden wrote that the government had a “constitutional obligation to refrain from viewpoint discrimination in selecting media outlets.”

The Trump administration also announced that it would cut funding to several US-run international news service. A legal challenge to this decision met with initial success when a judge ruled that the administration had to continue funding the broadcasters for now.

Funding for the public media outlets PBS and NPR is also in jeopardy, however.

In January, Trump appointed Republican Brendan Carr as head of the Federal Communications Commission, which regulates media in the US. Two days after Trump’s inauguration, Carr reinstated complaints against ABC, CBS, and NBC in connection with the broadcasters’ election coverage – the complaints had been rejected under the agency’s previous leadership.

Trump himself has threatened to sue authors and media outlets who use anonymous sources.

The US was ranked 55th out of 180 countries in the 2024 Index of Press Freedom published by Reporters without Borders. The organization wrote recently that the president’s actions, along with those of his administration and his political allies, “amount to a monumental assault on freedom of information.” (js)

Brazil: Illegal gold mining destroys large swaths of Amazon rainforest

2025-04-10T09:28:00+02:00

In the last two years more than 4,000 hectares of Amazon rainforest have been destroyed by illegal gold mining in indigenous regions of Brazil, Greenpeace reports.

Greenpeace criticizes the lack of transparency in the international gold trade. (Source: Samara Souza / Greenpeace)

Illegal gold mining in the indigenous Sararé region of the Brazilian Amazon has nearly doubled in the last year, according to a report by the environmental organization Greenpeace that was published on Tuesday. Illegal gold minding is one of the main causes of deforestation in the Amazon, according to Greenpeace. The group urges Brazilian authorities take action.

According to the report, “Toxic Gold,” illegal mining activities decreased last year in the Yanomami (-7%), Munduruku (-57%), and Kayapó (-31%) regions. But in the Sararé region, in the Brazilian state of Mato Grosso, mining increased by 93% in one year: from 619 hectares of new mining areas in 2023 to 1,197 hectares in 2024. According to reports from local communities, criminal organizations are involved in the operations and are “spreading violence and death threats.”

In the four regions examined in the report, a total of 4,129 hectares of rainforest were destroyed in the past two years for the extraction of gold.

Greenpeace’s research involved analyzing satellite images and carrying out overflights in the regions investigated.

While the Brazilian government under former president Jair Bolsonaro supported the exploitation of the Amazon region, the current government is making efforts to put a stop to illegal gold mining, Greenpeace reports. Authorities are better monitoring the destruction of the rainforest and carrying out security operations – in some cases destroying mining equipment. But so far, gold mining has not decreased; it has merely shifted to other indigenous regions.

Deforestation and toxic contamination

According to Greenpeace, illegal gold mining in the Amazon is one of the main causes of deforestation, the loss of biodiversity, and social disruption.

The Amazon rainforest plays a crucial role for the global climate, acting as an important carbon sink. It is considered one of the so-called tipping elements whose disruption could upset the equilibrium of the climate worldwide. The ecosystem also plays a key role for biodiversity.

In its entirety, the Amazon rainforest stretches across nine countries. According to Greenpeace it is home to more than three million animal and plant species and roughly 40 million people, including around 3 million indigenous people.

The forest is suffering from increasing tree mortality and reduced rainfall. But it is also being brought ever closer to its tipping point by illegal gold mining and other destructive actions. Greenpeace reports that mining in Brazil frequently takes place in remote protected areas and in indigenous regions – where government oversight is limited. Mining operations often use heavy machinery that can destroy large swaths of land.

Because of the low gold content in the ground, “huge quantities have to be extracted using large amounts of energy.” Mercury is commonly used in the extraction process. This highly toxic heavy metal contaminates the soil and waterways. It “accumulates throughout the food chain in fish, fauna and flora, ultimately poisoning humans.”

Dangers for indigenous communities

According to Greenpeace, initial studies show that indigenous communities have been exposed to the toxic chemical, “with contamination levels reaching well above the safe health limits.”

The group reports other consequences for indigenous communities as well. Illegal mining reduces the availability of hunting and fishing grounds, for instance, which are essential to these communities’ subsistence. Gold mining reportedly leads to forced labor and sexual exploitation. Miners may also bring infectious diseases that pose a substantial risk to isolated communities.

Greenpeace urges Brazilian authorities to develop and implement measures to fight illegal gold mining. The organization also calls for a ban on the use of mercury in gold mining – and for the adoption of a “protocol for the care and assistance of contaminated individuals.” Greenpeace proposes using confiscated gold “to fund the recovery of areas impacted by illegal mining.”

Opaque supply chains

In its report, Greenpeace also looks at the routes that illegal gold takes as it travels from the Amazon to the rest of the world. Smugglers and falsified documents help facilitate exports.

Switzerland is the most important trade hub. Greenpeace notes significant discrepancies between gold exports registered in Brazil and imports registered in Switzerland. These discrepancies are indicative of the opacity in the international gold trade – and show the need for strict oversight and transparent supply chains. According to a report by Instituto Escolhas, 94 percent of Brazil’s exports to the European Union likely came from illegal sources. In 2023, the EU imported a total of 1.7 tons of gold from Brazil, valued at $99 million.

Harald Gross, Amazon and gold expert for Greenpeace Deutschland, said in a statement: “Unchecked hunger for gold is poisoning people and animals, destroying the Amazon rainforest, and threatening the global climate.” Changing this, he said, is not just Brazil’s responsibility. “First, Brazil’s government must strengthen the rights of indigenous peoples and fight the poverty that drives gold miners into the mines. Second, governments throughout the world, including the German government and the EU, must work to require merchants to disclose their supply chains in order to ensure that this toxic gold no longer reaches our markets,” Gross said.

This year there is an added focus on Brazil and the Amazon rainforest. The next world climate summit, COP 30, will be held there this November. In advance of the summit, Greenpeace demands that the international community act to prevent the rainforest’s destruction. (js)

Global executions reach new high

2025-04-09T08:14:00+02:00

Last year saw another increase in the number of recorded executions worldwide, Amnesty International reports. 91 percent of executions took place in just three countries.

More than 40 percent of executions carried out worldwide were for drug offenses. (Source: IMAGO / Pacific Press Agency)

The human rights organization Amnesty International documented at least 1,518 executions in 15 countries in 2024. The figure comes from the organization’s annual report on the death penalty, published on Tuesday. The total number of executions documented in 2024 was the highest since 2015. That year Amnesty recorded 1,634 executions worldwide. The figure does not include what is believed to be a large number of unrecorded deaths in countries where no information is available – including China, where it is likely that more people are executed than in any other country.

According to Amnesty, three countries are primarily responsible for the rise in executions: Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq. At least 1,380 death sentences were carried out in these three countries.

Julia Duchrow, Secretary General of Amnesty International in Germany, said in a statement: “Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia are responsible for the drastic increase in executions in the preceding year: these three countries alone carried out more than 90 percent of the executions known to us worldwide. In Iran and Saudi Arabia especially, the death penalty is used to silence all those who are brave enough to voice their opinion.”

According to the report, at least 972 people were killed in Iran last year. The country accounted for 64 percent of known executions worldwide. Iran’s government also wielded the penalty as a form of retaliation against people who had challenged its authority by participating in the Woman Life Freedom movement: at least two people were executed in connection with the protests – “including a youth with a mental disability.”

Amnesty also criticizes the Iranian authorities’ disproportionate use of the death penalty against ethnic minorities. Though members of the Baluchi minority, for instance, only account for roughly 5% of Iran’s population, 10% of victims of the death penalty were Baluchi.

Drastic rise in Saudi Arabia

In Saudi Arabia, the number of recorded executions rose from 172 in 2023 to at least 345. More than a third of those executed had been sentenced for drug-related offenses. Death sentences were frequently handed out “after proceedings that did not meet international standards for a fair trial.” The death penalty was also imposed to silence political dissidents, Amnesty reports.

Executions in Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia (2015-2024) (Source: Amnesty International)

In Iraq there were at least 63 executions – almost four times the total in 2023. In Yemen the number more than doubled, from 15 to 38.

In Somalia as well the organization documented at least 38 executions. For the second year in a row Somalia was the only country in sub-Saharan Africa to carry out death sentences. Other countries in the region did impose death sentences, however: In Nigeria the penalty was handed out in at least 186 cases, and in the Democratic Republic of Congo at least 125. Nevertheless, ten percent fewer death sentences were handed out in 2024 than in the preceding year, according to the report.

US the only country in the Americas to carry out executions

For the 16th year in a row, the US occupied a unique role as the only country in North or South America to carry out executions. Trinidad and Tobago imposed new death sentences – but did not carry any out.

Last year 25 people in the United States were killed on the orders of the government – the second highest number since 2015. The states of Georgia, Indiana, South Carolina, and Utah each carried out one death sentence, ending years-long periods in which no executions took place. Alabama tripled its number of executions, from two in 2023 to six in 2024.

People were executed in a total of nine states, and new death sentences were imposed in eleven.

Newly elected president Donald Trump has repeatedly characterized the death penalty as a tool for protecting people from crime. Duchrow said in response: “Trump’s dehumanizing remarks perpetuate the myth that the death penalty has special power to deter people from committing crimes. This is false. The death penalty doesn’t prevent crime. This has been well established, based on scientific evidence. There are no arguments for the death penalty – it violates the human right to life. It is inhuman, in all circumstances and regardless of the crime.”

Thousands believed to have been executed in China

According to the report, the largest number of executions took place in the Asia Pacific region – though exact figures are for the most part unavailable. China, for example, is not included in the numbers published by Amnesty International because the Chinese government treats statistics on the death penalty as a “state secret.” Only a few death sentences were made public – “seemingly to send a message that crime and dissent would not be tolerated.” Despite the lack of official figures, Amnesty believes that more people are executed in China than in any other country – the number is likely in the thousands.

Recorded global executions (2015-2024) (Source: Amnesty International)

The organization also believes that many people were executed in North Korea and Vietnam – but no figures are available from these countries either. Due to ongoing conflict, no reliable numbers could be given for the Palestinian territories and Syria.

Many executions for drug offenses

Worldwide 42 percent of all recorded executions were carried out for drug-related offenses. In Iran, for example, more than half of the people executed had been convicted on drug charges. In Saudi Arabia, 122 people were executed for drug-related offenses and in Singapore eight out of nine executions were carried out for this reason. Amnesty believes that people are executed for such offenses in China and Vietnam as well.

Said Duchrow: “The death penalty always violates human rights. Those who recklessly take human life on the basis of drug-related accusations violate international law.”

Six countries worldwide executed women: In Iran, 30 women were killed, in Saudi Arabia nine. Two women were killed in Egypt; two in Yemen; and one in Iraq. Women were killed in China as well – but the exact number is unknown.

Fewer countries carried out executions

While the number of executions rose again last year, only fifteen countries carried out executions. This is the lowest number to date since Amnesty began documenting global executions. No executions were known to have been carried out in Bangladesh for the first time since 2018.

Last year 46 countries handed out 2,087 new death sentences. In 2023 the figure was 2,428 sentences in 52 countries. Although the overall number sank in 2024, South Sudan, Sudan, and Uganda were back on the list after a period in which they did not impose any new death sentences. On the other hand, no new sentences were imposed in Gambia, Guyana, Cameroon, Qatar, the Maldives, Zimbabwe, or Taiwan. Death sentences were handed out in all of these countries in 2023.

As of the end of 2024, at least 28,085 people were awaiting execution worldwide.

Amnesty also highlights positive developments: in Zimbabwe, for example, a law came into effect abolishing the death penalty for certain offenses. And Zambia acceded to the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which aims to abolish the death penalty. Also, in Malaysia, reforms led to the commutation of 900 death sentences.

More than two-thirds of UN member states voted for a resolution in the General Assembly calling for a moratorium on the use of the death penalty.

“The death penalty is an abhorrent practice with no place in today’s world,” Agnès Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International, said in a statement. Countries “that retain the death penalty are an isolated minority. With just 15 countries carrying out executions in 2024, the lowest number on record for the second consecutive year, this signals a move away from this cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment.”

As of the end of 2024, 145 countries had abolished the death penalty by law or in practice. (js)

Serbia: Journalists targeted with spyware

2025-04-03T12:22:00+02:00

Amnesty International reports two attacks on Serbian journalists using Pegasus spyware. Last year the organization uncovered numerous instances of spyware abuse in the country.

The journalists alerted Amnesty after they were sent a suspicious link. (Source: IMAGO / Panthermedia)

Two Serbian journalists have been targeted with Pegasus spyware. Cybersecurity experts at Amnesty International have confirmed the attacks. The organization believes Serbian authorities are responsible.

As Amnesty reported last week, the attacks were directed at the journalist Jelena Veljković and her colleague, who asked to remain anonymous. Both women work for the Balkan Investigative Reporting Network (BIRN), which runs the news site Balkan Insight. They both investigate corruption and report on other topics including politics and organized crime.

The journalist who wished to remain anonymous was researching a story on foreign investments and corruption at the time the attack was made. A day before receiving the suspicious text message, she had met with sources, “including individuals close to the government.”

According to Amnesty’s report, both journalists received messages in the Viber app on February 14. The messages were sent from the same telephone number, which analysts have determined was assigned to Telekom Srbija, a Serbian state-owned telecommunications operator.

Neither woman clicked on the link. Amnesty’s analysts were able determine “with high confidence” that the link was an attempt to infect their phones with Pegasus spyware. One of the links, when accessed later by Amnesty, led to a decoy page of a Serbian news site – the same site linked to in a previous spyware attack on an activist in 2023.

Journalism under pressure

According to Reporters without Borders (RSF), journalists in Serbia are often subjected to political pressures. The political climate has become “even more polarized” since the outbreak of anti-government protests in 2023, RSF reports. Since then, “journalists are often the targets of attacks by members of the ruling elite.” The country is ranked 98th out of 180 countries on RSF’s Index of Press Freedom. This puts it ten spots behind Greece, the worst-ranked EU country.

Amnesty reports that journalists at BIRN have frequently faced “online threats, physical attacks, and judicial harassment” in the form of so-called SLAPP suits. The organization is currently fighting four such lawsuits – one of which was filed by the mayor of Belgrade.

The journalist who chose to remain anonymous told Amnesty: "The context in which independent media in Serbia operate is completely volatile. When we investigate and write about an issue, we never know which bit of information and detail will irritate someone, but we can all expect retribution sooner or later.” She was surprised, not that she had been targeted, but that the attackers had used a type of spyware as sophisticated as Pegasus. “When I found out that the link on my phone was Pegasus, I was absolutely furious. This was the phone registered to my name, and I felt as if I had an intruder in my own home. This is an unnerving feeling.” She is now particularly concerned about the safety of her sources.

Jelena Veljković told Amnesty: “This was a targeted attack on investigative journalists – a form of pressure and a warning. Whether it was an attack on me personally or on BIRN, as a media outlet, I am not sure.” The incident “has caused a great deal of consternation” in BIRN’s newsroom, Veljković said. Since the attack she has attempted to meet with sources in person instead of speaking over the phone.

Repeated abuse

Pegasus spyware, developed by the Israel-based NSO Group, can gain complete access to a smartphone. Attackers can read a person’s chats, listen in on phone calls, track the device’s location and even turn on the camera and microphone without the owner’s knowledge.

Cybersecurity experts have uncovered numerous cases in recent years of the spyware being used against journalists, dissidents, human rights activists, and opposition leaders. NSO Group claims to sell Pegasus only to government clients.

Amnesty believes the Serbian government is behind these most recent attacks as well. The organization “could not identify any other governments” with an interest in targeting the journalists or BIRN. Given the evidence, Amnesty judges there to be a “strong likelihood” that Serbian authorities or agents acting on their behalf were responsible for the attacks.

Serbia’s intelligence agency, the Bezbednosno-informativna Agencija (BIA), did not respond to Amnesty’s inquiries.

Earlier cases

Amnesty condemns NSO Group for apparently allowing the continued use of Pegasus in Serbia, despite documented abuse of the spyware in the country.

In 2023, cybersecurity experts from several organizations found evidence of Pegasus attacks on the smartphones of two critics of the Serbian government. Analysts later discovered that a third activist’s smartphone was also targeted with Pegasus.

And in December 2024, Amnesty reported its findings that the Serbian police and the BIA had unlawfully spied on journalists and activists using their own NoviSpy software. According to Amnesty’s investigation, the authorities also made use of other forensic products to extract data from smartphones – and to covertly install spyware. Amnesty worked together with the Balkan Investigative Reporting Network on this investigation. (js)

Myanmar: Internet restrictions hinder rescue operations

2025-04-02T08:58:00+02:00

Despite a devastating earthquake in Myanmar, internet access in the country is still largely restricted. Advocacy groups warn that the limits hinder aid deliveries.

The earthquake has claimed the lives of more than 2,700 people. The death toll is expected to rise. (Source: IMAGO / Xinhua)

Internet restrictions are still in place in Myanmar, even after Friday’s devastating earthquake. Several advocacy groups have warned that the restrictions make it more difficult to deliver aid to affected regions. Some have also accused the ruling military junta of confiscating aid deliveries – and even of continuing to conduct air strikes.

On Friday afternoon, local time, a 7.7 magnitude earthquake struck Sagaing Region. The epicenter was near Mandalay, Myanmar’s second largest city, and the capital Naypyidaw. According to figures released by the military junta on Tuesday, more than 2,700 people were killed in the quake. More than 4,500 were injured, and 441 are reported missing. Experts fear that the actual death toll is significantly higher.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) demanded on Tuesday that the military junta immediately allow humanitarian aid to reach affected regions. All restrictions that might get in the way of the emergency response must be lifted, HRW urged – including restrictions on internet access.

On Monday, dozens of organizations including Access Now issued a joint statement condemning the military for continuing to keep restrictions in place despite the severity of the crisis. The junta’s actions show “a blatant disregard for the threat imposed on civilian lives,” the groups wrote.

Since the military took power in a coup in 2021, access to the internet in the country has been severely limited. Last year there were more internet shutdowns in Myanmar than in any other country in the world.

According to Access Now and its partner organizations, more than 100 townships in Myanmar are affected by internet shutdown orders. Moreover, access to social media platforms, news sites and other public sources of information is blocked throughout the country. Because many VPN services are also blocked, it’s difficult for people in the country to bypass the restrictions. The “power outages and damage to telecommunications infrastructure caused by the earthquake” have further exacerbated communications disruptions.

Impact on humanitarian aid

Access Now and its partners demand an immediate lifting of restrictions – “every second counts,” they write. Internet access is essential for coordinating life-saving disaster response measures and aid deliveries. “The lack of internet access has severe implications for emergency services,” wrote the Myanmar Internet Project, one of the joint statement’s signatories, in a separate post.

As noted in a 2022 report published by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, “Internet shutdowns have a profound effect on the ability of humanitarian actors to provide assistance. Supply chains and the flow of information critical to the delivery of goods and services can be disrupted.”

Access to the internet is also important for people in affected areas seeking to access information necessary for their survival. This includes alerts about aftershocks or information about where to access medical care – information that is especially vital in the current situation, given that Myanmar’s hospitals have been overwhelmed.

Little information coming out of Myanmar

Access Now warns that the limits on press freedom in the country have also slowed disaster relief efforts.

Joe Freeman, Myanmar researcher at Amnesty International, said in a statement that given the military’s banning of media outlets and restrictions on internet access, it may take some time for the full extent of the damage to become clear. Said Freeman: “That there appear to be more images and information coming out of Thailand than the epicenter in Myanmar is a startling reminder of the military’s crushing of press freedom since the 2021 coup.”

The earthquake also caused damage in Bangkok, in neighboring Thailand. According to the latest reports, there are at least 20 dead in the country. More than 80 people are reported missing.

A spokesperson for the military in Myanmar has already announced that foreign journalists are not permitted to report on the earthquake from inside the country.

WHO warns of potential disease outbreaks

Conditions in Myanmar were dire even prior to the earthquake. The World Health Organization (WHO) now reports that electricity and water supplies in regions hit by the quake have been disrupted. The risk of disease outbreaks in the country, which is already riven by civil war, has sharply increased. The WHO has declared the crisis a Grade 3 emergency – its highest designation. According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), almost 20 million people in the country were dependent on humanitarian aid prior to the earthquake. OCHA announced on Monday that rescue teams were still searching for survivors.

HRW reports that even after the earthquake the military has continued to conduct air strikes against rebel groups, further hindering the emergency response. According to Amnesty’s Joe Freeman, the epicenter of the earthquake lies in a region that is the site of clashes between resistance groups and the military. The military “has a longstanding practice of denying aid to areas where groups who resist it are active,” Freeman said. One group opposing the junta has reportedly declared a unilateral one-month ceasefire to enable humanitarian efforts – though the alliance said it would still engage in combat in “self-defense.”

Bryony Lau, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch, said in a statement: “Myanmar’s military junta still invokes fear, even in the wake of a horrific natural disaster that killed and injured thousands.” Lau called on the military to ensure that aid reaches those affected quickly.

Doctors meanwhile have accused the military of confiscating aid shipments. As HRW reports, areas hit by the quake also lack food and other essential supplies. Many people are sleeping in the open and are in urgent need of shelter.

Emergency workers lack machinery and safety gear, HRW reports. In Sagaing, the capital of Sagaing Region, emergency responders have even run out of body bags.

While the junta has asked for international support, it has already blocked aid workers from entering the country. HRW’s Bryony Lau said: “Myanmar’s junta cannot be trusted to respond to a disaster of this scale.” The group recommended that the international community send aid directly to independent local groups – the military has a “track record” of misusing funding and materiel. (js)

Pakistan: Afghan activists fear deportation

2025-04-01T08:00:00+02:00

Many women’s rights activists in Pakistan are threatened with deportation. Authorities in the country have stepped up arrests of Afghan nationals.

Even Afghans who have applied for a visa to a third country still face deportation. (Source: IMAGO / Newscom World)

Prominent Afghan women’s rights activists in Pakistan are threatened with deportation. The women fled their home country in the aftermath of the Taliban’s return. The Pakistani government has carried out mass deportations of Afghan refugees since September 2023.

As the Guardian reported on Sunday, 60 female Afghan activists are among those facing deportation. The women were persecuted in Afghanistan as a result of their advocacy for women’s rights or participation in protests. Many of the women have had to go into hiding in recent weeks, as police in Islamabad and Rawalpindi have already begun arresting Afghans.

One of the women facing deportation is Humaira Alim, who according to the Guardian “worked as a women’s rights and education activist in Afghanistan for seven years before the Taliban came back to power in 2021.” When the Taliban began reimposing restrictions on women’s rights, she helped organize protests.

Because of her actions, Alim began to receive threats, and finally in December 2022 she fled to neighboring Pakistan. She was given a visa, but must renew it monthly. Alim and her children “were recently forced to hide on the roof of their home” after police came looking for them, the Guardian reports.

Deportation would be “a death sentence”

Alim told the Guardian that the Taliban had records on her and her activism. “If they send me back to Afghanistan, it only means death,” she said. “There is no place for women like me” in the country. “They only arrest and torture us.”

Liliana Harrington from the organization Avaaz reiterated Alim’s assessment. She told the Guardian: “Deporting these people to the Taliban is a death sentence.”

According to Amnesty International, between September 2023 and February 2025, at least 844,499 Afghan nationals have been deported by the Pakistani authorities. Amnesty warns that many of those returned to the country face persecution at the hands of the Taliban – including members of the press, human rights activists, and former government employees.

Isabelle Lassée of Amnesty International said in a statement that the Pakistani government’s actions show “little respect for international human rights law.”

March 31 deadline

The Pakistani government announced in January that Afghan nationals must leave the capital of Islamabad and the neighboring city of Rawalpindi by March 31. As Amnesty reports, some of those affected by the order are to be resettled elsewhere in Pakistan, while others are to be deported to Afghanistan.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) also criticizes this plan and points to the dire humanitarian situation in Afghanistan, where almost half of the population – more than 22 million people – are dependent on food aid. “Those returning face unemployment, a broken healthcare system, and sharply declining levels of foreign assistance,” HRW reports. Compounding these difficulties is the alarming human rights situation, with critics of the government among those at risk.

Most noteworthy however is the fact that the rights of women and girls have been severely limited in the years since the Taliban’s return. Women have lost access to education beyond the sixth grade and can no longer practice many professions. They are not permitted to play sports or visit parks. The Taliban regard women’s voices as “intimate”; by law they are not allowed to be heard outside the home. According to HRW, the country is experiencing “the world’s most serious women’s rights crisis.”

More aggressive measures

In November 2024, Pakistani authorities began to ratchet up the pressure on Afghans in the country, according to HRW. “Pakistani police have raided houses, beat[en] and arbitrarily detained people, and confiscated refugee documents, including residence permits,” HRW reports. Police have reportedly demanded bribes from Afghans with valid papers, threatening arrest if they are not paid. Among the Afghans who hold residence permits are many who were born in Pakistan or have lived in the country for decades. More than 70 percent of those who have been deported are women and children.

“Afghanistan is not safe for any forced refugee returns,” said Elaine Pearson of HRW.

Even Afghans who are waiting for a visa to a third country still face deportation in Pakistan. HRW relates one example of a 37-year-old man who was arrested even though he and his family had a pending application for a Canadian visa. He was only released after making a payment.

In January, German broadcaster WDR reported that Pakistan had begun deporting people who were waiting for a German visa. According to the report, as of January there were more than 3,000 Afghans in Pakistan who had received initial approval of their application to resettle in Germany.

Shifting immigration policies in the United States have also had an impact. US president Donald Trump issued an executive order in January freezing all refugee admissions to the United States. The order has reportedly placed thousands more Afghans in limbo. (js)

Italy admits to using spyware against NGO

2025-03-31T08:13:00+02:00

After initial denials, the Italian government has reportedly admitted to using spyware against sea rescuers. The government claims not to be responsible for the attack on a journalist’s smartphone, however.

Cybersecurity experts had announced earlier that there were other, as yet unreported cases of spying in Italy. (Source: IMAGO / ABACAPRESS)

Italian Undersecretary of State Alfredo Mantovano has reportedly admitted to the use of spyware against members of the sea rescue organization Mediterranea Saving Humans. The government continues to deny responsibility for the cyberattack on the smartphone of investigative journalist Francesco Cancellato.

Mantovano oversees Italy’s intelligence agencies. According to media reports, the undersecretary testified last Tuesday before parliament’s intelligence oversight committee (Copasir). During his testimony, he reportedly admitted that Italy’s foreign intelligence agency, AISE, targeted the organization with spyware.

The spying scandal began in late January when WhatsApp announced that 90 users in more than two dozen countries had been hacked by Paragon Solutions’ Graphite spyware. Soon afterwards, targeted individuals in Italy came forward – including the founder of Mediterranea Saving Humans, Luca Casarini. The organization rescues refugees who become stranded in the Mediterranean. A co-founder of the NGO, Dr. Giuseppe “Beppe” Caccia, was also a target.

More spying targets

It remains unclear who was responsible for the attack on investigative journalist Francesco Cancellato. Cancellato is the editor-in-chief of the news site Fanpage, which last year exposed the use of fascist chants and slogans by members of the youth organization of the ruling Fratelli d’Italia party. Cancellato was the first victim to come forward in Italy. Undersecretary Mantovano reportedly stressed in his testimony before the parliament committee that the journalist was never among the targets of AISE’s operation.

It has also come to light that an Italian priest, Father Mattia Ferrari, was targeted with spyware as well. Ferrari works with Mediterranea Saving Humans and is considered a confidant of Pope Francis. Experts haven’t ruled out the possibility that a different spyware product was used to spy on Ferrari.

Graphite makes it possible for attackers to gain total access to a device and, for example, read a person’s text messages. The software is only sold to government agencies.

After the initial revelations the Italian government admitted to being a Paragon customer – but denied being responsible for any of the attacks. The country’s contract with the software developer has reportedly been suspended until the conclusion of the committee’s investigation.

On Thursday, MEP Hannah Neumann of Germany’s Green party called for a transparent investigation into the incidents. Neumann had earlier criticized Italy’s government, stating that Italy had joined “the list of EU countries that have used spyware illegally.”

NGO criticizes surveillance

In a statement responding to the government’s admission, Mediterranea Saving Humans pointed to the fact that five state prosecutors were currently leading investigations into the spyware attacks. The organization trusts that the investigations will prove that spyware was used in an abusive manner, the statement said.

According to reports of his testimony, Undersecretary Mantovano justified the use of spyware, saying it was deployed as part of a “preventive investigation into illegal immigration.” The NGO, which is active in the Mediterranean, had been designated a “danger to national security.” All measures, said Mantovano, were taken in accordance with applicable law and approved by the government and the attorney general of the Rome Court of Appeal.

Mediterranea Saving Humans however stated that there was no justification for the use of spyware to spy on its members. What was the intelligence agency actually looking for, the organization asked in its statement – and conjectured that the agency might have been interested in details pertaining to rescued individuals who intended to testify before the International Criminal Court as witnesses to the torture of refugees in Libya. Because the government’s investigations were classified as “preventive,” they cannot be used as evidence in court and can only be used by the intelligence agency for background purposes.

The government of Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni has come under fire for its agreements with the government in Tripoli, with critics accusing Italy of being complicit in the abuse of migrants in Libya. In another move that drew criticism, the Italian government released Osama Almasri Najim, head of Libya’s judicial police, despite an international warrant for his arrest on suspicion of war crimes being issued by the International Criminal Court. After his release, Najim returned to Libya. An investigation against Meloni and other top government officials is now ongoing.

David Yambio, an activist living in Italy, was among those who criticized Najim’s release. Yambio received a notification from Apple about a spyware attack on his device – in his case it is still not clear which type of spyware was used. Yambio has said that at the time of the attack he was in communication with the International Criminal Court.

Cybersecurity experts find additional cases

Cybersecurity researchers from the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab have confirmed the attacks and are continuing to investigate the hacked devices. Speaking to Citizen Lab, those attacked expressed the suspicion that they were targeted on account of their humanitarian work and their criticism of Italy’s migration policies.

In response to a report from Citizen Lab released earlier this month, Amnesty International announced that it had discovered additional, as yet unreported cases of spyware being used against sea rescue activists in Italy over the past six months.

Given its geographical location, Italy is often the first destination for many people fleeing conflicts in the Sahel. The Italian government has repeatedly tightened its migration’s policies and has also increased the pressure on civilian sea rescuers. Among other restrictions, these activists must now return to a designated port immediately after conducting a rescue, effectively prohibiting them from conducting multiple rescues. Violations can lead to the ships being seized by the authorities.

Volker Türk, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, criticized the new law when it was proposed, saying it punished “both migrants and those who seek to help them.” Türk pointed out at the time that under international law, “a captain is duty-bound to render immediate assistance to people in distress at sea.” (js)

London: Police to install permanent cameras equipped with live facial recognition

2025-03-27T12:05:00+01:00

London police will soon have the use of fixed cameras running live facial recognition. Up to now, the police have only used mobile cameras.

Civil liberties groups warn that at present police get to decide for themselves when to use facial recognition – and call for laws establishing guidelines. (Source: IMAGO / News Licensing)

Police in London will soon be using permanently installed cameras equipped with live facial recognition technology. The cameras are intended to search for wanted criminals. Civil liberties advocates warn of a “dystopian nightmare.”

As UK media report, the cameras are set to be mounted on lampposts or buildings in the South London neighborhood of Croydon. Installation is planned for North End, a busy pedestrian street with many shops, and London Road.

London’s Metropolitan Police has used the technology for years, but to date the force has only deployed mobile vans equipped with cameras. The vans are clearly marked and only positioned in certain locations for a limited amount of time.

Technology scans anyone who passes by

According to the Times of London, the new cameras are set to go into operation in June or July. The paper writes that the cameras will be the first permanently installed cameras running facial recognition in all of the United Kingdom.

The technology scans the faces of passersby and instantaneously compares them with a database of wanted individuals. If the software finds a match, it notifies the police. If no match is found, the captured data are immediately deleted.

Speaking to British media, London police stress that the new cameras “are only switched on when officers are deployed on the ground ready to respond to alerts.”

Conservative MP Chris Philp, speaking to the Times, characterized the use of fixed cameras as “the logical next step.”

As a member of former Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s cabinet, Philp was responsible for policing in the UK. In this role he expanded the use of the controversial surveillance technology.

Speaking to the Times, he said there were “no legitimate privacy concerns” in connection with the technology.

Critics point to lack of legal basis

Rebecca Vincent, interim director of Big Brother Watch, warned that the technology was being used without “oversight or legislative basis.” The time has come, the NGO said in a press release, “to stop this steady slide into a dystopian nightmare, and halt all use of LFR [live facial recognition] across the UK.”

In an opinion piece in the financial newspaper City AM, Vincent wrote that the installation of cameras “underscores the urgent need for legislative safeguards” on the use of live facial recognition. Thus far, Vincent argued, police forces have been able to choose when and how they use the technology. She also pointed out that the “watchlist” used by London police includes not just criminal suspects but also “vulnerable persons and even victims of crimes.” Before the use of the technology is expanded any further, Vincent wrote, “legislation must be developed without delay to ensure proper oversight and safeguards.”

In its criticism of the technology, Big Brother Watch points to the recent use of live facial recognition throughout the entire city center of Cardiff, Wales on the occasion of two rugby games in mid-March. The area surveilled by police included “places of worship, a family court, abortion and health clinics” – sensitive locations where the right to privacy is of particular importance. According to the organization, police scanned the faces of more than 160,000 people and did not make any arrests.

“Wild West”

The British human rights organization Liberty also expects that the use of facial recognition technology in the UK will increase. The group characterizes it as “dangerous tech” that is being used without safeguards. In a press release, Liberty stated: “There are simply no rules or laws governing police use of facial recognition in the UK – it’s a regulatory Wild West.”

Liberty demands that police “be banned from using facial recognition technology on the public.” In the absence of a full ban, however, laws should ensure “at the very least” that each use of the technology is authorized by a judge. What’s more, no one should appear on police watchlists “unless they are reasonably suspected of a serious crime.”

Criticism of the use of facial recognition by London police dates back to a trial conducted between 2016 and 2019. Researchers monitored this test phase and determined that the technology had a high failure rate. The monitors also pointed to the lack of legal basis for the tech.

In November 2024 the British Parliament held its “first ever debate” on the use of the controversial technology. Conservative MP David Davis was among those arguing that judicial and legislative oversight was needed. Independent MP Iqbal Mohammed warned of potential abuse in the absence of regulations.

A legal case against London’s Metropolitan Police in connection with its use of facial recognition is currently pending. The person bringing the suit, Shaun Thompson, was falsely identified as a criminal suspect and detained by officers.

Retrospective search in Scotland

Facial recognition is used in other parts of the UK as well. A recent report published by the Scottish Biometrics Commissioner states that police in Scotland have never deployed live facial recognition – instead Scottish police have only carried out retrospective searches comparing footage to police databases. To carry out such searches, officers use images like those taken by surveillance cameras at a crime scene, for example. This differs from live facial recognition, the use of which involves every person who passes by a camera being automatically scanned.

According to the report, the technology “has limited use in practice.” Roughly 98 percent of searches fail to produce a match. One reason for this is the poor quality of photos collected in the national database, where different police forces throughout the UK upload photos of suspects.

The report also contains numbers on retrospective facial searches conducted using the national database. According to these records, the London police force is particularly active: while police in Scotland carried out a total of 3,813 searches in 2023 and 2024, London police made 31,078 search queries in that same time frame. (js)

Spyware: More Paragon customers discovered

2025-03-25T08:03:00+01:00

Cybersecurity researchers at Citizen Lab have identified more customers of the spyware company Paragon. Citizen Lab has also confirmed the attacks on activists in Italy.

Amnesty International announced last week that its Security Lab had discovered additional cases in Italy. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

Government agencies in Australia, Denmark, Israel, Canada, Singapore and Cypress are likely customers of the spyware developer Paragon Solutions, according to a new report from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Citizen Lab’s experts have also investigated the cases that came to light recently in Italy.

Paragon and its Graphite spyware came under scrutiny earlier this year after WhatsApp revealed that 90 users had been attacked. Of the victims that have been identified, most have been from Italy.

As Citizen Lab’s cybersecurity experts write in their report published last week, they were able to identify part of Paragon’s server infrastructure – and draw conclusions about the company’s contracts with government clients. The researchers did not provide more detailed information about who these apparent clients might be – except in the case of Canada, where the evidence Citizen Lab uncovered suggested that the Ontario Provincial Police was a potential Paragon customer.

The company has itself confirmed that it has contracts with US agencies. Paragon only sells its products to government clients. Graphite allows a client to completely take over a targeted individual’s smartphone and, for example, read text messages sent and received by that person.

Paragon attempts to portray itself in a positive light

According to the report, the Israel-founded company was sold to a US firm last year for hundreds of millions of dollars.

Paragon has publicly extolled its practice of not doing business with non-democratic countries. Citizen Lab characterizes this promise as “marketing.” In the experts’ assessment, this messaging is likely directed primarily at the US government, which in the past has imposed sanctions on spyware companies.

According to Citizen Lab, Paragon’s intent is to produce the impression that abuse of its product is only to be feared in authoritarian states. But the company’s claims don’t hold up to scrutiny. Citizen Lab points to the recent cases in Italy as just one example. The report confirms the attacks – though it remains unclear whether the victims’ phones were successfully infiltrated and whether the actor behind the attack was able to spy on the individuals in question.

Sea rescue NGO targeted

Among the people targeted in Italy was the editor-in-chief of the online magazine Fanpage.it. The founder of the NGO Mediterranea Saving Humans, Luca Casarini, was targeted as well. Casarini’s organization rescues refugees who become stranded in the Mediterranean. According to the report, co-founder Dr. Giuseppe “Beppe” Caccia was also a target. Italian media report that Caccia filed charges earlier this month.

There have been other cases in Italy as well: Father Mattia Ferrari, a priest who works for the rescue organization, was also a target. According to the Citizen Lab report, it is unclear which type of spyware was used to hack Ferrari’s phone. It’s possible however that “multiple types of spyware” were used “as part of interrelated surveillance operations.”

The activist David Yambio received a notification from Apple alerting him to an attack. In his case as well, it’s unclear which type of spyware was used. Yambio founded the organization Refugees in Libya and works to gather evidence of the torture of refugees in that country. He told the Guardian that at the time his phone was attacked, he was in contact with the International Criminal Court.

It is not yet known who was behind the attacks. Citizen Lab points out that Luca Casarini, Giuseppe Caccia, Mattia Ferrari and David Yambio all work closely together. The activists told Citizen Lab that they suspect they were targeted because of their humanitarian work and their criticism of Italy’s migration policies.

After the initial revelations, Italy’s government admitted that it was a Paragon customer – but denied responsibility for the attacks.

More activists targeted

The scale of the scandal could be even greater than previously known: in response to the Citizen Lab report, Amnesty International’s Security Lab announced that it had discovered additional cases of spyware being deployed against sea rescue activists in Italy over the past six months.

Donncha Ó Cearbhaill, head of Amnesty’s Security Lab, said in a statement: “What we are seeing is the tip of the iceberg.”

Said Ó Cearbhaill: “Of particular concern is the targeting of sea rescue organizations engaged in life-saving activities in the Mediterranean. This adds a dangerous new digital threat to organizations already grappling with legal threats, obstruction and criminalization in Italy.”

Ó Cearbhaill also criticized the lack of effective measures being pursued at either the national or EU-level, despite numerous spyware scandals in Europe. “Europe’s shameful laissez-faire approach to regulation of the surveillance industry is fueling the global spyware crisis,” he said.

Member of European Parliament Hannah Neumann of Germany’s Green party was among those expressing criticism in response to the Citizen Lab report. “Italy now joins the list of EU countries that have used spyware illegally,” Neumann said. Paragon, Neumann noted, marketed itself as a purveyor of “ethical” spyware that only sold its product to democratic countries. “But this scandal shows that even under these conditions, abuse cannot be prevented.” In her statement, Neumann demanded “clear legal guidelines” to prevent the abuse of such technologies. (js)

Hungary: Police to use facial recognition to surveil Pride events

2025-03-20T08:03:00+01:00

Hungary has passed a new law prohibiting Pride events. Those who defy the law and continue to organize and participate in such events will be subject to surveillance using facial recognition.

The organizers of Budapest Pride have already announced that the event will still be happening this year. (Source: IMAGO / NurPhoto)

Authorities in Hungary may begin using facial recognition to identify those participating in Pride parades. The government passed a law on Tuesday banning demonstrations, like Pride, in support of the rights of sexual minorities.

The law was passed by a vote of 126 to 27. It was introduced just a day before passage by the ruling Fidesz party and is set to go into effect on April 15.

The AP reports that the bill amends Hungary’s law on assembly to make it illegal to organize or attend events that violate the country’s controversial “child protection” law. That law prohibits making information about non-heterosexual lifestyles accessible to minors. According to observers, the new law is targeted primarily at Budapest Pride.

What does LGBTQ+ stand for?

The abbreviation stands for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer/Questioning, with the “+” sign representing other, as-yet undefined identities and orientations. Collectively, the abbreviation refers to sexual identities and orientations that differ from female, male and heterosexual norms.

The organizers of Budapest Pride told media that the government was trying to “restrict peaceful protests with a critical voice by targeting a minority.”

Financial penalties and police surveillance

Participating in an event like Pride can now be penalized with a fine of up to 200,000 Hungarian forints (about $550).

The law also gives authorities license to use facial recognition to identify demonstrators.

The latter provisiohttps://www.euractiv.com/section/tech/news/hungarys-use-of-facial-recognition-violates-eu-ai-act/
w, told the news site Euractiv that the use of facial recognition during such events was “actively prohibited by the EU AI Act.”

The EU law only permits the use of the controversial technology by law enforcement agencies in certain exceptional cases. In Caroli’s view, Hungary would still be in violation of the law even if the country attempted to justify its actions on national security grounds.

Sharp criticism

Daniel Freund, a Member of European Parliament from Germany’s Green Party, condemned the decision. As Freund told Euractiv: “Abolishing the right to assembly and enforcing this measure with facial recognition software – what sounds like something out of Russia or China – is happening in an EU member state.” He added that Hungary’s prime minister, Viktor Orbán, “no longer even pretends to uphold democratic values.”

Freund demanded action from the EU: “The EU must respond to this rapid autocratization and stop transferring EU funds to the Orbán regime.”

Hungarian Helsinki Committee, a Hungarian human rights organization, said in a statement that the change to the law violates several fundamental rights, including the right to personal data protection, freedom of assembly and the prohibition on discrimination.

In the organization’s judgement, the use of facial recognition would violate the fundamental rights of any person whose face were captured by the police during a monitored event. In addition to Pride events, other demonstrations could be subject to surveillance as well. The use of the technology in this context, the organization said, not only violates the Hungarian Fundamental Law, but also the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights.

A “Practical toolkit for law enforcement officials to promote and protect human rights in the context of protests” published last year by UN human rights experts also includes this guidance: “Facial recognition technologies and other biometric systems must not be utilized to identify individuals who are peacefully participating in a protest.”

The EU commissioner for equality, Hadja Lahbib, wrote on social media: “The right to gather peacefully is a fundamental right to be championed across the European Union.”

Protests in Budapest

On Monday Amnesty International sharply criticized the law. The director of the organization’s Hungarian chapter called it a “full-frontal attack” on the LGTBQ+ community and a “blatant violation of Hungary’s obligations to prohibit discrimination and guarantee freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.”

During the vote in parliament, there was also protest inside the chamber, as opposition lawmakers set off smoke bombs in the colors of the rainbow. Thousands of people reportedly gathered outside the parliament building after the vote to demonstrate against the government.

In years past Orbán’s government has repeatedly passed laws that drew condemnation from human rights organizations and EU politicians. In 2022 the European Commission went so far as to file a case with the European Court of Justice, the EU’s highest court, alleging that Hungary’s “child protection” law discriminates against people on the basis of their sexual orientation. The case is still pending.

In its coverage, the AP characterized the law passed Tuesday as being “reminiscent of similar restrictions against sexual minorities in Russia.”

Tamás Dombos from the Hungarian LGBTQ+ rights group Háttér told the AP that the law was intended to distract voters from other issues. “It’s a very common strategy of authoritarian governments not to talk about the real issues that people are affected by: the inflation, the economy, the terrible condition of education and healthcare,” said Dombos.

Szabolcs Hegyi from the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union told the AFP wire service: “It is easy to win votes by restricting the rights of a minority in a conservative society.”

Parliamentary elections are due to take place in Hungary next year. Observers regard the leader of the Tisza party, Péter Magyar, as a serious challenger for Orbán, who has ruled the country since 2010. (js)

US administration cuts funding for international broadcasters

2025-03-19T08:04:00+01:00

US president Donald Trump has signed an executive order cutting funding for several federally funded international broadcasters. Journalists and other staff at Voice of America were placed on administrative leave.

Voice of America was founded during World War II – 83 years ago. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

The US government has cut funding to several of its international broadcasters. Almost the entire staff of Voice of America (VOA) was placed on administrative leave. The move endangers press freedom worldwide, warns Reporters without Borders.

US president Donald Trump signed an executive order over the weekend that directed several agencies, including the United States Agency for Global Media (USAGM), to reduce “their statutory functions and associated personnel.” USAGM oversees the state-funded media outlets Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) and Radio Free Asia (RFA).

According to media reports, Voice of America employees were informed on Saturday that they were being placed on leave. They were ordered “not to enter their work premises or access USAGM internal systems.” Workers were placed on notice that they may be required to surrender their press passes and government-issued devices. Nevertheless, they were instructed to remain available during working hours.

Heads of broadcasters express criticism

Michael Abramowitz, director of Voice of America, said that almost the entire staff of 1,300 journalists, producers and support staff had been placed on leave. “I am deeply saddened that for the first time in 83 years, the storied Voice of America is being silenced,” Abramowitz wrote in a statement.

Both Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and Radio Free Asia made announcements over the weekend in response to the cuts.

Bay Fang, head of Radio Free Asia, called the decision a “reward to dictators and despots.” Fang added that the broadcaster planned to challenge “this short-sighted order.”

Stephen Capus, the head of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, responded in similar terms, saying that the “Iranian Ayatollahs, Chinese communist leaders, and autocrats in Moscow and Minsk would celebrate the demise” of the station.

Trump’s decision was in fact hailed by Chinese state media, as the New York Times reported on Tuesday.

“In support of freedom and democracy”

As stated on its website, the mission of the US Agency for Global Media is “to inform, engage, and connect people around the world in support of freedom and democracy.” Voice of America was founded in 1942, during the Second World War, in order to counter Nazi propaganda. The broadcaster, which is based in Washington, D.C., broadcasts news internationally in 48 different languages.

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty was established in Munich during the Cold War to counter Soviet propaganda. Today the broadcaster is headquartered in Prague and reports in 27 different languages, including Russian. Last year the Kremlin barred the organization from operating in Russia.

The Czech foreign minister Jan Lipavsky has reportedly called on the EU to take over funding for RFE/RL.

Radio Free Asia was established in 1996 and reports in local languages and dialects, including Mandarin, Cantonese, Burmese, Korean and Vietnamese.

Freedom of the press in danger

Journalist organizations have sharply criticized Trump’s decision. Mike Balsamo, president of the US National Press Club, said in a statement that the mass suspension of journalists at Voice of America “raises urgent questions about the future of one of the world’s most important independent news organizations.” Balsamo continued: “This isn’t just about cutting an agency – it’s about whether VOA can continue its mission at all. For decades, Voice of America has delivered fact-based, independent journalism to audiences worldwide, often in places where press freedom does not exist.” Balsamo warned: “This move not only puts VOA’s credibility at risk but also undermines America’s long-standing commitment to a free and independent press.”

Thibaut Bruttin, general director of Reporters without Borders (RSF), warned that the Trump administration’s decision was a threat to press freedom worldwide. RSF urged the US congress to protest the move.

It is congress that approves funding for the US Agency of Global Media, which in turn supplies funding to the outlets it oversees. The so-called “firewall” enshrined in the US International Broadcasting Act prohibits interference by US government officials in the agency’s broadcasting services.

Journalists detained

RSF also warned of dangers to USAGM employees currently detained abroad. According to the organization, ten of the agency’s employees are currently imprisoned. Nine of these are journalists who were arrested for their work: four are in prison in Vietnam, two in Russia, and one each in Azerbaijan, Belarus and Myanmar.

Bruttin said in a statement that as a result of the US government’s decision, thousands of people were not only out of a job, but also in danger. “We urge the US authorities and the international diplomatic community to ensure journalists’ safety,” said Bruttin. “Those detained must be released and granted full freedom without delay.”

In a joint statement, France Médias Monde and Deutsche Welle warned that the US administration’s decision “endangers global media freedom.” The move “is particularly concerning given the United States’ long-standing role as a champion of press freedom and professional journalism.”

France Médias Monde and Deutsche Welle, like the US Agency for Global Media, are members of the DG8, a group of eight international public service media organizations.

Deutsche Welle’s director general Peter Limbourg said at a press conference on Monday that the Trump administration’s actions had “weakened freedom and strengthened autocracy.” He warned that based on previous experience, the vacuum created by USAGM’s absence would be filled by Russia and China. Europe must act, Limbourg said.

Trump attacks media

During his first term, Trump directed verbal attacks against Voice of America. Now a White House statement announcing the cuts in funding accuses the broadcaster of spreading “radical propaganda” at the expense of US taxpayers.

Since the beginning of his current term the US president has taken several actions against the media. Reporters for the Associated Press, for instance, have been denied access to White House events, and the administration has assumed control of reporter selection for the White House press pool. Prior to this weekend’s funding cuts, the administration had also ordered Voice of America to cancel its contracts with international wire services.

According to a report from the New York Times, in the past months, the US Agency for Global Media had launched internal investigations against journalists at Voice of America. The journalists had reported on criticism of Trump or made comments “perceived as critical of him.” One of the broadcaster’s most prominent journalists, Steven Herman, was placed on leave. This was a “warning sign,” said Mike Balsamo of the National Press Club. (js)

Iran uses surveillance technology to enforce hijab laws

2025-03-18T08:06:00+01:00

Iran is increasingly using technological tools to enforce mandatory hijab laws. The measures include the use of aerial drones, according to a UN report.

Citizens are encouraged to use a mobile app to report alleged violations of veiling laws. (Source: IMAGO / Middle East Images)

The Iranian government is increasingly relying on technology to enforce its hijab laws. According to a UN report published on Friday, the tools currently in use include facial recognition technology. Women who defy the veiling laws face persecution, including arrest and prosecution.

The report states that two and a half years after the “Woman, Life, Freedom” protests, the government continues to “enact and impose new measures to suppress women and girls’ fundamental rights.”

The protests which broke out in September 2022 were a response to the death of Mahsa Amini, a young Kurdish woman who died in custody after her arrest by the morality police. Although Iran’s president Masoud Pezeshkian gave assurances during his election campaign last year that he would ease enforcement of the veiling laws, new measures have still gone into effect. In April 2024 for instance the Iranian police announced plans for more aggressive countrywide enforcement action; these measures have continued since Pezeshkian took office in July. More than 600 women were arrested last year as a result of the more stringent policy, according to the report.

The use of surveillance technology has also increased. To monitor adherence to the hijab laws in public space, the state has even deployed aerial drones, both in Tehran, the capital, and in southern Iran. The government is also using facial recognition technology. Cameras equipped with the software were reportedly installed at the entrance to Amirkabir University in Tehran to monitor hijab compliance by women students.

Surveillance app

For their report, the UN’s experts were able to review the “Nazer” smartphone app. The app is available on the Iranian police’s official website. Citizens are asked to use the app to report women and girls seen in private cars without headscarves. An update in September 2024 has also made it possible to report women in ambulances, taxis, or on public transit.

As detailed in the UN report, the app lets users record the location, date, time and license plate of the vehicle in which the alleged infraction was observed. The vehicle is then “flagged” online, and the police are alerted. The owner of the vehicle also receives a text message warning them that their vehicle may be impounded.

In March 2024, Amnesty International reported that the so-called Moral Security Police had ordered the seizure of cars in which women and girls were observed wearing allegedly “inappropriate” headscarves. Cameras in public spaces were also used to enforce the order, according to Amnesty.

This practice has continued, according to the UN report. The state is also relying increasingly on private individuals to enforce its orders. The report’s authors call it “state-sponsored vigilantism.”

State control also extends into the digital realm, a “critical space” in Iran where people can express their views and organize. The government employs surveillance tools to monitor activity online and prohibits the use of certain apps.

Plans to further curtail rights

New laws are pending that would further curtail women’s rights. The “Hijab and Chastity” law has yet to go into force, but “measures to implement it have already begun,” according to the report. “Such measures include the expansion of existing restrictions on women’s and girls’ access to social and economic rights, and related services, including health, education, employment, banking and public transport.”

In another sign of escalating restrictions, the government has closed many cafés and other businesses that fail to comply with the hijab laws.

Should the law go into force, it would impose steep fines and lengthy prison sentences on women charged with not wearing a headscarf. The law would also increase the use of technology and surveillance, according to the report.

Judicial persecution

Activists in Iran continue to face lengthy prison sentences. The report cites evidence of abuse and torture – not even children are spared mistreatment. Activists and members of the press, including those living abroad, are targeted by the state.

In the aftermath of the protest movement, human rights organizations have also observed an increase in the number of executions. At least 938 people were reportedly killed last year at the hands of the Iranian government. Instances of women activists being sentenced to death have also gone up.

The UN report was written by the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Iran, which was convened in November 2022 and given a mandate to investigate suspected human rights abuses in Iran. For their report the mission’s experts conducted nearly 300 interviews and gathered a substantial quantity of additional evidence, at times working in collaboration with NGOs. The mission’s mandate was extended by one year in April 2024 and is now set to expire.

The mission has previously reported that with its actions to suppress the countrywide protests in 2022 the Iranian authorities had committed “gross human rights violations,” some of which amounted to “crimes against humanity.”

In this latest report, the authors warn of “a risk of recurrence of violence against those who continue to express dissent or challenge the State.” They urge the UN Human Rights Council and the international community to continue to pay close attention to the human rights situation in Iran. (js)

US immigration agency gains access to license plate readers

2025-03-13T13:47:00+01:00

The US immigration agency ICE has been given access to a network of license plate readers, a new report shows. Critics fear the data could be used to help carry out deportations.

ICE has long come under criticism for its use of an array of surveillance technologies. (Source: IMAGO / Pond5 Images)

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), a US immigration agency, received access to a network of license plate readers in the state of New York in 2022. The agency gained access even though Westchester County, where the scanners are located, legally limits cooperation by local police with federal immigration agencies. The Guardian details the findings in an article published Tuesday, based on documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request. It is unclear whether ICE still has access to the database; neither federal nor local authorities responded to inquiries.

According to the Guardian’s reporting, Westchester County in New York state “has had laws limiting cooperation with federal immigration authorities on the books since 2018.” But documents reviewed by the paper show that beginning in February 2022 ICE received access to data collected by license plate readers installed throughout the county.

License plate readers capture cars’ license plate numbers; some can also record photos or video. The plate numbers are saved along with information like the date, time, and direction of travel. As the Guardian reports, many local police departments in the US use such devices. The data they collect is often shared with other departments. Through such sharing arrangement, federal authorities can gain access, even if local authorities in certain states or counties aren’t actually authorized to cooperate with them.

Federal agencies can retrieve data

According to the documents seen by the Guardian, in January 2023 there were a total of 480 license plate readers in Westchester County. In the last week of January 2023 alone, these devices reportedly scanned roughly 16.2 million vehicles. As of February 2022, ICE and the Department of Homeland Security, of which it is a part, have had access to this database. The documents also show that the US Department of Justice, the Drug Enforcement Agency, the Secret Service and the FBI all were able to access this data.

Local law enforcement agencies outside of the state of New York were also given access.

Neither the police in Westchester County nor ICE responded to inquiries from the Guardian regarding whether this expanded access was still in place. It remains unclear why all the different authorities received access in the first place. The Guardian quotes emails from police in Westchester County that show the department was interested in establishing data-sharing relationships with other agencies.

Increased ICE activity

As the Guardian reports, the first weeks of US President Donald Trump’s new term saw increased enforcement activity from immigration agencies in Westchester County. Local media also confirm the ramped-up enforcement.

Raids in Westchester have prompted local mayors to assure residents that local laws prohibit the county police department from cooperating with federal agencies on immigration enforcement actions unless they are required to do so by a judicial warrant.

The documents reviewed by the Guardian suggest, according to the paper, that the exchange of data between local police and ICE effectively circumvented these laws.

Alber Fox Cahn of the New York-based Surveillance Tech Oversight Project told the Guardian: “Westchester can be a sanctuary county or a surveillance state. It can’t be both. This sort of mass tracking violates the promise made to undocumented residents that they will be safe in the county.” The term “sanctuary” applies to counties, cities and other jurisdictions in the US that limit their cooperation with federal agencies in the enforcement of immigration laws.

Access to more license plate scanners

The technology used in Westchester is supplied by the Rekor company. Rekor is not the only supplier in this sector, however: the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) revealed in 2019 that ICE agents had access to a database maintained by another company, Vigilant Solutions. The company collects license plate data from the “most populous 50 metropolitan areas” in the country, according to the ACLU.

Civil liberties groups warn that technology like license plate readers helps to create a giant surveillance net that makes it possible to monitor the movements of almost any car in the US – including across state lines.

Alber Fox Cahn told the Guardian: “We’re moving to a day where someone getting in their car in New York City could drive to Boston or Washington and have their car basically map every moment of the drive.”

According to the Guardian, Rekor has also advertised that it collects data in 30 US states – any agency that contracts with the company can “access real time data from any part of the network at no cost,” according to a company press release.

Criticism of the agency

ICE has long come under criticism. In the past the agency has bought data from private companies in order to monitor immigrants. Advocacy groups criticize the practice, arguing that it circumvents local laws that limit cooperation from local law enforcement.

During his election campaign, President Trump promised a severe crackdown on people without valid residency status. Civil rights advocates and immigrant rights organizations fear that ICE, which is the main agency in charge of deportations, could increase its use of surveillance technologies to track down individuals.

Meanwhile pressure on the agency from the administration could increase even further: on Tuesday the Atlantic reported, citing internal documents, that ICE was not carrying out as many deportations as the administration would like.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced this weekend that she was reshuffling the leadership of the agency. Noem is making the change just a month after taking office herself. She also announced that some ICE personnel would have to take lie detector tests – claiming that information about ICE raids was being leaked to media. (js)

Complaint against German intelligence law filed with European Court of Human Rights

2025-03-12T14:56:00+01:00

Reporters without Borders and the Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte have filed a complaint against Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service Act with the European Court of Human Rights. The groups claim the law violates press freedom.

The organizations filing the complaint hope for a landmark judgement whose impact extends beyond Germany alone. (Source: IMAGO / Ardan Fuessmann)

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has been asked to review Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service Act (BND law). Reporters without Borders (RSF) and the Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte (GFF) – Society for Civil Rights – along with several media professionals have filed a complaint with the court in Strasbourg against the Federal Republic of Germany. They argue that the law fails to provide sufficient protections for journalists and violates fundamental human rights that are guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

In the organizations’ assessment, the provisions of the BND law do not provide sufficient protections against violations of the right to respect for private and family life, which encompasses confidentiality in telecommunications. The law’s protections against violations of press freedom and the right to lodge an effective complaint are also insufficient, the groups argue.

RSF executive director Anja Osterhaus said in a statement: “The BND Act still enables the broad surveillance of media professionals, especially outside of Germany, and thus jeopardizes the freedom of the press. RSF is therefore appealing to the European Court of Human Rights to review the BND Act’s effects on press freedom. The provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights on the protection of freedom of the press and the right to information must be observed in Germany. There is a serious protection gap, it must be filled.”

The organizations charge that media professionals both in and outside of Germany are subject to surveillance measures at the hands of the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND) – the German Federal Intelligence Service – “that do not fulfill the requirements of the ECtHR case law.” According to RSF and GFF, the legal precedent established by the court requires that “intelligence gathering must have precisely identifiable objectives and may only be used for specific purposes.” What’s more, confidential relationships between journalists and their sources require special protection. An intelligence service may only store the information it has obtained “for specific occasions and for a limited period of time.” Finally, individuals who suspect that they have been targets of surveillance must have the opportunity to demand an independent review. The BND law, the complainants argue, “does not fulfill these requirements.”

Court decision prompts revisions

The German Federal Constitutional Court ruled in 2020 that the blanket foreign surveillance allowed for in the version of the BND law then in effect violated Germany’s Basic Law (Grundgesetz). According to the ruling, fundamental rights like the right to privacy and the freedom of the press also extended to non-Germans abroad. The complaint was brought to the court by RSF and the GGF.

After the ruling, the German government drafted a revised version of the law that went into effect on January 1, 2022.

In response, RSF and the GFF filed a new complaint against the revised law – arguing that not only had the government ignored the demands laid out by the court, it had also introduced new unconstitutional provisions.

The GFF explains that since the new version of the law went into effect, the BND has been permitted to gather data from so-called machine-to-machine communications, even those of German citizens – meaning that it can monitor individuals’ web activity, including “website visits, ticket bookings, or the use of online banking.” This data can be stored and analyzed “without cause and therefore on a massive scale” for up to six months. The only exception is for individual communication between natural persons.

The law also empowers the BND to use spyware against non-German citizens abroad. The intelligence service has “practically unconditional authorization” to use this power. The GFF calls it “the lowest threshold to date, in all of German law, for authorizing the government use of spyware.”

What’s more, non-German citizens who are long-term residents of Germany may be surveilled without limitation so long as they leave German territory for a short time. Comprehensive protections apply only to German citizens. This is the case even though, the GFF argues, the Federal Constitutional Court intended to protect both groups from strategic surveillance by the BND.

The court also demanded special protections for the communications of journalists. Instead, the new law contains no protections for what is know as traffic data – that is, information that reveals whom journalists have communicated with, and when. By failing to protect such data, the new BND law has a particularly negative impact on press freedom.

European court seen as next step

In November 2022, the German Federal Constitutional Court decided not to take up the second constitutional complaint brought by RSF and the GFF. The court did not give a reason, the organizations report. The German court’s decision not to act prompted the organizations to bring their complaint to the ECtHR.

Bijan Moini, legal director and procedural coordinator for the GFF, said in a statement: “The Federal Constitutional Court didn’t want to rule in the matter of whether the German parliament adhered to standards that the court itself had put in place for laws governing the foreign intelligence service. This is very regrettable – because the [revised] law contains more violations of the Basic Law than ever. These are severe intrusions into people’s privacy” – including government spyware. The GFF, Moini said, did not intend to sit idly by. “It’s a good thing that, with the European Convention on Human Rights, Europe has a system for protecting fundamental rights – and it’s because of this that we’re now headed to Strasbourg.”

The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France, is an institution of the Council of Europe and not of the European Union. The court is responsible for interpreting the European Convention on Human Rights. Its rulings are legally binding for the countries that are contracting parties to the convention.

In bringing their complaint to the ECtHR, the organizations hope to achieve a landmark decision whose impact will extend not only to the status of the law in Germany, but also to other member states of the Council of Europe.

The GFF and the German chapter of RSF are plaintiffs in the case, as is the Paris-based RSF International. Because they maintain intensive contact with legal claimants, members of the press, and politicians throughout the world, the organizations have claimed that their communications could be relevant to the BND’s activity.

Joining the complaint filed with the ECtHR are journalists and human rights activists from Germany, the EU, and other countries, including Meron Estefanos from Sweden.

Another complaint filed by the RSF in response to mass surveillance by the BND is currently pending before the ECtHR. It was taken up by the court in 2021 – no timeline has been set for a decision. (js)

Nepal: Criticism of proposed social media law

2025-03-11T08:05:00+01:00

In the future, social media platforms in Nepal may be required to register with the government – otherwise they could be banned. Critics fear limits on freedom of expression.

According to media reports, students and others have protested the bill in the last weeks. (Source: IMAGO / NurPhoto)

The Nepalese government is considering a new law to regulate social media platforms. NGOs fear it could be used to limit freedom of speech and of the press – and demand the bill’s withdrawal. The groups also criticize a recently passed law establishing a new “Media Council.”

Nearly 30 international organizations last week issued a joint statement on the proposed law. The signatories include the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), Reporters without Borders (RSF) and the UK-based Index on Censorship.

According to the government, the legislation proposed in February is meant to promote “decency and transparency online.” The groups opposing the law express concern however that its vague and broadly written stipulations could be used to prosecute human rights activists, journalists and critics of the government.

Platforms must register

The proposed bill reportedly calls for companies that operate social media platforms to register with the Nepalese government. Those who fail to comply could be banned in the country.

In their statement, the advocacy groups write that the proposed measure would prevent users from engaging online, “thereby restricting the plurality and diversity of voices.” Observers in local media also voice fears that this regulation could make it easier for the government to require platforms to hand over user data.

The bill also empowers the authorities to remove content that they deem “indecent” or “misleading.” To comply with this provision, platforms would have to designate a point of contact who reports to the government.

Imprisonment and fines

The proposed law calls for penalties of up to five years in prison and fines of up to NPR 500,000 ($10,500) for spreading “misleading” information. The bill would also impose penalties for behavior like “cyberbullying,” and would criminalize content that “disturbs the sovereignty, territorial integrity, national unity and security of Nepal.”

The signatories to last week’s statement point out that the draft legislation includes “overbroad definitions” and “ambiguous language.” The groups fear that the law could be used to criminalize opinions – which could lead in turn to self-censorship. Last month, Beh Lih Yi of the CPJ said in a statement: “Nepal’s proposed social media law is ripe for misuse against journalists reporting on critical topics of public interest.”

According to media reports, the law even calls for penalties of up to three months in prison and a fine for creating or using anonymous profiles on social media.

In last week’s statement, CPJ and its co-signatories point out that no civil society or media groups were consulted in the drafting of the law. The law threatens to “severely restrict the rights to freedom of expression, access to information and privacy.”

Rukamenee Maharjan, assistant professor at Nepal Law Campus, criticized the draft legislation in an interview with Deutsche Welle, a German broadcaster. While activists concede that some regulation is needed, Maharjan argued that the bill “should focus on creating an enabling environment for self-regulation,” rather than enacting punitive measures. She warned that the law could lead to self-censorship and could “disproportionately impact those who are less digitally literate and may inadvertently share misleading content.”

“Sexual and gender minorities, such as the LGBTQ+ community, often rely on anonymous handles,” Maharjan said. “This bill could suppress their voices.”

Modeled after problematic laws

Journalist Sanjeev Satgainya from the Indian newspaper The Hindu writes in an online post that while the draft legislation does represent an attempt on the part of the government to deal with problems like phishing and extortion, it also contains a number of “objectionable provisions which could have a bearing on freedom of speech and press.”

Satgainya adds: “What’s surprising is that the government claims to have taken cues from India and Bangladesh while drafting the bill” – referring to laws in those countries that have come in for strong criticism.

Currently the bill is being debated in the National Assembly, the upper house of Nepal’s parliament. If both houses of parliament approve the bill, it would then go to President Ram Chandra Paudel for signature. According to local media, some lawmakers have also called for changes to the bill.

In last week’s statement, the advocacy groups call for revising the bill to bring it “in line with human rights standards,” such as freedom of expression, that are guaranteed in Nepal’s constitution and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

New “Media Council”

The groups also criticize a law passed a few weeks ago that creates a new “Media Council.” Together with the proposed social media legislation, the passage of this law “raises serious concerns” that the government intends to control freedom of expression and the access to information.

The groups’ statement describes the Media Council as “a new regulatory body to monitor conduct, advise on policy and ensure compliance with ethics in Nepal’s media.” The groups fear however that in practice the council could limit press freedom. One concern is that the government has the powere to appoint the council’s chairperson – which could increase the government’s influence over independent media.

In their statement, the groups call on the government to change the law. The council, they write, must be led by someone with a judicial background, and include “experts and representatives from the media sector.”

Nepal is ranked 74th of 180 countries on the RSF’s World Press Freedom Index. This puts the country behind the United States (ranked 55th), for example, but well ahead of its neighbor India (ranked 159th).

RSF reports that vague laws give the authorities broad latitude for silencing members of the press who publish critical reporting. Journalists also have to contend with violence at the hands of security forces. In addition, the government owns the most influential radio broadcaster and several daily newspapers. According to Amnesty International, security forces in the country also imprison activists who are critical of the government. (js)

Afghanistan: Taliban expand mass surveillance using facial recognition

2025-03-04T08:16:00+01:00

The Taliban have expanded their network of surveillance cameras in Kabul. The cameras are equipped with facial recognition, according to a new report.

The Taliban force residents to pay for the cameras themselves. (Source: IMAGO / Dean Pictures)

Tens of thousands of cameras now watch the streets of the Afghan capital of Kabul. The footage flows to a central control room operated by the Taliban’s police force, the BBC reports. Human rights groups fear the technology could be used to persecute critics.

The Taliban have massively expanded the surveillance of public space in Kabul. An estimated 90,000 cameras reportedly monitor the streets of the city of more than six million residents. Before the Taliban’s return to power in August of 2021, there were only 850 cameras, a spokesman for the former government’s security forces told the BBC.

Reporters for the BBC were able to tour the surveillance network’s control room themselves. There members of the Taliban police monitor feeds from individual cameras throughout the city.

Facial recognition

According to the BBC’s report, the system is equipped with facial recognition technology that can display information on the gender and age range of people captured on camera. License plates are also monitored.

The Taliban claim the cameras are for fighting crime. If suspicious activity is observed, officers in the control room alert police near the scene. The cameras are even used to monitor other members of the police.

“When they retook power in 2021, the Taliban promised to crack down on crime,” the BBC reports. But since then the new government has also imposed “draconian measures” limiting the rights of the population – “especially those of women.” Given this reality, human rights groups are concerned about the use of surveillance technology by the new government, which has not been internationally recognized.

Criticism from human rights organizations

Amnesty International warned that the surveillance cameras could be used to advance the Taliban’s draconian policies, which “violate fundamental rights of people in Afghanistan – especially women in public spaces.”

The Taliban have drastically limited women’s rights in the last three years. Human Rights Watch (HRW) for example has called the situation in the country “the world’s most serious women’s rights crisis.”

Women and girls in Afghanistan no longer have access to education beyond the sixth grade and can no longer practice many professions. They cannot play sports or visit parks. The Taliban also view women’s voices as “intimate,” and by law they are not allowed to be heard outside the home – though according to the BBC, this law “is not being strictly enforced.”

Fears that critics and women will be targeted

The BBC reports that “women continue to be visible on the streets” of Kabul and other cities, but “are required to wear a face covering.” One young Afghan woman told the broadcaster that she was worried the cameras could be used to monitor for violations of the veiling laws.

The Taliban told the BBC that only the local police have access to Kabul’s surveillance system. The “Propagation of Virtue and Prevention of Vice Ministry – the Taliban’s morality police – does not use it,” the BBC reports. It is the morality police that enforces rules governing how women dress in public.

But the young Afghan woman told the BBC that there was concern that the cameras posed a danger to anyone critical of those in power. “Many individuals, especially ex-military members, human rights advocates and protesting women, struggle to move freely and often live in secrecy,” she told the BBC.

According to Amnesty International, the government in Iran already uses facial recognition technology in this way: in pedestrian areas the technology is deployed to identify women and report them to law enforcement. Surveillance cameras are also used in Iran to detect women driving without veils.

It is also unclear how long the authorities in Afghanistan store the data they collect. The police told the BBC that the footage was kept for three months – but HRW noted that “Afghanistan does not have the data protection laws in place to regulate how the collected CCTV footage is held and used.”

Taliban make residents pay for cameras

According to the BBC, some residents even had to help pay for the surveillance cameras on their street. One woman said that every household on her street had to pay “thousands of afghanis,” a significant sum.

Meanwhile the humanitarian situation in the country is catastrophic. According to the UN, roughly 30 million people are in need of aid. Of the women who are still permitted to work, many earn only around 5,000 afghanis (about $68) per month.

The Taliban told the BBC the payments were voluntary “donations.” But the woman interviewed by the broadcaster spoke of families that refused to pay being threatened with cuts to power and water. “We had to take loans to cover the costs,” she told the BBC.

Chinese cameras

The police refused to tell the BBC where the cameras came from, but reporters were able to see the name Dahua on the screens in the control room. Zhejiang Dahua Technology is a purveyor of surveillance technology that is linked to the Chinese government.

The US imposed sanctions on the company in 2019 for its role in the Chinese government’s mass surveillance of the Uyghur minority in the Xinjiang region. In December of last year the company announced its plans to terminate its projects in the region.

In 2023 Reuters reported on a meeting between the Taliban and another Chinese company currently under US sanctions, Huawei. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss a potential collaboration to expand the country’s surveillance network.

At the time the Taliban said the total number of cameras in Kabul and other cities was 62,000 – and announced plans to expand the network further. The announcement drew criticism from human rights organizations.

US left behind biometric data

After the withdrawal of Western troops from Afghanistan in 2021, media and human rights organizations also reported that the US military had left behind devices with biometric data stored on them. The data included fingerprints and iris scans as well as photos used for facial recognition.

Cybersecurity experts have since shown that the data saved on the devices were not protected with any type of security measures – and human rights groups have warned that the Taliban could use the data to target their perceived opponents. HRW reportedin 2022 that there was evidence that this was already happening in some cases. (js)

White House tightens control of media

2025-02-27T15:00:00+01:00

The White House wants to reserve for itself the right to decide which journalists cover the president in the Oval Office. It’s the latest action by the new administration against the media.

Groups representing journalists expressed sharp criticism of the administration. (Source: IMAGO / NurPhoto)

The White House announced on Tuesday that it would decide which media organizations would be represented in the press pool, the group of journalists that covers the president’s daily activities. The move breaks with decades-old precedent – and gives the government more control over media coverage. This is not the first action directed against the media since the new administration took power in January.

Before now, the White House Correspondents’ Association (WHCA), an organization with a 111-year history, has decided who is represented in the press pool, selecting journalists on a rotating basis. The members of the pool accompany the president during daily activities and events where space is limited, for example in the Oval Office. They then distribute their reporting to all credentialed media in accordance with a standard procedure.

The White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the move was intended to modernize the press pool. Alongside legacy media outlets, “new media” would now also be able to participate. These would also include local broadcasters – though many of these are owned by Sinclair Broadcast Group, which is considered to have a rightward slant. In 2018, Sinclair required its affiliate stations to read a promotional message criticizing “fake” news stories in the media – echoing the administration’s rhetoric.

The New York Times wrote that the move made it possible for the White House to exert tighter controls on which journalists could observe the activities of President Donald Trump up close and ask him questions.

Press groups and individual journalists express criticisms

The WHCA criticized the move in strong terms. WHCA president Eugene Daniels wrote in a statement that the White House’s actions “tears at the independence of a free press in the United States. It suggests that the government will choose the journalists who cover the president.” Daniels continued: “In a free country, leaders must not be able to choose their own press corps.” The WHCA was not given advance notice of the change by the White House.

A spokesperson for the New York Times said in a statement: “The White House’s move to handpick favored reporters to observe the president – and exclude anyone whose coverage the administration may not like – is an effort to undermine the public’s access to independent, trustworthy information about the most powerful person in America.”

Jacqui Heinrich of the Trump-friendly broadcaster Fox News wrote on social media: “This move does not give the power back to the people – it gives power to the White House.” And Peter Baker, chief White House correspondent for the New York Times, wrote, also on social media: “Having served as a Moscow correspondent in the early days of Putin’s reign, this reminds me of how the Kremlin took over its own press pool and made sure that only compliant journalists were given access.”

News agency excluded

This latest announcement comes after the White House’s move to bar reporters from the Associated Press (AP) from covering the president. The ban is a response to the news agency’s decision not to refer to the body of water known internationally as the Gulf of Mexico by President Trump’s preferred name, the “Gulf of America.” AP reporters were at first denied access to certain events. Starting in mid-February, the agency was permanently barred from the Oval Office and the president’s airplane. The AP is one of the world’s leading news agencies.

The dispute has now wound up in court. On Monday a US judge denied the AP’s request that the court immediately reverse the White House’s ban – but also urged the government to reconsider its decision. Another hearing is scheduled for March 20.

The AP argues that the ban violates the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech and of the press.

This view is shared by several organizations that advocate for freedom of the press, who demand that the news agency’s access be restored. Groups including the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), Reporters without Borders (RSF), the Freedom of the Press Foundation, PEN America and several chapters of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) published a statement to that effect on Tuesday.

“Attacks on press freedom”

Last Friday, the SPJ and more than 40 groups representing journalists released a statement in response to the “recent government press attacks.” The statement also called on the administration to restore the AP’s access to White House events – and to “cease punishing news organizations based on their reporting.”

In the statement the groups write: “When leaders try to silence reporters through intimidation, legal threats and denial of access, they are not protecting the country; they are protecting themselves from scrutiny. This is how authoritarian regimes operate.”

The changes to the press pool and the dispute with the AP are only the most recent examples of the Trump administration’s policy toward the press. Earlier this month for example the administration introduced a “media rotation program” at the Pentagon – under which the rightwing news site Breitbart will take over workspace once used by National Public Radio (NPR). The change also impacts NBC, CNN, the New York Times and the Washington Post. Despite the move the organizations’ journalists will keep their press credentials and will still have access to press briefings.

Trump has also directed verbal abuse against the media on several occasions – and not just since his return to office in January. Recently he has called the Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Eugene Robinson “incompetent” and called for his firing by the Washington Post. When CNN’s long-serving White House correspondent Jim Acosta announced in January that he was leaving the station, Trump called him a “loser.”

During his first term in office and during his campaigns, he repeatedly insulted journalists, referring to them as the “enemy of the people” and denouncing critical reporting as a “witch hunt.”

The US president has also taken legal action against the media. He has sued the broadcaster CBS as well as the Des Moines Register, a newspaper in Iowa. The paper published a poll during the campaign last year with results that were unfavorable to Trump – it has sought to have the case dismissed.

Trump accuses CBS of having manipulated an interview with presidential candidate and former Vice President Kamala Harris in a way that showed her in a better light. Trump is seeking $20 billion in damages. A transcript of the interview published by the broadcaster shows that Trump’s accusation is false.

In the past, Trump accused CNN of defamation – the case was dismissed.

New leadership at media regulator

After assuming office, Trump installed Republican Brendan Carr as head of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which regulates broadcast media. Carr reinstated complaints against ABC, CBS and NBC in connection with their election coverage – under the agency’s previous leadership, the complaints had been rejected.

Carr also announced investigations into the public media outlets NPR and PBS.

On Wednesday Trump also threatened to sue journalists who use anonymous sources.

In the 2024 World Press Freedom Index published by RSF, the US is ranked 55th out of 180 countries. The organization recently wrote that the actions of the new president, his administration and his political allies “amount to a monumental assault on freedom of information.” (js)

Utah: Bill would require police to disclose use of AI in police reports

2025-02-26T15:52:00+01:00

Draft legislation in Utah would require police to review reports that were written by so-called AI.

Several police departments in the US already use software that purports to generate reports based on bodycam footage. (Source: IMAGO / Imagn Images)

Police officers in the US state of Utah could be required in the future to disclose the use of so-called artificial intelligence (AI) in the writing of their incident reports. A bill mandating transparency is currently up for debate in the state legislature. Experts hope that other states follow suit.

The bill, S.B. 180, would require that any police report produced by so-called AI be reviewed by a person. Such reports would also have to include a disclaimer saying that they were created, in part or in whole, using AI tools.

The law would also require law enforcement agencies to develop guidelines that would, for example, list which AI programs officers were permitted to use.

The bill was proposed by Democratic State Senator Stephanie Pitcher. A lawyer and former prosecutor, Senator Pitcher told local media that “We’re seeing more of a reliance on artificial intelligence” by law enforcement agencies. The bill she proposes would create minimum standards for use of the technology. Said Pitcher, “Using AI to generate police reports – or just in the investigation process – presents a number of really interesting issues, I think, where some guardrails are appropriate.”

The bill calls for potential disciplinary action to be taken against officers who violate the new guidelines – but doesn’t detail specific punitive measures.

“A necessary step”

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a civil liberties group, said of the bill that it is “unfortunately a necessary step.” The group hopes the bill “will be part of a larger conversation about more robust regulations,” but warns that “it’s going to take more than a disclaimer to curb the potential harms of AI-generated police reports.”

The software Draft One in particular has come in for criticism in the past year. It is developed by Axon, a prominent supplier of police equipment, including Tasers and bodycams. Draft One uses the audio from footage taken by an officer’s body-worn camera to generate a police report. The company markets the technology as a time-saving tool that helps reduces the amount of time officers spend typing up reports. Police departments in several states are reportedly testing the software, or are already using it – including in Utah. Similar products made by other companies are also on the market.

Last year, shortly after Draft One was first introduced, the EFF warned that algorithms often have trouble reliably deciphering speech, given “the wide range of languages, dialects, vernacular, idioms and slang people use.” As a result, the technology could make mistakes in transcribing what people said.

Accounts produced by the software could also vary, depending on how it interpreted what was said: if for example an officer in a video is recorded saying “the suspect has a gun,” that doesn’t necessarily mean that the suspect was in fact armed. But in a report that is automatically produced by software, the officer’s claim could be presented as fact – which could have severe consequences for defendants at trial.

The EFF also warned that if officers were caught lying in their reports, they could deflect blame by claiming that the software had made a mistake.

Central role in prosecutions

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in December published a white paper registering concerns about the use of AI. Police reports, the organization notes, play a “crucial role” in the justice system. “They are central to the criminal proceedings that determine people’s innocence, guilt, and punishment, and are often the only official account of what took place during a particular incident.” Given their importance, law enforcement officers shouldn’t let algorithms write their reports for them.

The ACLU criticizes for example the fact that bodycam footage forms the basis for the reports. Video evidence, the organization notes, isn’t objective – factors like camera angle and the point in time when the camera begins recording influence how a situation is depicted.

How police officers remember an incident is another important basis for police reports – but a person’s recollections can easily change. For that reason it’s important, the ACLU argues, for officers to write down what they remember before they look at video footage or view a report that was generated from that footage.

Furthermore the ACLU criticizes the lack of transparency surrounding how Draft One actually functions. This “threatens to become a significant legal issue when people are charged with crimes.”

Still going through the legislative process

The Utah State Senate passed the bill last week. Currently it is being debated in the state House of Representatives. If passed by the House, Republican Governor Spencer Cox will have to sign the bill before it becomes law.

The EFF reports that in King County in Washington state, which includes Seattle, police have been instructed not to use these new technologies to write their reports – for now. (js)

More countries imposed internet shutdowns in 2024 than ever before

2025-02-26T14:26:00+01:00

There were at least 296 internet shutdowns worldwide last year, according to Access Now. Many were imposed in connection with conflicts and wars.

Myanmar saw the largest number of internet shutdowns. Seven countries resorted to the measure for the first time in 2024. (Archival photo) (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

Last year governments in 54 countries imposed at least 296 internet shutdowns, according to an annual report published on Monday by Access Now. This is the highest number of shutdowns since the organization began keeping track in 2016 – though as Access Now and its partner organizations stress, internet shutdowns are never justified.

At 296, the total number of documented shutdowns rose last year compared to the year before, when 283 were recorded. The number of countries that made use of the controversial measure also rose by 15. Millions of people were impacted. Forty-seven of the shutdowns begun last year continued into 2025.

The highest number of internet shutdowns were observed in Myanmar: there the internet was cut off 85 times – a sharp rise from the 37 times Access Now recorded in 2023. The military junta that has ruled the country since 2021 was responsible for most of the shutdowns.

With 84 shutdowns, India follows close behind the Southeast Asian country. It’s the first time since 2018 that India has not led the list. Nevertheless, Access Now writes in its report, 84 is still “an unacceptably high number” for “the world’s largest democracy.” According to the India-based Software Freedom Law Center, in most cases where the authorities cut off access last year, they did so as a preventive measure in anticipation of protests or similar unrest.

In Pakistan, 21 shutdowns were documented, more than ever before in the country. Russia imposed 19 shutdowns, including seven in Ukraine.

Wars and conflicts

As was the case in 2023, conflicts and wars were the most common triggers for internet shutdowns: warring parties in eleven countries cut off communications 103 times. Ethiopia, Myanmar, Israel, Russia and Sudan were among the countries imposing shutdowns. This too was an all-time high, Access Now reports.

Numerous tactics were used to block access to the internet during active conflicts. These included destroying power and telecommunications infrastructure, cutting cables, using jamming devices and occupying the offices of internet service providers.

Protest movements and elections

The organization also documented a new high in connection with protests: in 2024, governments in 24 countries imposed 74 shutdowns. Bangladesh, India, Kenya, Rwanda and Senegal were among the offenders. One motive for the shutdowns was to limit and suppress demonstrations against government policies or the economic situation.

Authorities also frequently block access to communications when violence erupts during conflicts or protests. As Access Now argues, this stokes “fear and uncertainty” in the population – and cuts people off from life-saving information. The organization linked 72 internet shutdowns in 2024 to human rights abuses or war crimes.

Elections were held in at least 64 countries in 2024. Twelve election-related shutdowns were documented in eight countries – the highest number since 2019. Azerbaijan, India and Uganda were among the eight offenders.

Exams prompt internet shutdowns

Some governments also resorted to internet shutdowns to prevent cheating during school or university exams – including in Algeria, Jordan, Kenya, and Iraq. This number too is the highest since Access Now’s record-keeping began.

Iran and Sudan did not impose any shutdowns during exam periods, despite having resorted to the measure in the past. Access Now notes however that in Sudan the majority of students couldn’t participate in exams at all on account of the ongoing civil war – while Iran blocked access to the internet several times last year in connection with demonstrations.

Access Now includes platform blocks in its tally. According to this year’s report, the number of blocks rose substantially: last year 71 instances were recorded in 35 countries – compared to 53 blocks in 25 countries in 2023. Last year’s total even surpassed the previous high from 2019. “Authorities imposed this type of shutdown to control the flow of information on popular platforms and target specific populations,” Access Now writes. “There is a misconception that such shutdowns minimize impacts or represent a more acceptable form of censorship than cutting off the internet entirely.”

X (formerly Twitter) was blocked most often (24 times in 14 countries), followed by Facebook (22 times in 12 countries). But authorities also blocked YouTube and Instagram, as well as chat services like WhatsApp and Signal. The dating app Grindr was blocked in 13 countries.

Seven countries block access for the first time

In 2024, seven countries shut down the internet or blocked platforms for the first time. Among them was Malaysia, which blocked access to Grindr – the restriction is reportedly still in effect on some networks in the country.

Thailand also turned up on the list for the first time. The country imposed a cross-border shutdown, blocking access to internet and telephone connections in a region of Myanmar that borders Thailand. The purported goal of the measure was to curb cybercrime operations based in Myanmar – but as the report notes, people in Thailand were also affected.

Zach Rosson of Access Now said in a statement: “The data doesn’t lie: 2024 was a record-breaking year for internet shutdowns. As perpetrators become more sophisticated in their tactics to silence dissent, so must our response as civil society and human rights defenders. Now more than ever, we need a collective and concerted effort to fight the unyielding use of internet shutdowns around the world – fundamental rights depend on it.”

The organization stresses that parties to conflicts must ensure that the civilian population has access to telecommunications infrastructure and essential platforms. In addition, the international community must hold accountable those who commit “gross human rights abuses and crimes against humanity under the cover of internet shutdowns.”

All governments must protect the right to freedom of expression and to access information, Access Now urges. But the organization reserves criticism for tech companies as well, noting that “many of the largest social media platforms have decisively stepped back form their past commitments to limit the spread of harmful content on their platforms” – like hate speech and misinformation. Access Now calls on tech companies to protect human rights – and on governments to go after the causes of misinformation, rather than block access to platforms. (js)

Italy: Journalist groups take legal action in response to spyware attack

2025-02-24T08:10:00+01:00

Two organizations representing Italian journalists have submitted a legal complaint after revelations of a spyware attack against at least one member of the press. The groups look to the courts to find answers while the government remains silent.

Cybersecurity experts are certain that a state actor was responsible for the attacks. (Source: IMAGO / Silas Stein)

The Italian national journalist union FNSI and the professional organization OdG have filed a criminal complaint with prosecutors in Rome in response to a spyware attack targeting at least one journalist in the country. A total of seven people in Italy were reportedly hacked using the Graphite spyware marketed by Paragon Solutions – FSNI and OdG suspect that more than one journalist was targeted.

As FNSI announced on Wednesday, the charges were filed “against unknown individuals.” It is now up to prosecutors to investigate the case and find those responsible.

Earlier this month, WhatsApp revealed that it had detected spyware attacks against 90 users – including members of the press and activists. The users were hacked using Graphite spyware, a product sold by Paragon Solutions. Because the method of infiltration was a so-called “zero-click attack,” the individuals affected had no way of knowing they were targeted. It is unclear whether the users’ smartphones were in fact compromised and whether the attackers were able to spy on their targets – but WhatsApp considers it possible.

Soon after WhatsApp’s disclosure the Italian investigative journalist Francesco Cancellato came forward to say that he was among those informed by WhatsApp of an attack on their smartphone. Cancellato is editor-in-chief of the news site Fanpage, which last year published an investigation showing members of the youth organization of the ruling party, Fratelli d’Italia, using fascist chants and slogans.

Government denies responsibility

The Italian government, citing information it had received from WhatsApp, has said that seven people were targeted. The government denies responsibility. The founder of the Italian NGO Mediterranea Saving Humans, Luca Casarini, was also among those targeted. His organization rescues refugees who become stranded while attempting to cross the Mediterranean Sea.

As the Guardian reports, no answers have come from parliament. On Tuesday the president of parliament invoked a rule that allows the government to refuse to answer questions from the opposition related to the matter. In justifying this step, the government claimed that “all unclassified information has already been shared” – and that any other details were subject to state secrecy rules.

The journalist groups criticize the government’s failure to clarify matters. If no answers were forthcoming from parliament, the groups said, then the courts would have to take over the investigation.

Alessandra Costante, secretary general of FNSI, the journalist union, said: “We believe that [the surveillance of Francesco] Cancellato was not an isolated case.” It is necessary, she said, to determine which other members of the press were spied on, and by whom. “We hope that the courts will be able to bring the clarity that politics does not want to provide.”

State actor responsible

Paragon’s Graphite spyware reportedly possesses capabilities similar to those of the controversial Pegasus spyware marketed by the Israel-based NSO Group: Attackers can take complete control of a device and, for example, read a user’s chat histories. Graphite, like Pegasus, is only sold to government clients. It is as yet unclear who is behind these latest attacks detected by WhatsApp.

Mediterranea Saving Humans on Wednesday published information from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto, which is currently investigating founder Casarini’s smartphone. Citizen Lab’s cybersecurity experts were able to determine that attempts to compromise Casarini’s phone began as early as February 2024. The investigation is ongoing, and could potentially reveal who is responsible for the attack. Citizen Lab’s investigators are already certain of one thing, however: the presence of Graphite “leaves no doubt that only government agencies are involved.”

Two weeks ago the Guardian reported, citing an anonymous source, that Paragon had terminated its contract with Italy in response to the recently revealed incidents. The Italian government at first denied the report. Minister Luca Ciriani, speaking to parliament, confirmed that the government has had a contract with Paragon for years – but insisted that the law was “rigorously respected.” He denied that the spyware was used to illegally spy on journalists and, as the AP reports, “threatened legal action against any claims to the contrary.”

According to the Ansa news agency, the head of Italy’s foreign intelligence agency AISE has since admitted to a parliamentary committee that his agency uses the spyware – but likewise denied using it to spy on journalists or activists. The matter is now being investigated internally. Until the investigation is concluded, use of Graphite has been suspended.

The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported earlier this month that an Italian law enforcement agency also has a contract with Paragon. The Israeli company, which has reportedly been sold to a US firm, counts US agencies and other governments in Europe among its clients.

The Italian government, citing information it received from WhatsApp, has reported that people in 13 other EU countries have also been targeted with the spyware.

Other activists targeted

Another of the individuals targeted is the Libyan activist Husam El Gomati, who lives in Sweden. The Guardian noted that, like the journalist Cancellato and the activist Casarini, El Gomati’s work has led him to be critical of the government of prime minister Giorgia Meloni.

The activist David Yambio, who lives in Italy, has also reported being informed of a spyware attack against him. In Yambio’s case, however, the warning came from Apple – whether Graphite was used is unclear.

Yambio has criticized the Italian government for its migration agreement with Libya – and for its decision to release Osama Najim, a Libyan police chief wanted by the International Criminal Court for suspected war crimes. Prosecutors in Italy are investigating Meloni in response to the decision. Yambio himself was allegedly abused in a prison led by Najim and is working to gather evidence of other cases of abuse.

Human rights organizations accuse Italy of complicity in abuses against migrants detained in Libyan prisons, given Rome’s agreements with the government in Tripoli. (js)

European Court of Human Rights condemns Italy for illegal landfills

2025-02-20T19:19:00+01:00

The mafia is disposing of illegal waste in the region of Campania. Therefore, the European Court of Human Rights has now condemned Italy.

According to the court, the Italian government has not done enough despite having been aware of the illegal waste disposal since 1988. (Source: IMAGO / Antonio Balasco)

The Italian government has not done enough against illegal landfills in the region of Campania – and has violated the European Convention on Human Rights. This was decided by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).

“Terra dei Fuochi” – the land of fires. This phrase is used to describe an area consisting of 90 parishes with approximately 2.9 million residents in which there are many illegal landfills. Groups of organized crime there have buried and burned waste for decades – some of which also includes toxic hazardous waste. This has dramatic consequences for its residents: ground water is polluted and an increased incidence of cancer has been detected.

Residents of the region accuse the Italian authorities of not doing enough against these illegal landfills – and were therefore brought before the ECHR.

Right to Life

The judges of the court have now vindicated them. The court determined that the Italian authorities had already known about the problem since 1988 and nevertheless took too little action to protect the lives of the plaintiffs. In doing so, the government violated the right to life from article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights .

The court declared that there was a “sufficiently serious, genuine and ascertainable” risk to life, which could be qualified as “imminent”. However, the government could not prove that there was a coordinated and comprehensive reaction of the authorities for the situation. The authorities only made sluggish progress in their evaluation of the effects of environmental pollution. It is still not possible to have an overview of where land still needs to be decontaminated.

The European Court of Human Rights, with its headquarters in Strasbourg, France, is an institution of the Council of Europe and not an institution of the European Union. The court ensures compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights. The court’s rulings are legally binding for the contracting states.

The government had stated that numerous measures were taken, such as the implementation of improved cancer screenings. The Court of Justice determined that most of these measures were first taken after 2013. In consideration of this delayed action, the authorities did not act with necessary care.

The government could also only name seven cases in which people were charged with environmental crimes that were connected with the situation in the region. Therefore, the ECHR was not convinced that the government took the required measures under criminal law to combat the illegal waste disposal.

Secrecy instead of communication

Furthermore, according to the court, there were deficits in communication between the authorities. Because the general population should have been comprehensively informed about the health risks and the measures taken. This, however, did not occur. In fact, at times some of the information was even subject to state secrecy.

Italy must now develop a comprehensive strategy to eradicate the problems in the region. Additionally, an independent monitoring system must be set up and a public information platform must be created. The court has given Italy two years time to do so.

During this time, further applications pending before the ECHR in the case of around 4,700 people will be suspended. Only after the end of the two-year period does the court want to decide about any potential non-material compensation for damages.

Waste disposal worth billions

The well-known Italian environmental organization Legambiente welcomed the ruling – and called for its immediate implementation. In order to do so, waste management in the region would also need to be reorganized.

The NGO stated that they had already published a report in 2003 that coined the term “ecomafia.” Since then, there have been several new governments at a national and regional level, without finding a solution for the waste problem in the region.

According to EMCR, there have been seven parliamentary commissions of inquiry in Italy that have focused on the illegal waste disposal. The EMCR states that waste was disposed of in illegal landfills in the provinces of Caserta and Naples. In part, waste was buried in fields that were later used for agriculture. Waste was also mixed with other materials to be used as building material or compost, for example. Waste was also burned – in Marcianise and Castel Volturno entire “mountains of car tyres” went up in smoke.

According to a parliamentary report, Campania was treated as “Italy’s waste bin.” Another report described it as an environmental catastrophe comparable only to the spread of the plague in the 17th century.

The reports state that mafia organizations in Italy earn billions with waste disposal – also in other parts of the country. Criminal organizations undercut standard market prices for waste disposal to obtain contracts. However, the waste – some of which also includes dangerous industrial waste – is not disposed of properly. The mafia has even sunken ships containing toxic hazardous waste . (js)

India: Internet shutdowns violate fundamental rights

2025-02-20T08:01:00+01:00

Authorities in India imposed more than 150 internet shutdowns in the previous two years. This limits millions of people’s ability to exercise their fundamental rights, a new report argues.

For years, NGOs monitoring the practice have observed that India imposes more internet shutdowns than any other country in the world. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

In 2024, 60 internet shutdowns were imposed in India, according to a new report from the India-based Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC). That number did drop somewhat compared to the previous year, but the SFLC nevertheless warns that curtailing internet access violates fundamental rights – and criticizes authorities for acting with little transparency.

For years, observers have noted that India imposes the most internet shutdowns of any country worldwide. The SFLC is among the groups documenting these shutdowns. In a new report, “Let The Net Work 2.0,” the organization looks at state-imposed restrictions on internet access in the years 2023 and 2024.

In these two years, the organization counted 156 internet shutdowns – 60 in 2024 and 96 in 2023. In 2023 there were shutdowns in a total of 13 states; in 2024 16 states made use of the controversial measure. Only complete shutdowns were included in the tally, not instances where only individual websites were blocked. According to the report, roughly 96 percent of internet users in India access the web through mobile devices – this being the case, the mobile internet is “the primary target for suspensions.”

Shutdown orders were frequently justified on public safety and national security grounds. In other cases, states cited the need to stop the spread of misinformation. The authorities imposed shutdowns both as a preventive measure in anticipation of “potential disturbances” and as a reactive measure in response to events like protests. Indian authorities also resorted to the measure to prevent cheating during exams and amidst expected tensions surrounding sporting events, the SFLC reports. Both in 2023 and 2024, most internet shutdowns were imposed as preventive measures.

Violating fundamental rights

The SFLC stresses that limits on internet access always have profound consequences for people in the regions affected. People’s daily lives are impacted, including their ability to access medical care. Shutdowns violate fundamental rights, including freedom of expression and the right to information. But the impact can even extend to the right to life and personal liberty, as defined in India’s constitution, for instance when emergency medical care can no longer be provided as a result of an internet shutdown. Patients who rely on telemedicine must also contend with “life-threatening delays.”

Curtailed internet access can have negative consequences for public safety as well, as “people are unable to report crimes, receive disaster alerts, or access navigation services.”

Poor people are often hit harder than those who are well-off and have access to fixed-line internet connections. Students, “especially in rural areas,” are cut off from online learning when the internet is shut down, limiting their ability to exercise their right to education.

Two years ago Human Rights Watch (HRW) and the India-based Internet Freedom Foundation published a report demonstrating the consequences the shutdowns had particularly for poorer segments of the population in India. The report cited instances of people being unable to receive food rations and wages.

Digitized daily life

In India, many aspects of daily life have been digitized – from payments to access to healthcare and social services. As a result, internet shutdowns impact people’s lives in multiple respects. For companies and freelancers, the shutdowns can cause financial losses.

The state of Manipur, with a population of 2.7 million, provides several examples of the impact such measures can have. The state government imposed long shutdowns in both 2023 and 2024. The causes were protests and, in some cases, violent unrest.

One student in Manipur told the SFLC that because the mobile internet was shut off, he wasn’t able to receive financial assistance from his parents and as a result couldn’t buy any study materials. Another student said he had difficulty finding work.

A journalist in Manipur stated that the shutdowns made reporting difficult. As the SFLC argues in its report, this situation “not only results in the suppression of freedom of [the] press,” it also prevents the public from accessing important information.

This was also evident in the city of Jainoor, where the internet was shut off after an outbreak of violence. “Without internet access,” the SPLC writes, “an opaque barrier was created between the people of Jainoor and the rest of the Indian citizenry.”

Internet shutdowns are also increasingly used as a tool to prevent cheating on exams in India. The SFLC points out that the entire population of a given region suffers under the restrictions – a case filed by the SFLC challenging the legality of this measure is currently pending before India’s Supreme Court.

Lack of transparency

Many internet shutdowns in India are accompanied by a lack of transparency, according to the report. The country’s Supreme Court stated in a 2020 ruling that curtailing access to the internet was a “drastic measure” that could be considered by the state only if “necessary” and “unavoidable.” The court ruled that “the State must assess the existence of an alternate less intrusive remedy.” The judges also ruled that internet shutdown orders must always be made public, and that shutdowns could not be of unlimited duration.

Nevertheless, the SFLC reports that the authorities frequently fail to publish their orders – as was the case in Jainoor. This lack of transparency persists despite the fact that the legal framework governing internet shutdowns in India was revised last year and now makes the publication of suspension orders mandatory. The orders must also include “detailed justifications.”

The SFLC calls the new rules a “step forward,” but voices some criticism, writing that “the definition of ‘public order’ remains broad and open to interpretation.”

The report also notes of the current legal framework: “The absence of a structured oversight mechanism increases the risk of misuse, with shutdowns potentially being employed for purposes beyond legitimate security concerns. The persistence of legal challenges before the Supreme Court highlights the ongoing demand for judicial scrutiny.”

The law also lacks a proportionality requirement, according to the SFLC. The Supreme Court had highlighted the importance of proportionality in its 2020 decision.

The organization calls for the creation of a legal framework that “prioritizes transparency, accountability, and the protection of fundamental rights.”

Experts at the UN have criticized internet shutdowns in the past, including in a 2022 report. Such measures, the report argued, have “dramatic real-life effects,” impacting the lives and human rights of millions of people. The report recommended that, as a fundamental principle, states should refrain from imposing internet shutdowns. Should states nevertheless resort to these means, the measures must be “clearly grounded in unambiguous, publicly available law.” The public must also be informed in advance, and the measure must be “subject to prior authorization by a court or another independent adjudicatory body.” (js)

Lax response from dating apps to reports of violence

2025-02-19T08:06:00+01:00

The dating-app conglomerate Match Group fails to respond effectively to reports of assault, according to a recent investigation. The company has reportedly known about instances of abuse for years.

Match Group owns some of the largest dating platforms, including Tinder. (Source: Imago / imagebroker)

The dating-app conglomerate Match Group does not do enough to guarantee the safety of its users. A joint investigation conducted by several media outlets shows the extent of the problem. Even if users are flagged for assaulting others on dates, they are often able to keep their accounts. Even users whose accounts are blocked are usually able to sign up for a new account using their same profile information.

The US-based Match Group corporation owns some of the most prominent dating apps, including Tinder, OKCupid, Hinge and Plenty of Fish. The Dating Apps Reporting Project, a collaboration between the Markup, the Guardian, and other outlets, spent eighteen months investigating how the platforms handle cases of abuse.

Over the course of their reporting, journalists for the project reviewed internal documents and spoke with current and former employees as well as victims of sexual violence – they also carried out their own tests.

Match Group promises to block the accounts of users who are reported to have committed abuse or assault; the ban is supposed to extend across the company’s platforms. But this latest investigation shows that in practice the company does little to curtail problematic users’ access – even though, based on internal documents, Match Group has had knowledge of cases of abuse since at least 2016. Since 2019 the company has maintained a central database that collects reports of this kind. The database saves data affiliated with the flagged accounts, including phone numbers, email addresses and profile photos.

Nevertheless, users whose accounts are blocked seem to have little difficulty in getting back on the platforms. In separate trials in 2024 and again in 2025, reporters created more than 50 accounts across Match Group’s platforms. They then reported these accounts for sexual assault on dates – and found that within two days, the accounts were blocked. After being banned, however, the investigators were able to sign up again using the same names, phone numbers, dates of birth, and even the same profile photos affiliated with the original accounts.

Continued access for those accused of assault

In the past, reports of abuse from female users have not always led to the accused individual having their account blocked. This is evident from a particularly egregious case chronicled by the Dating Apps Reporting Project. Several women had reported a doctor in Denver, Colorado to the app Hinge, accusing him of rape. The first report was received in September 2020 – and yet in January 2023 he was still active on Hinge. That month he attempted to rape yet another woman whom he had met on the app. At one point, in 2022, his profile had even been highlighted on the platform. His account was only blocked after he was arrested.

In October 2024, the man was sentenced to more than a hundred years in prison. He had been convicted of sexually assaulting, drugging or assaulting a total of eleven women. According to the Dating Apps Reporting Project, at least 15 women would eventually accuse the man of raping or drugging them. Nearly all had met him on a dating app.

Attorneys for the women argued that most of the assaults could have been prevented. One lawyer told reporters, “It is shocking that for years after receiving reports of sexual assault, Hinge continued to allow” the perpetrator to use the platform. She accuses the platform of having “actively facilitated his abuse.”

Reporters for the Dating Apps Reporting Project write that the case shows how Match Group’s apps enable perpetrators to find new victims. They point to a study conducted by Brigham Young University that analyzed hundreds of sexual assaults in the state of Utah. The study found that “attacks facilitated by dating apps happened faster and were more violent than when the perpetrator met the victim through other means.”

No transparency

According to the Dating Apps Reporting Project’s investigation, in 2020 Match Group promised to publish a transparency report – “a public document that would reveal data on harm occurring on and off its platforms.” To date no such report has been released. As the reporters argue, “Match Group has long possessed the tools, financial resources and investigative procedures” necessary to ratchet up its security measures. But instead, the company has failed to use its own tools consistently across its apps – “in part because safety protocols could stall corporate growth.”

In a statement released in response to the investigation, the company pointed to various measures it was undertaking, including the use of “harassment-preventing AI tools” – no further indication was given as to how these tools might function – and efforts to cooperate with law enforcement.

The investigation points out however that while Match Group has promised publicly for years to improve security on its platforms, insiders claim that no such measures have been instituted. The company has even fired members of its own security team. These employees’ tasks have reportedly been outsourced to contractors who receive little training and are subject to “severe quotas.”

The case of the doctor in Colorado has since had political consequences: last summer, a law was passed in the state. The Online Dating Safety Act requires dating-app companies “to tell the state attorney general which safety measures they are taking to protect users.” Nevertheless, the law does not require any company to disclose “how many people are raped or assaulted after using its platform.” (js)

US: Immigration agencies use vast array of surveillance technologies

2025-02-13T16:51:00+01:00

Technology could play a decisive role in the new US presidential administration’s deportation plans. US agencies have been expanding their surveillance capabilities for years.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the main agency in charge of executing deportation plans, has long been the focus of criticism – including for its surveillance of migrants. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press)

The new US presidential administration intends to deport migrants on a massive scale and shut down the southern border with Mexico. The government could deploy a vast arsenal of surveillance tools to help carry out its plans. Some agencies even hope to further expand their capabilities.

During the election, President Donald Trump announced he would carry out “mass deportations” of undocumented immigrants. According to reports, authorities have increased the number of arrests in recent weeks. Some people, fearing arrest, are choosing to stay home rather than go to work, media report.

Citlaly Mora from the US nonprofit Just Futures Law confirmed in an interview with Posteo that in the three weeks since Trump assumed office, the government has already stepped up its actions. The nonprofit has observed the targeting of immigrant communities throughout the country. Just Futures Law uses legal strategies to advocate for immigrant rights and oppose mass surveillance.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, is the primary agency in charge of deportations. According to media reports, ICE agents are already present in large cities like Chicago, New York, and Los Angeles.

But the current pace of arrests is apparently not enough for the new administration: according to a report by the Washington Post, ICE field offices have received orders to increase the number of arrests they make – from a few hundred people per day to between 1,200 and 1,500. The Post writes that agents could resort to “indiscriminate enforcement tactics” to meet the quota. The White House has denied the report.

ICE has repeatedly come under criticism in the past – not only for its surveillance of immigrants, but also for its harassment of activists and journalists.

Technologies to assist in deportations

ICE has a large arsenal of surveillance tools to draw on. Critics fear that these tools could be used to carry out the administration’s plans and help track down individuals. Citlaly Mora of Just Futures Law told Posteo: “We know that they have an ample inventory and throughout the years they’ve been building up their surveillance mechanisms and tools.”

Reporters from the New York Times recently reviewed nearly 15,000 public contracts that give a sense of this inventory. According to the Times’ reporting, since 2020, ICE and another enforcement agency, Citizen and Immigration Services, have spent a total of $7.8 billion to purchase immigration enforcement technology from 263 different companies.

As the paper reports, this technology includes DNA tests meant to establish whether individuals crossing together at the border are related. Other technologies allow officers to access and analyze data from smartphones and computers. The agencies have license plate readers; they use systems that compare biometric data against criminal records or automatically alert agents when individuals change their address.

According to the Times, most of the contracts were initiated under former president Joe Biden. In addition to enforcing immigration laws, the tools have been used in investigations into criminal activity like drug trafficking and human smuggling. How these technologies will be used by the new administration is unknown. But, the paper writes, “Tech products are almost certain to feature” in Donald Trump’s deportation plans.

John Torres, a former ICE official, told the Times that the agency will “certainly use all tools at their disposal, including new tech available to them.”

Lucrative business for tech companies

Those profiting from this technological arms buildup, which began after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, include a number of highly controversial companies. ICE, for example, has signed contracts with Palantir, a company that sells software designed for analyzing large quantities of data. The company has come under criticism for years, not least because of its collaboration with ICE – human rights organizations accuse Palantir of selling products that assist in deportations.

The controversial company Palantir partners with US immigration authorities. (Source: IMAGO / Dreamstime)

ICE also has a contract worth $9 million with the controversial facial recognition company Clearview AI. According to reports, the contract expired last year; it’s not yet known if the agency continues to partner with Clearview.

The agency has however purchased roughly $54 million in technology from the Israeli company Cellebrite. The company sells hardware and software for unlocking and scanning data from smartphones. Cellebrite gained renown after its tools made it possible for the FBI to unlock an iPhone belonging to a man who killed 14 people in a shooting in San Bernadino, California in 2015. The company has repeatedly been criticized for selling its products to repressive governments.

Critics fear surveillance of immigrants

Citlaly Mora of Just Futures Law told Posteo: “There’s an extensive surveillance dragnet that was deployed before and will continue to be weaponized by the Trump administration to track, surveil and detain immigrant residents in the United States.”

In recent years the organization has researched many of the tools that ICE uses to conduct digital surveillance. “While we feel that any technology can turn into a surveillance tool for the government,” Mora says, tracking tools like ankle shackles and the SmartLink app are especially concerning.

These technologies are used by ICE as part of its Alternatives to Detention program. Individuals whose asylum cases are pending, for example, can wait for their hearings at home instead of being held in custody. In exchange, however, they must endure ongoing surveillance. Some are required to wear ankle monitors, while others must regularly send photos of themselves through the app.

Surveillance via app

SmartLink has been criticized in the past for cconstantly tracking the location of those enrolled in the program. ICE has denied that constant surveillance is taking place, despite evidence to the contrary. SmartLink has also been criticized for reportedly gathering and storing additional data, including photos that users are required to upload.

According to Mora, hundreds of thousands of people in the US are monitored by means of the app, ankle shackles or other devices.

Location data gathered in this way has in fact been used in the past to help plan a major ICE raid. A court document reviewed by the New York Times shows that in August 2019, during the first Trump administration, ICE officers tracked the location of a woman in the agency’s monitoring program. Based on this information, officers were able to obtain a search warrant for a chicken processing plant in Mississippi – which was raided, along with several other worksites throughout the state, as part of a coordinated effort that led to the arrest of roughly 680 undocumented workers. As the Times reported at the time, this was the largest enforcement action carried out by the agency since 2006.

Protests against the government’s deportation efforts, like this one in Santa Barbara in January, have been held in the past weeks in the US. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

Mora told Posteo that facial recognition and tools for monitoring social media were among the most worrying technologies used by authorities.

According to the New York Times, ICE officers also have access to data sets sold by private data brokers. These could also be used to track down individuals.

Search for additional surveillance technologies

Nor do the authorities’ attempts to arm themselves with technology seem to end here: last year, for example, a contract between ICE and the Israeli software developer Paragon drew criticism. Though the Biden administration later decided to place the contract under review, its current status is unclear.

Wired Magazine also reported last November that just hours after Donald Trump’s election victory, ICE put out a call for contracts for new surveillance technologies.

Citlaly Mora told Posteo that Just Futures Law would continue to use legal strategies to counter new forms of surveillance. “Community members should have a tailored plan based on the risks they face and what data is most sensitive to them,” Mora said. “In this day and age, digital security is important to keep yourself as secure as possible.”

As part of its hardline immigration policy, the Trump administration also plans to keep people from entering the country. The administration shut down an app which asylum seekers were required to use to book appointments at the border. Though the app was highly controversial, suspending its use put thousands of asylum seekers in limbo. Several executive orders have also made it more difficult for people to claim asylum – civil liberties advocates are already challenging the directives.

The use of technologies at the US-Mexican border in particular could be expanded. In one of many executive orders, the new US president promises “to marshal all available resources and authorities” to prevent the entry of “illegal aliens” into the United States. The order explicitly calls for the use of technology to monitor the border. (js)

BBC investigation: AI chatbots produce false news summaries

2025-02-13T14:28:00+01:00

Chatbots frequently provide false information when asked about the news – claiming for example that former prime ministers are still in office. A new investigation by the BBC shows how inaccurate chatbots’ responses can be.

Last year the BBC raised concerns with Apple after the company’s software generated an erroneous notification and attributed it to BBC news. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

The BBC has tested how good so-called chatbots are at answering questions about the news. The result: more than half the time, chatbots’ answers had “significant issues.” The programs had problems distinguishing between facts and opinions, among other concerns.

The BBC tested four programs: OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Microsoft’s Copilot, Google’s Gemini, and Perplexity, made by the company of that same name. Each of the four chatbots is powered by so-called artificial intelligence (AI). Users can ask the tools questions in normal conversational language.

For its investigation, the BBC’s researchers asked each chatbot 100 questions about the news, instructing them to use the BBC as a source where possible. The broadcaster normally blocks chatbots from accessing its articles – but for the purpose of the investigation these restrictions were temporarily lifted.

The chatbots’ answers were analyzed by BBC journalists and rated according to seven criteria – including accuracy, attribution of sources, and the ability to distinguish fact from opinion. The journalists determined that 91 percent of answers contained at least “some issues,” while 51 percent had “significant issues.” The answers gave inaccurate dates or misstated facts. All the responses were included in the analysis, even if the chatbots didn’t use the BBC as a source.

Gemini, for example, claimed that Britain’s National Health Service (NHS) advised against vaping or using e-cigarettes for those who want to quit smoking. “In fact,” the BBC wrote in its analysis, “the NHS does recommend vaping as a method to quit smoking.” The BBC article cited by Gemini even stated that the NHS offers free vape kits for adults.

Microsoft’s Copilot, meanwhile, gave erroneous information in response to the question of how Gisèle Pelicot found out about the crimes committed against her – even though the BBC article cited by the chatbot as a source contained the correct information.

Chatbots take information from old articles

All four chatbots were prompted to use the BBC as a source. Nevertheless, the investigation found that the choice of sources used frequently led to mistakes. For example, the programs took information from live pages used during breaking news events that had since gone out of date. This led for example to claims that former British prime minister Rishi Sunak and former Scottish first minister Nicola Sturgeon were still in office.

Copilot referred to a BBC live page from 2022 and claimed that Sturgeon had recently launched “a fresh campaign” for a Scottish independence referendum.

With the exception of ChatGPT, all the chatbots had problems with quotes, either altering original quotes from BBC articles or using quotes not present in the article they cited.

Perplexity gave the wrong date for the death of BBC broadcaster Michael Mosley. The program also claimed that boy band singer Liam Payne died in 2023 – in fact he died in 2024.

Confusing fact and opinion

The chatbots also had trouble distinguishing between fact and opinion and struggled to handle context, the BBC’s investigation found. In 23 instances, BBC commentators’ opinions were presented as fact. More than half of these instances came in answers from Perplexity.

Another answer presented an interest group’s criticism as part of a parliamentary inquiry report, rather than commentary related to the inquiry. In other instances, sources covering hearings in official inquiries were falsely presented as findings.

In the BBC’s assessment, chatbots “have significant issues with basic factual accuracy.” The investigation concludes with a consideration of the consequences. “The BBC reports on conflicts and natural disasters, elections, and health and medical stories.” On these topics in particular, “Errors, like those shown in this report, could cause immediate harm.”

Playing with fire

“We live in troubled times,” Deborah Turness, CEO of BBC News and Current Affairs, said in a statement. “[H]ow long will it be before an AI-distorted headline causes significant real world harm?” The companies behind generative AI, she said, “are playing with fire.”

The BBC was itself using AI tools, Turness said, though she declined to specify what those tools might be. Regardless, the benefits of AI, she said, must not come at the expense of accuracy. People must not be “served distorted, defective content that presents itself as fact.” This “could undermine people’s already fragile faith in facts and verified information.”

This isn’t the first time that the BBC has criticized AI-powered news summaries: in December of last year, the broadcaster complained to Apple after the company’s Apple Intelligence feature generated a headline for a BBC article stating incorrectly that the suspect in a murder case in the US had shot himself – he had not.

A spokesperson for the BBC said at the time: “It is essential to us that our audiences can trust any information or journalism published in our name.”

Apple suspended its news summary feature last month.

In her statement earlier this week, BBC CEO Turness praised Apple for taking the problem seriously – and invited other tech firms to do the same, offering to lead a conversation between tech companies and the BBC and other news outlets to find solutions. Until then, however, she suggested that developers of AI chatbots should follow Apple’s lead and stop offering news summaries. (js)

Saudi Arabia: Woman imprisoned for online activity freed

2025-02-12T08:13:00+01:00

A Saudi Arabian woman has been released after spending several years in prison for statements she made online. She had been serving a decades-long sentence.

Salma al-Shehab’s sentence was first increased, then reduced several times. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

Salma al-Shehab has been released from prison in Saudi Arabia. She had been sentenced to 34 years in prison for sharing posts by women’s rights activists on Twitter (now X). In recent years, several cases have come to light of people in Saudi Arabia receiving harsh sentences for expressing opinions online.

The human rights organizations ALQST and Amnesty International announced on Monday that the 36-year-old had been released – ending four years of “arbitrary imprisonment,” ALQST wrote.

Dana Ahmed of Amnesty International said in a statement that al-Shehab had had to spend nearly 300 days in solitary confinement and was denied legal representation. “All just because she tweeted in support of women’s rights and retweeted Saudi women’s rights activists,” Ahmed said.

Prior to her imprisonment, Al-Shehab lived in the UK, where she was a PhD student at the University of Leeds. In January 2021, while on vacation in Saudi Arabia, she was arrested, interrogated, and finally indicted. The reason was her Twitter activity.

Advocating for women’s rights

Al-Shehab had shared posts by activists on the platform and published posts of her own. Among other things she had supported the call to end the Saudi system of male guardianship over women. In a tweet from 2020 she had called for “Freedom for the inmates of patriarchy.”

She had also retweeted posts in support of prominent women’s rights activist Loujain Al-Hathloul, who in 2018 was abducted from the United Arab Emirates, deported to Saudi Arabia and sentenced there in 2020 to nearly six years in prison. Al-Hathloul had advocated for several causes including an end to the ban on women driving in Saudi Arabia. In February 2021 she was released on parole – but is barred from leaving the country.

Salma al-Shehab was convicted on the basis of her Twitter activity, but after conviction her sentence was changed several times. First a Saudi court sentenced her to six years in prison. On appeal, however, the prosecution demanded a harsher penalty and her prison term was increased to 34 years. The court also imposed an additional 34-year travel ban.

Among other charges, the prosecution accused al-Shehab of “destabiliz[ing] the security of society and the stability of the state.” She was also convicted of “spreading false and malicious rumors on Twitter.” According to the Gulf Centre for Human Rights, she was sentenced under a Saudi anti-terrorism law and a law meant to combat cybercrime.

Al-Shehab’s sentence was reportedly one of the longest prison sentences ever imposed in Saudi Arabia for the exercise of the right to free speech. In 2023 a UN working group classified her imprisonment as arbitrary and demanded her release.

Another sentence reduction in 2025

In a separate appeal in January 2023, al-Shehab’s sentence was reduced to 27 years.

Then, last month, ALQST and other human rights organizations reported that her sentence had been reduced yet again, to four years, with an additional four years suspended. In announcing the reduction, the organizations stated that they expected al-Shehab’s release in the coming days.

ALQST now demands that al-Shehab’s freedom to travel be restored so that she can finish her studies in the UK. Dana Ahmed from Amnesty International makes the same demand: “Saudi Arabia’s authorities must now ensure she is not subjected to a travel ban or any further punitive measures.”

Saudi Arabia acting to suppress freedom of expression

Ahmed added that al-Shehab’s release was “also an opportunity to reflect on the many others serving similarly lengthy sentences in Saudi Arabia for their activities online.”

Nourah al-Qahtani, for example, was sentenced to 45 years in prison in 2022 for her activity on Twitter. Al-Qahtani is alleged to have published posts critical of the government using an anonymous account – though how this account was linked to al-Qahtani is unknown.

In 2023, in an even more egregious case, Mohammed al-Ghamdi was sentenced to death. In his trial before the Specialized Criminal Court, tweets in which al-Ghamdi voiced criticism of the Saudi royal family and Saudi foreign policy were presented as evidence. Last year the death sentence was commuted to a 30-year prison sentence.

Al-Ghamdi’s brother Asaad al-Ghamdi was sentenced last year to 20 years in prison, also for tweets critical of the government.

Last year the conviction of Manahel al-Otaibi also came to light. Al-Otaibi had expressed support for women’s rights on social media – and was sentenced to eleven years in prison for alleged “terrorist offenses.” While in prison, she has been subjected to physical and psychological abuse, according to Amnesty International.

Human rights organizations have long raised concerns about the Saudi authorities’ efforts to suppress freedom of expression, as well as the country’s practice of convicting defendants in unfair trials. The Specialized Criminal Court, for instance, was ostensibly established for trying terrorism cases – but has condemned several individuals merely for voicing opinions.

In recent years, some limits on women’s freedom have been lifted in Saudi Arabia – but according to human rights groups, discrimination against women continues in the country. (js)

China: Criticism of proposed internet ID

2025-02-06T15:20:00+01:00

Under a proposed measure, Chinese internet users would have to use a government-issued ID number to register for internet platforms. Experts warn this would expand state censorship.

The Chinese government already maintains a comprehensive system of censorship and surveillance online. Under current measures, for instance, many foreign websites are blocked. (Source: IMAGO / Depositphotos)

Internet users in China will soon need to obtain a personal digital identification number from the state in order to register for platforms online. The human rights organizations Article 19 and Chinese Human Rights Defenders (CHRD) warn that the measure will expand government surveillance and further limit the right to freedom of expression in the country. Use of the internet ID is ostensibly voluntary, but the groups express doubt as to whether it will be in practice.

The plan to introduce the internet ID is outlined in a draft provision, the Management Measure on National Network Identity Authentication Public Service, that was first announced last year. The Chinese government already has comprehensive measures in place to monitor and censor the internet in the country. Users in China must register for websites using their mobile phone number, which is linked to their personal ID card. Up to now, however, individual websites have been responsible for verifying users’ identities.

In the future, users will need to register through an app developed by the Ministry of Public Security. Registration requires users to present their national identification card and have their identity verified through facial recognition. After registering, users receive a “web number” and “web certificate,” which can then be used to access public services and internet platforms.

The measure has not yet become law – but several public service platforms and more than 70 commercial apps have already begun using the new system on a trial basis. These include prominent services like the widely used messaging app WeChat, the social media platform Xiaohongshu (known outside of China as RedNote) and the online marketplace Taobao, owned by Alibaba.

State control

In an analysis of the draft provision published on Wednesday, Article 19 and CHRD warn that the internet ID will enable the Chinese government to further tighten its control over the internet in the country. The measure would allow the authorities to follow the “digital trail” of each of the country’s roughly 1.1 billion internet users.

The authorities justify imposition of the proposed internet ID with claims that it will improve privacy protection. In fact, the measure would further erode anonymity online, argue Article 19 and CHRD – building on so-called real-name regulations first imposed in the 2017 Cybersecurity Law. Under these regulations, users are required to use their real names when registering for platforms online.

According to the organizations’ analysis, the draft provision further expands this requirement. Each individual’s internet ID is linked to their national ID number, photo and other personal information. This data is centrally stored on government servers, meaning that users can be easily identified and tracked. The centralized storage raises questions both with regard to surveillance and to cybersecurity, given that such information could be a target of cyberattacks.

Journalists whose reporting is critical of the government would face the greatest difficulties under the new system, as would activists and lawyers. The internet ID would allow the authorities to more easily monitor their activities across various platforms. CHRD and Article 19 fear that this could lead to more self-censorship.

By the same token, the measure would also make it easier for the authorities themselves to expand censorship. Users could be blocked from several platforms at once, simply by blocking their internet ID.

As the Chinese journalist Franka Lu explained last year in an article for Zeit Online, under the current system, users who are blocked from one platform often simply register with another. It’s also possible for those who have been blocked to use someone else’s phone number to register with a platform.

Silencing critical voices

Shane Yi of CHRD said in a statement that Chinese citizens “face gradually tightening restrictions in the online space.” The proposed internet ID measure represents a new level of restrictions, “expanding state control over user identity and making it easier than ever to silence dissent.”

What’s more, according to CHRD and Article 19’s analysis, China is also attempting to widen its control beyond its borders. According to the draft provision, eligibility for registration extends to Chinese citizens whose place of residence lies outside mainland China. Residents of Hong Kong and Macau – both territories classified as Special Administrative Regions – will be able to register for an internet ID as well. The authors of the analysis fear that Chinese authorities could use the new measure to gather information on activists in those territories.

The analysis’s authors argue that the proposed measure is incompatible with international human rights law, “in particular the rights to freedom of opinion and expression and privacy.” China’s current internet regulation legislation “is fundamentally in tension with human rights standards” – the new law would only worsen matters. CHRD and Article 19 therefore call on the UN Human Rights Council’s Special Procedures body to urge China to bring its laws in alignment with human rights standards – and, among other steps, to “repeal any legislation that could undermine online anonymity.”

Ostensibly voluntary

The draft provision stipulates that use of the new identification number is voluntary. Article 19 and CHRD express skepticism, however, noting that numerous government authorities are “explicitly tasked” with “promoting and supervising the measure’s implementation.” It is therefore likely, they argue, that users will ultimately be forced to register for an internet ID – or risk being unable to access public services. The authorities would in turn have the power to revoke single identification numbers and thus prevent certain individuals from using online services.

The proposed law has drawn criticism since it was first announced last year – including in China. Lao Dongyan, a legal scholar at Tsinghua University, publicly criticized the proposed measure, stating that the government’s goal was to monitor users’ online activities. In response, her account on the platform Weibo was blocked – search queries on the subject were also blocked. According to Article 19 and CHRD, critical comments by other experts have been scrubbed in similar fashion.

Writing in Zeit Online, Franka Lu also criticized the draft provision. The measure would make it more difficult for Chinese citizens to state their views online, she wrote. Up to now, there have always been certain loopholes allowing those who want to express critical views to do so online. The internet ID would close these loopholes. Critical voices could be banned from all platforms – echoing a similar measure tested during the Covid19 lockdown.

Lu, writing under a pseudonym, warned that the internet ID would also make it possible to set up a comprehensive rating system to classify users as “good” or “bad.” Because the internet and smartphones are nearly indispensable in China, it’s unlikely that anyone would let anyone else use their internet ID if it were linked to a state rating system.

And the journalist raised yet another concern: it could become more difficult to gain access to information in China from abroad. Even today many platforms were only accessible to those with a Chinese cell phone number. With the introduction of the internet ID, anyone seeking access would need to enlist the help of a Chinese contact person. In Yu’s view, this is the government’s goal: to exercise ever greater control over the flow of information. (js)

WhatsApp users targeted by spyware

2025-02-06T08:05:00+01:00

WhatsApp users, including journalists, were targeted by spyware made by Paragon Solutions. WhatsApp is weighing legal action against the company.

An Italian investigative journalist has come forward and identified himself as one of the victims. (Source: IMAGO / NurPhoto)

90 WhatsApp users were victims of a hack using spyware developed by Paragon Solutions. Those targeted include journalists and members of civil society, WhatsApp announced last week.

The company has not disclosed further details on the identities of those targeted. A spokesperson for WhatsApp told Reuters that the attacks were directed at individuals in more than two dozen countries. Victims’ devices were potentially compromised, meaning the attackers may have gained access to chats and other data – WhatsApp directs victims to the Canadian internet watchdog Citizen Lab, which has searched devices for evidence of spyware infiltration in the past.

Soon after the attacks became public, the Guardian reported that the Italian investigative journalist Francesco Cancellato was among the WhatsApp users targeted. Cancellato is editor-in-chief of the news site Fanpage, which last year published an investigation showing members of the youth organization of the ruling party, Fratelli d’Italia, using fascist chants and slogans.

The individuals targeted were sent a malicious PDF that gave the attackers access to their smartphones without any action on the victims’ part – a so-called “zero-click attack.”

As the Guardian reports, WhatsApp is currently alerting those impacted by the hack. The attacks were discovered in December and subsequently disrupted.

Paragon spyware

The spyware allegedly used in the attacks is a product of the Israeli company Paragon Solutions. According to the Guardian, the company sells its products exclusively to government clients – WhatsApp has not been able to determine who used the spyware against the 90 targeted individuals.

The Guardian cites a person close to Paragon who told the paper that the company “had 35 government customers, that all of them could be considered democratic, and that Paragon did not do business with countries, including some democracies, that have previously been accused of abusing spyware.” These countries, according to the source, include Greece, Poland, Hungary, Mexico and India.

Paragon’s spyware is known under the name Graphite. It has capabilities similar to the controversial Pegasus spyware developed by NSO Group, another Israeli company: for example, attackers using the tool can gain full access to a device and read an individuals chat histories and other data.

In December 2022, the New York Times reported that the US Drug Enforcement Agency used Graphite.

Wired Magazine also reported in October 2024 on a contract between the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency and Paragon. This prompted criticism from Human Rights Watch (HRW) – not least because, as HRW alleges, the agency has been “linked to human rights abuses.” Soon after Wired’s report appeared, the Biden administration placed the contract under review in order to determine whether it complies with guidelines governing the use of spyware by US agencies. Paragon has a US office in the state of Virginia.

Last year there were reports that the company, which was founded by former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak, had been sold to a US-based private equity firm. According to the Guardian, it is not clear whether the purchase has been finalized.

Criticism of the spyware industry

Natalia Krapiva of Access Now told the Guardian: “For some time Paragon has had the reputation of a ‘better’ spyware company not implicated in obvious abuses, but WhatsApp’s recent revelations suggest otherwise. This is not just a question of some bad apples – these types of abuses are a feature of the commercial spyware industry.”

John Scott-Railton of Citizen Lab, which has exposed several past instances of spyware abuse, told Reuters that this latest incident “is a reminder that mercenary spyware continues to proliferate.”

Paragon did not respond to inquiries from multiple media outlets.

A legal victory for WhatsApp

WhatsApp sent the company a cease-and-desist order – and is now exploring further legal options.

Last December, WhatsApp won a legal victory against Pegasus developer NSO group: a California court ruled that NSO was responsible for attacks on 1,400 WhatsApp users in 2019. The victims in the attacks included members of the press, lawyers, dissidents, human rights activists, diplomats, and government officials.

Who was behind the 2019 attacks is unclear. What is known is that the attackers exploited a vulnerability in WhatsApp’s security infrastructure to infect smartphones with Pegasus. This prompted WhatsApp to file suit against NSO Group. The spyware developer tried several times to have the case dismissed.

Under the administration of President Joe Biden, the US government imposed sanctions on NSO Group, whose spyware has been linked repeatedly to human rights abuses. So far these sanctions are still in effect under the new presidential administration. The Biden administration imposed sanctions on other spyware developers as well – but Paragon Solutions was not one of them. (js)

Pakistan: Criticism of fake news law

2025-01-30T08:14:00+01:00

New cybercrime legislation in Pakistan criminalizes the spreading of false information on social media. Critics see the measure as an attempt to limit freedom of expression.

Press freedom in Pakistan is already in an embattled state. (Source: MAGO / Zoonar)

Spreading allegedly fake news on social media is now a criminal offense in Pakistan. President Asif Ali Zardari signed off on amendments to a cybercrime law on Wednesday, making the change official. Press unions, human rights organizations and the political opposition have sharply criticized the new legislation.

The amendments alter an existing law, the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA), which has faced criticism since it first passed in 2016. The new amendments make it a crime for someone to “intentionally” disseminate information “that he knows or has reason to believe to be false or fake and likely to cause or create a sense of fear, panic or disorder or unrest” among the general public.

Social media users could now face a punishment of up to three years in prison. Offenses also carry a potential fine of up to 2 million rupees (about $7,000) that may be imposed in addition to prison time.

Authorities empowered to block content

The Pakistani newspaper Dawn reports that the amendments propose the creation of a new agency to investigate “illegal activities” on social media. The legislation also establishes the Social Media Protection and Regulatory Authority, whose chairman “will have the power to order the immediate blocking of any unlawful content on social media,” Dawn reports. The authority will be able to block content deemed to target members of the Pakistani armed forces, judiciary, or parliament.

Last week Pakistan’s National Assembly, the lower house of parliament, passed the amendments – with debate over the legislation reportedly lasting just 15 minutes. On Tuesday the Senate followed suit. Finally, on Wednesday, President Zardari signed the amendments, clearing the way for them to become law.

During the votes in the Senate and the National Assembly, journalists in the press gallery staged a walkout – and called on the president to refuse to sign the legislation.

No consultation with journalists

Afzal Butt, the president of Pakistan’s largest journalist union, criticized lawmakers for failing to consult press organizations in drafting the legislation. “We also are in favor of regulations,” Butt said, but “a law enforcement agency or a police officer can’t decide what is false or fake news.”

The union has called for protests against the new legislation. According to reports, members of the press answered this call in several cities, beginning on Tuesday. Photos show some protesters wrapping themselves in chains.

Several Pakistani media groups expressed concern that the law could be used to criminalize criticism of state institutions.

Representatives of the opposition PTI, the party of imprisoned former prime minister Imran Khan, criticized the rushed passage of the amendments and voiced fears that they could be used to target PTI members.

Constraints on press freedom

Beh Lih Yi of the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) called the new legislation “deeply concerning.” In a statement published after the Senate passed the amendments, Yi said: “While on its face, the law seeks to tamp down the spread of false news, if signed into law it will disproportionately curtail freedom of speech in Pakistan.”

Usama Khilji, director of the Pakistani digital rights advocacy group Bolo Bhi, published an opinion piece in Dawn, the Pakistani newspaper, criticizing what he calls a “disproportionate criminalization of speech” which “is bound to have a chilling effect.” The vague wording of the law “leaves plenty of room for abuse,” he writes.

Babu Ram Pant of Amnesty International responded to the National Assembly’s passage of the legislation last week, stating that the law “will further tighten the government’s grip over Pakistan’s heavily controlled digital landscape.” Given past use of PECA to “silence dissent,” Pant wrote, there is reason to fear that the “vague and ambiguous framing” of the provision against spreading fake news will be used to suppress online speech.

The new amendments, by granting authorities the power to block content with only vague justification, “violate the right to freedom of expression and fail to meet standards of proportionality and necessity under international human rights law.”

Pant also criticized the law’s passage in the assembly without “any consultation or debate.” Amnesty International calls on legislators to immediately withdraw the amendments “and instead engage in a meaningful consultative process with civil society to amend PECA to bring it in line with international human rights law.”

Long-standing criticism of law

The Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act was first passed in 2016. It immediately faced strong criticism from human rights organization based on its potentially negative impact on the rights to free speech and access to information. According to Amnesty International, these initial fears have been confirmed: prosecutors have used the law to target journalists, human rights advocates and members of the political opposition.

Pakistan is ranked 152nd out of 180 countries on the World Press Freedom Index published by Reporters without Borders (RSF). According to RSF, media in the country are constrained above all by the powerful military and intelligence agencies. Even indirect criticism of the military can prompt “retaliation” from the army. Media organizations that publish critical coverage also face censorship.

RSF also reports that PECA is used by authorities “more to restrict online freedom of expression than to crack down on online crime.”

In February 2024 Pakistani authorities blocked access to the online encyclopedia Wikipedia. The official reason for the shutdown was allegedly “blasphemous content” published on the website.

After the contested election in 2024 the authorities also blocked the social media platform X (formerly Twitter). According to Amnesty International, the platform continues to be blocked in Pakistan. Local media report that a judicial hearing on the shutdown is scheduled for February. (js)

US: Extent of healthcare data breach greater than previously known

2025-01-29T08:13:00+01:00

Last year hackers stole patient data from a US healthcare service provider. The company has now revealed the number of patients impacted by the theft to be 190 million.

The incident occurred in February 2024 – and has still not been fully resolved. (Source: IMAGO / Newscom / GDA)

A cyberattack on the US company Change Healthcare resulted in the theft of healthcare data from significantly more people than was previously known. The company has now confirmed that roughly 190 million individuals in the US were affected by the data theft. The breach occurred nearly a year ago.

A spokesperson for Change Healthcare’s parent company UnitedHealth Group told the news site TechCrunch that the company now believes the number to be 190 million. The final number will be confirmed at a later date and related to the Office for Civil Rights (OCR), the spokesperson said.

Last October, in a previous filing with the OCR, which is part of the US Department of Health and Human Services, the company estimated the number to be significantly lower, at 100 million individuals affected.

Change Healthcare is one of the largest processors of healthcare claims in the US. Pharmacies rely on the company to determine whether certain drugs are covered under patients’ insurance plans and to calculate the out-of-pocket costs of those drugs. The company reportedly processes roughly half of all healthcare transactions in the US.

The attack on Change Healthcare’s computer network occurred in February 2024 – according to TechCrunch, it was the largest theft of medical data in US history.

Sensitive data

Hackers were able to steal a wealth of information, including medical records like diagnoses, test results, images, and details of care and treatment. Health insurance information was also stolen, including policy numbers and billing information.

Those behind the attack gained access to individuals’ full names, mailing addresses, phone numbers, email addresses and dates of birth. In some cases Social Security numbers and driver’s license numbers were stolen, as well as information from other government ID documents. Information of this sort can be used to commit identity theft.

The attack triggered months-long outages and massive disruptions across the US health sector. Many pharmacies were unable to determine if patients’ insurance plans covered their medications. Patients had to decide whether to bear the full cost of their medication or forego treatment. The attack also caused disruptions at US military hospitals and pharmacies around the world.

The group thought to be behind the attack is known as AlphV or BlackCat. The US State Department has offered a $10 million reward for information related to the group’s membership.

Earlier in its investigation, UnitedHealth Group stated that members of the group behind the attack were able to break in to Change Healthcare’s systems by using stolen login credentials – the systems did not require multi-factor authentication. After gaining access, the hackers copied data and installed ransomware.

In a ransomware attack, criminals typically demand a ransom in exchange for restoring access to encrypted data. Paying the ransom doesn’t guarantee however that the blackmailers will decline to publish the data they stole or restore access. UnitedHealth Group has admitted to paying the hackers behind last year’s breach – but according to reports, some of the stolen data has since been published.

Targeting healthcare systems

Cybersecurity experts told Wired magazine in April 2024 that even though UnitedHealth Group had paid the attackers, there was still a risk of patient data being published. They also feared that the payment would encourage other criminal groups to target the healthcare sector.

According to the US Department of Health and Human Services, in 2023 more than 88 million people in the US were affected by data breaches in the healthcare system. The agency is currently investigating a host of security incidents – including several that occurred in the first weeks of 2025.

In recent days a case in Denmark has also come to light. Late last year, hackers stole data from the company Alles Lægehus, which operates medical facilities in the country. The stolen data included names and phone numbers, as well as CPR numbers. This civil registration number is required to claim health insurance in Denmark – and to perform any number of essential activities in the country, from opening a bank account to borrowing a book from the library. Given the risk of abuse, consumer advocates warn individuals not to disclose the number online. Medical files were also reportedly stolen in the attack.

How many people in Denmark were affected by the data breach is still unclear – 130,000 patients are registered with the company. According to reports, data has already been published.

This month in Germany marked the beginning of a program aimed at creating an electronically accessible medical chart for all patients (“ePA für alle”). Each patient’s chart will contain important healthcare documents like medical reports and treatment records. Critics have expressed concern over several aspects of the program, including the fact that it calls for centralized storage of sensitive data – Deutsche Aidshilfe, an advocacy group, warns that a centralized database poses an attractive target for would-be attackers. (js)

South Sudan shuts down social media

2025-01-28T08:06:00+01:00

The government of South Sudan has ordered internet providers in the country to block access to social media. Human rights organizations warn that the move puts people’s safety at risk.

Facebook and TikTok are no longer accessible, according to reports – observers criticize the authorities for failing to name the platforms individually in their order. (Source: IMAGO / CFOTO)

Last week the South Sudanese government imposed a shutdown of Facebook and TikTok. The move came in response to unrest that broke out after violent videos appeared on the platforms. Human rights organizations warn that the measure denies people access to information at a time of crisis.

On January 22, the National Communication Authority (NCA), South Sudan’s telecommunications regulator, ordered internet service providers in the country to block access “to all social media accounts” for at least 30 days. According to the order, which was obtained by journalists, the shut down can be kept in effect for a maximum of 90 days. Internet service providers MTN and Zain have confirmed that Facebook and TikTok are no longer accessible on their networks.

In a press conference held last Thursday the head of the NCA clarified that the measure was targeted specifically at the two platforms. He also floated the possibility of lifting the ban within days. But as the human rights organization Access Now reports in a press release updated on January 27, the shutdown is still in effect. Access Now and its partner organizations demand an end to the blockade.

Violence erupts

According to the authorities, the shutdown is intended to prevent the dissemination of videos that show alleged killings of South Sudanese citizens by the army in neighboring Sudan. Since April 2023, Sudan has been embroiled in a civil war between the army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces.

After the videos first appeared, violent unrest erupted in the South Sudanese capital of Juba and other parts of the country. According to media reports, the violence has resulted in at least 16 deaths. On January 17 the government imposed a nightly curfew – the internet shutdown order came days later.

Access Now and several other organizations criticize the shutdown. “These platforms are not solely for social communications, they are lifelines in times of crisis,” Access Now wrote in a press release. Blocking access not only limits freedom of expression, but also cuts people off from information about healthcare and emergency services.

Access Now and its partners also warn that internet shutdowns “impede the documentation of human rights abuses.”

Muthoki Mumo of the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) said in a statement: “Blocking social media access is a blanket act of censorship and a disproportionate response to unrest that makes it difficult for journalists to do their jobs and robs the public of the diverse sources of news.”

Disproportionate measures

Access Now stresses that internet shutdowns “contravene national and international legal frameworks.” The shutdown in South Sudan undermines the rights to freedom of expression and access to information guaranteed in the country’s constitution – rights that are also guaranteed in international agreements that the country has ratified. Internet shutdowns are “inherently disproportionate,” the organization writes, given that alternatives exist to help prevent the dissemination of certain types of content – like using content moderators, for example.

Internet service providers are also responsible for assessing the constitutionality of orders like this latest government directive, Access Now argues. The order refers vaguely to “social media sites” – but such terms must be precisely defined.

This is not the first time that South Sudan’s increasingly authoritarian government has blocked access to social media platforms. In 2021 Facebook and WhatsApp were shut down. On that occasion the measure was prompted by protests against the economic situation.

“Dramatic real-life effects”

Human rights experts at the United Nations have in the past sought to bring attention to the “dramatic real-life effects” of internet shutdowns. A 2022 report found that such measures always impact large numbers of people – and lead to “enormous collateral damage.” The report also cautions that internet shutdowns “directly put people’s safety and well-being at risk, for example, when they make it impossible to warn people against impending danger.”

Shutting down the internet can also impact aid deliveries – including in the war in Sudan. The International Rescue Committee (IRC) warns that the country is currently experiencing the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, as well as the world’s worst displacement crisis. According to the IRC’s Emergency Watchlist, published last month, the war has displaced roughly 11.4 million people inside the country’s borders. An additional three million have fled to neighboring countries like South Sudan. South Sudan became independent from Sudan in 2011.

South Sudan is also on the Emergency Watchlist. The country has suffered not only from the conflict to the north, but also from political instability and the climate crisis. People in South Sudan also face widespread violence and a severe economic crisis. Of the country’s 11.1 million inhabitants, 9.3 million are dependent on humanitarian support.

The IRC warns that the situation could deteriorate further in 2025 – among other causes of concern, the peace agreement that ended the civil war that lasted from 2013 to 2018 is set to expire in February.

According to human rights organizations, the government in South Sudan is severely limiting the rights to freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, and freedom of association. Journalists, activists, government critics and members of the political opposition are subject to intimidation and arbitrary imprisonment. The first elections since independence were meant to be held in December 2024 – but were postponed for an additional two years. (js)

UK: Advocates call for transparency in delivery service algorithms

2025-01-23T14:48:00+01:00

Unions and advocacy groups in the UK have called on delivery companies to explain their algorithms and the decisions they make. Delivery workers, they argue, must be able to understand the algorithms in case they need to challenge them.

Delivery services have repeatedly come under criticism for fostering poor working conditions. (Source: IMAGO / Pond5 Images)

Twelve British and European organizations have called on major food delivery services to improve transparency, urging the companies to explain the algorithms they use. Those who work making deliveries for the apps complain that their working lives are determined by systems that are scarcely comprehensible.

The organizations calling for changes include the UK-based Trades Union Congress and App Drivers and Couriers Union as well as the human rights organizations Privacy International and Amnesty International. In an open letter the groups appeal to the delivery platforms Uber Eats, Just Eat and Deliveroo – the market leaders in the UK and Ireland. As the Guardian reports, the 88,000 riders for Just Eat alone deliver 4.7 million orders a week.

Algorithms assign orders

Companies operating in the so-called gig economy assign jobs to workers on short notice via app. In their letter, the organizations criticize the use of “black box algorithms” to automatically make decisions on the allocation of delivery orders and even pay. Workers don’t receive sufficient explanation of these decisions, and as a result they can’t challenge them. The companies’ systems create “precarity, stress and misery” for delivery workers – who must also divulge a substantial amount of personal data to even be able to work.

The organizations call on the companies to first set up a public register of the algorithms they use. The register would include explanations in plain language of how these algorithms, which do everything from rating workers’ performance to allocating orders for them to fulfill, function in real terms.

Workers must also be given explanations as to why the companies’ systems make certain decisions – and how they can challenge them. This step would include connecting workers to human support staff.

Finally, the organizations call on the companies to allow workers, unions and public interest groups to test how the algorithms work. The platforms should also consider releasing the data they have used to train their systems.

Workers left “in the dark”

A representative for Deliveroo told the Guardian that riders could already find information about its algorithms on the company’s website. In cases where riders’ accounts are terminated, the decision is subject to review by a human staffer, the spokesperson said.

Just Eat told the newspaper that it maintained an “open dialogue” with its workers.

But, Jonah Mendelsohn from Privacy International told the Guardian, “Too often workers are left in the dark about the reasons why they have been fired, underpaid, or that they’ve been discriminated against as more and more decisions impacting them are made by algorithms.”

A “nightmare”

Delivery workers themselves also spoke with the Guardian and voiced criticism. The paper reports that some wonder why fellow riders who have just logged on to an app are immediately assigned orders, while others who have waited longer are passed over.

“It’s an absolute nightmare,” said one driver, who also spoke of the apps’ faulty facial recognition software, which he must use to identify himself. If the software doesn’t recognize him, he is sometimes logged out for hours – and receives no orders and no pay.

At other times he is given less pay per job, but is unable to challenge the discrepancy. “There’s nobody you can talk to,” he told the paper. “Everything is automated.”

The Guardian reports that the US state of Colorado recently passed laws requiring ride-sharing companies like Uber to explain the reasoning behind decisions to deactivate drivers’ accounts. Uber has challenged the legislation in court. Ride-sharing companies, like food delivery companies, also use an app to connect customers and workers.

In the UK the Supreme Court ruled in 2016 that Uber drivers were entitled to a minimum wage and holiday pay.

Facial recognition locks driver out of app

Uber Eats was sued in the UK in 2021 after the facial recognition tool in its driver app repeatedly failed to recognize a black worker and eventually locked him out of his account. The company first tried to have the case dismissed, but after the presiding judge rejected the motion, Uber Eats settled out of court, agreeing to pay the driver an undisclosed amount.

In November 2024 the Italian data protection authority imposed a fine on the Foodinho delivery service, ruling that its rider app had collected location data from riders and shared it with third parties without the riders’ knowledge.

The Italian regulator also determined that the company used automated systems to assign a so-called “Excellence Score” to riders. Based on this score, riders might be given preferential shift assignments. The practice failed to adhere to privacy guidelines however, because riders could not ask for a human review of the systems’ decisions.

The data watchdog had fined the delivery platform once before, in 2021, after finding that the company used algorithms to assign orders without ensuring their accuracy or fairness. In some cases the systems could decide that some riders would receive no orders at all – but the workers were unable to request a review of the process. (js)

US pulls out of Paris agreement on climate

2025-01-22T14:43:00+01:00

The incoming US presidential administration has decreed that the country will withdraw from the Paris Agreement. Scientists criticized the move.

In 2024 global average temperatures exceeded the crucial mark of 1.5 degrees Celsius. The goal set by the Paris Agreement applies to a longer timeframe, however – and thus in theory is still achievable. (Source: IMAGO / MediaPunch)

Incoming president Donald Trump has decreed that the United States will leave the Paris agreement on climate. Shortly after beginning his new term in office on Monday he signed a directive to be submitted to the United Nations. The US is the world’s second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases.

The Paris Agreement is a treaty binding under international law that was adopted in December 2015. The parties to the agreement committed themselves to the goal of limiting global warming to “well below” 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels – and to “pursuing efforts” to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius. In order to reach this goal, countries that ratified the agreement committed to reducing their greenhouse gas emissions, among other steps. The agreement also calls for industrialized countries to provide financial assistance to poorer nations to help these countries reduce emissions and adapt to climate change.

The US has left the agreement once before, during Trump’s first term in office. The decision was of short duration, however: the withdrawal officially went into force in November 2020 – but Trump’s successor Joe Biden reversed the decision and rejoined the agreement on his first day in office in January 2021. Almost every country in the world is party to the agreement. Only Yemen, Iran and Libya have not ratified it.

One-year withdrawal period

The decision to pull out of the agreement was issued as an executive order stating that the United States would consider its withdrawal to have gone into force immediately after notifying the United Nations. The agreement stipulates however that a party’s withdrawal from the agreement does not go into effect until a year after notification.

The United Nations responded by emphasizing the significance of the historic agreement. UN spokesperson Florencia Soto Niño said in a statement: “The collective efforts under the Paris Agreement have made a difference but we need to go much further and faster together. It is crucial that the United States remain a leader on environmental issues.”

The past ten years have been the hottest in recorded history, the UN spokesperson said. “We need look no farther than Los Angeles to see this human, ecological and economic disaster play out.” Devastating wildfires have spread throughout the Californian metropolis in the past weeks – more than 20 people have lost their lives.

Scientists voice criticism

Others criticized the US’s withdrawal from the climate agreement as well, including the US-based Union of Concerned Scientists. Rachel Cleetus, the group’s policy director, issued a statement characterizing the action as being “in clear defiance of scientific realities.” The order also shows the new US administration to be “cruelly indifferent to the harsh climate change impacts that people in the United States and around the world are experiencing.”

Cleetus continued: “The scientific imperative to address the climate crisis remains clear and necessitates urgent actions from US and global policymakers.” Cleetus referred to the fact that global average temperatures exceeded the 1.5 degrees Celsius mark for the first time in 2024. The United States is “the largest historical emitter of heat-trapping emissions” – and therefore obligated to do its part in averting the consequences of the climate crisis.

Laurence Tubiana, CEO of the European Climate Foundation and a lead negotiator of the Paris Agreement, told National Public Radio, a US broadcaster, that the country’s withdrawal from the agreement was “unfortunate” – but said the actions of the international community on climate are “stronger than any single country’s politics and policies.”

EU Climate Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra called the move a “truly unfortunate development.” Despite this setback, however, the EU remains “committed to working with the US and our international partners to address the pressing issue of climate change.” He added: “Every incremental increase in global temperatures will come with enormous costs, economically, socially but also in human lives.”

German climate activist Luisa Neubauer told the Deutsche Presse-Agentur (dpa): “The climate crisis doesn’t care whether an American president denies its existence or not. The crisis is there and endangers human lives every day – in the US and around the world.” She continued: “I expect the present and future German government to clearly distance itself from Trump’s idiotic action and respond like adults: with a clear statement in support of the Paris Agreement and even more emphasis on climate issues.”

The order signed by Trump also instructs the US Ambassador to the UN and the State and Treasury Departments to immediately cease or revoke financial commitments made by the US under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. The US International Climate Finance Plan, which commits financial support to countries particularly impacted by climate change, is likewise “revoked and rescinded immediately.”

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is a multilateral agreement that forms the basis for regular global climate conferences. It was under the auspices of these periodic conferences that the Paris Agreement was negotiated. Parties to the convention acknowledge that climate change is caused by humans and that human activities exacerbate global warming, which in turn endangers the ecosystem and humanity along with it. The convention is also a pledge to pursue international cooperation to come up with measures to slow this development. The convention places a higher degree of responsibility on developed countries – who commit to financially support poorer countries in meeting their obligations and achieving climate goals. The goal of the agreement is to stabilize the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere at a level that prevents a dangerous disruption of the climate.

Signing a slew of orders

Trump signed a slew of executive orders on Monday. One decree promotes oil and gas drilling in Alaska, reversing the previous administration’s policy prohibiting such activity on public lands in Alaska and in coastal waters. US media report that the action will likely be fought in court.

The new president also ordered the country’s withdrawal from the World Health Organization and declared a state of emergency on the border with Mexico, calling for the military to guard the frontier. (dpa / js)

Tunisia: Authorities use cybercrime decree to prosecute journalists

2025-01-21T08:11:00+01:00

The Tunisian government has increased its use of a controversial decree to jail journalists. Even social media posts critical of the government can lead to prison sentences.

Human rights organizations report that in 2024 the Tunisian government also intensified its crackdown on civil society groups. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

The government in Tunisia is stepping up its efforts to prosecute journalists. Many have been arrested for allegedly violating a law aimed at fighting cybercrime, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) reported last week. According to the CPJ, as of December 1, 2024, at least five journalists were imprisoned in the North African country – the highest number since the group began keeping track in 1992.

Four journalists currently in prison in Tunisia were sentenced for alleged violations of the controversial Decree 54, the CPJ reports. Comments the journalists had made on television or radio and posts they had made on social media formed the basis for the charges.

Members of the press in Tunisia argue that the government applies the decree in a targeted way to suppress investigative journalism and journalism critical of the authorities. Many have started practicing self-censorship out of fear of prosecution.

Ziad Debbar of the National Syndicate of Tunisian Journalists (SNJT), a trade union, told the CPJ: “Decree 54 has now turned every journalist into a suspect.” Members of the press, he said, “can be summoned for questioning at any time over anything they post online.”

Lofti Hajji, also of the SNJT, told CPJ that the decree “has been excessively applied to journalists, bloggers and political commentators in the media.” Hajji continued: “This has led to a huge decline in political television and radio programs that once in abundance offered in-depth analysis of current political issues.” Journalists were also hesitant to report about the decree itself, he said, for fear of prosecution.

Five years in prison for allegedly spreading fake news

Decree-Law no. 2022-54 on Combating Crimes Related to Information and Communication Systems makes it a crime to disseminate false news, with those convicted under the decree facing up to five years in prison and a fine. President Kais Saied issued the decree in 2022; critics say Saied has grown increasingly authoritarian since assuming power in 2019.

According to the CPJ, Tunisian authorities stepped up their harassment of journalists in the lead up to elections last October, arresting and charging prominent members of the press. Lawyer Sonia Dahmani, who also works as a political commentator, was sentenced to a year in prison for allegedly spreading fake news. The sentence was later reduced to eight months – but as the CPJ reports, Dahmani was tried again under the decree and sentenced to an additional two years.

Dahmani had appeared on a popular program aired by the private radio station IFM. The program’s moderators, Mourad Zghidi and Borhen Bsaies, were arrested the same day as Dahmani. As Amnesty International reported last year, citing the police report, officers questioned Zghidi about social media posts in which he had criticized President Saied – including a Facebook post he had written expressing support for a jailed investigative journalist. Zghidi’s interrogators also asked about critical comments he had made on his television and radio programs.

The CPJ reports that Zghidi and Bsaies were each sentenced to a year in prison for allegedly violating Decree 54. The journalists also face additional charges.

Journalists in Tunisia were once protected by a press law, Decree 115. But as the CPJ reports, the decree is no longer enforced, and the freedom of expression enshrined in Tunisia’s constitution is no longer respected. The country’s media regulator has also been forced to suspend activities.

Criticism of decree

Several rights groups sharply criticized Decree 54 when it was first issued in 2022 – and warned of increasing limits on press freedoms. Among the criticisms was that the law fails to define what counts as a rumor or as fake news. The groups feared that the terms could be applied broadly by the authorities as a way of prosecuting journalists, human rights advocates and opposition politicians.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) noted in 2023 that since it had gone into force, the decree had been used to intimidate critics. HRW reported on the first sentences handed down under the decree.

For years observers have warned that the democratic achievements of the past few years in Tunisia are increasingly in peril and that the country risks lapsing back into authoritarianism. In July 2022, a controversial new constitution was passed by referendum that places nearly all power in the hands of the president – granting him, for instance, the authority to appoint and fire judges and ministers. According to official statistics, turnout for the referendum was only about 30 percent – with the political opposition calling for voters to boycott the referendum.

According to the German Foreign Office, in October 2024 the government also began monitoring social networks more closely for “immoral content.” The heightened scrutiny is focused especially on Instagram and TikTok.

Last week, HRW reported that the Tunisian government had intensified its crackdown on critical voices in the country, targeting members of civil society groups and of the media who have spoken out against the president’s policies. As of November of last year, more than 80 people “were detained on political grounds or for exercising their rights.” Those detained include political opponents, lawyers, journalists, and human rights advocates – as well as ordinary social media users.

According to Reporters without Borders (RSF), following the revolution in 2011 a diverse media landscape emerged in Tunisia – but the climate in the country has significantly worsened since the election in 2019. Tunisia is ranked 118 of 180 countries on the RSF’s World Press Freedom Index. (js)

US: Police rely solely on facial recognition results

2025-01-16T14:50:00+01:00

Many US police departments rely on facial recognition systems when conducting investigations. According to a new report, some ignore their own guidelines for use of the technology.

To date at least eight people in the US have been arrested based on false facial recognition results. (Source: IMAGO / Newscom World)

Some police departments in the US rely solely on facial recognition technology to identify potential suspects. Their use of the technology sometimes replaces standard investigative methods – and fails to follow the departments’ own guidelines, the Washington Post reports. For those who are falsely accused of a crime, this can have far-reaching consequences.

As the Post reports, some US police departments see facial recognition as a kind of investigative shortcut – a tool that allows them to identify and arrest suspects even in the absence of corroborating evidence. According to the Post’s reporting, at least eight people in the US have been arrested to date after being falsely identified by the technology. In most cases the police could easily have established the person’s innocence, for example by checking their alibis or comparing distinctive physical features like tattoos.

The Post’s team of reporters requested records on the use of the controversial technology from more than 100 police departments in the US. 75 confirmed that they used facial recognition, and of these 75 some provided the journalists with additional records. Still, only 23 departments provided information which, according to the Post, was detailed enough to reconstruct their investigations. Of these 23, the Post found that 15 departments across 12 US states have arrested at least one person identified by facial recognition technology without gathering additional evidence – these include police in Austin, Detroit, Miami and St. Louis.

Blurry photo

In St. Louis, Missouri, officers were searching for two individuals who had assaulted a security guard. In the course of the investigation a photo taken by a surveillance camera was run through a facial recognition program. The photo was blurry and the face of the person in it was partially obscured by a hood and a surgical mask. Nevertheless, the software produced the names and photos of several individuals that the attacker supposedly resembled.

The Post reports that St. Louis’s facial recognition policy characterizes the results of the technology as “nonscientific.” The policy also warns that results “should not be used as the sole basis for any decision.” Despite these warnings, police began to focus their investigation on 29-year-old Christopher Gatlin, whom the software had suggested as a possible assailant.

Gatlin’s photo was shown to the victim of the assault, along with photos of five other individuals – even though the victim had said that, because of the injuries he sustained, he couldn’t remember what his attackers looked like. Eventually Gatlin’s photo was selected. As the Post reports – and as the lead detective on the case later admitted in court – the photo lineup was handled improperly. The detective influenced the victim’s selection.

Gatlin was subsequently arrested and spent more than a year in jail awaiting trial.

Facial recognition instead of DNA evidence

The Post is aware of eight cases in which individuals were arrested after being falsely identified by facial recognition programs. In each of these cases, police skipped basic steps in their investigations – and apparently viewed the matches generated by the software as fact. In six cases the police didn’t bother to check the suspects’ alibis – even though doing so would have confirmed that they could not have committed the crime they were accused of.

In two cases, police even ignored evidence that would have exonerated the suspect. The case of Nijeer Parks, who was arrested by police in Woodbridge, New Jersey in 2019 on suspicion of robbery, seems especially egregious. In this case, police had collected DNA and fingerprint evidence at the scene of the crime that “clearly pointed to another potential suspect,” the Post reports. Instead of pursuing this suspect, officers ran a blurry photo through facial recognition software and arrested Parks. Last year the police department paid Parks a settlement of $300,000 – but admitted no wrongdoing.

Facial recognition technology is frequently criticized for being unreliable. According to this latest report by the Post, the systems used by police function well in a lab setting when using high-quality comparison photos. But as Katie Kinsey from the NYU School of Law told the paper, there has been no independent testing of how the technology performs in real-world conditions – for example with blurry photos taken by surveillance cameras. These low-quality photos are the kind that police tend to use in their investigations.

Federal tests conducted in the US in 2019 showed that facial recognition software works best at identifying white men. When identifying black or Asian people, the failure rate was up to 100 times higher. In the cases investigated by the Post, seven of the eight people who were wrongfully arrested were black.

The one white man in the group was accused of cashing a fraudulent $36,000 check. He had been correctly identified by facial recognition software – but his arrest was still unjustified. He had merely been a customer at the bank on the day the crime was committed and had cashed a legitimate check for $1,500. The police checked neither his bank account nor the time stamp on the surveillance footage, nor did they search for any other evidence. Prosecutors eventually dropped the case.

Afraid of the police

Each of the falsely identified individuals told the Post that they had suffered negative consequences as a result of their wrongful arrest – some lost jobs, for example. Some said they had to seek counseling for their children, who had had to watch their parent being arrested. “Most said they also developed a fear of police,” the Post reports.

In the fall of 2024 the Post reported that US police rarely inform suspects of the use of facial recognition. By failing to do so they deprive them of the opportunity to dispute the results of the unreliable technology.

In the case of Christopher Gatlin from St. Louis, Gatlin’s public defender learned that police had used facial recognition in her client’s police report – and then began researching the technology. She was able to argue that the comparison photo used by the police didn’t fit the department’s own standards. The court also ruled that the victim’s identification of Gatlin was not permissible, given that the detective had improperly influenced his choice. Because there was no other evidence against him, the charges against Gatlin were dropped – now he is suing those responsible for his arrest. (js)

Canadian court upholds ruling that Clearview violated data privacy law

2025-01-14T14:58:00+01:00

A Canadian court has upheld a privacy regulator’s ruling against Clearview AI: the company must stop collecting images of residents of the province of British Columbia.

Canada’s top-ranking data privacy official accused Clearview in 2021 of engaging in mass surveillance. (Source: IMAGO / Dreamstime)

The controversial company Clearview AI must not collect images of residents of the Canadian province of British Columbia. The province’s Supreme Court has issued a ruling that upholds a 2021 decision by British Columbia’s Information and Privacy Commissioner.

Clearview collects photos of people online on a massive scale in order to use the images for facial recognition. The company claims its database contains more than 50 billion entries.

The company collects these images without obtaining the consent of the individuals pictured. British Columbia’s Information and Privacy Commissioner found in December 2021 that the company had violated Canada’s Personal Information Protection Act (PIPA). Clearview was ordered to delete all data that it had collected from residents of the province – and to stop collecting further data.

Court upholds ruling

Clearview attempted to fight the ruling in court. But the Supreme Court of British Columbia has now upheld the commissioner’s ruling, as the Canadian legal news site Lexpert reported last week.

As Lexpert reports, the US-based company marshaled several arguments, including that PIPA “should not apply to the company’s activities as a foreign entity.” The court rejected this and other arguments and affirmed that the Information and Privacy Commissioner did in fact have jurisdiction.

Clearview claims to sell access to its database only to government clients. Law enforcement agencies in Canada have used the company’s service in the past – but in summer 2020 the company stopped offering its service in the country. Clearview has stated that it intends to return to the Canadian market at a later date.

The Supreme Court has now found that Clearview’s voluntary exit from Canada does not exempt the company from regulatory oversight. Otherwise, the court reasoned, companies could resort to this tactic in the middle of an official investigation in order to avoid regulatory action – only to re-enter the market at a later date. Moreover, even after leaving the Canadian market, Clearview continued to collect data from individuals in Canada.

The company also claimed it did not require consent from individuals because the data it collected was “publicly available.” But on this point as well the court sided with the regulator, which found that, for example, information published on social media does not qualify as “publicly available” under PIPA.

Risk of data breaches

The court found further that Clearview could not claim a legal basis for collecting billions of images for its commercial facial recognition database. This practice also carries “significant” risk – in the event of a data breach, for example, the biometric data of billions of people could wind up in the wrong hands.

Clearview claimed in 2021 that it couldn’t determine whether a given photograph was taken in Canada or included likenesses of residents of Canada – and that, as a result, it could not delete photographs that met those criteria. But when imposing its ruling the Information and Privacy Commissioner pointed to a court proceeding in the US state of Illinois: in a filing in that case, the company had stated that it would exclude from its search results all images “that contain metadata associating them with Illinois” – and would also stop collecting such images. The court ruled that the company must now take the same measures for residents of British Columbia.

Illegal mass surveillance

The 2021 ruling by British Columbia’s Information and Privacy Commissioner was the result of a joint investigation with privacy regulators in other provinces as well as Canada’s top data privacy official, then-Privacy Commissioner Daniel Therrien. Therrien had voiced his criticism of the company earlier that year: “What Clearview does is mass surveillance and it is illegal.”

The commissioner in British Columbia had first issued recommendations. When Clearview failed to comply, the regulator followed up with a binding order.

Privacy regulators in the EU have also taken action against the company on several occasions. Most recently the Dutch data protection authority imposed a fine of €30.5 million after finding that Clearview had repeatedly violated the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

Data protection authorities in Italy, Greece and France are among the regulators that have imposed financial penalties on the company in recent years.

In Germany in March 2020, Johannes Caspar, at the time Hamburg’s Commissioner for Data Protection, opened an investigation into Clearview AI. The basis for the investigation was a complaint filed by an individual affected by the company’s practices who had demanded information from Clearview regarding his data. In August 2020 Caspar had ordered Clearview to delete the complainant’s biometric profile.

For Clearview, business as usual

When imposing its fine in September, the Dutch data protection authority stated its concern that despite being fined by several other countries on several occasions, Clearview seemed unwilling to change its conduct. In August of last year the Australian privacy regulator announced that it would stop attempting to enforce its 2021 ruling against the company. Like other regulators, the Australian authority had demanded that the company delete its data – but there was no evidence that Clearview had complied with the order.

Given Clearview’s refusal to comply with regulations, the Dutch data protection authority is currently investigating whether “the directors of the company can be held personally responsible” for its data privacy violations. (js)

Meta: Criticism of retreat from independent fact-checking

2025-01-09T14:46:00+01:00

Meta will end its partnerships with independent fact-checkers in the United States. Instead the platform will rely on users to flag false content – a move that has prompted sharp criticism.

Meta has worked with external fact-checkers since 2016. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

Meta is dispensing with independent fact-checking and introducing so-called “Community Notes” on Facebook, Instagram and Threads. The company will also change some of the guidelines for content on its platforms. Experts warn of a surge in disinformation and hate speech.

As Meta’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced on Tuesday, independent fact-checking by external partners will be replaced by a new feature called “Community Notes.” Users will be able to add context to “potentially misleading” posts. In making the change, Meta is following the example set by X, formerly known as Twitter. That platform shifted heavily toward its Community Notes feature after it was acquired by billionaire Elon Musk – who fired many of the company’s content moderators. X has been criticized for allowing more hate speech and right-wing extremist content since making the change.

The Community Notes feature will be introduced on Meta’s platforms in the coming months. Notes pointing users to additional information will be less visible: before now, to view posts flagged by fact-checkers, users had to first click through a notice before viewing the actual post. In the future, posts will appear as normal and be accompanied by a separate notice indicating that additional information is available. Users will have to take the additional step of clicking on this notice in order to access the information.

Zuckerberg also announced that limits on content related to certain topics like immigration will be lifted in the coming weeks.

The company will also change how it enforces its rules: in the future, Meta’s automated moderation systems will only target “illegal and high-severity violations” – content relating to terrorism and drugs, for example. For “less severe policy violations,” the company will only take action after users have reported an issue.

Years-long partnership with fact-checkers

Meta introduced independent fact-checking in 2016. After the election of Donald Trump that year the company had come under pressure for its role in the spread of misinformation – and responded by partnering with well-regarded external fact-checking organizations. These included the Associated Press, which ended its partnership with Facebook a year ago.

According to an article in Wired magazine, Meta’s current US partners were not warned in advance of Meta’s decision – and first learned that their partnerships with the company would be ending in Zuckerberg’s Tuesday announcement video.

US media outlets like the New York Times view the announcement as a “stark sign” of the company’s move to reposition itself in advance of Donald Trump’s second term as US president, which begins later this month. Though fact-checking organizations have explained repeatedly that they fact-check claims from all political camps, Republicans in the US have claimed that social networks censor “conservative voices.” After the announcement, Republican Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky said in a post on X that Meta “finally admits to censoring speech.” The change in policy was “a huge win for free speech.”

In the last week, Meta promoted Joel Kaplan – “the highest-ranking Meta executive closest to the Republican Party,” according to the New York Times – to a more prominent post and announced that Dana White, an ally of Donald Trump, would join its board. In his announcement on Tuesday Zuckerberg himself referred to the fact-checking on Meta’s platforms as “censorship.”

Neil Brown of the Poynter Institute sharply criticizes this charge. The institute founded the International Fact-Checking Network in 2015 and runs its own fact-checking outlet, PolitiFact, which counts Meta among its clients. Brown said of Zuckerberg’s statement, “It perpetuates a misunderstanding” of Meta’s own fact-checking program. “Facts are not censorship. Fact-checkers never censored anything.” Brown pointed out that Meta “sets its own tools and rules.” According to PolitiFact, the decision to remove content or not was always made by Facebook – not the external fact-checker.

Said Brown, “It’s time to quit invoking inflammatory and false language in describing the role of journalists and fact-checking.”

Criticism of the shift

The human rights organization Article 19 criticized Zuckerberg’s attempt to present the changes as a measure to protect freedom of expression – in reality, the company has revealed “a troubling willingness” to subordinate itself to a political agenda. Article 19 fears negative consequences for user safety and criticizes Meta for placing corporate interest over respect for human rights.

German internet policy journalist Markus Beckedahl wrote that Zuckerberg was “kowtowing” to Republicans.

Warnings of more false information

Experts also warn of the consequences of the planned changes. Alex Mahadevan of the Poynter Institute told the New York Times that he expected the introduction of Community Notes to be a “spectacular failure.”

Valerie Wirtschafter of the Brookings Institute, a think tank, told the newspaper that a feature like Community Notes can be “one piece of the puzzle” – but it can’t be seen as the whole solution.

Imran Ahmed, CEO of the Center for Countering Digital Hate, charged Meta with “turbocharging” the spread of lies and hate.

The US consumer advocacy group Public Citizen characterized the end of fact-checking as “wrong and dangerous.” “Misinformation will flow more freely with this policy change,” said co-president Lisa Gilbert in a statement.

Nicole Gill of the organization Accountable Tech warned that dispensing with external fact-checking would lead to a “surge of hate, disinformation and conspiracy theorists” on the platform – and could lead to real-world violence.

Only in the US, for now

Meta works with external fact-checkers outside the US as well. In Germany for example its partners include a subsidiary of the DPA news agency and the media company Correctiv.

In Europe these partnerships will apparently continue. Responding to a query from the news site Politico, Meta clarified that there were no plans to end its fact-checking practices in the EU. The company will review its obligations in the EU before making changes to its content moderation policy. (js)

US: Washington state files suit against T-Mobile after data breach

2025-01-08T08:05:00+01:00

The state of Washington has filed a lawsuit against the mobile provider T-Mobile US. The suit comes in response to a data breach that occurred in August 2021.

Attackers were able to steal customers’ sensitive data, including Social Security numbers. (Source: IMAGO / glasshouseimages)

The attorney general of the US state of Washington filed a consumer protection lawsuit against T-Mobile US on Monday. The filing accuses the US subsidiary of Deutsche Telekom of failing to sufficiently protect customer data against a cyberattack in 2021. The personal data of more than 79 million people was stolen in the attack.

Of those 79 million customers, more than two million are residents of Washington state, Attorney General Bob Ferguson announced in a press release. In the lawsuit Ferguson accuses the company of violating the state’s Consumer Protection Act. The attorney general is demanding compensation for those impacted by the data breach and calls on the court to require T-Mobile to improve its cybersecurity. With more than 120 million customers, the company is one of the largest mobile service providers in the United States.

The hackers behind the 2021 cyberattack were able to steal customers’ names, addresses, and dates of birth, among other information. Telephone numbers, driver’s license information, and Social Security numbers were also stolen. The hackers reportedly put some of this data up for sale.

Social Security numbers are especially sensitive because in the US they are used not only for tax purposes, but also as a form of identification. In the wrong hands, the numbers can be used to commit identity theft – a criminal with access to a person’s Social Security number could for example apply for a credit card in that person’s name.

Avoidable data theft

Washington’s attorney general accuses T-Mobile US of having neglected the security of its IT systems for years. The company knew of its vulnerabilities but failed to remedy them, the lawsuit charges. In a 2020 filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, for example – at a time when the company had already experienced numerous instances of data theft in preceding years – T-Mobile stated that it expected “to continue to be the target of cyber-attacks, data breaches, or security incidents.”

Nevertheless, in practice, the provider failed to adhere to its own cybersecurity policies. For instance, the company used “obvious passwords” for some of its systems – in 2021, attackers were able to simply guess some of these passwords in order to gain access to customer data. There was also no limit on the number of login attempts allowed. The data breach “was a direct result of T-Mobile’s lack of accountability,” the lawsuit states.

What’s more, because T-Mobile did not adequately monitor its own systems, hackers had continued access between March and August 2021 without the company’s knowledge. The company did not learn of the breach until it received an outside tip that its customers’ data was being sold online.

Attorney General Ferguson said in the press release: “This significant data breach was entirely avoidable. T-Mobile had years to fix key vulnerabilities in its cybersecurity systems – and it failed.”

The lawsuit characterizes the company’s response to the breach as inadequate as well. Customers were notified of the incident by text – but the notifications omitted legally required information. In some cases customers who were impacted by the breach were misled about its extent.

Customers whose Social Security numbers were stolen were not informed of this key detail, while customers who did receive such notifications had not in fact had their Social Security numbers stolen. Because they were not adequately informed, customers were not sufficiently able to assess the risk of potential identity theft.

A spokesperson for T-Mobile told the news site TechCrunch that the lawsuit was a “surprise.” The company is “open to further dialogue and welcome[s] the opportunity to resolve this issue.”

Repeated instances of customer data theft

Hackers have been able to steal data from the US mobile service provider in several different instances over the past few years. In August 2018, for example, information like the names, phone numbers, and email addresses of around two million customers were stolen.

Hackers were able to grab names and phone numbers again in November 2019. The company stated at the time that a “small number” of its prepaid customers were affected.

In 2022 there was yet another data breach. And again in January 2023 hackers were able to grab customers’ data – in this case roughly 37 million people were affected.

The FCC, a US regulator, investigated the data leaks in the years 2021, 2022, and 2023 and in September 2024 announced that T-Mobile had agreed to pay a penalty of $15.75 million. The company also committed to invest the same sum in the security of its IT systems. (js)

Reporters without Borders: Prominent journalists released from prison in 2024

2025-01-07T14:51:00+01:00

There were a number of success stories for press freedom in 2024: several prominent journalists were released from prison. Some however already face new charges.

The journalists Niloofar Hamedi and Elaheh Mohammadi (pictured) received a provisional release. As 2024 drew to a close, 550 members of the press were still detained worldwide. (Source: IMAGO / ABACAPRESS)

In many parts of the world, members of the press risk imprisonment for doing their work. In 2024 however a number of prominent journalists were released. The non-profit organization Reporters without Borders (RSF) sees this as a positive sign, despite new challenges to come in 2025: these cases show that fighting for press freedom pays off.

In January 2024 the Iranian journalists Niloofar Hamedi and Elaheh Mohammadi were released on bail. They had been among the first to report on the death of Mahsa Amini in the fall of 2022. Amini, a young Kurdish woman, died in custody after being arrested by the morality police – an event that set off massive protests against the Iranian government.

As a result of their work, the reporters were sentenced in October 2023 to more than ten years in prison. Speaking to Posteo at the time, RSF called the sentences “scandalous” – they showed how “vindictive the regime in Tehran” could be.

When the women were released in January, they had already spent several months in detention. A court had since reduced their sentences. But in October 2024 the Iranian judiciary declared its intention to force both women to serve out their remaining five-year sentences. According to RSF, since the beginning of the Woman, Life, Freedom movement, more than 100 journalists have been arrested in Iran; 18 of them are currently still in prison.

RSF reports that in March the Congolese journalist Stanis Bujakera was freed after six months in detention. The correspondent for the news magazine Jeune Afrique had been accused of “forging and disseminating” an allegedly false document. In convicting Bujakera, the authorities in the Democratic Republic of the Congo had tried to force him to reveal his journalistic sources. Human Rights Watch called his case politically motivated. After his release he urged Congolese journalists “not to give in to any pressure.”

In May, after nearly six years in prison, the Indian journalist Aasif Sultan was released on bail. Sultan, a journalist for the monthly Kashmir Narrator, works in the union territory of Jabbu and Kashmir – he had been accused of membership in a separatist group. RSF reports that colleagues and family members have disputed these accusations and suspect that he was arrested in response to his critical reporting. RSF criticizes the Indian authorities’ use of anti-terrorism laws to systematically harass independent journalists in the region – Aasif Sultan’s case is one example of this harassment.

Judicial tug of war

The release of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange in June garnered global attention. Assange’s release ended a judicial tug of war that had gone on for 14 years.

Julian Assange at the Council of Europe in Strasbourg in October. (Source: IMAGO / ABACAPRESS)

The US Justice Department had accused the Australian citizen of conspiring with whistleblower Chelsea Manning to steal and publish classified military documents in 2010. The US claimed that publication of the documents endangered national security. Assange had been imprisoned in the Belmarsh high-security prison in the UK for years while the US pressed for his extradition. British courts repeatedly denied US requests.

In the end Assange made a deal with the US and admitted to a charge of “conspiring to unlawfully obtain and disseminate classified national defense information.” He then went home to Australia.

Prisoner exchange

The release of Alsu Kurmasheva and Evan Gershkovich in August likewise drew substantial attention: The Russian-American journalist Kurmasheva and the American journalist Gershkovich were released from prison as part of a major prisoner exchange between Russia and several countries, including the US.

Gershkovich was arrested by Russian security forces in March 2023 and accused of espionage. The correspondent for the Wall Street Journal was subsequently sentenced to 16 years in prison.

Kurmasheva works for the US-funded international media organization Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and was sentenced to six and a half years in prison for allegedly spreading “false information” about the army.

In Burundi in August the radio host Floriane Irangabiye was pardoned and freed. She had been sentenced in January 2023 to ten years in prison for “endangering the integrity of the national territory.” According to RSF, Irangabiye was convicted on “trumped-up charges” relating to her broadcasts from neighboring Rwanda, which were often critical of the Burundian authorities.

Appeal in Guatemala

Finally, in October, José Rubén Zamora in Guatemala and Ihsane El Kadi in Algeria were released from prison.

José Rubén Zamora is the founder and publisher of the newspaper elPeriódico, which according to RSF spent two decades uncovering political corruption in Guatemala – before being forced to close in May 2023. In July 2022 Zamora was arrested on spurious charges of money laundering. He was sentenced to six years in prison after spending almost a year in pre-trial detention.

In October he was provisionally released to house arrest. Just a month later, however, this decision was revoked – a move criticized even by Guatemalan president Bernardo Arévalo. Zamora’s appeal is currently before Guatemala’s Supreme Court.

Ihsane El Kadi was freed after receiving a pardon from Algeria’s president. The director of Radio M and the news site Maghreb Émergent was accused of supporting organizations that threatened the government and security of Algeria. Despite his release, El Kadi was made to pay steep fines and his assets were confiscated. According to RSF, Radio M was forced to shut down in June.

Many journalists remain in prison

According to statistics collected by RSF, at the close of 2024 at least 550 journalists around the world were in prison because of their work – an increase of 7 percent compared to the previous year. China and Hong Kong had the largest number of imprisoned journalists (124).

Among them is the citizen journalist Zhang Zhan, who came to prominence through her reporting from the city of Wuhan at the start of the Covid-19 pandemic. She was arrested in May 2020 and later that year was sentenced to four years in prison. In May 2024 she was released – but then arrested again in August. According to Amnesty International she has been charged with “picking quarrels and provoking trouble.” This charge is often used as a pretense for arresting critics in China, according to RSF. Zhang Zhan now faces an additional five years in prison.

RSF expects 2025 to bring immense challenges for press freedom – but in highlighting these cases of journalists who were freed last year, the organization means to show that fighting for freedom of the press pays off. (js)

Northern Ireland: Police unlawfully spied on journalists

2024-12-23T08:13:00+01:00

Police in Northern Ireland broke the law by spying on two investigative journalists, a British court has ruled. Advocacy groups call the ruling a “landmark judgement.”

The journalists, Barry McCaffrey (left) and Trevor Birney (right), will each receive a financial settlement. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

Police in Northern Ireland waged an illegal surveillance campaign against journalists Trevor Birney and Barry McCaffrey, a British court ruled last week. The police had attempted to identify the reporters’ sources.

Britain’s Investigatory Powers Tribunal ruled that the surveillance authorization obtained by police violated the European Convention on Human Rights. The tribunal “is the only British court with the power to rule on covert surveillance operations by the intelligence agencies and police,” according to the Guardian. It awarded each journalist £4000 in damages.

Investigating the police

Birney and McCaffrey produced the 2017 documentary “No Stone Unturned.” The film examines an event known as the Loughinisland massacre: In 1994, members of a Unionist paramilitary group murdered six Catholics in a bar in Loughinisland. According to the filmmakers’ research, police at the time protected the murderers – to this day no one has been prosecuted.

In 2018, the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) arrested the two journalists and searched their homes and offices on suspicion that they had stolen police documents. These measures were declared illegal in 2019 – and the PSNI was made to pay the reporters a penalty in the amount of £875,000.

That same year, Birney and McCaffrey filed a complaint with the tribunal alleging that the 2018 search was “not the only attempt made to identify their confidential sources.”

Rights violated

As the BBC reports, the PSNI claimed before the tribunal that its surveillance operation was targeted only at an official working for the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, an independent public body responsible for exercising oversight over the police force. The Police Ombudsman had been conducting an investigation into the Loughinisland murders – and internal documents taken from this investigation appear in the film. The police sought to determine whether an official at the ombudsman’ s office was meeting with the journalists.

The court rejected this claim, however, ruling that Chief Constable Sir George Hamilton, then head of the PSNI, had failed to “consider whether there was an overriding public interest justifying an interference with the integrity of a journalistic source.” The journalists’ rights had been violated as a result of the surveillance.

During the proceedings the tribunal also determined that McCaffrey had been the target of unlawful surveillance on a previous occasion as well: London’s Metropolitan Police had requested the journalist’s phone records in 2012. The following year the PSNI asked for these records, after McCaffrey, who was investigating allegations of bribery against a senior police official, had contacted the PSNI’s press office.

The phone records request also targeted Vincent Kearney, a journalist then working for the BBC – a complaint made by Kearney and the BBC is still before the tribunal.

Demand for further investigations

Reporters without Borders (RSF) welcomed the court’s ruling and said it underscores journalists’ fundamental right to protect their sources.

Fiona O’Brien, Director of RSF’s UK Bureau, said in a statement that this was “a landmark case for press freedom. It is deeply shocking that police showed such disregard for the vital right of journalists to protect their confidential sources.” Safeguards are needed, she said, to ensure such abuses aren’t repeated.

Patrick Corrigan, Northern Ireland Director for Amnesty International, echoed this assessment: “The right of journalists to protect their sources is a cornerstone of a free society.” Police in Northern Ireland “saw fit to ride roughshod” over this right.

Corrigan also lamented that while the police considered it appropriate to arrest journalists who had exposed their complicity in the Loughinisland murders, “twenty years on they have still arrested no one for those murders.”

Amnesty also pointed to the tribunal’s findings that police had obtained the phone records of more than a dozen investigative journalists working for a BBC TV program. The organization called on the PSNI to disclose “all instances of its abuse of surveillance powers against journalists and others,” and expressed hope that the McCullough Review would provide answers. This, according to the BBC, “is an independent review of any use of surveillance against journalists and other specific groups by the PSNI” that was announced in June.

The journalists Birney and McCaffrey said that the ruling was a significant victory for the freedom of the press and called for police reforms to enforce respect for that freedom. Both reporters are also calling for a public inquiry – because their case could just be the tip of the iceberg.

McCaffrey added a further note of criticism, saying that the police wasted “time and resources going after us instead of the Loughinisland killers.”

Birney told the Guardian: “We’re delighted after six years that we’ve got this victory, but this isn’t so much for us; it’s about journalism throughout the UK.”

The current head of the Police Service of Northern Ireland said he accepted the ruling. (js)

Meta fined millions in penalties due to data leak

2024-12-23T08:09:00+01:00

The Irish Data Protection Commission imposed a data protection fine of €251 million on Meta. The background to this is a data theft incident from 2018.

Approximately 29 million users globally were affected by the data theft. (Source: IMAGO / AAP)

The Irish Data Protection Commission (DPC) imposed a fine of €251 million on the Facebook mother company, Meta. The background is a security vulnerability through which unknown persons gained access to personal data from Facebook users in 2018.

As the authorities shared on Tuesday, about 29 million users across the globe were affected at the time. Approximately 3 million of those users were from the EU.

Unauthorized persons used the vulnerability to steal personal data stored by users on the platform. According to the data authorities, this included full names, email addresses and telephone numbers, birth dates as well as place of residence. Furthermore, the attackers could also access information about gender, religion and place of employment. Unauthorized persons could also see which posts users had published on Facebook and in which groups they were members. At that point in time, according to the DPC, personal data from children was also stolen.

Meta reported security vulnerabilities

The authorities began their investigation after Meta (then Facebook) reported the security issue in September 2018. The Group at the time stated that the vulnerability existed from July 2017 until September 2018 within the “View As” feature. Users could see how their profile appeared on Facebook to non-friends.

The security vulnerability allowed authorized persons to steal so-called “access tokens” from Facebook. These tokens are a type of digital key with which users can remain logged in to the Facebook app.

Originally, the Group assumed that approximately 50 million users were affected. However, after the investigation the number was corrected and lowered. According to their own numbers, the platform closed the vulnerability within two days after it was discovered in September 2018.

The Irish data authorities have now determined various violations against European data protection laws (GDPR) for which fines have respectively been imposed – the total amount being €251 million.

The Deputy Commissioner, Graham Doyle, said these measures emphasized how failures in design and development processes can expose people to serious risk and harm. He added that Facebook profiles often contain information that users may only want to reveal in certain circumstances such as religious and political views or sexual orientation. The security vulnerability at Facebook enabled unauthorized persons to access these details which poses a great risk for abuse of the affected data.

The Irish data authorities are responsible for Meta in the EU as the European headquarters of the company are located in Dublin. The DPC has already imposed multiple privacy-related fines on Meta. However, critics repeatedly accuse the DPC of being too slow in processing cases.

A total of €2.8 billion in fines

As reported by the Irish public service broadcaster RTÉ, the fines imposed on Meta from DPC meanwhile amount to €2.8 billion. To date, only €17 million has actually been paid from this amount because the Group has appealed against some of the authority’s decisions. It is also expected for Meta to appeal against the fine in the current case.

In Germany, the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) ruled in November (German article) that the “mere and temporary loss of control over one’s own personal data” as a result of a GDPR violation can already constitute non-material damage “within the meaning of the standard”. And as a result, a claim for compensation may exist. Neither a specific instance of misuse of data, nor are any other noticeable negative consequences required.

The background to these proceedings also involved an incident with Facebook. Unknown persons scraped data from Facebook in September 2019. This process involves automatically collecting and compiling publicly accessible data without IT systems being invaded. This often violates the terms and conditions of platforms.

As a result, personal data from up to 533 million Facebook users from 106 countries were made public in an online forum. This included email addresses, telephone numbers, birth dates, gender, relationship status and residential addresses. Because of this, the Irish data authorities already imposed fine of €256 million against the Meta Group two years ago.

After the BGH ruling, the Federal Association of Consumer Organizations (vzbz) filed a class action lawsuit against Meta (German article). Those affected by the scraping incident should be able to assert claims for damages against Facebook free of charge. (dpa / js)

Welsh police to use facial recognition app

2024-12-19T08:07:00+01:00

Police officers in Wales will be armed with a smartphone app that conducts facial recognition scans. Critics call it “Orwellian tech.”

British police continue to retain photos of certain individuals, despite a legal requirement to delete them. (Source: IMAGO / Pond5 Images)

Police in Wales will soon begin using a facial recognition smartphone app. Civil liberties and human rights groups warn of severe encroachment on individuals’ privacy rights. British police have also been criticized for continuing to retain photos despite a court ruling stating that they must delete them.

Officers in Gwent and South Wales will be given the app, known as Operator Initiated Facial Recognition (OIFR). It has been tested by 70 officers and will now be introduced for use in routine police work, South Wales Police announced last week.

Police will use the app on smartphones issued to them by the force. Officers can take photos of individuals they encounter while on patrol or feed images from surveillance cameras into the app, the BBC reports. The software will then compare the biometric data found in the uploaded image against data taken from photos stored in police databases. The goal is to help determine the identity of people wanted by police. Individuals who are unconscious or deceased could also be identified in this manner, South Wales Police stated.

According to South Wales Police, photos taken by the app, and the biometric data associated with them, will not be retained after running the comparison.

Critics warn of encroachment on fundamental rights

Critics of the measure include the British human rights organization Liberty. Charlie Whelton of the group told the BBC that the technology was a “deeply invasive breach of our privacy rights, data protection laws and equality laws.”

Jake Hurfurt of Big Brother Watch, a civil liberties group, warned that the app “creates a dangerous imbalance” between the rights of individuals and the police’s powers.

He warned further: “This Orwellian tech is alarmingly close to introducing ID cards by the back door.” ID cards were in fact introduced in the UK in 2009, but were discontinued in 2011.

Said Hurfurt: “In Britain, none of us has to identify ourselves to police without very good reason, but this unregulated surveillance tech threatens to take that fundamental right away.” Hurfurt calls on the government to regulate the use of facial recognition in order to protect the rights of individuals, and to stop police from using “mobile face-scanning tech.”

Hurfurt also pointed out that “South Wales Police will search against thousands of unlawfully held photos every time they do a face scan.”

Police have retained photos unlawfully for years

As Britain’s Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner wrote in his annual report, published earlier this month, it is “a concern” that police continue to retain photos of persons who were detained but never charged with a crime. Every person taken into custody by police is photographed, according to the report. Even if these individuals are never charged with a crime, their photos are retained and may be used “for facial recognition purposes.”

According to the Guardian, the UK’s high court ruled in 2012 “that keeping images of people who faced no action or who were charged and then acquitted was unlawful. Despite the ruling, custody images of innocent people are still on the Police National Database,” which all local police forces in the UK are able to access.

A 2017 review by the British government found that the database contained more than 19 million photos. More than 16 million of these photos can be searched using facial recognition technology.

Charlie Whelton of Liberty told the Guardian that it is “deeply concerning” that the police are continuing to retain the sensitive biometric data of people who were never charged with a crime – and even using it for facial recognition purposes. “The police need to answer as to why they are still holding this highly personal data more than 10 years after the courts said this is against the law.”

A spokesperson for the British Home Office told the Guardian that the police set the rules for the retention of custody images. “If individuals who have not been convicted want their images deleted they can request this.”

Jake Hurfurt of Big Brother Watch told the Guardian: “Police and the Home Office have no idea how many people’s photographs they hold unlawfully.” Hurfurt pointed to the example of the police force in Scotland, which had shown that it was possible to delete such images – other forces, he said, must follow Scotland’s lead.

The Guardian reports that Police Scotland only uploads custody images into the UK’s national database if a person has been charged. “Police Scotland also reviews custody images to delete those not linked to a live prosecution or conviction.”

Millions invested in facial recognition

In April of this year the British government, then led by the Conservative party, announced plans to invest millions in facial recognition technology for use by the police. Current Prime Minister Keir Starmer of the Labor party, who took office in July, has also spoken in favor of the use of facial recognition technology. According to a notice published in November, the government is now looking to invest up to £20 million in the technology.

Several police forces in the UK use so-called Live Facial Recognition – and some have done so for years. After being falsely identified by London’s Metropolitan Police, one man filed suit against London police in May.

In 2020 an appeals court found the use of facial recognition by police in South Wales unlawful, ruling that the right to privacy of the man who had brought suit against the police had been violated. The claimant’s face had been scanned at a demonstration and on other occasions. After the ruling, civil liberties groups demanded that police stop use of the technology – police however claimed that they could continue their trials after making changes.

In a 2022 study, researchers from the University of Cambridge criticized the tests of the Operator Initiated Facial Recognition app in South Wales, citing, among other reasons, the fact that images were being compared against unlawfully retained photos. The researchers called for a ban on police use of facial recognition. (js)

Serbia: Authorities use spyware to keep tabs on activists

2024-12-17T15:17:00+01:00

In Serbia the police and the country’s intelligence agency are targeting activists and members of the press with spyware, Amnesty International reports. The authorities have used pretenses to gain physical access to individuals’ smartphones and install the invasive programs.

Serbian authorities have been tied to the use of spyware in the past as well. (Source: IMAGO / Wirestock)

The Serbian police, along with the country’s intelligence agency, have unlawfully spied on journalists and activists using surveillance software. A report published Monday by Amnesty International details the abuse. According to the group’s investigation, authorities used a suite of products to extract data from smartphones – and to install the spyware in secret.

Dinushika Dissanayake at Amnesty International said in a statement, “Our investigation reveals how Serbian authorities have deployed surveillance technology and digital repression tactics as instruments of wider state control and repression directed against civil society.”

As the organization reports, Serbian authorities have developed their own novel spyware, called NoviSpy, to infect smartphones that run the Android operating system. Both the police and the Serbian intelligence agency, Bezbedonosno-informativna Agencija (BIA), have reportedly used the spyware.

According to the report, NoviSpy isn’t as technically sophisticated as the more well-known Pegasus spyware. Nevertheless, it has made it possible for authorities to gain access to sensitive personal data stored on individuals’ smartphones. Researchers at Amnesty’s Security Lab discovered for example that the software captures and transmits screenshots of chats. It also makes it possible for authorities to activate an infected smartphone’s camera and microphone remotely.

Officers circumvent passcode

While attackers can install spyware like Pegasus on a smartphone remotely, with no action required by the targeted user, the Serbian authorities seem to require physical access to a device in order to infect it with NoviSpy. In at least two cases Amnesty was able to reconstruct how exactly this was done.

The report relates for instance how in February 2024 officers arrested Serbian investigative journalist Slaviša Milanov under the pretense of asking him to take a test for driving under the influence of alcohol. “While in detention,” Amnesty reports, “Slaviša was questioned by plainclothes officers about his journalism work.” Before the sobriety test and the interrogation he had been asked to surrender his phone. The phone was off and he was not asked for the passcode. When the device was returned to him, however, he noticed that the settings had changed, and asked Amnesty for help.

The organization’s forensics experts were able to find evidence that his smartphone had been unlocked using a suite of Cellebrite products. The Israeli company sells hardware and software to government clients that make it possible to unlock and copy data stored on smartphones. After gaining access, the officers installed spyware on Milanov’s phone.

Amnesty’s investigators were able to show that the authorities used Cellebrite products to unlock activist Nikola Ristić’s smartphone as well. As they had on Milanov’s phone, the authorities installed spyware on Ristić’s device after unlocking it.

In November, Ristić had played a leading role in organizing protests in Belgrade after the collapse of a train station roof in Novi Sad. 14 people were killed and many more injured in the accident. Demonstrators suspected that corruption had been involved in the awarding of the contract to renovate the train station. When Ristić went to a demonstration at Belgrade’s Republic Square in early November, he was stopped by officers from the intelligence agency and taken in for interrogation; he was also made to surrender his phone.

Insufficient laws

Amnesty’s Dinushika Dissanayake said in a statement that the organization’s investigation “highlights how Cellebrite mobile forensic products – used widely by police and intelligence services worldwide – can pose an enormous risk to those advocating for human rights, the environment and freedom of speech, when used outside of strict legal control and oversight.”

Amnesty argues that the use of spyware and similar technologies is insufficiently regulated in Serbia. This leaves “too much space for potential abuse of such technologies for political purposes.”

Cellebrite released a statement on Monday in response to the Amnesty report and said that it was investigating the claims. The company claims to have stopped selling to certain customers in the past on ethical grounds. Prior to these most recent revelations, human rights organizations have accused Cellebrite of selling its products to repressive regimes – thus contributing to human rights abuses.

Activists surveilled

Evidence gathered by Amnesty suggested that Serbian authorities had used their NoviSpy surveillance software to spy on dozens of devices – but the number of victims in recent years may be even higher, reaching into the hundreds.

In one instance Amnesty’s experts were able to show that the spyware was installed on the smartphone of an activist while he was being questioned by BIA officers. The activist worked for Krokodil, an organization that promotes dialogue and reconciliation in the Western Balkans. The occasion for the interrogation was an attack on the organization’s Belgrade office. During questioning the activist left his smartphone in his jacket outside the interrogation room; afterwards he discovered suspicious notifications on the device.

Attempts were also made to install NoviSpy on a device belonging to an environmental activist. In other cases Cellebrite products were reportedly used to access data on smartphones belonging to individuals who had not been accused of any crime. In at least one case an activist was shown a court order; many were not. Regardless, Amnesty argues that such forensic tools should only used in cases where individuals are charged with serious crimes, like terrorism – not with merely expressing their opinion.

The Serbian interior ministry and the BIA intelligence agency refuted the charges in the report, calling them “nonsensical” and “false,” as reported by Serbian broadcaster RTS.

But this is not the first time that Serbian authorities have been tied to the use of spyware. In 2013, security experts at the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab identified Serbia as a client of the now-bankrupt German software developer FinFisher.

Experts also assume that the BIA uses Predator spyware, the technology that is currently at the center of the Greek surveillance scandal.

And last year human rights groups and IT experts were able to prove that critics of the Serbian government had been targeted with spyware. Pegasus was likely used in the attacks – and Serbian authorities are suspected to have been behind them.

Constraints on freedom of expression

The attacks detailed in Amnesty’s latest report come against the backdrop of increasing state repression and increasing constraints on freedom of expression in Serbia. Since 2021 there have been numerous protests against the government – and the authorities have responded with harsh measures.

In the aftermath of protests against lithium mining and a raw materials agreement with the EU the government’s attacks against civil society have “dramatically escalated,” the report states. Activists have been arrested and charged with crimes – with some charges carrying potential sentences of up to eight years in prison.

As Amnesty argues in its report, “Digital surveillance does not only have a devastating impact on people’s right to privacy but also profoundly affects the rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly.” Serbian activists told the organization that they had changed their behavior after learning that they were being surveilled. “Some became more reluctant to speak out about controversial issues, while others decided to lower their profile or completely disengage from activism.” One activist described the situation as “a digital prison.”

Slaviša Milanov, the journalist spied on by authorities, also expressed concerns that his sources could have been compromised. “I can no longer use phone or email and have to find other ways to speak with people, including in person. I tend to do this only when we are in public places and in larger groups, which is obviously not ideal.”

Amnesty demands that the Serbian government “immediately stop using highly invasive spyware.” The government must also carry out “prompt, independent and impartial investigations” into unlawful surveillance. Finally, the government must ensure “that digital technologies are not misused to violate human rights” – for instance by establishing a legal framework for reviewing the use of such technology. Companies like Cellebrite must likewise ensure that their products do not contribute to human rights violations. (js)

US: FTC acts to limit sale of location data by data brokers

2024-12-05T08:13:00+01:00

The US Federal Trade Commission has proposed measures that would ban three data brokers from selling sensitive location data. The brokers’ clients include US government agencies – civil liberties groups have criticized the companies for years.

The FTC accuses the companies of violating consumers’ privacy. (Source: IMAGO / VectorFusionArt)

The US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has banned data broker Gravy Analytics and its subsidiary Venntel from sharing and selling “sensitive location data.” The companies will be required to delete location data that they have already collected. Data broker Mobilewalla will likewise be prohibited from selling such data in the future, the agency announced on Tuesday.

The FTC accuses Gravy Analytics and Venntel of having violated the law by tracking and selling users’ location data without their consent.

Location data is collected by smartphone apps. The data is often linked to a “mobile advertising ID” assigned to each smartphone by its operating system. As the FTC notes, Gravy Analytics and Venntel didn’t collect location data themselves, but instead obtained it from other companies. The data brokers then processed the data and resold it.

According to the FTC, the companies advertise their ability to provide especially precise location data. The brokers claim to collect data from roughly one billion devices daily. This data is not anonymized and can be used to identify users.

Data can provide in-depth insights

Some of the data sold by the companies can reveal visits to “sensitive” locations. Places like hospitals, reproductive health clinics, union offices, correctional facilities, places of worship, and women’s shelters are classified as sensitive by the FTC.

According to the FTC’s complaint, the companies analyzed the data they had collected and sold information that purported to provide insights into consumers’ “health or medical decisions,” political activities, and religious views – as well as many other aspects of their lives. Gravy Analytics compiled data sets on individuals who shared certain characteristics and sold them to clients. These data sets are grouped into categories like “McDonald’s Breakfast Diners,” “Parents with Young Kids,” or “Political Activist.” The company also sells tools that allow its clients to use the mobile advertising IDs assigned to users to generate a list of devices that were present at a particular place at a particular point in time – enabling the clients to determine, for example, whether users attended a specific event.

In Tuesday’s announcement, the FTC wrote that by selling this location data the companies “exposed consumers to potential privacy harms.” The companies’ practices also put consumers “at risk of stigma, discrimination, violence, and other harms.”

Samuel Levine, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, said in a statement: “Surreptitious surveillance by data brokers undermines our civil liberties and puts servicemembers, union workers, religious minorities, and others at risk.”

Deleting data

The FTC has now proposed an order prohibiting the two companies from “selling, licensing, transferring, sharing, disclosing or using” sensitive location data – though there would be exceptions in cases involving national security or a law enforcement response “to an imminent risk of death or serious bodily harm to a person.” The companies must also maintain a list of sensitive locations – including medical facilities, union offices, correctional facilities, schools, and shelters for refugees and victims of domestic violence – in order to ensure that data that might indicate that an individual has visited one of these locations is not sold or shared. The companies must delete any data they have already collected.

According to 404media, the two Virginia-based firms are among the most important companies in the US location data industry.

In 2020, media reported that the US Department of Homeland Security had entered into contracts with Venntel. Location data obtained from the company was used to track illegal border crossings. According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a US civil liberties organization, Venntel sold location data to other US agencies as well, including the FBI.

Demonstrators’ data collected

The FTC on Tuesday announced a second proposed order to prohibit the data broker Mobilewalla from selling sensitive location data. The company also improperly retained data acquired in advertising auctions, according to the FTC’s complaint.

Samuel Levine of the FTC said in a statement: “Mobilewalla collected massive amounts of sensitive customer data – including visits to health clinics and places of worship – and sold this data in a way that exposed consumers to harm.”

The agency accuses Mobilewalla of collecting more than 500 million unique advertising identifiers between 2018 and 2020. These identifiers were paired with location information. According to the FTC’s complaint, Mobilewalla offered data to clients looking to target specific audiences for advertising purposes – like women who have visited pregnancy centers. The company also authored a report in June 2020 that “”https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/carolinehaskins1/protests-tech-company-spying" target="_blank">analyzed individuals who protested the death of Georg Floyd," according to the complaint.

Civil liberties groups have long criticized the data broker industry. The level of alarm increased in 2022, when the US Supreme Court revoked the right to abortion. Advocates warned that data collected from individuals, including commercially available location data, could be used by law enforcement and opponents of abortion to track and persecute women.

The FTC itself has acted to rein in data brokers in the past.

On Monday the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau also proposed new rules that would prohibit data brokers from selling certain data like social security and telephone numbers. Given the looming change in presidential administrations, however, US media doubt that the rules will actually be implemented. (js)

Poland: Former intelligence chief compelled to appear before Pegasus committee

2024-12-04T16:28:00+01:00

The former head of Poland’s domestic intelligence agency was compelled to appear before a parliamentary investigative committee. The committee is looking into the alleged use of Pegasus by the previous government.

Pegasus was reportedly used to spy on hundreds of people in Poland – among them opposition leaders.(Source: IMAGO / newspix)

The former head of Poland’s Internal Security Agency (ABW), the country’s domestic intelligence service, was arrested on Monday and brought before the Pegasus committee in parliament. The committee is investigating allegations that the former government led by the Law and Justice party (PiS) spied on political opponents. The PiS government was voted out of power in fall 2023.

Piotr Pogonowski led the intelligence agency from 2016 to 2020 under the PiS government. According to media reports, he had ignored three summons to appear before the investigative committee. His testimony on Monday came after a court ordered the police to compel him to appear.

The Polish news site Onet reported that this was the first time in the history of the Sejm, the lower house of Poland’s parliament, that a witness has been compelled to appear before an investigative committee in this manner.

No concrete answers

Pogonowski, who currently sits on the board of the central bank, claimed when questioned by the committee that he first heard about Pegasus from the media. He later clarified however that he was referring to the name “Pegasus” – not to the actual surveillance software.

According to media reports, during his testimony before the committee Pogonowski repeatedly noted that by law he was prohibited from discussing certain aspects of his work at the intelligence agency. He refused to give concrete answers to many questions – though he did state in general terms that Polish security services made use of modern technology. After a recess, the committee continued its questioning of Pogonowski behind closed doors.

Magdalena Sroka, head of the Pegasus committee, said that Pogonowski was an important witness because he led the ABW during the period of time when the Polish government is believed to have purchased Pegasus. The agency is also believed to have used the spyware.

Poland’s Supreme Audit Office declared in 2022 that it had found an invoice showing that Polish authorities had bought Pegasus. PiS ultimately admitted to the purchase – but denies having used the spyware to spy on opposition leaders.

Opposition leaders surveilled

Pegasus is a form of spyware developed by NSO Group, an Israeli company. It can take complete control of an infiltrated device – without the target of the attack ever having to click on a link or perform any other unwitting action to grant the attackers entry. Attackers gain access to all the data saved on the device. They can track the device’s location and turn on the microphone and camera without the device owner’s knowledge. The surveillance software has been linked to human rights abuses and has come under criticism for years.

In Poland, the former PiS-led government is alleged to have used Pegasus to spy on political opponents. Security experts from the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab were able to prove for example that in the lead-up to elections in 2019, the smartphone belonging to Krzysztof Brejza was infiltrated by Pegasus. At the time, Brejza was leading the opposing coalition’s campaign.

Citizen Lab’s experts were able to find additional evidence that lawyer Roman Giertych was also spied on in 2019. One of his clients at the time was Donald Tusk, then head of the Civic Coalition, an alliance of opposition parties. Since December 2023 Tusk has been Poland’s prime minister.

The new Polish government >launched the investigative committee in January of this year.

Last fall, Poland’s Senate came to the conclusion that the purchase of surveillance software was illegal. The Senate also concluded that because Pegasus was used to spy on opposition leaders, the 2019 elections were not conducted fairly.

According to a preliminary report put out by the Justice Ministry earlier this year, the former PiS-led government used Pegasus to surveil nearly 600 people. Among other matters, the Pegasus committee is tasked with investigating whether these surveillance measures were legal. Current Justice Minister Adam Bodnar stated in April that the authorities evidently obtained court authorizations before engaging in surveillance. Still, in Bodnar’s judgement, the courts were not fully informed about the use of Pegasus.

In September the Prosecutor General’s office brought charges against former Deputy Minister of Justice Michał Woś. He is alleged to have approved the illegal transfer of funds from a Justice Ministry fund to pay for the purchase of Pegasus spyware. Woś disputes the charges.

More PiS politicians have been called on to testify before the investigative committee – including former Justice Minister Zbigniew Ziobro. Current Justice Minister Bodnar has requested that his predecessor be compelled to appear. Last month Bodnar submitted a motion to parliament requesting the body’s consent for this measure – a necessary step, given Ziobro’s legal immunity.

Ziobro has cited health reasons for not appearing before the committee before now. Like former intelligence agency head Pogonowski, however, he also points to a September decision by the Constitutional Tribunal (TK) which stated that the Pegasus commission was unconstitutional. The new ruling coalition for its part does not acknowledge the legitimacy of this court – arguing that the PiS government unlawfully packed the tribunal with political allies. In September Poland’s parliament passed a law aimed at reforming the constitutional court. (js)

UN plastics treaty talks break down

2024-12-03T16:06:00+01:00

At the latest round of negotiations in South Korea, member states of the United Nations could not agree on a plastics treaty. Talks are now set to continue next year, past the deadline originally set. Environmental groups call on member states to agree to binding measures without further delay.

According to the UN, an estimated 400 million tons of plastic are discarded as waste each year – and the number is trending upward. (Source: IMAGO / Joa Souza)

Negotiations for a UN plastics treaty broke down over the weekend – for now at least. Delegates from more than 170 countries had convened in the South Korean city of Busan for a week of talks, hoping to agree, after years of preparation, to binding measures to contain the pollution caused by plastics throughout the world. Environmental groups urge the parties to the negotiations to agree to binding rules in the coming year to lower global plastics production.

The meeting in Busan was the fifth round of negotiations – and was supposed to be the last. Now talks are set to continue in the coming year. The draft agreement negotiated over the past week will serve as the basis for future discussions.

The key point of contention during the talks was a proposed limit on plastic production. The measure is supported by a coalition of more than 100 countries, among them Mexico, Panama, Rwanda and the member states of the European Union. These countries also support rules governing the use of dangerous chemicals in plastics production.

Opposing the measure are oil-producing countries like China, Saudi Arabia and Russia. They came out strongly against production limits – and instead argued that the treaty should focus on efficient waste management. A large amount of plastic is made with petroleum.

According to media reports, the delegate for Saudi Arabia even called for the entire draft agreement to be renegotiated.

In order for an article to be included in the treaty, all countries that are party to the negotiations must agree.

Hardest-hit countries disappointed

Juan Carlos Monterrey Gómez of the Panamanian delegation said at the conclusion of talks, “We did not achieve what we came for.” Every river, every ocean, and every life was at stake, he said – it was a “fight for survival.” Plastic, he said, is “poison.”

Sam Adu-Kumi of the Ghanaian delegation told the AP that Ghana’s “communities, bodies of water, drains and farmlands are choked with plastics.” Dumps that hold plastics are always on fire. “We are here for a legally binding instrument to end plastic pollution,” he said. “We want a treaty that will be able to solve” the problem.

German environmental minister Steffi Lemke, speaking to reporters, said it was fatal that resistance from a few countries could block the treaty. Still, Lemke said, the group of countries that wanted a treaty was growing. When talks continue next year, the goal will be to overcome the obstruction of oil-producing countries.

Criticism from environmental groups

The WWF, a conservation organization, expressed disappointment at the results of the talks. Florian Titze, who was in Busan representing WWF’s German chapter, said in a statement: “The results of the negotiations are frustrating. Once again the overwhelming majority of countries asked for ambitious and binding rules to effectively fight plastic pollution, and once again they were thwarted by a few obstructionists.” For two years, he said, a “loud minority of oil-producing countries and countries involved in plastic production” have worked to undermine progress.

Titze stated further that the WWF urged countries to agree in the next round of negotiations to binding measures that would cover the entire life cycle of plastic production. “This includes measures like a global ban on and incremental elimination of harmful artificial substances and chemicals, a global push for product design that promotes recyclability, a solid financial mechanism and means to further develop and strengthen the treaty over time.”

Greenpeace also sees opportunity in a further round of negotiations. Moritz Jäger-Roschko, expert on circular economy and resource conservation at Greenpeace, said in a statement: “We are glad that the negotiations will be continued rather than have the parties agree to a weak deal under time pressure. An effective agreement must contain binding global goals and measures for the lowering of plastic production. We also need bans on avoidable single-use plastics, reusable quotas and a plan for financing these measures.” A “historic opportunity” for a plastics treaty still remained.

Barbara Metz of Deutsche Umwelthilfe, a German environmental group, criticized the failure to reach an agreement. She said in a statement: “The contamination of nature with plastic is, along with climate change, one of the world’s largest environmental problems.” Each year millions of tons of plastic wound up in oceans, rivers and lakes. Microplastic was now finding its way into the human body and endangering animals and plants. Germany, Metz said, must advocate at the next round of negotiations for a strong treaty with an enforceable goal for lower plastic production.

Growing amount of plastic waste

According to the UN, each year, roughly 400 million tons of plastic are discarded as waste. This number is expected to grow to up to 1.2 billion tons by 2060 if measures are not taken.

In 2019, only about 9 percent of the plastic produced worldwide was recycled, according to the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD). More than 20 percent lands in “uncontrolled dumpsites, is burned in open pits or ends up in terrestrial or aquatic environments, especially in poorer countries.” The OECD warns that the plastic pollution of the ocean will continue “for decades to come.” Plastic in the ocean contributes to the dying off of coral reefs, among other negative effects – animals can die after ingesting plastic waste; some absorb chemicals that can impair their ability to reproduce.

The United Nations agreed in March 2022 to author a joint agreement to curb plastics. Negotiations first began in November 2022 in Punta del Este, Uruguay.

Organizations like the WWF call for the UN treaty to include a global ban on harmful products and materials. Moreover, a comprehensive measure to introduce or improve methods for collecting and managing waste plastics must be enshrined in the agreement in order to avoid any release of plastic waste into the environment.

Prior to the latest round of negotiations, UN human rights experts at the Office for the High Commissioner on Human Rights (OHCHR) had also called for the agreement to impose controls on chemicals of concern in plastic production. Further, plastic producers should be required to contribute to a global fund, the OHCHR said. This money would be used in part to remove toxic materials from the environment – in accordance with the polluter-pays principle. (dpa / js)

Italy: Foodinho delivery service must pay €5 million fine

2024-11-27T15:10:00+01:00

The Italian food delivery service Foodinho used an app to spy on and share its workers’ location data. Now the company must pay a fine.

The company was also barred from using facial recognition technology for identity verification purposes. (Source: IMAGO / Wirestock)

The Foodinho delivery service must pay a €5 million fine in Italy after unlawfully processing the personal data of thousands of delivery workers. The Italian data protection authority (Garante per la protezione dei dati personali) has imposed the penalty.

Foodinho is a food delivery service that is part of the Glovo group. Based in Spain, Glovo was itself bought by the German company Delivery Hero in 2022.

As the Italian data watchdog announced last Friday, the company unlawfully processed personal data belonging to more than 35,000 “riders,” as its delivery workers are known.

The authority determined that Foodinho recorded its riders’ location data and shared it with third-party companies – without informing the riders themselves. As a rule, delivery workers who work for delivery services like Foodinho use a smartphone app which assigns them orders. According to Italy’s data protection authority, the app also collected and shared location data when the riders weren’t working.

The authority has now ordered the company to redesign the app to include a symbol that indicates that the user’s location data is being actively collected. In the future, if the app is running in the background, collection of location data must be deactivated.

Additional GDPR violations

The authority also determined that the company employed automated systems to assign a so-called “Excellence Score” to riders. Based on this metric, riders might be given preference in receiving certain shift assignments – but the practice did not follow the guidelines of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). For one, riders were not able to request a review of their score by a human evaluator.

The Italian authority also barred Foodinho from using facial recognition technology to process its workers’ biometric data for identify verification purposes. The company had used such a procedure since July 2022.

The delivery service must also revise the notifications that it sends to workers to alert them that their account has been deactivated or locked – previously, these notices did not provide workers with options to dispute the decision or restore access to their account.

Criticism of the rider app

The Italian data watchdog launched its investigation in the wake of media reports and investigations by IT experts. In 2022, media reported on a rider who was killed in a traffic accident during his shift – the following day, the company sent him a termination notice by email, stating that he had violated the company’s terms and conditions. Riders reportedly receive such notifications when they fail to complete deliveries.

Experts at Algorithm Watch also investigated the Foodinho rider app and found several data privacy infringements. The 2023 investigation showed that the app collected location data from riders even when they weren’t working – and shared this data, together with “personal and identifiable information,” with Google and other third parties.

Experts cheered the Italian authority’s decision, calling it a success for worker rights in the gig economy.

Earlier fines for data privacy violations

Italy’s data protection authority first fined Foodinho in July 2021 to the tune of €2.6 million. At the time the authority sanctioned the company for employing algorithms to assign orders without ensuring their accuracy or fairness. The automated decision-making process could result in riders being assigned no orders at all – but riders themselves were unable to request an evaluation of the process.

Companies use similar technologies in other countries as well: in the UK, for example, a delivery worker successfully sued Uber Eats after the facial recognition feature in the company’s driver app repeatedly failed to recognize him – and locked him out of his account.

The EU recently adopted a new directive “on improving conditions in platform work.” The measure includes regulations on the use of algorithms. Member states now have two years to incorporate the directive in their national legislation. (js)

Iran: More demonstrators sentenced to death

2024-11-25T08:05:00+01:00

In recent weeks a wave of new death sentences has been handed down in Iran. Observers warn that executions could be imminent.

Human rights groups have long criticized Iran’s use of the death penalty as a means of political repression. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

More death sentences have been handed down this month in Iran, human rights groups report. Demonstrators are once again among those facing execution.

As the Oslo-based organization Iran Human Rights (IHRNGO) reports, last week at least eight death sentences were handed down against individuals who had been charged in connection with the “Woman, Life, Freedom” demonstrations or were being held as political prisoners.

In fall 2022 protests against the Iranian government broke out across the country in response to the death of Mahsa Amini, a young Kurdish woman. Amini was detained by the morality police for allegedly wearing an “improper” hijab and died soon after while in police custody. In the months that followed the authorities employed brutal measures in their response to the demonstrations. Tens of thousands were arrested.

Demonstrators sentenced to death

According to IHRNGO and Human Rights Watch (HRW), on November 13 six demonstrators were sentenced to death. They are alleged to have injured a member of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps during a protest in October 2022, leading to his death. A total of 14 people were charged in connection with the incident.

Before the sentence was handed down, the confessions, obtained by torture, of at least four of the defendants were reportedly broadcast on Iranian television. Their executions would not be the first that Iran has carried out in connection with the Woman, Life, Freedom protests. The sentences of the six condemned men are still subject to appeal, HRW reports.

Both HRW and IHRNGO also report that Warisha Moradi has been sentenced to death by a revolutionary court in Tehran for allegedly engaging in “armed rebellion against the state.” The Kurdish activist is a member of the Free Women’s Society of Eastern Kurdistan and has advocated for women’s rights. During the trial Moradi’s lawyer was not allowed to present a defense, the Kurdistan Human Rights Network (KHRN) reports.

Moradi was arrested in August 2023 and later transferred to the notorious Evin prison. There she spent several months in solitary confinement and was also reportedly tortured. The authorities have not allowed her family to visit since May.

Nahid Naghshbandi of HRW said in a statement: “Iranian authorities use the death penalty as a tool of fear, particularly targeting ethnic minorities and political dissidents after unfair trials. This brutal tactic aims to suppress any opposition to an autocratic government through intimidation.”

According to the rights groups, death sentences were also handed down against members of the Kurd and Baluch minorities in recent weeks. In August the UN Fact-Finding Mission reported that since 2022 ethnic and religious minorities in Iran had been “disproportionately impacted” by the government’s crackdown against protesters – “in particular Kurd and Baluch minorities.”

Warning of new wave of executions

IHRNGO believes that the latest wave of death sentences should be seen as a warning that new executions are imminent. The government’s aim is to instill fear in Iranian society, the group writes. IHRNGO also fears that more executions could be carried out in Iran while international attention is diverted elsewhere amidst other domestic and international crises.

IHRNGO director Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam said in a statement: “The relatively low political cost of executing hundreds of ordinary crime prisoners in the past months has prompted the authorities to intensify the execution of protesters and political prisoners.” He added: “The Islamic Republic, which is going through the most critical period of its rule, can only survive by resorting to repression and executions.” Amiry-Moghaddam calls for “a stronger response from the international community” to put a stop to the state’s “execution machine.”

Human rights organizations have long criticized the Iranian government’s practice of systematically executing people who are sentenced in unfair trials.

The UN’s Fact-Finding Mission reported in September that women who had engaged in activism in Iran were increasingly being sentenced to death for alleged national security offenses. In the last two years, the death penalty has been used “to terrorize and deter Iranians from protesting and expressing themselves freely.”

According to statistics from the Abdorrahman Boroumand Center, the government has already carried out 748 death sentences in 2024 – in August 29 people were killed in a single day. The organization, in collaboration with Amnesty International, publishes an annual report on executions in Iran. (js)

Australian hardware store chain used facial recognition unlawfully

2024-11-21T08:06:00+01:00

The Australian hardware store chain Bunnings must not use facial recognition in its stores, the country’s data protection authority has ruled. The decision follows a two-year investigation.

Australian media call the decision a “landmark finding.” (Source: Bunnings)

The Australian hardware store chain Bunnings violated Australia’s privacy laws with its use of facial recognition technology. The determination was made by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC), which announced the findings of its investigation on Tuesday. The company captured sensitive personal data from potentially hundreds of thousands of people, the data protection authority found.

Privacy Commissioner Carly Kind said in a statement that Bunnings had used the technology in 63 stores in the states of Victoria and New South Wales between November 2018 and November 2021.

Cameras captured the face of every person who entered one of these stores – making it likely that the privacy rights of hundreds of thousands of people were infringed upon. The images were compared against a database kept by the retailer that contained photos of people who had previously been banned from Bunnings locations.

Sensitive data

Facial recognition technology processes data considered sensitive under Australia’s Privacy Act – given its sensitivity, this data comes in for special protections. Bunnings, however, processed this sensitive data without obtaining the consent of those affected or sufficiently informing them about how their data was being processed.

Said Privacy Commissioner Kind: “We can’t change our face. The Privacy Act recognizes this, classing our facial image and other biometric information as sensitive information, which has a high level of privacy protection, including that consent is generally required for it to be collected.”

Bunnings Managing Director Mike Schneider argued in a response to the OAIC’s decision that the company had begun using facial recognition technology to protect employees and customers from the aggressive behavior of certain individuals.

The OAIC for its part acknowledged that facial recognition technology may help protect from violent behavior. “However,” Kind said, “any possible benefits need to be weighed against the impact on privacy rights, as well as our collective values as a society.”

“Just because a technology may be helpful or convenient, does not mean its use is justifiable,” Kind added. In this case “facial recognition technology was the most intrusive option,” encroaching on the privacy of every customer who entered the stores.

The regulator has instructed Bunnings to delete any facial recognition data it still holds. The company must also publish a statement explaining its actions and advising customers on how to file a complaint.

Bunnings has already announced its intention to seek a review of the decision.

Consumer advocates demand update of data privacy laws

Australian media are calling the regulator’s decision a “landmark finding” that will have substantial consequences for the use of facial recognition by companies in the future.

In 2022, the Australian consumer advocacy organization CHOICE asked major Australian retailers about their use of facial recognition technology and analyzed their privacy policies. CHOICE found that in addition to Bunnings, the department store chain Kmart and the electronics retailer The Good Guys were using the controversial surveillance tool in their stores. CHOICE warned that customers were not being sufficiently informed about the use of the technology – and filed a complaint with the OAIC.

The regulator responded by opening investigations into Bunnings and Kmart. Both retailers paused use of the technology while the OAIC conducted its investigations. The result of the Kmart investigation has yet to be announced.

The Good Guys also stopped using facial recognition in the wake of the CHOICE report. According to media reports, the company has not been investigated.

CHOICE welcomed Tuesday’s decision. Rafi Alam, CHOICE Senior Campaigns and Policy Advisor, said in a statement: “This is a landmark decision that will prompt all businesses to think carefully about the use of facial recognition in Australia going forwards.” He added that Australians had been “shocked and angered” by the use of facial recognition technology by big retailers – but also in “sporting and concert venues, pubs and clubs.”

Kate Bower of CHOICE told ABC News that the decision was a warning to other companies – she was disappointed, however, that the OAIC had chosen not to impose a fine on Bunnings.

CHOICE also criticized Australia’s current data privacy laws, calling them “confusing, outdated and difficult to enforce.” The organization calls for updated legislation. (js)

Denmark: Amnesty criticizes use of algorithms by welfare authority

2024-11-20T08:10:00+01:00

In Denmark, algorithms are supposed to help detect social benefits fraud. A new report by Amnesty International warns that this could lead to discrimination against marginalized groups.

Amnesty argues that the merging of data from various state registries creates a system of mass surveillance. (Source: IMAGO / Depositphotos)

The Danish welfare authority is trying to detect social benefits fraud with the help of algorithms – and in doing so has created a system of mass surveillance, Amnesty International reports. The organization argues that the system “is eroding individual privacy and undermining human dignity” – and could even run afoul of a new EU ban.

For its new report, “Coded Injustice: Surveillance and Discrimination in Denmark’s Automated Welfare State,” Amnesty investigated the use of algorithms by the Danish welfare authority Udbetaling Danmark (UDK). The authority was established in 2012 to centralize payouts of state benefits – including childcare, sick pay, housing, and unemployment benefits. Working together with private companies, the authority developed algorithms that are meant to help identify potential benefits fraud.

Up to 60 different algorithms are deployed to flag individuals for further investigation by the authorities. While conducting its investigation, Amnesty had partial access to four of the algorithms in use.

Merging of data

In order to detect fraud, UDK accesses state databases that contain information about recipients of benefits, their family members, and other members of their households. According to Amnesty’s report, the personal data of millions of Danish residents is linked or merged in this way. The data processed by the authority includes information on individuals’ residency or change of residence, citizenship, birth place and family circumstances. Tax and health data, as well as information on a person’s education level, employment and income, are also processed.

Algorithms analyze these and other data points to generate a list of people who supposedly pose a higher risk of claiming benefits fraudulently. Their cases are then examined further by specialists.

Hellen Mukiri-Smith, researcher on artificial intelligence and human rights at Amnesty, said in a statement: “This expansive surveillance machine is used to document and build a panoramic view of a person’s life that is often disconnected from reality. It tracks and monitors where a social benefit claimant lives, works, their travel history, health records, and even their ties to foreign countries.”

“Pre-existing inequalities”

Amnesty points out that these algorithms are being deployed “in an environment of pre-existing inequalities – laws, rules, institutions, norms, and values – within Danish society. These discriminatory structures are embedded” in the algorithms. People are categorized based on purported differences in what amounts to “othering.”

In its investigation, the NGO determined that the fraud detection mechanism specifically and disproportionately targets already marginalized groups that are seen as “other” because their living patterns or family arrangements are “unusual.” Individuals belonging to these groups come under suspicion of fraud or are classified by the authorities as ineligible for benefits. The authorities’ method of categorization carries the risk of discriminating against low-income individuals, migrants and refugees, ethnic minorities and people with disabilities.

To identify fraud in childcare or pension programs, for example, Danish authorities use an algorithm to detect “unusual” or “atypical” living patterns. “Yet there is no clarity on what constitutes such situations,” Amnesty reports, “leaving the door open for arbitrary decision-making.”

Said Mukiri-Smith: “People in non-traditional living arrangements [. . .] are all at risk of being targeted” by algorithms for further investigation. This could include people who are married but live apart as well as “those living in a multi-generational household, a common arrangement in migrant communities.”

An algorithm to determine “foreign affiliation”

In evaluating recipients of child benefits, the algorithms seek to identify whether a person has “strong ties” to a country outside the European Economic Area (EEA). Those categorized as such are prioritized for further investigation. According to Amnesty, the perceived need for such categorization stems from the UDK’s fears that beneficiaries are living abroad without informing the authority – and thus unjustly continuing to receive benefits.

Amnesty points out that the UDK’s method of investigation is not based on objective criteria. Rather, an individual’s “strength of ties” is determined in relation to other beneficiaries who are seen as the “norm.” Information on individuals’ foreign residence and travel in and out of the country are among the data processed – as are the number of children a person has and their citizenship.

Responding to Amnesty’s investigation, the UDK stated “that the use of ‘citizenship’ as a parameter in their algorithms does not constitute processing of sensitive personal information.” Amnesty disagrees, arguing that in some circumstances citizenship could be used as a proxy for a person’s ethnicity or migration status. The report states that the use of these criteria “explicitly targets people from countries outside the EEA and, therefore, directly discriminates on the basis of nationality, ethnicity and migration status.”

Denmark has passed laws to enable this comprehensive data processing. Amnesty argues, however, that the country has engaged in the processing of sensitive data – and that this intrusion into people’s private lives is neither necessary nor proportionate, as defined by international human rights treaties.

Heightened scrutiny “eating” away at recipients of benefits

Amnesty also spoke to organizations and individuals affected by this algorithm-driven scrutiny. One person interviewed by Amnesty said that they were “always afraid” of becoming the target of investigations into potential benefits fraud. Gitte Nielsen of the Dansk Handicap Foundation spoke of people with disabilities who were subject to constant interrogation and felt that the scrutiny was “eating” away at them.

According to the report, the Danish system not only facilitates the surveillance of those who apply for and receive benefits, it also acts as a barrier that prevents access to those benefits. Among those affected are women in crisis shelters. Many don’t have access to computers with internet connections, which are necessary to apply for benefits. Digitization also limits access for people with disabilities – even a new wheelchair can only be applied for online.

Danish authorities confirmed that in investigating suspected cases of fraud, they also monitor recipients’ social media profiles. This “may pose risks to a person’s rights to privacy, freedom of expression and social security,” Amnesty’s report states. This type of surveillance can also have a “chilling effect,” writes Amnesty, “as people are forced to censor themselves.”

The report also cites instances of authorities drawing false conclusions based on social media posts – posts that don’t always reflect a person’s actual living circumstances. Amnesty demands an end to the practice.

The lack of sufficiently independent oversight over the UDK’s processing of data encourages human rights abuses, Amnesty argues. The organization recommends the creation of an independent public authority with oversight powers. The Danish data protection authority must also investigate UDK’s data processing, says Amnesty.

The Danish system could fall under the prohibition against “social scoring” included in the EU’s new AI Act, Amnesty believes. The NGO calls on Danish authorities to suspend use of the system, at least until its permissibility under EU guidelines can be determined. The use of data relating to “foreign affiliation” must also be banned, Amnesty argues.

“Under various international human rights treaties, European Union laws, and national law, Denmark has a legal obligation to safeguard human rights like privacy, data protection, freedom of expression, equality, and non-discrimination,” Amnesty writes. Hellen Mukiri-Smith adds: “These rights aren’t just the driving force of a just society, they also enable fair access to social security, healthcare, and more.”

Together with other NGOs, Amnesty filed a complaint in France last month against the use of another social security algorithm. The groups allege discrimination and call for a ban. (js)

German intelligence agency not required to disclose use of Pegasus

2024-11-14T08:10:00+01:00

Germany’s foreign intelligence agency is not required to disclose information related to its acquisition and use of Pegasus spyware to journalists, Germany’s Federal Administrative Court has ruled. The surveillance tool has been highly controversial for years.

Media organizations first reported on the BND’s use of Pegasus three years ago. (Source: IMAGO / Schöning)

Germany’s foreign intelligence agency, the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND), is not required to disclose information to the press related to its acquisition and use of Pegasus spyware. The Federal Administrative Court in Leipzig issued a ruling on the matter last week.

Arne Semsrott, editor-in-chief of the online research platform FragDenStaat (“Ask the State”), filed a lawsuit against the BND in August 2023 seeking information about whether the intelligence agency had purchased Pegasus spyware. In the event the BND had acquired the tool, Semsrott also wanted to know how frequently it had been used in previous years – and if it was still in use.

Semsrott filed suit after the BND declined his request for information. The agency justified its decision on the grounds that as a matter of policy it refrained from commenting on all matters that touched on intelligence gathering or other intelligence-related activities.

No disclosures required

The Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht) has now sided with the BND. While acknowledging that Semsrott had standing to invoke the constitutional right to freedom of the press – ruling that it was immaterial whether he pursued his work as a journalist in the context of print media or the digital realm – the court decided that a substantial public interest outweighed Semsrott’s journalistic interest in the release of the requested information.

In the court’s view, the BND argued convincingly that the disclosures the plaintiff was seeking could limit its functional capabilities. The aim of Semsrott’s questions was to reveal the agency’s current intelligence work and methods. Disclosing the information requested could do indirect damage to ongoing operations – and the information could also be of significant interest to foreign intelligence agencies.

Pegasus is developed by NSO Group, an Israeli company that claims to sell the tool only to government clients. It can be used to gain complete control of a targeted individual’s smartphone; once the phone has been infiltrated, attackers can for instance read the owner’s chats and listen in on their conversations. The device’s location can also be tracked, and its microphone and camera activated without the device owner’s awareness. According to cybersecurity experts, Pegasus can also be placed on devices as part of so-called zero-click attacks – meaning that the targeted individual has no awareness that their phone is infected, and does not have to trigger the infection by, for example, clicking on a link.

Pegasus used by German agencies

Investigations by Norddeutscher Rundfunk, Westdeutscher Rundfunk, the Süddeutsche Zeitung and Die Zeit revealed in 2021 that the BND had deployed Pegasus abroad. According to the outlets’ reporting, the chancellor’s office under then-Chancellor Angela Merkel had received advance notice and had approved the use of the tool – while the committee in the Bundestag responsible for exercising oversight of the BND was initially kept in the dark.

More precise details about the BND’s use of Pegasus were not made public at the time – neither the BND nor the chancellor’s office disclosed information on the matter.

Prior to these revelations it had come to light that in fall 2020, Germany’s federal police agency, the Bundeskriminalamt (BKA), had acquired Pegasus. BKA Vice President Martina Link confirmed the purchase to the Bundestag’s Committee on Internal Affairs. The BKA reportedly has at its disposal a modified version of Pegasus that was adapted to be in line with German law – the modification was necessary because the standard version of the spyware has capabilities that exceed what is legal in Germany.

Years-long criticism of Pegasus

The revelations of the BKA and BND’s acquisition of Pegasus drew widespread criticism. Among the critics was Bundestag member Konstantin von Notz of the Green Party. Von Notz characterized Pegasus as a “dream for dictators” and a “nightmare for the rule of law” and said it was “highly problematic for a German agency to acquire such an instrument of total surveillance.”

The heightened controversy surrounding Pegasus stems from the fact that the surveillance tool has repeatedly been tied to human rights violations. An investigation led by Amnesty International and an international group of media organizations revealed in summer 2021 how Pegasus had been used to spy on journalists, activists, and opposition figures around the world.

Even before these revelations, however, NSO Group and Pegasus had already come in for criticism for failing to adhere to human rights standards. Human rights experts have long called for a moratorium on Pegasus and related products.

The United States imposed sanctions on NSO Group in November 2021. The US has also placed limits on the use of commercial spyware by government agencies.

In response to the Federal Administrative Court’s ruling, plaintiff Arne Semsrott said that the “antiquated understanding of the press held by many agencies and courts” was now a thing of the past – the acknowledgement that online and print media have the same rights was long overdue, he said. But: “That the BND can still worm its way out of the affair and continue to keep silent on whether it uses the controversial Pegasus software is disappointing.” (js)

WMO: 2024 on track to be the warmest year since record keeping began

2024-11-14T08:07:00+01:00

This year is on track to be the hottest since record keeping of average temperatures began. The World Meteorological Organization has issued a red alert for the climate.

Nearly 200 countries are meeting at the COP29 UN Climate Change Conference in Azerbaijan to deliberate over the climate crisis and its consequences. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

The latest data indicate that 2024 will likely be the hottest year since record keeping began. The findings come from the World Meteorological Organization (WMO)’s State of the Climate Update, released on Monday to coincide with the opening of the COP29 UN Climate Change Conference in Azerbaijan. The report warns that the goals of the Paris Agreement are in jeopardy.

As the WMO announced on Monday, according to data available so far, global average temperatures in 2024 are on pace to surpass even 2023 – the current warmest year on record. Global mean surface air temperature from January to September of this year was 1.54 degrees Celsius above average as compared to the period between 1850 and 1900.

Just last week, the EU’s Copernicus Climate Change Service announced that it was “virtually certain” that 2024 would be the warmest year since recording began. The dataset compiled by Copernicus was among those analyzed by the WMO for its report.

The period between 2015 and 2024 was also the hottest decade since recording began, according to the WMO.

1.5 degree goal in jeopardy

The international community committed in the Paris Agreement to do what it could “to limit the temperature increase to 1.5˚C above pre-industrial levels.” This goal is in severe jeopardy, according to the WMO. Still, the organization is careful to note the necessity of considering a longer timeframe: “One or more individual years exceeding 1.5˚C does not necessarily mean” that the goal of limiting the rise in temperatures is unachievable. According to the WMO’s team of experts, long-term global warming is currently projected to be about 1.3 degrees over the pre-industrial average.

WMO Secretary-General Celeste Saulo said in a statement: “Recorded global temperature anomalies at daily, monthly, and annual timescales are prone to large variations, partly because of natural [phenomena] such as El Niño and La Niña.” El Niño contributed to warming in 2024 as well.

Saulo warned however that “it is essential to recognize that every fraction of a degree of warming matters.” Every rise in average temperature exacerbates climate extremes. “The record-breaking rainfall and flooding, rapidly intensifying tropical cyclones, deadly heat, relentless drought and raging wildfires that we have seen in different parts of the world this year are unfortunately our new reality and a foretaste of our future,” Saulo said.

Increasing greenhouse gas concentrations

The WMO also reports that the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere already reached record levels in 2023. Overall the concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) has risen 51 percent compared to pre-industrial levels. “Real time data indicate that” greenhouse gas concentrations continued to rise this year. “This traps heat and causes temperatures to rise.”

The oceans too were hotter last year on average than in any year since recording began. Preliminary data indicate that temperatures are comparably high this year as well. Roughly 90 percent of the earth’s energy is stored in the ocean, according to the WMO. Ocean warming is a change that is “irreversible” for hundreds to thousands of years.

(Source: World Glacier Monitoring Service/WMO)

The WMO also reports an increasing rate of glacier loss. “In 2023, glaciers lost a record 1.2-meter water equivalent of ice – about five times the amount of water in the Dead Sea.” This was the largest loss since measurements began in 1953.

Melting glaciers also contribute to the accelerating rise in sea level. From 2014 to 2023, the global mean sea level rose at a rate of 4.77 millimeters per year – “more than double the rate between 1993 and 2002.” Last year, because of the El Niño effect, the rate increased even more rapidly. Preliminary data for the current year analyzed by the WMO show that thanks to the decline of El Niño the rate of sea level rise “has fallen back to levels consistent with the rising trend from 2014 to 2022.”

Worsening climate extremes

Weather and climate extremes have continued to exacerbate food insecurity and drive people from their homes this year, the WMO reports. Millions of people have suffered from dangerous heat. “Heavy precipitation, floods and tropical cyclones [have] led to massive loss of life.”

UN Secretary-General António Guterres said in a statement: “Climate catastrophe is hammering health, widening inequalities, harming sustainable development, and rocking the foundations of peace. The vulnerable are hardest hit.”

WMO Secretary-General Saulo said: “We urgently need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and strengthen our monitoring and understanding of our changing climate. We need to step up support for climate change adaptation through climate information services and Early Warnings for All” – a WMO initiative to ensure that people across the globe are alerted to impending severe weather events.

The WMO’s State of the Climate report appears yearly. The current “Update” was published to coincide with the COP29 UN Climate Change Conference – the final version of the report will be published in March 2025.

This year’s COP runs from November 11 to 24 in the Azerbaijani capital of Baku. Nearly 200 countries are there to deliberate over ways to halt global warming and mitigate against its fatal effects. UN Climate Change Executive Secretary Simon Stiell admonished participants at the opening of the conference: “We cannot leave Baku without a substantial outcome.” (dpa / js)

EU: Cosmetics and pharmaceutical companies must bear costs for wastewater treatment

2024-11-12T09:21:00+01:00

A new directive will require producers of medicine and cosmetics to bear the costs of wastewater treatment in the EU. Their products are the primary source of micropollutants in wastewater.

In the future, EU member states must do more to remove water pollutants. (Source: IMAGO / Zoonar)

Pharmaceutical companies and cosmetics producers will have to bear a significant portion of costs for wastewater treatment in the European Union going forward. Last week the European Council approved a revised urban wastewater treatment directive. Now it must be adopted by national legislatures.

As the Council announced on Monday, producers of medicines and cosmetics are “the main source of micropollutants in urban wastewater.” In the future, these companies must bear at least 80 percent of additional costs for more extensive treatment under an “extended producer responsibility (EPR) scheme.” Producers will also have to cover the costs of “gathering and verifying data on products placed on the market.”

The directive does provide for exceptions to the EPR program – for example, where companies are able to demonstrate that their products “are rapidly biodegradable in wastewater.”

Micropollutants dangerous even in small quantities

As the revised directive states, micropollutants “are now routinely detected in all waters” in the EU. Some of these micropollutants “are hazardous for public health and the environment even in low concentrations” of just a few micrograms per liter or below.

The German environmental advocacy group BUND has also argued that micropollutants pose a threat to animals and plants in rivers, streams and lakes even in low concentrations. These pollutants include residues of medicines or cosmetic products – but also of household chemicals and pesticides.

The organization highlights one example: diclofenac is a “widely promoted” painkiller that is available as a topical ointment and in pill form. When used topically, most of the drug is either washed off in the shower or expelled in urine, and ends up in wastewater. It cannot be removed by most wastewater treatment facilities and ends up in bodies of water, where it causes substantial harm to fish and other organisms. Those who use the drug, however, are largely unaware of this harm – not least because the packaging contains no information on the drug’s environmental impact. Only treatment facilities that are equipped to carry out what is known as quaternary treatment can remove such micropollutants. By 2045, according to the EU’s revised directive, certain urban wastewater treatment plants must be able to conduct quaternary treatment.

The revised directive also calls for wastewater to be closely monitored for antimicrobial-resistant bacteria, viruses and microplastics. EU member states are required to promote the reuse of treated urban wastewater wherever appropriate – “especially in water-stressed areas.”

The first version of the EU directive on wastewater treatment was adopted in 1991. In 2019 the European Commission evaluated the directive and determined that a revision was needed. The Commission submitted its proposal for a revised directive in October 2022.

The European Parliament approved the revised directive in April 2024 – approval by the European Council was the last step in the legislative process. The new regulations will now be published in the Official Journal of the EU and will go into force 20 days after publication. EU member states will then have 31 months to adapt their own laws in accordance with the directive.

Criticism and praise

The new rules have come in for criticism from the pharmaceutical sector. Pro Generika, a trade group, released a statement in response to the directive’s approval: “It is beyond dispute that treatment plants must be built in such a way that trace substances are filtered out of wastewater. What is not understandable is why only two industries are being penalized, even though the contaminants that need removing” also come from other sectors. The group warns of billions in costs.

But environmental and wastewater management groups emphatically welcome the new directive.

Dorothee Saar, head of transport and air quality at Deutsche Umwelthilfe, a German environmental group, said in response to an inquiry from Posteo: “We welcome the pharmaceutical and cosmetics industry’s sharing the costs of wastewater treatment.” Saar warned however: “Nevertheless, these rules must apply to all other producers of pollutants that end up in wastewater, like the fertilizer industry. More important than cost sharing is halting the introduction of harmful substances into wastewater. Non-degradable substances especially, like trifluoroacetic acid (TFA), which to a large extent can no longer be removed, must never be allowed to reach bodies of water in the first place.”

Saar criticized the situation in Germany specifically: “Germany lags far behind when it comes to imposing legal requirements for water quality.” To that end, Deutsche Umwelthilfe has filed lawsuits against the state government of North Rhine-Westphalia seeking effective measures to reduce mercury contamination in the Rhine, and against the state government of Schleswig-Holstein seeking a reduction in water contamination due to TFA and pesticides.

The Bundesverband der Energie- und Wasserwirtschaft (BDEW), a trade group representing the German energy and water management sector, also hailed the new directive. Martin Weyand, chief executive for water and wastewater, said in a statement: “Final approval of the urban wastewater treatment directive is an environmental economic milestone. With it, a binding extended producer responsibility program has finally been introduced in the wastewater management sector. In the future, producers of medicines and cosmetic products will be required to bear the initial and ongoing costs for quaternary treatment.” The “polluter pays principle” will now be legally binding, creating incentives to reduce the release of contaminants at the source and develop environmentally friendly raw materials and products. With the new directive, Weyand said, “there is no longer a license to pollute.” (dpa / js)

Mauritius temporarily blocks access to social media

2024-11-06T08:14:00+01:00

In the run up to parliamentary elections on November 10, the government of Mauritius ordered that access to social media sites be temporarily blocked. The order has since been rescinded.

NGOs had sharply criticized the shutdown – and call the lifting of the ban a “win for human rights.” (Source: IMAGO / AAP)

The government of the island nation of Mauritius ordered last week that access to social media sites be temporarily blocked. The restrictions were supposed to remain in place until the day after parliamentary elections on November 10 – but over the weekend the decision was reversed.

According to media reports, Mauritius’s Information and Technologies Authority instructed internet providers on the evening of October 31 to block access to social networks.

On Friday the organization NetBlocks confirmed that the blockade had been put in place: Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), TikTok, YouTube and LinkedIn were no longer accessible through various Mauritian internet providers.

The next day, however, on Saturday, the Mauritian authority announced that “after conducting a review of the situation” it had reached the decision to lift the directive. The internet provider Emtel announced on Monday that access to the platforms had been fully restored.

Felicia Anthonio of the NGO Access Now called the lifting of the ban a “win for human rights.”

The communications authority had initially announced that the suspension would be in effect until November 11. On November 10 the island nation with a population of 1.2 million will hold elections. The current prime minister Pravind Jugnauth is running for a second term. He has held office since 2017, having succeeded his father as prime minister.

Excerpts of conversations posted online

The communications authority justified its plan to suspend access to social media platforms as a response to “illegal postings that constitute a serious threat to national security and public safety.”

This was reportedly a reference to a wiretapping scandal that had broken in the lead up to elections. Last month, conversations involving politicians, businesspeople, and members of civil society were posted on social media.

According to Reporters without Borders (RSF), the leaked conversations included phone calls featuring five prominent Mauritian journalists. The prime minister and the police have claimed that the audio clips were manipulated using artificial intelligence, but after being contacted by RSF, the journalists confirmed the authenticity of the excerpts. “The authorities are hiding behind the artificial intelligence argument because they are embarrassed,” one of the journalists told RSF.

Condemnation of internet shutdowns

The political opposition reportedly criticized the social media ban, calling it a political maneuver by the ruling party aimed at preventing an electoral defeat.

The NGO Access Now also expressed criticism and was joined by other organizations in demanding an end to the shutdown.

Access Now has documented internet shutdowns throughout the world since 2016. In that time, Mauritius had never before blocked platforms or shut down the internet completely, according to Access Now’s record keeping. The country has in fact been “known for its strong record of upholding political and civil liberties.”

Access Now and its partners warn that shutting down social media platforms before elections carries “a risk of undermining the country’s human rights and democratic progress.” Shutdowns “prevent voters, journalists, opposition, and election observers from accessing or sharing essential information” and “empower incumbent regimes to control the narrative throughout the electoral period, undermining the electorate’s ability to make informed decisions.” This decreases the “fairness, credibility, and transparency of elections.”

The organizations remind the Mauritian government that the rights to freedom of expression and access to information are guaranteed in the country’s constitution.

Human rights experts at the United Nations have also drawn attention to the “dramatic real-life effects” of internet shutdowns. In a 2022 report, experts warned that internet shutdowns in the periods surrounding elections limited public discussion and made it more difficult to monitor the electoral process. Only “very rarely” would an internet shutdown “meet the fundamental requirements of necessity and proportionality.” (js)

Vertebrate populations have been shrinking globally for decades

2024-11-06T08:10:00+01:00

The WWF has determined that many vertebrate populations are getting steadily smaller. Some species’ numbers have sunk dramatically over the past few decades. The causes are human in origin.

“What we need for a good and secure life is at risk, thanks to our way of life.” – Kathrin Samson, WWF Germany. (Source: David Lawson / WWF-UK)

Vertebrate populations are declining worldwide. The number of living mammals, amphibians, reptiles, birds and fish has shrunk by 73 percent on average over the last 50 years, according to a report by the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) published on Thursday. The report analyzed data on nearly 35,000 populations representing nearly 5,500 vertebrate species. Despite conservation measures, biodiversity on the whole continues to trend downward. The WWF also warns that the planet is approaching several ecological tipping points, for example for climate change or the loss of local ecosystems. Passing these tipping points would bring further negative consequences for animal populations.

The environmental organization recorded the most severe population decline in freshwater ecosystems, at 85 percent, followed by terrestrial ecosystems (69 percent) and marine ecosystems (56 percent). Freshwater fish suffer most from encroachment on their habitat – like structural alterations along their migratory routes. Many of the ocean fish species covered in the report are fished commercially. Some fish stocks have been able to recover, thanks to conservation measures and catch quotas. The state of shark and ray populations, however, remains critical, according to the report.

Biodiversity ensures the survival of humanity both directly and indirectly, the report argues. Kathrin Samson of WFF Deutschland warns that people are destroying the very basis for their own survival. “Our health, our food supply, our access to clean water, the stability of the economy and tolerable temperatures depend on intact ecosystems and healthy wildlife populations. What we need for a good and secure life is at risk, thanks to our way of life.”

Exported environmental destruction

One example of a threatened population is that of the cod, which lives in the northern Atlantic Ocean and western Baltic Sea. The situation is dire: cod stocks declined by 77 percent between 2000 and 2023. Populations of Amazon pink river dolphins and of the smaller Tucuxi dolphin in Brazil’s Mamirauá reserve are also at risk. From 1996 to 2016 they declined by 65 and 75 percent, respectively. “In 2023 more than 330 river dolphins died in just two lakes during a period of extreme heat and drought,” the WWF reports.

The most severely impacted regions are Latin America and the Caribbean (95 percent), Africa (76 percent), and the Asia and the Pacific region (60 percent). Some causes for the decline in biodiversity in Latin America and Africa can be traced to other regions, like the demand for agricultural products or raw materials. The consumption patterns of people living in Europe, for example, have an impact on the environment in distant nature-rich regions from which Europe imports materials.

Myriad causes

All the causes for the extinction of species are human in origin, according to the WWF. Changes wrought by humans alter animal habitats – or destroy them entirely. Habitats are degraded by “unsustainable agriculture, logging, transportation, residential or commercial development, energy production and mining.” Rivers and streams are threatened by “fragmentation” and “abstraction of water,” marine habitats by “bottom trawling or dredging.”

Other human-induced threats include overexploitation by hunting or poaching; climate change; environmental pollution; and invasive species and disease. The latter are introduced into new regions either by humans directly or by animal species whose distribution has grown wider as a result of climate change.

Certain threats have a greater impact on the decline in populations, depending on the region: In Africa, for example, large mammals serve as a resource, particularly for the rural population. Because of this, “overexploitation is more commonly reported as a threat” to populations on the continent. In the island ecosystems of Asia and the Pacific, invasive species and disease are prominent threats, alongside habitat destruction and overexploitation. The effects of climate change are also more pronounced there than elsewhere.

In Europe and Central Asia habitat destruction is the central threat to native biodiversity. Pollution and the appearance of invasive species are also contributors. The effects of climate change, however, are not yet as clearly discernible as in other regions.

In Latin America and the Caribbean, much biodiversity is lost by “the conversion of grasslands, forests, and wetlands.” Climate change and the overexploitation of certain animal groups are also a problem. In North America the threats caused by pollution and invasive species are relatively pronounced.

Conservation measures are effective

In light of the situation, the WWF calls on the global community to strengthen efforts to protect biodiversity and ecosystems. “We must respond with new strategies and concepts to save what biodiversity can still be saved in the coming years,” WWF Deutschland writes in the German-language summary of the report. More protected areas must be established, the rights and needs of indigenous peoples must be respected, and so-called “nature-based solutions” must be found. The WWF also calls for the transformation of the food, energy and finance systems.

The report cites individual examples to show that measures to protect species do help: the European bison, for example, was extinct in the wild in 1927. Today there are roughly 6,800 bison in Europe, living largely in protected areas. Another example is that of the mountain gorillas in the Virunga Massif, whose population now comprises roughly 700 individuals.

“The next five years will be crucial for the future of life on our earth,” warns Samson of WWF Deutschland. “We can still turn the tide and halt the loss of biodiversity.” But in order to do this, the transformation of the economy and society must happen faster.

The WWF has published its Living Planet Report since the 1970s. It is meant to document changes in global biodiversity. For this year’s report, the WWF worked in collaboration with the Zoological Society of London to study nearly 35,000 global populations of almost 5,500 vertebrate species throughout the world. (hcz)

UK: Dissident can pursue legal action against Saudi Arabia for spyware attack

2024-11-04T08:10:00+01:00

A UK court has granted permission to a prominent Saudi Activist to file suit against Saudi Arabia. He accuses the country’s authorities of hacking his mobile devices and spying on him.

In addition to Yahya Assiri (pictured), other dissidents in the UK are also filing suit after alleged spyware abuse. (Source: IMAGO / TT)

The prominent human rights activist Yahya Assiri can bring suit in British court against Saudi Arabia for its alleged use of spyware against him. The High Court in London ruled that Assiri’s suit could move forward; his lawyers announced the decision last week. Human rights groups call the decision an “important step.”

As Assiri’s lawyer Monika Sobiecki wrote, “the High Court has accepted our evidence that Yahya has a reasonable prospect of winning his claim against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and thus has granted permission for the claim to be served out on the state.”

Assiri accuses the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia of using surveillance software to spy on him between 2018 and 2020, when he was living in exile in Britain.

Human rights activist in exile

Assiri is the founder of the London-based human rights organization ALQST, which focuses on Saudi Arabia. He is also a founding member of the National Assembly Party, a Saudi opposition party that operates in exile in London.

Assiri became increasingly critical of the Saudi royal family while serving as an officer in the Royal Saudi Air Force. He left his homeland in 2013, after coming under suspicion for making comments critical of the government online under the pseudonym Abu Fares. In exile in London, he came forward and revealed himself as Abu Fares and founded ALQST. In 2017 he was granted asylum in the UK.

First spyware attacks confirmed in 2018

In 2018, technologists at Amnesty International first investigated texts and WhatsApp messages received by Assiri and an Amnesty staff member. They were able to demonstrate that the texts were attempts to infiltrate Assiri’s smartphone with Pegasus spyware.

Pegasus is developed by NSO Group, an Israeli company. Using the spyware, attackers can fully take control of a target’s smartphone, viewing saved data and messages and listening in on phone calls. The phone’s location can be tracked, and its camera and microphone can be covertly activated.

NSO Group claims to sell its spyware only to government clients. For years, Pegasus has been linked to human rights abuses.

People close to the journalist Jamal Khashoggi, who was murdered at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in 2018, were reportedly spied on using Pegasus before and after the murder. According to an investigation by the Guardian and other media outlets, Saudi Arabia was behind this covert action.

Multiple forms of spyware deployed

Assiri also accuses Saudi Arabia of targeting him using the lesser known Reign spyware developed by the QuaDream company. According to his lawyers, security experts from Citizen Lab in Toronto have shown that his mobile phone was infected with both Reign and Pegasus.

As ALQST writes in a post on its website, the court’s decision means that the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office must now serve Assiri’s claim on the Saudi Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Speaking to Amnesty International Assiri’s lawyer Monika Sobiecki said the decision was a huge moment for his case, since “the abuse of [Assiri’s] privacy rights now formally calls for an explanation from the state.”

Concern about contacts

Assiri said in a statement: “I am fully aware that the authorities will want to target me. However, it is outrageous for them also to target individuals such as the victims of rights abuses and their families in Saudi Arabia simply because these people have been in contact with me. We have no idea how the authorities might use the information found on my device against them.”

“Saudi authorities have for years been using spyware against human rights defenders living in other countries who seek to document the worst of the government’s abuses,” said Joey Shea, a Saudi Arabia researcher at Human Rights Watch (HRW). “This case is an important step toward accountability and justice.”

Cases brought against Saudi Arabia and Bahrain

A case brought by another Saudi dissident who accuses the country of using spyware against him has been making its way through UK courts since 2020. The High Court ruled in 2022 that the Saudi government could not claim immunity in the case. This January an appeals court ruled that the case could move forward.

Legal action has also been taken by dissidents from Bahrain now living in the UK, who allege that Bahrain’s government spied on them using FinFisher spyware. Earlier this month a British appeals court dismissed a claim of state immunity made by Bahrain. Security experts at Citizen Lab accuse the country’s authoritarian government of repeatedly using Pegasus to spy on activists. (js)

Majority of raw materials extracted worldwide sourced from countries with limited press freedom

2024-11-04T08:08:00+01:00

Most of the world’s natural resources, including fossil fuels, come from countries with restrictions on press freedom. Reporters without Borders warns that environmental destruction and human rights violations often go unreported as a result.

Members of the press in some countries are threatened with violence and incarceration for critical reporting. (Source: IMAGO / Pond5 Images)

Two thirds of the world’s natural resources come from countries in which the freedom of the press is limited. That’s according to a new analysis by Reporters without Borders (RSF). The NGO calls on the international community to work towards improving the situation in these countries – allowing journalists to report freely on the problems associated with the extraction of raw materials.

The organization compared its own World Press Freedom Index with data collected by the World Bank. The analysis showed that in many countries it is difficult for journalists to investigate and report freely on the effects that resource extraction has on people and the environment.

According to RSF, between 2013 and 2021, 78 percent of the world’s fossil fuels were extracted in countries where the situation for press freedom is classified as “difficult” or “very serious.” In that same time frame, 67 percent of forest products and 45 percent of minerals like tin, gold, lead, iron, bauxite and copper came from countries with these designations.

Investigating environmental impacts

The United Nations warns that the demand for natural resources will likely continue to increase in the coming decades. If action isn’t taken, this will have catastrophic effects on ecological processes.

According to RSF, environmental journalism is often “the initial source of information about the impacts of extraction.” But almost a third of resources worldwide come from countries in which the situation for press freedom is “very serious.”

Arthur Grimonpont of RSF said in a statement: “The right to information about the exploitation of natural resources is vital to understanding the disastrous consequences of extraction, including the massive pollution of ecosystems, destruction of biodiversity, depletion of resources and exploitation of workers. Without journalists present to cover forest clearcutting, photograph giant open-cast mines or tell the stories of displaced and exploited populations, crimes against the environment and fundamental rights will take place in deadly silence.”

Press restrictions in China

One country in which investigating environmental issues is difficult is China. The country is the largest producer of coal in the world – and its mining and logging industries are each the second-largest. On the World Press Freedom Index, however, China is ranked only 172nd out of 180 countries.

The journalist and raw materials specialist Guillaume Pitron told RSF: “Although blatant, the environmental destruction caused by mining is poorly documented in China because it is hard to collect data, dangerous to go into the field, and nearly impossible to publish information about these issues in the national media.”

According to RSF there are only a few journalists reporting on environmental issues in China. They “risk being censored or labeled as ‘traitors’ and thrown in prison” by the Communist Party. In no other country are there more journalists in prison.

In 2018, Lu Guang, an internationally acclaimed photojournalist, disappeared. Part of his work has been to investigate the environmental pollution caused by China’s mining industry.

Risks in Russia and India

In Russia as well, journalists who report critically on the environment and other topics face the threat of violence and imprisonment. The country is one of the leading global exporters of fossil fuels and is ranked 162nd on the World Index of Press Freedom.

RSF reports that since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine the country’s few remaining independent news outlets have been censored or shut down. These include the environmental news site Kedr, which was labeled a “foreign agent” by the authorities and forced to close.

Simply conducting research in Russia is difficult, RSF reports: “The government has also blocked all access to official databases on the environment and pollution.”

In India, too, reporting on environmental issues is dangerous. The country is one of the world’s largest producers of coal and of mining and forest products. It is ranked 159th on the World Index of Press Freedom.

According to RSF, 28 journalists have been killed in India over the past ten years. Almost half were covering issues related to the environment – above all land seizures and illegal mining. Some of the murdered journalists had been investigating the so-called “sand mafia,” an organized crime network that illegally excavates sand for the construction industry both in India and abroad.

According to RSF, journalists in oil-producing countries have also been persecuted – for example in Saudi Arabia (ranked 166th), the United Arab Emirates (160th), Iran (176th) and Kuwait (131st).

Just last year RSF brought to light the difficulties and dangers facing journalists who report on environmental issues in the Brazilian Amazon.

Said Arthur Grimonpont of RSF: “We urge the international community to pressure the countries concerned to remove these obstacles [to reporting] and to guarantee the protection of environmental journalists.” (js)

US data broker declares bankruptcy after data leak

2024-10-16T14:33:00+02:00

Months after a trove of personal data it had collected was stolen, US data broker National Public Data has filed for bankruptcy. In its filing the company admits that the number of people impacted by the data theft is much higher than previously reported.

The purloined data was reportedly put on sale last spring. (Source: IMAGO / Depositphotos)

Earlier this year personal data belonging to “hundreds of millions” of people was stolen from US data broker National Public Data. The company admitted to the scope of the theft in a bankruptcy filing. Several outlets are reporting on the story.

National Public Data is a company based in Florida that conducts background checks. Its clients include employers seeking to investigate potential new hires.

In August the company confirmed that it had been the victim of a data breach. An announcement on National Public Data’s website stated that “a third-party bad actor” attacked the company’s database in December 2023. In “April and summer 2024,” data was stolen from the database.

Social Security numbers stolen

National Public Data had at first indicated that the stolen data included names, addresses, email addresses, telephone numbers and social security numbers. It remained unclear however how many people had been affected by the theft. In its announcement, the company gave no information as to the scale of the breach – while in a data breach notification submitted to the Maine attorney general’s office, the company claimed that 1.3 million people were affected.

Now, however, in its bankruptcy filing, National Public Data’s parent company Jerico Pictures admits that there are “hundreds of millions of potentially impacted individuals.” According to the news site TechCrunch, security experts estimate the number of stolen Social Security numbers to be around 270 million.

Of all the information stolen, the Social Security numbers are considered especially sensitive, because they can be used as proof of identity – meaning criminals could potentially use the information to commit identity theft. The Social Security Administration warns that each year, millions of US citizens are victims of identity theft. Criminals can also use Social Security numbers to gather information about potential victims.

The cybersecurity site BleepingComputer reported in August that the stolen data had been put up for sale on a “hacking forum.”

Investigations and class action lawsuits

According to court documents, the company filed for bankruptcy because the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and more than 20 states are currently investigating the breach and could potentially impose fines. Individuals impacted by the data breach have also filed lawsuits; “more than a dozen” class action lawsuits have already been filed. National Public Data “cannot generate sufficient revenue to address the extensive potential liabilities, not to mention defend the lawsuits and support the investigations.” The company worked primarily with institutional clients – and was run by its owner from his home office.

According to TechCrunch, after the bankruptcy filing, it’s unlikely that people impacted by the data theft will receive compensation.

In the announcement on its website concerning the data breach, National Public Data now claims to have stopped its data brokering activities entirely: “We have opted out ALL personal data and are not selling your personal information through our services.”

Call for regulation

Lena Cohen of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a civil liberties group, told the news site The Register that the case shows how important data privacy laws are. “The data broker industry is the wild west of unregulated surveillance,” said Cohen. Companies are making billions of dollars per year selling personal data. “Without strong privacy legislation,” data brokers will not sufficiently protect that data.

Cliff Steinhauer of the National Cybersecurity Alliance told CBS News in August that companies like National Public Data were able to collect and sell data “because there’s no national privacy law in the US – there is no law against them collecting this data against our consent.”

The FTC has taken action against data brokers before, even prohibiting some from selling data – in these cases, however, the prohibition applies only to location data. (js)

United States: Marriott pays multimillion dollar fine for allowing data leaks

2024-10-16T08:17:00+02:00

The Marriott hotel chain will pay 52 million dollars to a group of US states. The company allowed data breaches that affected more than 340 million customers worldwide.

Marriott’s insufficient security measures made the data theft possible, the FTC alleges. (Source: CC0 1.0 Universal)

The Marriott International hotel chain has reached a settlement in the US with the attorneys general of 49 states and the District of Columbia and will pay a 52 million dollar fine. The attorneys general investigated several data leaks at Marriott and its Starwood subsidiary and found that the data of more than 344 million people had been stolen. The company has also reached an agreement with the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to institute further measures to protect personal data.

Both the FTC and the group of attorneys general conducted investigations into the data leaks at the hotel chain: between 2014 and 2020 there were three such incidents, leading to the theft of the data of hundreds of millions of guests worldwide, the FTC reported on Wednesday. The Marriott International hotel network includes more than 7,000 properties across the US and more than 130 countries.

System intrusions not detected

The first breach occurred in June 2014, when payment information was stolen from more than 40,000 Starwood customers. According to the FTC, the data breach went undetected for 14 months. In November 2015 Starwood finally informed its customers – four days after Marriott had announced its plan to acquire the company. The acquisition was finalized in 2016. Since then, Marriott has been responsible for data security at both companies.

In July 2014 unknown actors again infiltrated Starwood’s systems. This data theft went undetected until September 2018, the FTC reports – by which time Marriott had acquired the company. During this four-year period, malicious actors had access to over 480 computer systems located not only in data centers but also at individual hotels. The hackers installed malware, among other actions. The data that was stolen included 5.25 million unencrypted passport numbers.

Other guest information stolen at the time included names, dates of birth, gender, addresses, email addresses, phone numbers, and payment information. Information relating to guests’ hotel stays was stolen as well.

A third cyberattack on Marriott’s computer systems went undetected between September 2018 and February 2020, according to the FTC. During that time period hackers had access to the data of more than 5.2 million guests of the hotel chain. This data included names, addresses, email addresses, phone numbers, and “hotel stay and room preferences.”

At the time, Marriott said that payment information and ID numbers were not stolen.

Connecticut Attorney General William Tong said in a statement: “Companies have an obligation to take reasonable measures to protect consumer data security. Marriott clearly failed to do that, resulting in the breach of the Starwood computer network and the exposure of personal information for millions of its guests.”

Marriott has now agreed to the multi-state settlement and will pay a fine of 52 million dollars. The fine will be divided between the 49 participating states and the District of Columbia. The attorneys general had accused the hotel chain of violating consumer protection and data protection laws.

Company must improve security practices

As part of its settlement with the FTC, the company commits to implement a “comprehensive information security program” to improve its data security. The FTC charges Marriott and Starwood with failing to take sufficient steps to protect customer data. In its complaint, the agency alleges that Marriott and Starwood’s systems lacked “appropriate password controls” and multi-factor authentication. The company also “failed to patch outdated software and systems in a timely manner.”

Samuel Levine, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, said in a statement: “Marriott’s poor security practices led to multiple breaches affecting hundreds of millions of customers.”

Over the next 20 years Marriott must provide annual assurance to the FTC that it is adhering to its new security policies. The company must also ensure that it retains personal data for only as long as is necessary. Customers must be provided with a link allowing them to request deletion of data associated with their email address or loyalty rewards account.

After the data breach that came to light in 2018, Britain’s data protection authority, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), took action and imposed a fine of 99.2 million pounds. The hotel chain contested the fine, and in 2020 it was ultimately reduced to 18.4 million pounds. (js)

US police rarely inform defendants about the use of facial recognition

2024-10-14T08:14:00+02:00

Hundreds of individuals in the United States have been arrested after being flagged by facial recognition technology, according to a new report. Many however never learn how they came to the attention of the police.

Police departments in seven US states are required by law to be transparent about their use of facial recognition. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

Police departments in the United States frequently employ facial recognition technology in criminal investigations – but don’t inform suspects identified by the technology about its use, a new investigation by the Washington Post reveals. Critics accuse police of a lack of transparency.

The team of reporters from the Washington Post requested documents relating to the use of the controversial technology from more than 100 police departments across the US. More than 40 departments in 15 states provided data – 30 departments also provided police reports from more than 1,000 investigations stretching back over the last four years.

According to the Post’s reporting, police often do not inform suspects who have been arrested that they were identified with the help of software – “denying them the opportunity to contest the results of an emerging technology that is prone to error.”

Even in reports that are available to the public, police in some cases obscured their use of facial recognition, stating instead that suspects were identified “through investigative means” or “by utilization of investigative databases.” According to the Post, the Coral Springs Police Department in Florida even “instructs officers not to reveal the use of facial recognition in written reports.”

Innocent people arrested

Defense lawyers and civil rights groups criticize this practice, arguing that “people have a right to know about any software that identifies them as part of a criminal investigation.” This is especially important in light of the fact that, in several documented instances, innocent persons have been arrested after being falsely identified by facial recognition.

The Post reports that the reliability of facial recognition “has been successfully challenged in a handful of recent court cases” throughout the US. As a result, some defense lawyers “posit that police and prosecutors are intentionally trying to shield the technology from court scrutiny.”

Cassie Granos, an assistant public defender in Minnesota, told the post that police probably “want to avoid the litigation surrounding liability of the technology.” One of her colleagues successfully argued in a case this year that facial recognition results should not be permitted at trial. The judge ruled that the software does not “consistently produce accurate results.”

Tests conducted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology have shown in the past that facial recognition software is “more likely to misidentify people of color, women and the elderly.”

Found by “the computer”

According to the Post, at least seven people in the US have been wrongfully arrested after being falsely identified by facial recognition software. Six of the seven were black. In every case, the charges against those arrested were later dropped.

Some of the defendants only found out about the use of facial recognition because officers happened to mention that “the computer” had found them.

The Post cites the case of Quran Reid, who spent six days in jail in 2022. He was accused of using stolen credit cards to buy luxury purses in Louisiana. Reid, who lives in Georgia, said he had never been to Louisiana.

A police officer in the state had written in a sworn affidavit that a “credible source” had brought Reid to his attention. “In fact,” writes the Post, “Reid was identified by facial recognition software that was fed a crime scene photo.” Charges were dropped after Reid’s lawyer pointed out that his client has a facial mole – while the alleged perpetrator did not.

Reid told the Post that when he was in jail he asked himself why he had been arrested. “You don’t even know where it’s coming from.” He has since filed a lawsuit against the Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s Office and the detective who issued a warrant for his arrest.

Some police departments in the US use facial recognition software to compare images taken by surveillance cameras at a crime scene with photos saved in databases, for example mug shots or driver’s license photos. According to the Washington Post, however, “there is no scientific consensus on what constitutes a match.” Because of this lack of consensus, there is wide variation between different products and the results they provide.

The controversial facial recognition software Clearview AI, for example, was used in an investigation in Ohio and produced a photo of basketball player Michael Jordan. In response to the Post’s inquiries, Clearview pointed out that the perpetrator was also included in the search results.

Barely regulated

There is no federal law in the US governing the use of facial recognition. According to the Post article, a few states and cities require that police departments be transparent about their use of the technology – “but even in these locations, the technology is either not being used that often or it’s not being disclosed.”

Florida has no such transparency requirements. Police in Miami did however provide the Post with data relating to the use of facial recognition over the past four years. According to the data, in that time the Miami Police Department ran 2,500 searches with the software. These “led to at least 186 arrests and more than 50 convictions.” But among those arrested, less than 7 percent were informed that facial recognition software had been used to identify them.

Even the state attorney for Miami Dade County told the Post that “police had not informed her office about their use of facial recognition in the vast majority of cases.” She acknowledged that there were concerns about the technology’s accuracy and said, “You cannot rely on this for probable cause alone.”

Carlos J. Martinez, the county’s chief public defender, told the Post: “One of the basic tenets of our justice system is due process, is knowing what evidence there is against you and being able to challenge the evidence that’s against you.”

In response to the Post’s reporting, “Miami police and local prosecutors announced plans to revise their policies.” In the future police will be required to disclose their use of facial recognition.

The Post points out that as a result of a 1963 Supreme Court ruling, prosecutors in the US are actually required “to inform defendants about any information that would help prove their innocence, reduce their sentence, or hurt the credibility of a witness testifying against them.” If they fail to do so, the court could overturn a conviction “or even sanction the prosecutor.” But, the Post reports, US courts are not in agreement about whether these rules cover the use of facial recognition. (js)

Saudi Arabia: Sharp Rise in Executions

2024-10-01T11:47:00+02:00

Saudi Arabia has executed more people this year than in any other since 1990, Amnesty International reports. Defendants face unfair trials, often without legal representation.

Saudi Arabia has boasted of its reform efforts. (Source: IMAGO / NurPhoto)

Saudi Arabia has executed 198 people so far this year, more than in any year since 1990. The human rights organization Amnesty International announced the death toll on Saturday.

According to Amnesty, the number of executions for drug offenses has risen sharply in 2024. Already this year, 53 people have been killed for drug-related offenses – in July, an execution was carried out every two days on average. By comparison, in all of 2023, only two people were executed for drug-related offenses.

Amnesty writes that the state has also “weaponized the death penalty to silence political dissent, punishing citizens from the country’s Shi’a minority who supported ‘anti-government’ protests between 2011 and 2013.” Saudi authorities have also “routinely” failed to adhere to international standards for fair trials and protections for defendants.

“The death penalty is an abhorrent and inhuman punishment which Saudi Arabia has used against people for a wide range of offenses, including political dissent and drug-related charges following grossly unfair trials,” said Agnès Callamard, Amnesty International’s Secretary General.

Saudi authorities have repeatedly promised to limit the use of the death penalty. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman announced in March 2022 that the country had “got rid of” the death penalty, except in cases where the penalty is mandated under Sharia. Amnesty dismisses such promises as no more than an “empty-worded campaign to rebrand” the country’s image.

The organization demands that Saudi Arabia immediately impose a moratorium on executions. The authorities must “order re-trials for those on death row in line with international standards without resorting to the death penalty.”

Fabricated charges

As an example of the use of the death penalty against government critics, Amnesty cites the case of retired traffic police officer Abdulmajeed al-Nimr. The state-run Saudi Press Agency (SPA) announced al-Nimr’s execution on August 17, reporting that he was accused of having joined Al-Qaeda. According to Amnesty however, Al-Nimr’s court documents “tell another story.” The charges against the retired police officer were in fact “related to his alleged support for ‘anti-government’ protests in Saudi Arabia’s Shi’a majority Eastern Province.”

The Specialized Criminal Court had originally sentenced Al-Nimr to nine years in prison in October 2021 for “seeking to destabilize the social fabric and national unity by participating in demonstrations,” as the court put it. He had also “[dissented] against the decision to arrest and prosecute wanted individuals.”

On appeal, Al-Nimr’s sentence was increased and the death penalty was imposed. “The Specialized Criminal Court did not make a single reference to Al-Nimr’s involvement with Al-Qaeda,” Amnesty reports. “The discrepancy in the charges announced by the Saudi Press Agency and Al-Nimr’s court documents shows a striking lack of transparency in judicial proceedings of death penalty cases.”

Al-Nimr was denied access to a lawyer for two years. He spent three months in custody without having been informed of the reasons for his detention. Al-Nimr’s conviction, Amnesty writes, citing court documents, “was based solely on a ‘confession’ he said was obtained under duress.”

Detained without rights

Death penalties for drug-related offenses were meted out in large part to foreign nationals, Amnesty reports. Men from Egypt, Syria and Niger are among those who have been executed this year. Many on death row have been in prison for years without being informed of the status of their case. An Egyptian man who was sentenced to death for drug-related offenses and is currently detained in Tabuk Prison told Amnesty, “I’ve been on death row for seven years for the possession of eight grams of hashish. I was also convicted of the intent to receive drugs, which I didn’t confess to and have denied. Where else in the world is someone sentenced to death for this?”

The man was sentenced in 2019 and since then has asked “all governmental entities” about the status of his case – “from the Ministry of Interior to the Supreme Judicial Council.” None of these authorities has been able to give him an answer. He and three other men have been denied legal representation as well as the right to file an appeal, Amnesty reports.

More executions worldwide

The actual number of executions in Saudi Arabia could be even higher, Amnesty warns. The Saudi Press Agency under-reported the number of executions in 2022. That year, by the official count, 196 people were executed – then the highest annual number documented by Amnesty in 30 years.

In 2023, the number of people executed worldwide was higher than in any year in almost a decade. In its annual report, Amnesty documented 1,153 executions in 16 countries. The organization assumes that the actual number is higher, given that no information is available in some countries – including China, where more people are likely executed than in any other country. According to the report, the number of documented executions worldwide rose 31 percent from the previous year, 2022, when Amnesty documented 883 executions.

Saudi Arabia was responsible for 15 percent of the executions recorded by Amnesty in 2023. That year, the country carried out 172 executions. (hcz)

Record-setting emissions from wildfires in South America

2024-09-26T16:16:00+02:00

Wildfires in Brazil and Bolivia have caused massive damage – and have released large amounts of carbon dioxide. Emissions this year have already reached record levels.

The impact of the South American fires can be felt even over the Atlantic. (Quelle: IMAGO / NurPhoto)

Central regions of South America have seen widespread wildfires in August and September, with devastating effects. The fires have led to an extraordinary increase in carbon dioxide emissions and a worsening of air quality, the EU’s Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service (CAMS) reported on Friday.

Fires in the Pantanal and the Amazon region were the main contributors to the poor air quality. In the second half of July, the number of fires in Brazil’s Amazon region and in Bolivia rose significantly, as did emissions throughout the region, CAMS reported. The smoke plume extended from Ecuador to São Paulo.

Mark Parrington, Senior Scientist at CAMS, said: “The smoke transport has had an impact far beyond the vicinity of where the fires have been burning, even reaching across the Atlantic.”

Historic levels of air pollution

So far this year in Brazil, CAMS estimates that roughly 183 megatons of carbon dioxide have been released into the atmosphere. That number exceeds the average for emissions over the last 22 years. In September alone, more than 60 megatons have been released. Total emissions are at a level similar to the record-high amount measured in 2007.

In most Brazilian states covering parts of the Amazon region, carbon dioxide emissions from wildfires were in line with the average until early August. Since then, however, they have surpassed these levels. In Amazonas and Mato Grosso do Sul, estimated carbon dioxide emissions from July through September are higher than any recorded by CAMS over the past 22 years.

The wildfires in Bolivia this year have also broken records: by mid-September carbon dioxide emissions had already reached 76 megatons – the previous high mark of 73 megatons was for the entire year of 2010. September 2024 alone saw the release of 32 megatons of carbon dioxide.

Record wildfire activity

According to CAMS Senior Scientist Parrington, “the wildfire activity in South America has been markedly above average, especially in the Amazon region and in the Pantanal wetlands.” Brazil’s Pantanal region is the largest inland wetland in the world. The first half of the year saw the worst fires ever recorded in the region. The seasonally recurring fires began significantly earlier this year and have been far greater in scope than usual.

The causes, according to CAMS, are the extremely high temperatures over the past few months in South America, long-term drought as indicated by low soil moisture, and “other climatological factors.”

Wildfire season in Brazil lasts from June to October. Traditionally farmers use fires to clear patches of forest for grazing. If the fires get out of control, the result can be massive wildfires. Many fires are set illegally.

The Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service of the European Union monitors wildfires and their emissions through satellite observations of active blazes. Carbon dioxide emissions are estimated based on the intensity of the fires. (hcz)

Germany: Civil society organizations criticize proposed security measures

2024-09-26T16:13:00+02:00

A slate of new security measures proposed by the German government would allow large-scale biometric surveillance by law enforcement and other agencies. An open letter from 26 civil society organizations criticizes the proposed measures.

The signatories fear the establishment of a giant state-run facial recognition database. (Quelle:D 64 – Zentrum für Digitalen Fortschritt e.V. – Screenshot Posteo)

A group of civil society organizations in Germany has published an open letter voicing opposition to a slate of new security measures proposed by the ruling coalition. The letter is addressed to members of the German Bundestag (Parliament) and criticizes both the expansion of law enforcement powers in the digital realm and the limiting of the right to asylum.

The letter’s signatories include Amnesty International, the Chaos Computer Club, and Wikimedia Deutschland. Under the title “Take a Stand: Defend Human Rights and the Rule of Law, Stop Biometric Facial Recognition,” the group calls on lawmakers to rethink the planned measures and oppose any form of biometric remote identification in Germany.

The letter argues that any gains in security that might potentially result from the proposed laws are not proportionate to the harm caused. Furthermore, the legislation will burden law enforcement agencies with additional tasks that will keep them from performing their actual function. In certain areas the measures have “a purely symbolic character.”

“Despite serious open questions regarding the effectiveness of the proposed measures and their compliance with EU law and the [German] constitution, this package is set to be approved and implemented in record time,” the organizations write. They urge lawmakers to oppose this “mindless impulse to act” and stand for the rule of law and fundamental and human rights.

Biometric mass surveillance

In early September the federal cabinet agreed on draft legislation containing the proposed security measures. The signatories to the letter are particularly critical of the plans to introduce biometric surveillance on a mass scale. The laws would allow the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees to use biometric data to determine the identity of asylum seekers. Refugees need not be suspected of having committed a crime for the authorities to use such data.

The Federal Criminal Police Office and Federal Police would be allowed to use biometric data to determine the identity of suspects. These agencies would be permitted to compare individuals’ biometric data with publicly available photos, videos, or sound recordings taken from the internet. The use of artificial intelligence by law enforcement agencies would also be allowed.

The organizations argue in their letter that these measures would require the creation of a giant, indiscriminate facial recognition database. They point out that such facial recognition databases are prohibited under Article 5 of the EU’s law on artificial intelligence, on the grounds that they enable mass surveillance and can violate fundamental rights.

“Granted, there are exceptions in the context of national security, but a prohibition of the use of biometric remote identification systems is explicitly possible under the AI Act and can legally be introduced by the member states,” the organizations write.

Human rights protections cannot be conditional, the signatories warn. “Especially in light of the growing strength of extreme right-wing parties, democratic forces must work together to minimize the potential for the institutional abuse of power.”

The letter also points out that in their coalition agreement, the ruling parties pledge to explicitly reject both “biometric recognition in public spaces” and the “use of biometric [data] gathering for surveillance purposes.”

Pending legislation

The security package criticized in the letter is a response by the federal government to events like the knife attack that took place last month in the city of Solingen and resulted in the deaths of three people. The package consists of two separate pieces of draft legislation, one of which only contains measures that do not require the approval of the Bundesrat (Federal Council).

On Monday the Committee for the Interior and Community took up the first piece of draft legislation, titled “Draft Legislation for the Improvement of Internal Security and the Asylum System.” The measures outlined therein, like the use of biometric data to screen asylum seekers, do not require Bundesrat approval. The second piece of draft legislation proposed by the coalition parties, “Draft Legislation for Improving the Fight against Terrorism,” must pass both the Bundestag and Bundesrat.

The next step for the legislation after the committee’s review would be a second and third reading before the full Bundestag. The timeline for this next step is not yet clear. (hcz)

Apple moves to drop suit against spyware developer NSO Group

2024-09-17T14:44:00+02:00

Apple has filed a motion in a US court to drop its lawsuit against the spyware developer NSO Group. The move is in part an effort to protect users.

Apple cites changes in the spyware market as another reason behind its decision. (Source: IMAGO / NurPhoto)

Apple will no longer pursue its lawsuit against the spyware developer NSO Group. On Friday the company filed a motion in a California court to have its case dismissed. The company sees “too significant a risk” to its efforts to recognize and defend against spyware attacks against Apple devices.

The US company had filed suit against the Israel-based NSO Group in November 2021. The legal action came after international media had revealed how NSO’s Pegasus spyware had been used to spy on journalists, activists, dissidents, and government officials around the world.

The goal of the lawsuit was to hold the spyware developer accountable for the surveillance and deliberate targeting of Apple users.

But now the company has filed a motion in court to have the case dismissed. Apple cites several reasons for the decision, including its fears about having to disclose important information regarding its own security measures. Three years ago, when first filing the lawsuit, the company “understood that it would involve disclosure of information to third parties” – but since that time the risk has grown.

Infrastructure built to protect users

In November 2021 Apple began to inform users if the company detected signs of a spyware attack. In several instances security analysts were able to find evidence of attacks or spyware infections after users had received alerts from Apple. The company also introduced a “Lockdown Mode” feature designed to wall devices off from potential attacks.

What is Pegasus?

Pegasus is a surveillance software developed by NSO Group, an Israeli company. The spyware can take complete control of an infiltrated device. It can turn on a smartphone’s camera and microphone, or copy all data saved on the phone – without the knowledge of the phone’s owner. Infiltrators using Pegasus can access location data and view passwords. The surveillance software has come in for criticism for years and has been linked to human rights abuses.

In the motion filed Friday, Apple writes that since first filing the lawsuit, it has continued to develop “extensive threat-intelligence information” to guard against spyware attacks. “Compromise of this information – an unavoidable risk inherent in disclosing such information to third parties – would severely undermine the effectiveness of Apple’s program and ability to protect its users.”

The spyware industry has also changed considerably since the lawsuit was first filed, Apple argues. There are now “a growing number of different spyware companies” rather than just “a single, powerful actor,” namely NSO Group. “The result is that even complete victory in this suit will no longer have the same impact as it would have had in 2021,” Apple writes. Three years ago it would have been possible to defeat a “significant portion” of the market – now however there are many more companies that “would be unaffected by the suit and able to continue their destructive tactics.”

Finally, Apple points to reports that the Israeli government allegedly confiscated documents from NSO Group – presumably to prevent them from appearing as evidence in an ongoing lawsuit brought against the developer by Meta and WhatsApp. In light of these reports, Apple worries that it might be difficult to obtain necessary evidence for its case.

Damages sought

In its lawsuit Apple had originally sought an injunction that would bar NSO Group from using any Apple software, services, or devices and from developing or selling spyware for them. The company had also demanded a sum in damages to be determined by the court.

In its original filing, the iPhone manufacturer had sharply criticized NSO group, characterizing the company as “amoral 21st century mercenaries.” The surveillance machinery created by NSO Group and its parent company Q Cyber “invites routine and flagrant abuse,” Apple charged. The spyware developers had also forced Apple “to engage in a continual arms race”: “Even as Apple develops solutions and enhances the security of its devices,” NSO Group was constantly upgrading Pegasus to overcome new hurdles. This caused “huge costs” for Apple.

This past January the court had decided that the suit against NSO Group could go forward. NSO had moved to dismiss the case, arguing that because the company was based in Israel, Apple had to file suit in an Israeli court. The presiding judge was not moved however and ruled that the lawsuit could be tried in the US.

The court is expected to decide in late October on Apple’s latest motion to dismiss the case.

Meta also files suit against NSO Group

A separate suit against NSO Group brought by Meta and WhatsApp is currently before a US court. WhatsApp and its parent company Meta accuse the spyware developer of being responsible for attacks on 1,400 WhatsApp users. NSO allegedly exploited a security loophole in the call function on WhatsApp to smuggle its controversial Pegasus spyware onto users’ smartphones. The device receiving the phone call was infiltrated even if the call was not accepted. The individuals targeted via WhatsApp are believed to include members of the press, lawyers, dissidents, human rights activists, diplomats, and government officials.

After the revelations about the abuse of Pegasus around the world, the US government in November 2021 imposed sanctions on NSO Group: Since then US companies have been prohibited from doing business with the company without special authorization. The US government has imposed similar sanctions on other spyware developers as well. (js)

Nearly 200 environmental activists killed worldwide last year

2024-09-12T08:08:00+02:00

In 2023, 196 environmental activists were murdered worldwide. Indigenous peoples were disproportionately likely to be targeted by violence.

The most dangerous country in Asia for environmental activists is the Philippines. Seventeen activists were killed there last year, and many others abducted. (archival photo) (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

Last year at least 196 environmental activists were killed worldwide. The most dangerous region for activists was Latin America, continuing a trend from last year. The data comes from a report published Tuesday by the human rights organization Global Witness. The actual number of deaths could be even higher.

Laura Furones of Global Witness said in a statement: “As the climate crisis accelerates, those who use their voice to courageously defend our planet are met with violence, intimidation, and murder. Our data shows that the number of killings remains alarmingly high, a situation that is simply unacceptable.”

Colombia witnessed the highest number of murdered activists, according to the report – 79 were killed in the country last year. This is the highest number of murders that Global Witness has ever documented in a single country. In 2022, 60 activists were killed in Colombia. According to Global Witness, organized crime groups are responsible for half of all killings of activists in the country.

Last year Global Witness expressed hope that the situation in the country would improve after President Gustavo Petro promised to better protect human rights and environmental activists. But so far Petro’s commitments have not led to a decrease in attacks – and in fact the violence seems to be increasing.

Latin America the most dangerous region

With 166 murders, Latin America is the most dangerous region for environmental activists, according to the report. In Brazil, 25 activists were killed last year – in both Mexico and Honduras, 18.

In Nicaragua ten activists were murdered. The victims there were all indigenous people who were fighting the destruction of the rainforest. The second largest rainforest in the western hemisphere is located in northern Nicaragua. The Nicaraguan government is doing nothing to stop the destruction of the forest, and in some places is even facilitating this destruction, according to Global Witness.

In Asia the NGO documented a total of 25 murders – 17 of which were in the Philippines. In previous years as well the country has seen the most killings in the region.

The deaths documented in Africa include those of two environmental activists killed in the Democratic Republic of Congo. One activist was killed in Ghana, and one in Rwanda as well.

Global Witness assumes that the actual numbers in the region are higher, “as access to information continues to be a challenge across the continent.”

Mobilizing against mining projects

Also difficult, according to the report, is establishing a direct connection between the murder of environmental activists and particular economic interests. Among cases in which it was possible to determine a connection, it was found that 25 murdered environmentalists were protesting mining projects. Activists opposing fishing, logging, farming, roads and infrastructure, and hydropower were also killed.

Seven activists protesting in the Philippines were abducted. In Mexico as well there were two cases of abduction.

Other environmentalists faced criminal charges or were victims of defamation campaigns intended to silence them.

The report also criticizes the increasingly severe measures taken against activists in Europe, the UK and the US, where “harsh sentences are more frequently imposed on those who have played a role in climate protests.” In the US, police in Atlanta, Georgia shot and killed an activist protesting the destruction of a forest.

More than 2,000 murders since 2012

Global Witness has been publishing its annual report on the murders of environmental activists since 2012. Between 2012 and 2023, the organization has documented a total of 2,106 deaths worldwide, most of them in Colombia (461). In Brazil, 401 activists were killed in the same period, in the Philippines 298, and in Mexico 203.

Global Witness demands better protections for environmental activists. Said Laura Furones: “Governments cannot stand idly by; they must take decisive action to protect defenders and to address the underlying drivers of violence against them. Activists and their communities are essential in efforts to prevent and remedy harms caused by climate damaging industries.”

The NGO calls for governments “to systematically document attacks and reprisals. New and better data on these attacks and their causes would enable governments to improve existing laws and mechanisms.” Victims of violence must also be ensured access to justice. Global Witness appeals to corporations as well, urging that they uncover, document and prevent human rights violations along their supply chains. (dpa / js)

US: Local politician convicted of murdering reporter

2024-09-11T08:14:00+02:00

A former local official in Nevada was sentenced to life in prison for the murder of a journalist who had published reporting critical of his professional conduct.

Jeff German (pictured) was murdered on September 3, 2022. He reported on crime and corruption in the city of Las Vegas. (Source: Harrison Keely – CC BY-SA 4.0 (cropped) )

A former Nevada county official was sentenced to life in prison for the murder of journalist Jeff Gordon. Gordon had published reporting that was critical of the politician’s professional behavior.

Jeff German was stabbed to death outside his home in September 2022. Just days later, police had taken Robert Telles, then the Clark County Public Administrator, into custody as a suspect in the killing.

A jury has now found Telles guilty of murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment. He will be eligible for parole after 20 years.

German worked for the Las Vegas Review-Journal and had published stories critical of Telles. In May 2022 he wrote an article that quoted sources claiming that Telles had created a “hostile work environment” and was involved in a relationship with a coworker to whom he was giving preferential treatment. Telles denied the criticisms at the time.

As the New York Times reports, Telles lost his bid for re-election a month after the article was published. German was working on a follow-up article at the time of his death.

The Washington Post reports that under cross-examination, Telles said that he “probably” would have won the election had it not been for German’s reporting. He also said in court that he was upset with German – and that he had told German directly at the time.

DNA evidence

The prosecution accused the 47-year-old defendant of hiding outside German’s house and then stabbing the journalist to death in retaliation for his reporting. Among the evidence produced by the prosecution were traces of Telles’s DNA which were found under the fingernails of the deceased.

Telles’s defense attorney criticized the police for failing to consider evidence that might have pointed to other suspects, the New York Times reports.

In court Telles insisted on his innocence. In testimony that lasted nearly three hours he claimed that a professional hitman had killed German – and that he was now being framed for the crime.

The twelve-member jury however returned a unanimous verdict finding Telles guilty of first degree murder.

Glenn Cook, executive editor of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, said in a statement that the verdict “brought a measure of justice for Jeff German.” Said Cook: “Jeff was killed for doing the kind of work in which he took great pride: His reporting held an elected official accountable for bad behavior and empowered voters to choose someone else for the job.”

Cook added: “In many countries, the killers of journalists go unpunished. Not so in Las Vegas.”

“Justice”

The nonprofit Reporters without Borders (RSF) also welcomed the verdict against the former official. Teller’s conviction “sends an important message of accountability for crimes against journalists.”

Clayton Weimers, Executive Director of RSF USA, said: “In a world where the vast majority of crimes against journalists are met with impunity, we are grateful that justice has been delivered for Jeff German and that his killer will undoubtedly spend a very long time behind bars. German’s legacy will forever be his steadfast commitment to journalism and the stories he told about his city, Las Vegas.”

While praising the verdict, however, RSF repeated earlier criticisms of the investigation into German’s murder: “While investigating Telles, law enforcement risked German’s confidential sources by seizing his electronic devices and newsgathering materials.”

According to RSF, since 2000, eleven journalists in the United States have been killed in connection with their work.

Katherine Jacobsen of the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) told the New York Times that local reporters in the US “face particular risks” – for one because they “live among the people they cover.” Jacobsen also drew attention to the fact that German was killed outside his own home. “It’s chilling to think that there are no safe places for those local journalists to go,” she said.

In the RSF’s 2024 World Press Freedom Index, the US is ranked 55th out of 180 countries – down ten spots from last year’s ranking. (js)

Dutch data watchdog hits Clearview AI with 30.5 million euro fine

2024-09-05T14:11:00+02:00

Controversial facial-recognition company Clearview AI must pay a steep fine in the Netherlands. The Dutch Data Protection Authority warns other organizations not to use the company’s facial recognition database.

In recent years several EU regulators have imposed penalties on the company. (Source: IMAGO / Dreamstime)

The Dutch Data Protection Authority (DPA) has imposed a fine of 30.5 million euros on Clearview AI. The data watchdog accuses the US company of having compiled an illegal facial recognition database containing billions of photos. Now the Dutch DPA is investigating whether the company’s leadership can be held personally accountable. The authority announced the fine on Tuesday.

Clearview has amassed a gigantic trove of photos of people taken from the internet and uses them to train its facial recognition software. The database contains more than 50 billion images of faces, the company claims. The data, according to the Dutch DPA, was processed by the company without necessary legal basis and also includes the data of Dutch citizens.

Clearview claims to sell access to its software only to intelligence and investigative services. A 2020 report by the New York Times brought greater attention to the then little-known company.

The Dutch regulator now accuses the company of having “seriously violated” the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – and as a consequence has imposed a fine of 30.5 million euros.

Illegal database

The Dutch data watchdog argues that Clearview “should never have built” its database. The regulator regards as especially problematic the sensitive biometric data the company has collected. “There are some statutory exceptions” to prohibitions on the collection of such data, but they do not apply in Clearview’s case, the Dutch DPA writes.

The data watchdog also takes issue with the company’s “insufficient transparency”: Clearview does not give sufficient notice to the people in its database about its use of their photos and biometric data. Under the GDPR, if asked, Clearview has to inform people what data of theirs it has collected. “But Clearview does not cooperate in requests for access.”

The Dutch DPA has ordered Clearview to stop the practices that violate the law. If the company fails to comply, it will face an additional penalty of up to 5.1 million euros.

“Facial recognition is a highly intrusive technology that you cannot simply unleash on anyone in the world,” said Dutch DPA chairman Aleid Wolfsen. “If there is a photo of you on the internet – and doesn’t that apply to all of us? – then you can end up in the database of Clearview and be tracked.”

Use prohibited

Wolfsen concedes that facial recognition can contribute to the work of law enforcement – but in his view, the technology should be used “by competent authorities in highly exceptional cases only.” Police should have to “manage the software and database themselves,” rather than relying on the services of a private company. Moreover, use of the technology should be subject to supervision by relevant authorities.

The chairman also issued a warning to Dutch institutions: “Clearview breaks the law, and this makes using the services of Clearview illegal. Dutch organizations that use Clearview may therefore expect hefty fines.”

The Dutch DPA initiated its investigation last year after receiving several complaints against Clearview. The regulator informed the company of its decision in May. Tuesday’s announcement stated that because Clearview has not officially objected to the decision, the company is unable to appeal the fine.

In a statement sent to US media Clearview’s chief legal officer wrote that the company does not have a place of business or customers in the EU or the Netherlands and is not subject to the GDPR. The Dutch DPA’s decision is “unlawful, devoid of due process and is unenforceable,” the chief legal officer wrote.

Earlier penalties for privacy violations

Prior to this latest fine, several data protection agencies in the EU had taken action against the company. In 2022 Italy’s data regulator imposed a 20 million euro fine. France’s data protection authority meanwhile demanded a penalty of 25.2 million euros.

In the UK the company successfully challenged a fine imposed by the British Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). A British court ruled in October of last year that the UK regulator did not have jurisdiction. The ICO later indicated its intent to appeal the ruling.

Last month Australia’s privacy regulator announced that it would cease attempts to enforce an order issued to the company in 2021. The regulator had ordered Clearview to delete photos of Australians within 90 days. “There is no indication as to whether Clearview has since complied with the order,” the Guardian reported.

Management to be held accountable?

The Dutch DPA also acknowledged that despite previous fines from other regulatory authorities, Clearview had not changed its conduct. Given this reality, the regulator is looking for ways to ensure compliance. This includes “investigating if the directors of the company can be held personally responsible.”

Wolfsen, the Dutch DPA chairman, said that the company “cannot continue to violate the rights of Europeans and get away with it. Certainly not in this serious manner and on this massive scale.” The regulator now plans to look into whether financial penalties can be imposed on the company’s management for causing the privacy violations. Directors can be held liable, Wolfsen said, if they “know that the GDPR is being violated” and have the authority to put a stop to the violations, but decline to do so.

In July Clearview reached a settlement in a lawsuit in Illinois. In this case as well, the company had been accused of violating the rights of the people impacted by its massive data collection. As part of the settlement, however, Clearview did not admit any liability. (js)

Poland: Former minister charged in connection with spyware purchase

2024-09-04T08:12:00+02:00

While serving as deputy minister of justice, Michał Woś is alleged to have illegally approved the use of state funds for the purchase of Pegasus spyware. He has now been indicted.

Hundreds of people in Poland were reportedly spied on with Pegasus under the previous government – including opposition leaders. Michał Woś (pictured) has now been charged in connection with the spying. (Source: IMAGO / SOPA Images)

The Polish prosecutor general’s office has brought charges against former deputy minister of justice Michał Woś. He is alleged to have approved the transfer of funds from a justice ministry fund to pay for the purchase of Pegasus spyware – in violation of the law. The charges were announced last week.

Woś was deputy minister of justice from 2017 to 2018 under the Law and Justice (PiS)-led government. He is now a member of Sovereign Poland, a splinter party founded by former members of PiS.

In its announcement, the prosecutor general’s office alleges that while in office Woś transferred 25 million zloty (roughly 6 million euros) from a justice ministry fund to the Central Anticorruption Bureau (CBA) – which then used the funds to buy Pegasus spyware.

The former minister knew that the CBA “did not meet the conditions for obtaining such financial support,” said Prosecutor General Adam Bodnar. By law, the CBA’s activities are financed only with funds taken from the state budget.

In 2022, the president of the Supreme Audit Office announced that his office had found an invoice showing that Polish authorities had purchased Pegasus: according to the auditor, the CBA purchased the controversial spyware using illegal funds that were meant to be used to support crime victims.

This invoice is now being presented as evidence by the prosecutor general’s office, alongside other proofs. Woś disputes the charges against him.

Immunity revoked

The Sejm, the lower house of Poland’s parliament, voted in June to revoke Woś’s legal immunity. This was in response to a request by Prosecutor General and Justice Minister Adam Bodnar. According to media reports, the accused could face up to ten years in prison if convicted.

While his case moves through the legal system, Woś must regularly report to police. He is also prohibited from being in contact with other suspects and accused persons as well as with witnesses.

Woś told journalists last week that he believes the charges are illegitimate, because the prosecutor general is not authorized to make such an indictment. He also claimed that financing the purchase of surveillance software was legal. According to Woś, the CBA used Pegasus to uncover foreign spies.

Opposition leaders spied on

Security analysts uncovered evidence in 2021 that the smartphone belonging to Krzysztof Brejza, a former opposition leader and current member of European parliament, had been infiltrated several times by Pegasus during the 2019 election. At the time, Brejza was leading the opposing coalition’s campaign.

What is Pegasus?

Pegasus is a surveillance software developed by NSO Group, an Israeli company. The spyware can take complete control of an infiltrated device. It can turn on a smartphone’s camera and microphone, or copy all data saved on the phone – all while the phone’s owner remains unaware. Infiltrators using Pegasus can access location data and view passwords. The surveillance software has come in for criticism for years and has been linked to human rights abuses.

Pegasus was also used to spy on lawyer Roman Giertych. His clients have included Donald Tusk, who became prime minister of Poland in December 2023 (having held the post previously from 2007 to 2014) and before that was head of the Civic Coalition, an alliance of opposition parties.

Prosecutor Ewa Wrzosek was another target of surveillance. She co-founded an independent association of prosecutors who criticized the changes to the Polish judicial system implemented by the former PiS-led government.

The mayor of the city of Sopot also had his phone hacked, according to later reports.

Incidents under investigation

In January of this year, shortly after taking office, the new Polish government convened a parliamentary commission to investigate whether the former PiS-led government used Pegasus to spy on political opponents.

According to a preliminary report put out by the Justice Ministry in April, Pegasus was used to target nearly 600 people in Poland between 2017 and 2022. Justice Minister Bodnar stated at the time the report was released that the list included “many more well-known people” than had previously been made public.

Even before this, in October of last year, the Polish Senate had concluded that the purchase of surveillance software was illegal. The Senate also found that the 2019 elections were unfair as a result of the use of Pegasus against opposition leaders.

Spyware used in other EU countries as well

Elsewhere in the EU the use of spy software against members of the political opposition or the press has also come to light in Hungary, Spain and Greece.

An investigation in Greece was shuttered in July. A similar investigation in Spain was initially dropped, but was reopened in April of this year.

After conducting its own investigation, the Hungarian data protection authority determined that the use of spyware in the country was legally justified. (js)

Uber hit with 290 million euro fine for data protection violations

2024-09-04T08:11:00+02:00

European data protection authorities accuse Uber of transferring drivers’ sensitive data to the United States without appropriate protections. Now the company faces a steep fine. Uber denies any wrongdoing.

Uber claims it has been treated unfairly and will contest this latest fine. (Source: IMAGO / CFOTO)

The Dutch Data Protection Authority (DPA) has imposed a substantial fine on the ride-hailing company Uber. The US company allegedly transferred personal data from Europe to the US without legal basis. Now it must pay a fine of 290 million euros, the Dutch DPA announced last week.

According to the Dutch authority, for two years Uber transferred its drivers’ personal data to its headquarters in the US without due protections and without legal basis. The data included drivers’ account information and taxi licenses as well as “location data, photos, payment details, identity documents, and in some cases even criminal and medical data.”

Uber’s actions violated Article 44 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). “In Europe, the GDPR protects the fundamental rights of people, by requiring businesses and governments to handle personal data with due care,” Dutch DPA chairman Aleid Wolfsen said. “Uber did not meet the requirements of the GDPR to ensure the level of protection to the data with regard to transfers to the US. That is very serious.”

Uber sees the root of the problem in a 2020 decision by the European Court of Justice (Schrems II) that declared the EU-US Privacy Shield agreement invalid – and led to “immense uncertainty between the EU and US,” a spokesperson for the company said. The Dutch DPA meanwhile argues that in transferring the data Uber should have used standard contractual clauses to provide a level of data protection comparable to that in the EU.

According to the Dutch authority, Uber has since stopped the practices that violated the GDPR; the company’s data transfers are now conducted on an appropriate basis.

Drivers sought help

The Dutch DPA’s investigation was prompted by complaints from more than 170 Uber drivers in France. The drivers had sought help from the Ligue des droits de l’Homme (LDH), a French human rights organization, which in turn lodged a complaint with the French data protection authority. The French authority forwarded the complaint to its counterpart agency in the Netherlands.

Uber processes data from various EU member states, but its European headquarters are in Amsterdam. This gives the Dutch DPA jurisdiction under the GDPR. The Dutch authority worked closely with its French counterpart and consulted other European data protection authorities as well.

No agreement on Uber’s side

A spokesperson for Uber called the Dutch DPA’s decision “flawed” and said the fine was “completely unjustified.” Said the spokesperson: “We will appeal and remain confident that common sense will prevail.”

This is now the third fine that the Dutch authority has imposed on the company. In 2018 the Dutch DPA fined the company 600,000 euros, and in 2023 10 million euros. The company appealed the latter penalty. In the 2023 case, the Dutch DPA determined that Uber did not respond fast enough to its drivers inquiries concerning their data and provided incomplete information in its privacy policy about how the company transfers data to the US.

The Ligue des droits de l’Homme cheered this latest fine imposed by the Dutch authority. Its extraordinary scale was appropriate, given the gravity of the violation, the organization said in a statement. The LDH announced that it would be filing a joint complaint with the INV-FO union against Uber to demand compensation for the 40,000-50,000 drivers in France affected by the company’s actions. (hcz)

US: Social Security numbers stolen from data broker

2024-08-22T08:04:00+02:00

Hackers have stolen personal data collected by a US data broker. The stolen data has since been put up for sale.

It remains unclear how many people have been impacted. (Source: IMAGO / Depositphotos)

Hackers have stolen personal data that was collected and stored by the US data broker National Public Data. The data includes the addresses and Social Security numbers of US citizens. The company has confirmed the breach.

National Public Data (NPD) is a company headquartered in Florida that conducts background checks. Its clients include employers seeking to investigate potential new hires.

Cliff Steinhauer at the National Cybersecurity Alliance told CBS news that companies like NPD are able to collect and sell data “because there’s no national privacy law in the US” to prohibit them from doing so.

Personal data

As NPD has now admitted in a post on its website, a “third-party bad actor” is believed to have stolen data held by the company in “April 2024 and summer 2024.” The company “cooperated with law enforcement and government investigators” and has since “implemented additional security measures.” NPD believes the stolen data to include names, mailing and email addresses, telephone numbers and Social Security numbers.

Social Security numbers are particularly sensitive pieces of information because they can be used as proof of identity – criminals can use stolen Social Security numbers to commit identity theft. The Social Security Administration warns that each year millions of US citizens are victims of identity theft. Criminals can also use Social Security numbers to find out more about potential victims.

So far it is unclear exactly how many people were affected by the data breach. In the post on its website announcing the breach, NPD gives no indication of the scale of the theft – but promises to “try to notify” those affected.

In a data breach notification submitted to the Maine attorney general’s office, the company claims that 1.3 million people were affected. According to media reports, the data of Canadian and British citizens was also included in the leak.

As the cybersecurity site Bleeping Computer reports, hackers first attempted to sell the stolen data in April. They claimed to be selling 2.9 billion records. As the site notes, multiple records may pertain to the same person – thus the number of individuals impacted is likely lower than 2.9 billion.

This month a class action lawsuit was filed against NPD for “its failure to properly secure and safeguard” the data.

Another SSN leak

US media are also reporting on a leak at the flight tracking company FlightAware, which according to its website “operates the world’s largest flight tracking and data platform.”

In a notice submitted to the California attorney general’s office, the company wrote that in July it discovered a “configuration error” that “may have inadvertently exposed” user data, including customers’ names and addresses. In some cases Social Security numbers may have been among the data left unprotected and accessible on the internet. The problem dates back to January 2021.

It is not known how many of FlightAware’s roughly 12 million registered users were affected. Also unclear is whether the data was accessed by unauthorized actors. (js)

Geofence warrants: US court rules warrants for the release of location data unconstitutional

2024-08-15T08:05:00+02:00

A US appellate court has ruled that warrants for the release of location data violate the constitution. Civil liberties groups applaud the decision.

In the future Google will only store location data locally on users’ devices – which could make it more difficult for law enforcement to access the data. (Source: IMAGO / VectorFusionArt)

So-called “geofence warrants” are “categorically” unconstitutional, a US appellate court ruled last week. Court orders demanding the release of location data have drawn criticism for years.

With a geofence warrant, law enforcement agencies in the US can demand that companies turn over information on every mobile device known to have been in a particular place at a particular time. Unlike a normal search warrant, geofence warrants do not target a specific person. For that reason civil liberties advocates say that such warrants can subject individuals to law enforcement scrutiny who have no involvement in the matter under investigation.

According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a civil liberties organization, Google is the key recipient of this type of court order. Many of the company’s products, like Google Maps, collect location data.

Location data used to track down suspects

The case ruled on last week concerned a 2018 armed robbery of a US Postal Service truck in Mississippi. Postal inspectors were initially unable to identify the suspects in the robbery. The inspectors applied for a geofence warrant, seeking to obtain information on smartphones whose location data showed them to have been within a certain radius of the crime scene within a one-hour timeframe.

As the Harvard Law Review has documented,, Google’s first step in responding to geofence warrants is to provide anonymized data. Law enforcement then review this data to filter out users whom they deem irrelevant to their investigation. After narrowing the field, investigators then ask for more information on individual users, like the name and email address linked to a Google account.

This was how investigators in the Mississippi case tracked down the suspects, who would eventually be convicted. In their appeal, the defendants disputed the constitutionality of the geofence warrant – and requested that the evidence obtained with the warrant not be admitted.

“Constitutionally insufficient”

In its decision the court observed that location data can be used “to follow an individual into areas normally considered some of the most private and intimate.”

The court came to the conclusion that geofence warrants are “categorically prohibited” by the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution. The Fourth Amendment protects individuals against “unreasonable searches and seizures” by the government and specifies that search warrants cannot be issued without probable cause and without “particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Because geofence warrants are not directed at a specific individual, civil liberties advocates have long argued that they are unconstitutional.

The appeals court judges stated that a company like Google that receives a geofence warrant must “search through its entire database” of location data, a search that occurs “while law enforcement officials have no idea who they are looking for.” The “quintessential problem with these warrants is that they never include a specific user to be identified, only a temporal and geographic location” – this, the court ruled, is “constitutionally insufficient.”

Decision goes into force for three US states

The online magazine TechCrunch reports that the decision issued by the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit will go into force for the states of Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas. The ruling “effectively makes the use of geofence warrants unlawful” in these states.

Nevertheless, the ruling was ultimately not in the defendants’ favor. The court found that the investigators applying for the geofence warrant in 2018 were acting in “good faith,” considering, among other factors, the “novelty of the technique” – Google had received its first geofence warrant request only two years prior, in 2016. The evidence obtained by the warrant was thus ruled to be admissible in this case.

Still, the EFF considers the decision to be an important one. “It is gratifying to see an appeals court recognize the fundamental invasions of privacy created by” geofence warrants, the organization wrote in response to the ruling. Furthermore, “it is essential that every person feels like they can simply take their cell phone out into the world without the fear that they might end up a criminal suspect.”

Related decisions

Only last year did a US appeals court review a geofence warrant for the first time. In that case, in California, the court ruled that the warrant violated the Constitution.

Last month, however, another court ruling on a separate case came to the opposite conclusion. The judges in the case based their conclusion on their finding that the defendant had “voluntarily exposed” his location data to Google.

There have been repeated reports of individuals who have been wrongly targeted by law enforcement because of geofence warrants. In 2020, for example, a man was wrongly suspected of committing a burglary – he had regularly biked past the scene of the crime while using an app to record his rides.

Meanwhile Google has announced that in the future it will only store location data locally on users’ devices. The EFF believes that this change will make it difficult or even impossible for law enforcement officials in the US to obtain location data from Google. The organization stated that it was “cautiously optimistic that this will effectively mean the end of geofence warrants.” (js)

Data protection complaints filed against X for training algorithms with user data

2024-08-15T08:01:00+02:00

X employed user data to train its algorithms – without informing users. The data privacy watchdog Noyb has now filed several complaints.

Last week X informed the Irish data protection authority that it would suspend its use of EU citizens’ data for the time being. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

The social media platform X (formerly Twitter) trained a so-called artificial intelligence (AI) model with user data. Users were not given advance notice that their data would be employed for this purpose, prompting the Austrian data privacy organization Noyb to file legal complaints in nine European countries.

X offers paying users the option to use its chatbot, Grok, which was developed by the company xAI. To teach the software language skills, developers “train” it with large amounts of data – including posts by human users.

Noyb reports that X began “irreversibly” feeding the data of European users into Grok back in May. But the company did not ask for users’ consent for this type of data processing, as required by the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – in fact, X didn’t inform users at all.

According to Noyb, most users only found out about X’s use of their data after reading a post by an X user. The user had pointed out a new default setting that allows the platform to employ user data for “training and fine-tuning.”

A simple yes or no question

According to Noyb, companies that want to process personal data must have a legal basis for doing so, one rooted in the GDPR. But instead of relying on the consent of its users, which would provide such a basis, X is claiming a “legitimate interest.” As Noyb points out, however, “This approach has already been rejected by the Court of Justice [of the European Union] in a case concerning Meta’s use of personal data for targeted advertising.”

Max Schrems, chairman of Noyb, said in a statement: “Companies that interact directly with users simply need to show them a yes/no prompt before using their data. They do this regularly for lots of other things, so it would definitely be possible for AI training as well.”

X has also violated several other provisions of the GDPR, Noyb argues. In response, the organization has filed complaints with the national data protection authorities in Austria, Belgium, France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland and Spain.

X in court

Last week it was reported that Ireland’s Data Protection Commission (DPC) had taken legal action against X. Because the company’s European headquarters are in Ireland, it falls under the DPC’s jurisdiction.

In response, X agreed “to suspend its processing of the personal data contained in the public posts of X’s EU/EEA users.”

According to Noyb, however, a court hearing last week “revealed that the DPC seems to have been mainly concerned with so-called ‘mitigation’ measures.” The Irish data watchdog “does not seem to go for the core violations” – namely X’s failure to obtain users’ consent.

Schrems added: “The court documents are not public, but from the oral hearing we understand that the DPC was not questioning the legality of this processing itself. It seems the DPC was concerned with so-called ‘mitigation measures’ and a lack of cooperation from Twitter [X]. The DPC seems to take action around the edges, but shies away from the core problem.”

In Noyb’s view, many questions went unanswered during the court hearing. The organization has filed complaints “to ensure that the core legal problems around Twitter’s AI training are fully addressed.” The more EU data protection authorities get involved, the higher the pressure will be on both the DPC and X.

In light of the fact that the data processing has already begun, Noyb has requested an “urgency procedure.” This would empower authorities to take preliminary action.

Opt-out possible

X users who would like to object to their data being used to train the company’s AI model can go to their settings and uncheck the box next to the option “Allow your posts as well as your interactions, inputs, and results with Grok to be used for training and fine-tuning.”

Facebook’s parent company Meta had planned to employ user data to train its own AI model. In this case the company did inform users of the new measure – but instead of asking for their consent, Meta only informed users of their right to object.

In response, Noyb filed eleven complaints with national data protection authorities. Consumer advocates also issued a warning to Meta.

In June Meta announced that for the time being it would not employ users’ posts for machine learning purposes. (dpa / js)

Iran: 29 people executed in a single day

2024-08-12T08:06:00+02:00

Iran has again carried out multiple death sentences in a single day. A man was also executed in connection with the mass protest movement of 2022. Human rights groups warn that more executions could follow.

Human rights organizations say that the executions dispel all illusions of progress under new president Massud Pezeshkian. (Source: IMAGO / Metodi Popow)

In Iran last Wednesday 29 people were executed, human rights activists report. The day before the government had also executed another man in connection with the 2022 protest movement.

As the Oslo-based organization Iran Human Rights (IHRNGO) reports, last Wednesday 26 men were hanged in a mass execution in Ghezelhesar Prison in the city of Karaj, near Tehran. That same day, three more people were executed in a different prison in Karaj.

According to IHRNGO the men were executed for murder, rape, and drug offenses. Two Afghan citizens and a member of the Baluch minority were among those killed.

Two women were also reportedly executed, though IHRNGO was unable to confirm the reports.

Warning of more executions to come

IHRNGO director Mahmood Amiry-Moghaddam warned: “Without an immediate response from the international community, hundreds of individuals could become victims of the Islamic Republic’s killing machine in the coming months!”

Several death sentences were carried out in the days preceding the mass execution: one of the victims, according to Amnesty International, was 34-year-old Reza (Gholamreza) Rasaei, who was executed on August 6. Rasaei had been sentenced to death in connection with the mass protests that broke out across the country in 2022. The authorities had accused him of stabbing a member of the Revolutionary Guard during the protests.

Amnesty reports that Rasaei was sentenced to death in October 2023 after a “grossly unfair” trial that followed his arrest in November 2022. The court relied on forced confessions – while in prison, Rasaei was tortured.

The authorities had not informed Rasaei, his family or his lawyer in advance of the execution. Only hours after the execution was carried out, Rasaei’s family was forced “to bury his body in a remote area far from his home and in the presence of security forces.”

Reza Rasaei was a member of Iran’s Kurdish minority. Just a day before his death, the UN’s Fact-Finding Mission on Iran released a report concluding that ethnic and religious minorities in the country – especially Kurds and Baluch people – “have been disproportionally impacted by the government’s crackdown on protesters since 2022.”

A means of repression

Diana Eltahawy, Deputy Director for the Middle East and North Africa at Amnesty International, pointed out that the execution of Rasaei took place while attention was focused on regional tensions between Iran and Israel. But, said Eltahawy, Rasaei’s death “highlights the Iranian authorities’ resolve to use the death penalty as a tool of political repression to instill fear among the population.”

Eltahawy added that the execution “dispels any illusions of human rights progress with a new president assuming power last week.”

According to Amnesty, Rasaei is the tenth person to have been executed in connection with the protests of the “Woman Life Freedom” movement.

Countrywide protests against the government broke out in September 2022 in response to the death of Mahsa Amini, a young Kurdish woman. The authorities responded with more intense repressive measures – thousands of people were arrested. The authorities have also cracked down on violations of the country’s veiling laws; enforcement measures include the use of surveillance cameras.

The death penalty has also been employed more frequently in the country: in 2023 at least 853 people were executed in Iran, according to Amnesty – more than in any other year since 2015. In the aftermath of the mass protests, the authorities have used the death penalty “to instill fear among the population and tighten their grip on power,” Amnesty wrote in April.

As of June 30 of this year, the Iranian authorities have already executed at least 274 people, according to the Abdorrahman Boroumand Centre for Human Rights in Iran. Amnesty International has long demanded that the Iranian authorities impose a moratorium on executions. IHRNGO has counted 87 additional executions since the election on July 6. (js)

"Google is a monopolist," rules US court

2024-08-08T08:06:00+02:00

Google has a monopoly in internet search, a US court has ruled. The judge will now decide on the consequences.

Google reportedly paid roughly $18 billion to Apple in 2021 to be the default search engine on the iPhone. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

Google has a monopoly in internet search – and has used illegal means to defend that monopoly against competitors. A US court made the determination in a ruling announced on Monday. Observers call the decision groundbreaking – but there will not be any consequences as yet.

The ruling comes in a case first brought in 2020 by the US Justice Department and several states. Attorney General Merrick Garland on Monday called the decision “an historic win.” Google has already announced its plans to appeal the ruling.

Billions paid for default status

At the center of the trial were billion-dollar payments to other companies that Google used for years to secure its place as the default search engine in web browsers like Apple Safari and Mozilla Firefox.

According to a report in the New York Times, in 2021 alone, Google paid Apple roughly $18 billion to keep Google as the default search engine on the iPhone.

Users have the option to change this setting – in Firefox, for example, the option is located under “Preferences → Search → Default Search Engine.” But, as the ruling states, “many users simply stick to searching with the default.”

Search engine monopoly

In court, Google argued that it provided users with the better choice. “Users choose to search on Google because they find it useful,” the company’s lawyers said, according to the Times.

The US government on the other hand accused Google of leveraging its billion-dollar payments to deny competitors the opportunity to compete with its search engine. Google collected more data about consumers than its competitors could, and with that data it was able to make its search engine better and more dominant, the government argued.

Judge Amit P. Mehta “sided with the government, saying Google had a monopoly over general online search services,” the Times reports. “The company’s agreements to be the automatic search engine on devices and web browsers hurt competition, making it harder for rivals to challenge Google’s dominance.”

The Justice Department also accused Google of having a monopoly over the ads that are shown inside search results.

On this point too the judge sided with the government. As the ruling states, “Google has exercised its monopoly power by charging supracompetitive prices for general search text ads.” The inflated revenue these ads brought in allowed Google to continue paying other companies to ensure its search engine had default placement.

Additional ruling to decide consequences

It is not yet clear what consequences the ruling will have. The judge will now decide what further steps to take. It is not known, furthermore, what sanctions the government will seek. Google meanwhile has already announced that it will appeal the decision. Observers expect the appeal to take several years.

Nevertheless, experts consider the ruling important. The New York Times called it a “landmark decision” and a “major blow to Google.” According to the paper, the ruling “could have major ramifications for Google’s success.” It will also likely influence antitrust cases that the Justice Department is currently pursuing against other tech companies like Meta and Apple.

Rebecca Haw Allensworth, a professor at Vanderbilt University who studies antitrust law, told the Times: “This is the most important antitrust case of the century, and it’s the first of a big slate of cases to come down against Big Tech.” The decision, she said, is “a huge turning point.”

In the European Union, the Digital Markets Act (DMA) that went into effect last year mandates that users be asked to select a default search engine from a list of suggested options.

The European Commission is pursuing its own antitrust case against Google, arguing that the company distorts competition in the advertising technology industry.

And back in the US the Justice Department filed a separate suit against Google last year over its online advertising practices. The case is set to go to trial in September. (dpa / js)

Texas: Meta to pay $1.4 billion for use of facial recognition

2024-08-05T08:05:00+02:00

Meta has agreed to pay $1.4 billion to settle a lawsuit brought in response to its use of a facial recognition feature. The lawsuit was brought by the state of Texas.

The feature, which has since been discontinued, drew criticism in other countries as well. (Source: IMAGO / Science Photo Library)

Facebook’s parent company Meta has agreed to settle a lawsuit in Texas for the sum of $1.4 billion. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced the settlement on Tuesday. He had accused the company of illegally collecting and using the biometric data of millions of users.

At the center of the lawsuit was a now-discontinued feature on Facebook that automatically recognized users in photos and suggested them for tagging. The site first tested the tool in 2010 and officially introduced it the following year. At that time the feature was automatically activated on all users’ accounts.

Thanks to its new feature, Facebook was able to compile a massive databank of biometric data. In November 2021 the company shut down the feature worldwide – declaring at the time that as part of the measure it would “delete more than a billion people’s individual facial recognition templates.” Biometric data like the data taken from photos of a person’s face is especially sensitive, because it cannot be changed. Data of this kind can be used to identify a person throughout their life.

Texas criticizes violations of law

In February 2022 Texas attorney general Paxton filed suit against Meta for its use of the facial recognition system and accused the company of capturing biometric data from millions of Texans without their consent. The company had done so, the lawsuit alleged, in violation of Texas’s Capture or Use of Biometric Identifier Act, which requires companies to obtain consent before collecting or using such data. The company also ran afoul of the state’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act.

“Unbeknownst to most Texans, for more than a decade Meta ran facial recognition software on virtually every face contained in the photographs uploaded to Facebook,” the attorney general’s office wrote in a Tuesday press release.

Meta dismissed the charges as baseless when the suit was first filed. Following the announcement of the settlement, a spokesperson for the company told Reuters that the company was “pleased to resolve the matter.” Meta “has continued to deny any wrongdoing,” Reuters reports.

“Largest settlement ever obtained”

According to the Texas attorney general’s office, the company will pay the $1.4 billion to the state over a period of five years. The penalty represents “the largest settlement ever obtained from an action brought by a single state” in a case involving data privacy. The previous largest settlement came in a 2022 case, when Google agreed to pay $392 million to a group of 40 states. Attorney General Paxton called the settlement announced Tuesday “historic.”

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a civil liberties organization, cheered the settlement but added in a statement that “it also highlights the need to give consumers their own private right of action to enforce consumer data privacy laws.” In Texas only the attorney general has the authority to enforce the state’s law governing the capture of biometric data. The law has been in effect since 2001, but has not been publicly enforced until now. “State regulators do not always have the resources or the will to aggressively enforce consumer privacy laws,” the EFF writes. “That is why consumers should be empowered to bring lawsuits on their own behalf.”

The EFF also criticizes the settlement for not requiring Meta “to destroy any models or algorithms trained on Texas biometric data” – a measure the state initially sought when it filed the lawsuit.

This most recent settlement is now the second that Meta has agreed to in the US in connection with its facial recognition feature: in 2020 the company paid $650 million to settle a class action suit in Illinois. Like Texas, the state has a law prohibiting companies from collecting and processing biometric data without individuals’ consent.

Years of criticism

Facebook’s facial recognition feature met with criticism in other countries as well. After the tool was first introduced in 2011, Johannes Caspar, who at the time was Commissioner of Data Protection in Hamburg, Germany, said that it violated both European and German data protection law. It was alarming, Caspar wrote, that behind the scenes Facebook was building up a data bank for the purposes of facial recognition. He demanded that Facebook delete the biometric data it had collected.

That same year, Caspar announced plans to take legal action against Facebook.

The company removed the feature in Europe in 2012, only to reintroduce it six years later. Now European users had to first activate the feature and consent to the processing of their biometric data, as required by the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation, which went into effect in 2018.

But the criticism didn’t stop: after the feature was reintroduced, Caspar again raised the alarm, saying that the technology made it possible to automatically identify and track individual users, and to create in-depth profiles. Furthermore, noting that some people had multiple accounts on social media, Caspar pointed out that facial recognition made it possible to link these accounts against those users’ will.

When it shut down the feature worldwide in 2021, Meta cited “growing societal concerns” about facial recognition. (dpa / js)

Priest sues Grindr for sharing data

2024-08-02T15:24:00+02:00

An American priest and former high-ranking administrator in the Catholic Church has sued the dating app Grindr for sharing his data. As a consequence of the data sharing, the priest was outed as gay and lost his position in the church.

Fundamentalist Christians purchase data from dating apps and target members of the clergy who may have broken their vows of celibacy. (Source: IMAGO / Depositphotos)

A priest from Wisconsin has filed a lawsuit in California Superior Court against the dating app Grindr. Monsignor Jeffrey Burrill, who until his resignation in 2021 was the top administrator at the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), said in the lawsuit that his data was sold without his knowledge or consent. In July 2021, data from the app was published indicating that Burrill was a user of the app and had apparently patronized gay bars.

Burrill was made to leave his position in the church in the wake of the forced outing. Now he says that the release of his data caused “significant damage” to his reputation – especially given his vow of celibacy and the Catholic Church’s stance towards homosexuality.

Grindr did not inform Burrill that his information was being sold to data vendors, the lawsuit alleges. According to the lawsuit filing, the dating platform sold the priest’s data to companies and data vendors between 2017 and 2021.

Burrill filed the lawsuit on July 18, after a request from one of his lawyers that Grindr pay $5 million in compensation was denied. Burrill hopes that the lawsuit will force the platform to pay damages and will in the future prevent the company from sharing users’ data without informing them.

A spokesperson for Grindr told the Washington Post that the company “intends to respond vigorously to these allegations, which are based on mischaracterizations of practices relating to user data.”

Data-sharing business model

Burrill resigned from his post as general secretary of the USCCB after allegations of “improper behavior” surfaced against him. According to Gregory Helmer, one of Burrill’s attorneys, the USCCB asked for his resignation. Soon afterwards the right-wing Catholic news site the Pillar reported on the priest’s activities on the dating platform and published details gleaned from his personal data. The website claimed to have reviewed his activities using “commercially available records of app signal data.”

In the lawsuit Burrill now alleges that the Pillar obtained the data from Catholic Laity and Clergy for Renewal (CLCR). The Christian organization buys data from queer dating apps in order to identify leading clergy members who have broken their vows of celibacy. CLCR admitted to obtaining data from Grindr in the past but “denied sharing information with the Pillar,” according to the Washington Post.

The Pillar meanwhile has still not revealed the source from which it obtained the data. The site has said only that it obtained the data legally from a data vendor that trades in anonymized data that Grindr sells in accordance with its terms of use.

Helmer, Burrill’s attorney, told the Washington Post that he hopes that going to court will ultimately reveal where the CLCR bought its data from. “We want answers so we can use that as a warning to other Grindr users,” Helmer told the paper.

The user data collected and shared by Grindr is anonymized, but because the app registers and saves users’ locations, profiles can be linked to individual users. In Burrill’s case the data showed logins from a device whose location was tracked to Burrill’s office, his residence, and other places he was known to have visited.

As stated in its privacy policy, Grindr reserves the right to share user information with third parties. This information includes profile information, location data, and users’ activity on the app. The app even holds information regarding some users’ HIV status – but this is not shared with advertising companies.

“Anonymized” – not anonymous

Burrill’s case demonstrates how even ostensibly anonymized data can sometimes be linked to specific individuals. Even when clear identifiers like names and telephone numbers are removed, there is usually still enough information to significantly narrow down the field of potential matches. If someone is searching for a particular person in a set of anonymized data, often enough the location data alone is sufficient to identify the person.

The Pillar’s article immediately prompted sharp criticism from within the church. James Martin, an American Jesuit priest, called the site’s methods spying “under the guise of a journalistic ‘investigation’,” and added: “These witch hunts, usually aimed at vulnerable people working for the church, must end.” Martin also decried the article’s conflation of homosexuality and pedophilia. The article cited instances of adults using Grindr and similar apps to contact minors and seemed to suggest a link between these instances and prior instances of child sexual abuse in the church.

James Carr, another lawyer representing Burrill, sent a letter to Grindr in June stating that his client was “publicly ‘outed’ as gay” as a result of the app’s release of his data. “To have that decision forced out of your hands and into the public realm is reprehensible,” Carr told the Washington Post. (hcz</a)

US: Federal court finds phone searches at the border unconstitutional

2024-08-01T08:04:00+02:00

US border agents must obtain a warrant before searching a traveler’s cell phone. That’s according to a decision by a federal judge in New York.

Observers expect the question of whether phone searches are legal to end up before the US Supreme Court. (Source: IMAGO / USA TODAY Network)

A US federal court has ruled that border patrol agents need a warrant to search cell phones and other electronic devices belonging to travelers. The ruling applies only to the Eastern District of New York – which includes John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK), a major point of entry into the US.

US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) claims the authority to search electronic devices as part of the inspections it conducts at all ports of entry. On its website the agency states that “all persons, baggage and merchandise arriving in, or departing from, the United States are subject to inspection by CBP” – this includes “all electronic devices crossing our nation’s borders.”

According to CBP, in the 2023 fiscal year, the devices of “only” about 41,700 international travelers were searched.

Last week however the United States Court for the Eastern District of New York ruled that officers must obtain a search warrant before they conduct such an inspection.

Civil liberties experts criticize unconstitutional searches

The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University in New York City cheered the ruling. The institute, together with the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, had filed an amicus brief in the case arguing that warrantless searches of cell phones at the border violate the US Constitution. The judge in the case “relied heavily on the amicus brief in issuing her ruling,” the institute wrote in a press release.

The Knight Institute based its argument against warrantless searches on the First Amendment’s protections of the freedoms of the press, speech, and association. The amicus brief also invoked the Fourth Amendment, which protects against “unreasonable searches and seizures” and specifies that search warrants cannot be issued without probable cause and without “particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Scott Wilkens, Senior Counsel at the Knight Institute, said: “As the court recognizes, warrantless searches of electronic devices at the border are an unjustified intrusion into travelers’ private expressions, personal associations, and journalistic endeavors – activities the First and Fourth Amendments were designed to protect. The ruling makes clear that border agents need a warrant before they can access what the Supreme Court has called a ‘window onto a person’s life.’”

Ruling after the fact

The decision came in response to a motion filed in a criminal case by a US citizen who argued that material found on his phone could not be used as evidence against him at trial.

As related in the text of the decision, the defendant was detained upon arrival at JFK airport in March 2022. Border patrol agents told him to hand over his phone and provide them with the passcode. He complied with the agents’ demand after being told he had no other choice.

The agents at the airport manually searched the phone and allegedly found child pornographic material. Two weeks later the government obtained a warrant to conduct a forensic search of the device as well as of a second phone belonging to the defendant.

The defendant was subsequently indicted. He filed a motion arguing on the basis of the Fourth Amendment that the material found during the search of his phone could not be permitted as evidence.

The court granted his motion in part and found that the initial search of his phone had in fact violated the Fourth Amendment. In her decision the judge referred to a 2014 Supreme Court decision that found that police require a warrant to search the cell phone of a suspect they have taken into custody. The Supreme Court’s arguments were also applicable to searches at the border, the judge found.

Nevertheless, in this specific criminal case the evidence was ruled admissible – the court came to the conclusion that even though the initial search was conducted in violation of the Fourth Amendment, a warrant had been obtained for the second search and the officers conducting it had acted in “good faith.”

As the online magazine TechCrunch reports, the current ruling only applies for the Eastern District of New York, which covers Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island and Long Island. La Guardia and JFK airports are both located in the Eastern District. An appeal of the ruling is possible. A spokesperson for CBP told TechCrunch that the agency was “reviewing” the decision.

No unitary legal framework

There have been earlier cases in which courts in the US have examined the legality of searches of phones and other electronic devices at the border. In 2019 a US district court in Massachusetts also determined that such searches violated the constitution. A year later however an appeals court reversed the decision, ruling that US border agents were in fact authorized to search electronic devices.

Civil liberties organizations like the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) have long criticized the phone searches.. “The US Constitution generally places strong limits on the government’s ability to pry into our private lives,” the organization writes on its website. At the border “those limits are not as strong” – this even though cell phones and laptops store personal information that “can reveal our political and religious affiliations, medical conditions, family and romantic lives,” and more.

Speaking to the news site The Register, , Wilkins of the Knight Institute said that because the issue is so important, and because different courts have reached conflicting decisions, “There is a good chance this issue will end up in the Supreme Court.” (js)

English school illegally uses facial recognition

2024-07-29T08:10:00+02:00

Data protection authorities in England have decided that the use of facial recognition at a school canteen was illegal. The school did not evaluate the risks posed by the technology.

Fingerprint scanners are also being used at British schools. (Source: IMAGO / UIG)

A school in the English County of Essex violated data protection laws by using facial recognition in its canteen. The school had not created a data protection impact assessment in advance as was required. The decision was made after an investigation by the British Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) and a warning has been issued to the school.

In March 2023, the Chelmer Valley High School in Chelmsford began using facial recognition technology in connection with a payment system in their canteen. Prior to this, the school had already used fingerprint scanners so that approximately 1,200 students at the school could pay for their lunch without cash.

The school intended to reduce queues for serving meals with the help of facial recognition, as reported by The Telegraph.

Risks not analyzed

As stated on Tuesday by British data protection authorities, the use of facial recognition was, however, illegal. This is due to the school not conducting a data protection impact assessment beforehand. The authorities explain that the data risks for those children affected could not be evaluated as a result.

When using facial recognition, biometric data is processed with which people can be clearly identified. According to the British authorities, such data is considered particularly sensitive. Processing such data therefore involves high risks. An impact assessment is necessary to determine and evaluate the corresponding risks.

Lynne Currie from the ICO said: “Handling people’s information correctly in a school canteen environment is as important as the handling of the food itself. We expect all organisations to carry out the necessary assessments when deploying a new technology to mitigate any data protection risks and ensure their compliance with data protection laws.”

Currie continues to explain that a data protection impact assessment (DPIA) is required by law and an important instrument for protecting the rights of those affected. By doing so, it makes organisations already consider data protection at the beginning of a project.

Opting-out instead of opting-in

Furthermore, the authorities criticize that the school did not first obtain valid consent for processing data. Parents of students were informed in writing about the new technology in March 2023 and had the opportunity to object. However, according to the data protection authorities, it is required by law to obtain explicit consent. The so-called “opt-out” was not legitimate.

Additionally, most of the students affected were old enough to provide their own consent. Objections made by parents would prevent them from exercising their rights and freedom. Parents or students were not included beforehand in the decision-making process about the use of the technology.

The school did, however, retroactively obtain consent from those affected in November 2023. A data protection impact assessment was also conducted at this point in time. Regardless, it was a violation of data protection laws as both aspects are required to be met beforehand. The authorities considered the measures that had been taken by the school prior to this point in time and simply issued a warning. If the school were to violate data protection laws again in the future, other actions may be taken.

Currie said: “We’ve taken action against this school to show introducing measures such as FRT should not be taken lightly, particularly when it involves children.”

The authorities do not want to discourage schools from using new technologies. However, data protection needs to be a top priority to create trust and to protect the privacy of children.

The authorities also issued a legally non-binding recommendation to the Chelmer Valley High school. They should, for example, follow the guidelines of the authorities for video surveillance. Part of this is also a case study of facial recognition at schools. In this study, they warn that the use of facial recognition poses a particular risk for discrimination. Therefore, schools must check if there are alternatives that interfere less with the rights of those affected.

Criticism of identity checks similar to border-control

Mark Johnson from the British civil rights organisation, Big Brother Watch, criticized with regard to the current case: “The faceprints taken by these systems contain highly sensitive biometric data. No child should have to go through these kind of border-style identity checks just to get a school meal.” He demanded: “Children should be taught how to look after their personal data, not treated like walking bar-codes by their own schools and encouraged to give away their biometric data on a whim.”

According to details from the BBC, many British schools are using payment systems which work with fingerprint-reading devices. The use of facial recognition is still uncommon.

For example, in 2021 it was made public that nine schools in North Ayrshire (Scotland) had facial recognition installed in their canteens. In response, an organization specializing in children’s digital rights, Defend Digital Me, called for a ban on the use of biometric recognition technology in schools. The technology excessively interferes with childrens’ rights to have their privacy protected and is not necessary in a democratic society.

Eventually, the school discontinued the project. The data protection authorities intervened at the time. After an investigation in 2023, the data protection authorities declared that the implementation in the school likely violated privacy laws. (js)

US data broker sells location data taken from millions of German users

2024-07-29T08:08:00+02:00

Journalists have gained access to a commercially available data set containing billions of geo-tracking data points. The information can be used to trace a person’s movements and create detailed profiles. The data is collected from common smartphone apps.

Tracking and profile building for marketing purposes must be banned, consumer advocates demand. (Source: IMAGO / Zoonar)

Data brokers sell sensitive location data taken from users around the globe. A joint investigation by Bayerischer Rundfunk (BR) and netzpolitik.org now shows that brokers also share data linked to people living in Germany. Politicians warn of a “security-related problem.”

Location data, or geo-tracking data, is frequently collected by smartphone apps: for instance, by weather or navigation apps. Often this data is packaged and sold for commercial purposes – like showing users targeted advertising.

Reporters at BR and netzpolitik.org received a free sample of location data from the US data broker Datastream – a taste of the broker’s commercially available offerings. As they describe in an article published last week detailing the findings of their investigation, BR and netzpolitik.org made contact with the company through the Germany-based online marketplace Datarade.

The data set consisted of 3.6 billion geo-tracking data points collected over a two-month time period last year. The data seems to come from several million people in Germany, and can be used to construct highly detailed profiles based on a person’s movements. Because of a few errors in the data set, it wasn’t possible to determine exactly how many people it pertains to. Datastream claims it can deliver location data that is updated by the hour. Netzpolitik.org calls this a “new dimension of mass surveillance.”

While the location data aren’t linked to users’ names, they are linked to a unique “Mobile Advertising ID” that is assigned to each device.

BR and netzpolitik.org’s reporters write that they were able to identify several people based on their residences and places of work and to reconstruct how they spent entire days – including visits they took to clinics or brothels.

Verified data

In order to verify the data, BR and netzpolitik.org contacted some of the individuals whose movements they were able to trace. The individuals were surprised to learn that their location data was commercially available.

Also included in the data set were the profiles of what are presumed to be tens of thousands of individuals who work in so-called security-related fields. These individuals’ workplaces include federal ministries, weapons manufacturers, branches of the Verfassungsschutz domestic intelligence service, the Federal Intelligence Service (Bundesnachrichtendienst), and the federal police, as well as German military facilities.

Neither Datarade, the online platform, nor Datastream, the company that supplied the data, responded to questions from BR and netzpolitik.org.

Impacting “the privacy of every individual”

Ramona Pop, the president of the Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband, Germany’s independent consumer advisory body, told BR and netzpolitik.org that users are “clearly at the mercy of” the marketing industry. Said Pop, “European lawmakers must finally recognized that personal user data does not belong in the hands of the marketing industry and change the law accordingly. Tracking and profile creation for marketing purposes must be categorically banned.”

Konstantin von Notz of the Green Party characterized the data-sharing as a “security-related problem.” Von Notz, chairman of the control committee in parliament that oversees the intelligence services warned that governments could also use data of this kind for espionage purposes. “If you know how people act and where they go, then you can spy on them. You can create points of contact and generate seemingly coincidental situations that allow you to enter into conversations with people in order to recruit them or bribe them,” von Notz said. He also demanded that data not be allowed to be kept or sold “in this form” and said that it concerned the “privacy of everyone who lives in the Federal Republic.”

Louisa Specht-Riemenschneider, professor of data law and data protection at the University of Bonn and recently appointed successor to the current Commissioner for Federal Data Protection, said that it is very difficult for European authorities to go after data brokers located outside of the European Union. In her view it is also difficult to take measures against data marketplaces like Datarade. Said Specht-Riemenschneider: “The data marketplace is essentially a broker, it doesn’t process personal data itself. In a certain sense this is a regulatory loophole.” It is therefore urgent, she said, for lawmakers to find a solution.

Criticism of location data sales in the US as well

The sale of data by data brokers has long come in for criticism, especially in the US. The New York Times for example showed in 2018 that such data sets can be used to gain detailed information about individuals.

Cases have also come to light of authorities in the US purchasing such data. Critics say that state authorities can use commercially available data to get access to information that they would otherwise need a court order to obtain – and warn that individuals’ privacy is at risk.

The US Federal Trade Commission has already taken action against data brokers: in one case, the agency prohibited the company X-Mode from sharing or selling “sensitive location data.” The FTC warned that such data could indicate for instance whether a person is seeking a particular medical treatment.

Netzpolitik.org has published an article with tips on how to turn off or at least limit location monitoring by smartphone apps. (js)

EU consumer watchdogs question legality of Meta's subscription model

2024-07-29T08:05:00+02:00

Consumer protection authorities in the EU are examining whether Meta’s “pay or consent” model violates EU law. The company could potentially have used “misleading or aggressive practices.”

Consumer advocates in Germany have already taken issue with the company’s subscription model. (Source: IMAGO / IP3press)

European consumer protection authorities are currently examining whether Meta has violated EU consumer law in introducing its paid subscription model. The company has been informed of the authorities’ concerns, the EU commission announced on Monday. Meta now has until September to respond.

At issue is the paid subscription model that Meta introduced in the EU last year. According to Meta, the new model allows users to use Facebook and Instagram without ads – if they pay a monthly fee. Meanwhile their activity on the platforms continues to be tracked, even if they choose the paid subscription option.

National consumer protection authorities in the EU have now examined several elements of the paid subscription model – and found that they could constitute “misleading or aggressive practices.” Part of the authorities’ investigation is to assess “whether Meta provided consumers upfront with true, clear and sufficient information.” Consumers could potentially have been subjected to “undue pressure to choose rapidly between the two models,” paid and unpaid. It is questionable whether, based on the information presented to them, consumers were in a position to understand the impact their decision might have on their rights.

Violation of EU consumer law?

Authorities are concerned that Meta’s paid subscription model could violate EU guidelines against “unfair commercial practices” and “unfair contract terms.”

A press release issued by the European Commission outlines the authorities’ concerns, one of which is the use of the word “free.” This could be seen as misleading to consumers. Those who decide not to pay the monthly subscription fee must accept that their data will be used to target them with personalized ads – which Meta uses to generate revenue.

The authorities also see Meta as potentially “confusing users” in violation of EU law. In order to find out how their data is used, users have to navigate through several windows and links.

Consumer protection authorities criticize the vague language used by Meta, for instance its use of “your info” to refer to users’ “personal data.” The company also suggests that paying customers will not see any ads at all, which is not the case, since “they might still see ads when engaging with content shared via Facebook or Instagram by other members of the platform.”

Finally, Meta potentially pressured consumers to quickly choose between the models – without giving them sufficient time to assess the implications of their choice. Users for whom Facebook and Instagram “often constitute a significant part of their social lives and interactions” were unable to access their accounts before making a choice.

Meta must respond

These concerns were relayed to Meta in a letter from the Consumer Protection Cooperation (CPC) Network, which brings together the authorities responsible for enforcing EU consumer law.

The company now has until September 1 to respond to the CPC network’s letter and propose solutions. If Meta fails to address the concerns, CPC authorities can take “enforcement measures, including sanctions.”

The CPC network began looking into Meta’s “pay or consent” model after the European Consumer Organization (BEUC), a group of consumer organizations, filed a complaint against the company. The group welcomes the CPC network’s actions.

Agustín Reyna, Director General of the BEUC, now urges Meta “to change its pay-or-consent choice screen” and provide consumers “with a fair and freely-given choice.”

Further investigations

The investigation by European consumer protection authorities is coordinated by the European Commission and led by the French Directorate General for Competition, Consumer Affairs and Fraud Prevention.

In a different proceeding earlier this month the European Commission informed Meta of its preliminary findings that the company’s paid subscription model violates the EU’s Digital Markets Act. In this case as well Meta has the opportunity to respond. If the preliminary findings are confirmed, the commission can assess a monetary fine equalling up to 10 percent of the company’s total global revenue. Repeat infractions can lead to even higher penalties.

The Irish consumer protection authority is also currently assessing the permissibility of the subscription model within the framework of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

Meanwhile in May a consumer protection group in the German state of North Rhine-Westphalia filed an injunction against Meta. The group alleges that users cannot make a choice on a voluntary basis – a central violation of the GDPR. What’s more, the options are presented in such a way that users are encouraged to agree to free use and thus consent to Meta’s comprehensive user tracking for the purpose of displaying personalized ads.

In January of this year Alexander Roßnagel, the data protection commissioner for the German state of Hesse, called the subscription model false advertising. The company failed to meet legal requirements, Roßnagel said. He also criticized Meta for continuing to collect comprehensive data on users even if they pay subscription fees. (dpa / js)

Protests in Bangladesh prompt internet shutdown

2024-07-24T08:12:00+02:00

The government in Bangladesh has shut down the internet amidst violent protests. More than 140 people have reportedly been killed during the protests.

On Sunday the Supreme Court scaled back a controversial quota system for public sector jobs. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

The internet hasn’t worked for days in Bangladesh as the government has imposed an ongoing shutdown. The blackout comes amidst countrywide protests against the reintroduction of a controversial quota system for government jobs. In the past week there have been violent clashes between protesters, paramilitary groups and security forces.

As the internet monitoring group NetBlocks reports, the countrywide shutdown first went into effect on July 18. Restrictions have reportedly been imposed on both fixed-line internet connections and mobile networks, and continue to persist as of July 23.

In the days before the full blackout began, the government had limited access to Facebook and WhatsApp. These restrictions were followed by a shutdown of the mobile internet.

Babu Ram Pant of the human rights organization Amnesty International criticized the “arbitrary imposition” of an internet shutdown that restricts both freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. “It is reckless to impede access to information during what has been a week of escalating violence,” said Pant, noting that shutdowns put people’s safety at risk.

Protests since July 1

The protests at universities in Bangladesh began on July 1. In the past week there have been violent clashes between demonstrators and security forces. More than 140 people have reportedly been killed. Police say they have arrested more than 500 people. On Friday a curfew was imposed.

The protests began in response to a plan to reimpose a controversial quota system. Under the system, more than half of civil service positions would be reserved for certain groups. Thirty percent of jobs would be given to descendants of soldiers who fought in the country’s 1971 war of independence. Protesters argue that applicants from families with government connections would receive preferential treatment. A similar quota system was in place in the past, but was abolished in 2018 after massive protests.

Civil service jobs are considered well-paying and relatively secure – while unemployment in the country remains high, especially among young people. For weeks now students have taken to the streets to oppose the reimposition of the quota system.

Supreme Court rules on measure

On Sunday the Supreme Court revoked parts of the controversial measure: according to the ruling, 93 percent of jobs will now be filled based on applicants’ qualifications. Five percent of jobs will be reserved for the descendants of soldiers. The rest will go to women, members of ethnic minorities and people with disabilities.

According to media reports, protest leaders have cheered the ruling, but plan to continue protesting. One organization, however, Students Against Discrimination, announced on Monday that it would pause demonstrations for 48 hours. Demands have come from the ranks of students for the release of all those who have been arrested and for universities to be reopened. Some protesters are calling for the government to resign.

The internet shutdown continues despite the court’s decision, the AP reported on Monday. The German Foreign Office announced as part of a travel advisory that “further restrictions and a worsening of the situation” could potentially be expected – the announcement cited the internet blackout.

Internet shutdown draws criticism

The human rights organization Access Now issued a statement on Monday demanding that the government in Bangladesh restore internet access. This followed an open letter sent to the government on Friday and signed by Access Now and other NGOs.

The imposition of internet shutdowns fails to respect rights “enshrined in Bangladesh’s constitution and the country’s international commitments,” the letter states, and calls internet shutdowns a “disproportionate measure” that is “ineffective at quelling violence.”

Human rights experts criticize internet shutdowns for the massive scope of their impact – they inevitably affect a large number of people. People’s security and well-being are put at risk when, for example, they lack access to communication and cannot be warned of “impending danger.” Reporting by independent news organizations can also be restricted.

According to Access Now, internet connections have been slowed and individual platforms have been blocked in Bangladesh in several instances since 2018. In December 2022, for example, connection speeds slowed repeatedly when members of the opposition protested against the government. (js)

United States: Phone records stolen from "nearly all" AT&T customers

2024-07-17T08:04:00+02:00

Hackers have stolen the data of millions of customers of the US mobile service provider AT&T. The breach is said to have occurred at a third-party cloud platform that has also been linked with recent instances of data theft at other companies.

A suspect has reportedly been apprehended in the case. (Source: IMAGO / NurPhoto)

Hackers have stolen phone records from customers of the US telecommunications corporation AT&T. More than 100 million people are believed to have been affected by the data theft.

The data was stolen from a third-party cloud platform, the company announced on Friday. The data consist of phone records covering the time period between May 1 and October 31, 2022.

The stolen data reveal which telephone numbers customers interacted with in that time period, whether in the form of phone calls or text messages. “[N]early all of AT&T’s cellular customers” are believed to have been affected by the breach, as well as customers of service providers that use AT&T’s wireless network – according to US media reports, more than 100 million people in all.

“For a subset of records, one or more cell site identification number(s) associated with the interactions are also included,” AT&T reports – meaning that those with access to the data can trace users’ approximate location.

Phone records from January 2, 2023 were also stolen – “for a very small number of customers,” AT&T said.

According to AT&T’s announcement, the stolen phone logs do not include the contents of the calls or texts, nor do they include time stamps. Likewise, sensitive data like social security numbers were not stolen.

AT&T first learned of the incident in April

AT&T said that it first learned of the data theft in April. At that point, “We launched an investigation and engaged leading cybersecurity experts,” the company said. The company is also “working with law enforcement” – one suspect is said to have been arrested in the case.

According to a notice from the US Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) which exercises oversight over the stock market, the US Department of Justice agreed in May and again in June that AT&T could wait to publicly disclose information about the data theft.

Fears of phishing

Anton Dahbura at the Information Security Institute at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore told the New York Times that the data theft was “highly worrisome.” The stolen records reveal who people talk to, “where they go, where they socialize.” Such information could be exploited “to create a highly intelligent cyberattack through phishing or hacking.”

CNN reports that hackers “could see that a customer is in constant contact with a big bank’s line and could send a phishing attempt posing as the bank” via text message.

The New York Times also reports that federal agencies like the State Department and the Department of Defense are AT&T customers. But the company “did not immediately respond to a request for comment on how federal customers’ phone logs may have been affected by the breach,” the Times writes.

In its own announcement, AT&T wrote that it does not believe that the data have been published at this time.

Several data thefts at third-party cloud platform

Earlier this year, in March, AT&T admitted that customer data had been published. At the time the data in question were believed to come from the year 2019 and to pertain to roughly 7.6 current customers and 65.4 million former customers. This earlier data set did include social security numbers and other personal information.

US media outlets report that in the current case, the data was taken from the servers of the cloud storage platform Snowflake. In recent months, “more than 100 of that company’s corporate customers have been compromised,” according to the Washington Post.

A prominent example is the ticket sales company Ticketmaster: hackers were reportedly able to snatch the personal information of roughly 560 million of the company’s customers, including names and addresses.

The data of employees and customers of Santander bank and of customers of Advance Auto Parts, a US car parts retailer, were also reportedly taken from Snowflake’s servers. (js)

United Kingdom: Police in Essex introduce live facial recognition

2024-07-16T08:00:00+02:00

The Essex police force is preparing to begin regular use of real-time facial recognition. Civil liberties groups warn of a threat to citizens’ privacy.

Mobile units will use facial recognition on public streets. (Source: IMAGO / Offside Sports Photography)

Police in the county of Essex plan to deploy live facial recognition on a regular, ongoing basis. The force had used the technology on a trial basis before now. Earlier this year the Conservative government had announced plans to invest millions in facial recognition systems – and drawn criticism from civil liberties groups.

Live facial recognition operates by having cameras capture images of any and all passersby. The images are automatically compared against a list of wanted individuals. If the system identifies a potential match, officers are informed and must decide on the spot what further actions to take. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), Britain’s data protection authority, in 2021 brought attention to the potential risk of massive amounts of biometric data being collected by live facial recognition systems. Biometric data is considered particularly sensitive, because it cannot be changed easily and can be used to identify a person throughout their life.

In Essex, the cameras will be placed on marked police vehicles and used in public places. These mobile units have been in use for some time in other parts of the UK, for example in London.

Police in Essex want to use the technology to “catch wanted criminals,” Chief Constable Ben-Julian Harrington said in an interview with the BBC. The system will be used, he said, only for “really serious” crimes.

According to Harrington, “It is always an officer who makes the decision whether someone should be arrested or not.” The system is supposed to “automatically and immediately” delete data from people who are not wanted after comparing them against the databank.

Criticism from civil liberties groups

The Essex police force first tested the technology in public places last year. Now the force is set to begin regular use by the end of this year, Harrington told the BBC. A facial recognition system is already in use that retrospectively compares footage from surveillance cameras with images in a police databank.

The British civil liberties organization Big Brother Watch compared the use of live facial recognition in public places to a “digital police line-up.” The technology is “dangerously imprecise” and represents a serious threat to privacy and civil liberties.

Critics have repeatedly pointed out that facial recognition is unreliable. In London for example researchers from the University of Essex accompanied police during trial runs and determined that the system had a failure rate of 81 percent.

Scant legal basis

The same researchers also pointed out that there was no legal basis for the use of facial recognition systems.

In January of this year the Justice and Home Affairs Committee of the House of Lords found that the deployment of real-time facial recognition “lacks a clear legal foundation.” In a letter to the Home Secretary, the committee wrote that it “accepts that [live facial recognition] may be a valuable tool for police forces, but we are deeply concerned that its use is being expanded without proper scrutiny and accountability.” The chair of the committee, Baroness Hamwee, said: “We question why there is such disparity between the approach in England and Wales and other democratic states in the regulation of [live facial recognition].”

Nevertheless, the Conservative government that was voted out of office this month had planned to expand the use of facial recognition: In fall 2023 Policing Minister Chris Philp encouraged police to deploy live facial recognition on a larger scale.

In April of this year the government announced plans to invest more than 50 million pounds in facial recognition systems. A portion of the funds were earmarked for “mobile units” that could be deployed in shopping districts.

Big Brother Watch has called live facial recognition a dystopian instrument of mass surveillance, and criticized the planned spending as “an abysmal waste of public money.”

Legal challenges against police

The civil liberties organization is currently backing two lawsuits prompted by misidentification by facial recognition – one of the lawsuits is directed against London’s Metropolitan Police.

In the London case, a 38-year-old man was on his way home when he was falsely identified as a wanted individual by the facial recognition system run by the police. Officers detained the man for nearly half an hour and threatened him with arrest – even though he was able to show identification.

The second case concerns the use of the controversial technology by retailers.

Silkie Carlo, director of Big Brother Watch and a co-claimant in the case against the London police, said when the lawsuit was filed: “Facial recognition is inaccurate and dangerously out of control in the UK. No other democracy in the world spies on its population with live facial recognition in the cavalier and chilling way the UK is starting to.” (js)

Saudi Arabia: 20-year prison sentence for tweets criticizing government

2024-07-15T08:04:00+02:00

A Saudi court has sentenced a man to decades in prison for posting tweets critical of the government. It is not the first case of this kind in the country.

According to Human Rights Watch, Saudi authorities often target the relatives of government critics who live abroad. (Source: IMAGO / NurPhoto)

A Saudi Arabian man has been sentenced to 20 years in prison for voicing criticism of the government on the online platform X (formerly Twitter), Human Rights Watch (HRW) reported on Tuesday. Last year the man’s brother was sentenced to death for his social media activity.

According to HRW, Asaad al-Ghamdi, a 47-year-old teacher, was convicted of several alleged crimes in May by the Specialized Criminal Court, which prosecutes terrorism offenses – the total sentence was 20 years. The sole basis for the charges was opinions al-Ghamdi had expressed online.

According to court documents reviewed by HRW, Asaad al-Ghamdi was charged under articles of Saudi Arabia’s counterterrorism law. His social media posts allegedly “harmed the security of the homeland.”

Criticism of the government

Citing sources familiar with the case, HWR reports that in some posts al-Ghamdi criticized projects connected to Vision 2030, a reform plan initiated by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman that is intended to make the country’s economy less dependent on oil.

In one post, al-Ghamdi also lamented the death of a renowned Saudi human rights advocate who had died in prison.

The prosecution sought the maximum sentence for each charge. It also requested that al-Ghamdi’s X account be closed.

Asaad al-Ghamdi was first arrested in November 2022, after security forces staged a nighttime raid on his house. Electronic devices were confiscated as part of the arrest. Al-Ghamdi was not told at the time of the grounds for his arrest – and did not learn what the charges against him were until the trial began in September 2023.

HRW reports that al-Ghamdi was held in solitary confinement for months. It was not until January 2023 that his relatives were permitted to visit him.

The court appointed a lawyer for al-Ghamdi who refused to provide him or his family with documents relevant to his case. The lawyer met with his client only in the court room when the court was in session. He also refused to meet with his client’s family and declined to inform the court of the fact that al-Ghamdi suffers from epilepsy.

“Saudi courts mete out decades-long sentences to ordinary citizens for nothing more than peacefully expressing themselves online,” said Joey Shea of Human Rights Watch. “The government should also stop punishing family members of critics living abroad.”

Brother of critic in exile

HRW assumes the sentence against Asaad al-Ghamdi to be a repressive measure taken in response to the activities of his brother, Saeed bin Nasser al-Ghamdi, a prominent government critic who lives in exile in Great Britain. According to HRW, Saudi authorities often go after the family members of critics and dissidents as a means of forcing them to return to the country.

A third al-Ghamdi brother, Mohammed al-Ghamdi, was convicted of similar charges last year – and sentenced to death. In this trial as well, the defendant’s activities on X and on YouTube were put forward as evidence. Experts at the United Nations and several human rights organizations sharply criticized the court’s decision and demanded that the authorities revoke the sentence.

UN experts warned that the sentence, “if carried out, would constitute a flagrant violation of international human rights and will be considered an arbitrary execution.”

According to HRW, Mohammed al-Ghamdi is suffering from health problems even as he faces execution. His condition “has significantly deteriorated in detention.” The organization demands that Saudi authorities immediately provide both brothers with proper medical attention.

Human Rights Watch criticizes the “rampant abuses” in Saudi Arabia’s criminal justice system, which include “long periods of detention without charge or trial, denial of legal assistance, and the courts’ reliance on torture-tainted confessions as the sole basis of conviction.”

Decades-long prison sentences for voicing opinions

In recent years several cases have come to light of Saudi courts sentencing people to years-long prison terms for expressing their views on social media.

PhD student Salma al-Shehab was sentenced to 34 years in prison in August 2022 for following women’s rights activists on X and sharing their posts. The sentence was reduced to 27 years on appeal in early 2023 – though it also imposes a 27-year travel ban.

Nura al-Kahtani too was convicted for sharing her opinion on X, according to human rights advocates. A court handed down a sentence of 45 years. Activists have documented still more cases: according to Amnesty International, in the last year alone a total of 15 people have been sentenced to prison terms of between 10 and 45 years for expressing opinions online.

According to the human rights organization ALQST, the Saudi-American filmmaker Abdulaziz al-Muzaini was also recently sentenced to 13 years in prison for his social media posts. (js)

Brazil: Devastating fires in the Earth's largest wetland

2024-07-11T08:02:00+02:00

The fire season hasn’t even begun yet in Brazil’s Pantanal region, but the number of blazes is already breaking records. Experts are predicting massive damages – some could be irreversible.

The Pantanal is known for its biodiversity and is a habitat for rare animal species. (Source: Filipefrazao – CC BY-SA 3.0)

The worst fires ever recorded in the first half of the year are currently raging across Brazil’s Pantanal region – the largest inland wetland in the world. The seasonally recurring fires have begun significantly earlier this year and are far greater in scope than usual. Brazil’s National Space Research Institute (INPE) monitors deforestation and reported the fires last Tuesday. The current numbers indicate that it may be a record year for fires in the ecosystem.

In the first half of this year alone, 3,538 fires were recorded – the highest number since recording began in 1999. The previous record was set in 2020, when 2,534 fires were registered in the first six months of the year: almost 30 percent of the Pantanal was affected. Experts now expect an even more devastating scenario.

Usually fire season in western Brazil’s Pantanal region doesn’t begin until the dry season sets in, typically between late July and August. But this year there were 2,639 fires in June alone – a month that in previous years saw on average only 154 blazes.

Drought and human-caused fires

According to government reports, the large number of fires this year is the result of several factors. Chief among them is a prolonged drought that set in three months before the usual dry period. “The Pantanal is facing its longest period of drought in 70 years, exacerbated by climate change and one of the strongest El Niño’s in history,” Brazil’s environmental ministry said last Sunday. The Geological Survey of Brazil reported last month that almost every major river in the region was experiencing below-average water levels for this time of year.

Some regions of the Pantanal could suffer significant damages, according to IBAMA, part of Brazil’s Ministry of the Environment. “After these types of catastrophes, nature bounces back in many regions. But in some areas the losses are substantial. In some places they could even be irreversible. We are very shocked by the fact that for the sixth year in a row, the Pantanal is not experiencing a flood season,” IBAMA president Rodrigo Agostinho told the news site G1.

So far this year, nearly 700,000 hectares (1.7 million acres) have burned – almost 5 percent of the entire Pantanal region.

Agostinho suspects that some of the fires were caused by criminal activity. Renata Libonati, a meteorology professor and coordinator of a fire alert system in the Pantanal, told the Associated Press (AP) that the majority of fires currently burning in the region were very likely caused by humans and not by natural causes like lightning. According to official data, 85 percent of the fires originated on private property.

Invisible blazes

The military is working alongside firefighters to help contain the flames. Firefighting planes have been deployed. The Brazilian government has also dispatched 285 officials from various agencies as well as 82 members of the national guard to support local firefighters, the AP reported last Saturday.

One challenge facing first responders is the need to travel great distances in order to contain the flames, a leader of one fire brigade said. Another is that many of the fires are burning underground. “We can’t see them, but around 10 in the morning, they start emerging again,” said the firefighter. “They keep burning underground due to the material deposited by the floods in the Pantanal. These fires are very difficult to manage, as they burn through nearly one meter of material under the soil.”

Indispensable for nature and the climate

The Pantanal is among the most biodiverse ecosystems on the planet and is home to rare species like jaguars, tapirs, and hyacinth macaws. The region also stores a large amount of CO2 – which is released back into the atmosphere by raging wildfires. According to the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), less than 5 percent of the region is protected by international agreements. Roughly 95 percent of the Pantanal is privately owned.

The main economic activity in the region is cattle-raising. Farmers traditionally burn forested areas to clear new land for grazing. If these fires get out of control, the result can be massive wildfires like those seen this year. The practice is banned during the dry season, starting on July 1, and this year the authorities moved the ban up to early June because conditions were so dry.

A new study released in May by INPE, the space research institute, determined that arid and semi-arid regions have spread throughout the country over the past 30 years. The study found that the Pantanal is the ecosystem that is most severely affected by drought. An earlier study from the MapBiomas research initiative predicted furthermore that the central-western region of Brazil in which the Pantanal is located would likely grow hotter.

An end to the catastrophe in the Pantanal is not yet in sight: as the AP reports, official data shows that between July and September the number of fires is usually 20 times greater than in June. (dpa / hcz)

Detroit: Police issue new guidelines for facial recognition after unlawful arrests

2024-07-10T08:02:00+02:00

The Detroit Police Department has repeatedly arrested people for crimes they did not commit based on automatic facial recognition. New guidelines should prevent such cases from happening in the future.

Civil rights activists as well the police are satisfied with the new regulations. (Source: IMAGO / USA TODAY Network)

The city of Detroit has imposed stricter regulations on the Detroit Police Department (DPD) for how automatic facial recognition can be utilized. The regulations were revised as part of a court settlement in which a man was wrongfully arrested and detained in the Michigan District Court for 30 hours as a result of faulty automatic facial recognition in 2020, the authorities stated last Friday. In response, the civil rights organization, American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), sued the Detroit Police Department on behalf of the victim in 2021.

Stephen Lamoreaux, head of informatics at Detroit’s Crime Intelligence Unit said the city now has the strictest regulations in the country. The police stated on Friday that they were satisfied with the changes and are convinced that it will be recognized nationally as an example for how facial recognition should be ideally handled. The aim was to ensure – much like the plaintiff ACLU – that police work would be fair, just and conducted in compliance with the constitution. In the future, automatic facial recognition should only be used for serious criminal offences like assault and battery, murder and burglaries.

For instance, the new regulations require that an investigator must first receive approval from at least two additional people before the technology can be implemented and it is no longer permitted to arrest suspects based solely on results from facial recognition software or from photos. There must be additional “physical proof” such as traces of DNA at the crime scene or a registered cell phone of the accused within the cell site of a crime scene, for example. A line-up of suspects – also in the form of displayed photos – with evidence based solely on automatic facial recognition also no longer allowed and requires further evidence. If these requirements are met, the officer who shows potential witnesses the photos is not allowed to know who the suspect is themself.

New guidelines and requirements for documentation

In an effort to promote transparency, the police are now required to provide information about the weaknesses of facial recognition technology and to disclose when it has been used during an arrest. Additionally, officers must disclose if facial recognition did not determine any suspects or if the results suggested other suspects. All cases since 2017 are to be investigated, audited and reported to the District Attorney in which arrest warrants were issued based on automatic facial recognition.

Additionally, police departments must organize training courses that explain the risks and dangers of the technology and the high rate of misidentifications with people of color.

According to the New York Times (NYT), the guidelines are going into effect this month – a federal court is to enforce it for four years. Phil Mayor, an attorney at ACLU, explained to the NYT that the court settlement makes the DPD a leader nationwide for adhering to strict regulations – after he previously spoke of the best-documented abuse of facial recognition technology.

Part of the closed settlement also includes a payment of 300,000 US dollars in damages to the victims. The Detroit City Council already approved the settlement in May.

The case

The plaintiff was arrested in front of his family as a result of misidentification and detained for 30 hours. Facial recognition software identified the Black man, Robert Williams, as a potential suspect of a robbery at a jewellery store in 2018. The system compared drivers license photos and mug shots with blurry recordings of the perpetrator from a private security camera.

The program compared the face of the perpetrator from the security camera footage with the existing data and found 243 supposed matches that showed similarities with the person they were looking for. The software sorted the presumably matching photos by probability to reduce the amount of suspects. According to police documents that were disclosed to Williams as part of the lawsuit, a photo of the plaintiff from an expired drivers licence was in ninth place on a ranked list. The investigator in charge found Williams to be the most matching fit and sent a report to the Detroit Police.

Apparently Williams’ photo was included in a selection of six different portraits of people that were shown to the owner of the security camera. She confirmed that Williams looked most similar to the perpetrator. Afterwards, an arrest warrant was issued.

Other victims also pressed charges

To date, there have been three cases made public of arrests based faulty automatic facial recognition in Detroit.

In one case, a Black woman was accused of taking part in a robbery and robbing a man in February 2023. Automatic facial recognition software from the police identified her as a potential suspect. After a witness indicated that she recognized her on a photo, Porcha Woodruf was arrested in front of her children while in her eighth month of pregnancy.

The police detained her for eleven hours and interrogated her. Woodruff was also charged in court with robbery and theft. The mother of several children was only set free after paying bail of 100,000 US dollars. A month later, the public prosecutor dismissed the case against her and discontinued it.

Afterwards, Woodruff sued the city of Detroit and a police officer. She accused the officer of violating her fundamental rights and discriminating her based on skin color – because they implemented facial recognition software that has been proven to frequently misidentify Black citizens more than others.

Discriminating technology

For a long time, civil rights activists have criticized the use of automatic facial recognition by law enforcement agencies for its inherent flaws and unreliability – especially when attempting to identify Black people. The likelihood that innocent people coming under suspicion is considered high.

At least seven people have been unlawfully imprisoned in the USA because the police relied on incorrect facial recognition results, as explained by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in April. In almost all cases, Black people were the victims.

Among other things, a study commissioned by the US government and conducted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology at the end of 2019 found that the error rate for people with dark skin was 10 to 100 times higher than with people with lighter skin. Women with dark skin color had the highest rate of misidentification. Indigenous people and people of Asian descent were also frequently affected.

Earlier investigations also produced similar results. As a consequence, US cities like San Francisco and Somerville officially forbade the use of facial recognition.

A warning to stop

Nevertheless, the DPD is convinced of the usefulness of automatic facial recognition. Last year, James White, the Police Chief of Detroit reported to the NYT that the technology helped remove 16 murderers from the streets. However, police officials did not provide specific details or further information regarding the cases when asked. White blames the unlawful arrests on human error. His officers relied too much on suggestions made by the facial recognition software and too little on their own judgment.

For Molly Kleinman, Director of the Science, Technology, and Public Policy program at the University of Michigan, the new protective measures sound initially very promising but she remains skeptical, according to the NYT. Surveillance cameras are everywhere in Detroit if the technology really did what it promised, Detroit would be one of the safest cities in the country.

Willie Burton, Police Commissioner and member of the supervisory authority that approved the new regulations, also considers the new guidelines a step in right direction. However, as in the past, he rejects the use of automatic facial recognition technologies. The technology is simply not advanced enough, Burton explains. A false arrest is one too many and having three in Detroit should be a warning to stop. (hcz)

New York: Comptroller voices criticism of gunshot detection technology

2024-06-27T08:17:00+02:00

A network of thousands of microphones installed throughout New York City is supposed to automatically detect gunshots and report them to police. A new audit report criticizes ShotSpotter’s high number of false alarms, confirming longstanding criticisms from civil liberties groups.

Police officers reportedly spend several hundred hours a month investigating false alarms from ShotSpotter. (Source: Dllu – CC BY-SA 4.0)

The New York City comptroller has found evidence of the unreliability of the controversial gunshot detection system ShotSpotter and questioned the continued use of the technology. An audit report published on June 20 reveals that the system produces a substantial number of false alarms. Police officers are often dispatched to locations only to determine that no shots have been fired. “During the sampled months of review in 2022 and 2023, ShotSpotter alerts only resulted in confirmed shootings between 8% and 20% of the time,” the report states.

In June 2023 for example the New York Police Department (NYPD) responded to 940 alerts issued by ShotSpotter. In 82 percent of cases, the officers who arrived at the scene could not confirm shootings. In 5 percent of cases the alerts were unfounded, and only in 13 percent did a shooting incident actually take place. In the months reviewed for the audit, the number of alerts that led to confirmed shootings was never higher than 20 percent. Nevertheless, the system achieved its contractually obligated performance goals in almost all police precincts – because the goals were set so low.

Comptroller Brad Lander said in a press release: “The evidence shows that NYPD is wasting precious time and money on this technology and needs to do a better job managing its resources. Chasing down car backfires and construction noise does not make us safer.”

ShotSpotter can purportedly detect, locate, and alert law enforcement to shootings in public areas – and do so automatically. In order to pick up suspicious noises, microphones are installed on fixtures like streetlights across entire neighborhoods or even entire cities. The system then uses algorithmic analysis to determine whether the sounds are actually gunshots and not other noises, like fireworks. If the software flags a sound as suspicious, employees listen to the recording – and alert the police if they believe the alert is justified.

A waste of time

The unreliability of the system results in police officers spending lots of time chasing down false leads, according to the audit: In June of last year officers spent 427 hours investigating alerts that did not lead to confirmed shootings. “Spread across a year, this potentially represents significant waste of officer hours,” the report states. “This in turn has fiscal consequences which the City can ill-afford.”

Nevertheless, “NYPD does not currently track the amount of time – or the associated staff costs – spent responding” to false alarms, the report states. The department did not respond to a request for comment from the New York Times. A spokesperson for the mayor’s office said in a statement, “While we understand that emerging technologies evolve and there is always room for improvement, what seems to be lost on the comptroller is that ShotSpotter has given the NYPD the ability to solve countless crimes and save lives.”

SoundThinking, the company that owns ShotSpotter, issued a statement in response to the report, claiming that its findings “show a lack of understanding of public safety operations in the field.” The comptroller’s audit “uses the wrong metrics” to evaluate the success of the system, the company said.

Risk of discrimination

Scholars and civil liberties groups have repeatedly voiced concerns about ShotSpotter. In April an investigation by the American Civil Liberties Union Massachusetts (ACLUM) concluded that “ShotSpotter is an unreliable technology that poses a substantial threat to civil rights and civil liberties, almost exclusively for the Black and brown people who live in the neighborhoods subject to its ongoing surveillance.”

Critics call attention to the fact that false alarms – like fireworks or other loud noises – can lead to a disproportionately heavy police presence in flash-point neighborhoods, since officers are dispatched even when no crime has been committed. In February Wired magazine published a list of sensor locations – which was confirmed by SoundThinking as accurate. The list shows that the sensors are installed “primarily in low-income communities of color.” Civil liberties groups have long pointed out that victims are subject to unjustified police actions simply because the sensors are installed in their neighborhoods.

In light of the criticism, a group of three US senators and one representative sent a letter to the Department of Homeland Security in May of this year demanding that it review its funding of ShotSpotter and investigate whether the use of the controversial surveillance technology has led to civil rights violations.

Other cities end use

Numerous cities across the US have already stopped using ShotSpotter and allowed their contracts to expire, the New York Times reports. In one incident in Chicago, an unarmed 13-year-old boy was shot and killed by police officers after the system issued a false alarm. Mayor Brandon Johnson promised after the killing to get rid of ShotSpotter. In Boston the system has also fallen in for criticism after the letter from congressmembers demanding an investigation into its use.

Since the NYPD began using ShotSpotter in 2014, the city has paid 45 million dollars to California-based SoundThinking, with an additional 9 million still left on the contract. More than 2,000 sensors are currently installed in the city.

The NYPD’s contract with ShotSpotter will expire in December. The comptroller recommends that the contract not be renewed until the system can be fully evaluated. “NYPD’s data collection should be improved, analyzed more critically, and published in the interest of transparency,” the audit states. “The data currently collected and published by NYPD does not support a comprehensive assessment of the tool’s effectiveness or economy.” (hcz)

UK: Hackers publish stolen patient records

2024-06-27T08:14:00+02:00

Patient records were stolen as part of a ransomware attack against a British healthcare service provider. The stolen records include sensitive test results.

Some patients will reportedly have to wait months for blood tests as a result of the attack. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

An IT security breech at a British healthcare service provider resulted in the theft of patient data, according to media reports. Hundreds of gigabytes have now been published. The stolen records include results of blood tests for HIV and cancer.

As the Guardian reported on Friday, hackers stole records pertaining to roughly 300 million individual patient interactions with the National Health Service (NHS). The records include blood tests conducted on patients in advance of surgery, as well as the results of tests on patients “suspected of having a sexually transmitted infection.” The records reportedly date back “a significant number of years.”

The patient records were taken from the healthcare provider Synnovis. The company, which conducts tests of blood samples for hospitals, confirmed earlier this month that it had been the victim of a ransomware attack. Impacted hospitals have only been able to operate at limited capacity since the attack.

In a ransomware attack, criminals encrypt normally accessible data in a computer system and demand a ransom to restore access. Often the hackers will steal information and threaten to publish it. Paying the ransom doesn’t guarantee that the blackmailers will actually restore access to encrypted data or refrain from publishing stolen information.

Hackers publish trove of data

A criminal group from Russia that calls itself Qilin is said to be responsible for the attack. The hackers have reportedly demanded a ransom of 50 million US dollars. The group has allegedly published data on the so-called dark web.

The BBC was able to view a portion of the data and reports that it contains patient names, dates of birth, and unique NHS patient numbers. Descriptions of blood tests were also published – though the BBC was unable to determine whether the information included test results.

The NHS issued a statement saying that it was working in tandem with the National Crime Agency and National Cyber Security Centre to “determine the content of the published files as quickly as possible.” It could however take “weeks if not longer” to complete the investigation.

Procedures postponed

The ransomware attack has had major consequences for seven London hospitals. One of them, King’s College Hospital in London, oversees care for roughly one million people. Royal Brompton and Harefield Hospitals, which together comprise the largest heart and lung clinic in the UK, have likewise been unable to operate normally.

According to the NHS, in the first thirteen days following the incident, more than 1,000 planned procedures and more than 2,000 outpatient appointments were postponed. These included 184 cancer treatments and 64 organ transplants.

Patients reportedly must wait up to six months for the NHS to perform blood tests. Some have chosen to pay private clinics to perform the tests rather than wait, the Guardian reported on Sunday.

The NHS has admitted that the effects of the IT breech would continue to be felt for months to come.

Ransomware targeting the healthcare system

Several ransomware attacks in the healthcare sector have come to light in recent years. In 2017 numerous companies and institutions around the world were infected with the malware known as WannaCry – with British hospitals among those affected. According to the National Health Service, at least 7,000 appointments, including operations, had to be canceled. But by the NHS’s own estimate, the figure could have been as high as 19,000.

In fall 2020 Düsseldorf University Hospital in Germany had to postpone operations and close its emergency department after data on the hospital’s servers was encrypted by ransomware.

The incident drew a great deal of attention after one patient who had to be transferred to another hospital died shortly after the transfer. The state prosecutor opened an investigation on suspicion of negligent homicide, but later dropped the inquiry after an autopsy revealed that the woman likely would have died even if she had received faster treatment.

Late last year a company that operates 30 hospitals in six US states had to divert patients from its own emergency rooms to those of other hospitals. The health care chain’s systems were taken offline after ransomware was discovered.

A similar incident earlier this year impacted US pharmacies. And in February hospitals and other medical facilities in Romania were affected by a ransomware attack. (js)

UK: Cameras running emotion detection technology tested at train stations

2024-06-24T14:42:00+02:00

The public body that operates British rail infrastructure tested a surveillance system at a number of train stations in the UK. The tests have drawn criticism; one concern is the system’s purported ability to detect emotions.

The tests reportedly did not include the use of facial recognition. (Source: IMAGO / Pond5 Images)

Thousands of people were subjected to algorithmic surveillance at several train stations in Great Britain, reports Wired magazine, citing documents obtained in response to freedom of information requests. Civil liberties advocates have now filed complaints with the British data protection authority.

According to the report, the system was tested at a total of eight train stations across Britain over the last two years – among them busy stations in London, Leeds, Glasgow and Manchester. Network Rail, the publicly owned company that owns most train stations in the UK and operates many of them, is responsible for the tests.

The stated purpose of the tests was to alert personnel in the case of certain incidents. According to Wired, the system was supposed to be able to recognize if people were trespassing on tracks or if platforms were overcrowded. But another goal was to recognize so-called “antisocial behavior” – including running, skateboarding or smoking.

Demographic information

But the system was also used to estimate the age and identify the sex of passengers – and to detect emotions such as “happy, sad, and angry.” Per Wired, the documents contained suggestions “that the data could be used in advertising systems in the future.” It is unclear however how extensively the emotion analysis technology was actually implemented, according to Wired’s reporting.

Automated emotion detection in particular has been the focus of much criticism. As the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), the British data protection authority, stated in late 2022, “Emotion analysis relies on collecting, storing and processing a range of personal data.” This carries with it a large discrimination risk.

Deputy Commissioner Stephen Bonner characterized these systems as “immature,” saying, “They may not work yet, or indeed ever.”

Past studies have shown that facial expressions can’t reliably be used to determine emotions. A person with a grim look on their face is not necessarily angry. In criticizing the technology, advocacy groups also point out that it is scientifically dubious.

New and old cameras

As Wired reports, one aspect of the tests at train stations involved the use of so-called smart CCTV cameras that can “detect objects or movements.” Another aspect involved footage from security cameras already in use being connected to analysis software – software reportedly developed by Amazon. Between five and seven cameras at each station were used for the tests.

The system being tested is meant to be capable of automatically alerting station staff in the case of certain incidents. Facial recognition technology, whose purpose is to identify individuals, was not used, according to Wired.

Network Rail would not respond to Wired’s questions – not even to say whether the technology was still in use. A spokesperson said only that Network Rail uses “a range of advanced technologies across our stations to protect passengers, our colleagues, and the railway infrastructure,” and added: “We always comply with the relevant legislation regarding the use of surveillance technologies.”

Criticism and Complaints

Jake Hurfurt at the British civil liberties organization Big Brother Watch, which filed the request to obtain the documents, told Wired, “The rollout and normalization of AI surveillance in these public spaces, without much consultation and conversation, is quite a concerning step.” The analysis of “passenger demographics” was particularly concerning, Hurfurt said.

Carissa Véliz at the University of Oxford said of the tests: “Systems that do not identify people are better than those that do, but I do worry about a slippery slope.” Said Véliz: “There is a very instinctive drive to expand surveillance. Human beings like seeing more, seeing further. But surveillance leads to control, and control to a loss of freedom that threatens liberal democracies.”

Véliz pointed to similar tests conducted at a station on the London Underground: at first people’s faces were blurred on the footage taken. Later however the approach changed: the faces of people who were suspected of fare dodging were rendered visible and the footage was kept.

Hurfurt of Big Brother Watch said in a statement that he had submitted a complaint in response to the tests at train stations. “Network Rail had no right to deploy discredited emotion recognition technology against unwitting commuters at some of Britain’s biggest stations.”

He added: “Technology can have a role to play in making the railways safer, but there needs to be a robust public debate about the necessity and proportionality of tools used.” Hurfurt warned that everyone’s privacy could be at risk – especially if the technology was misused. (js)

EU: Meta won't train its AI model with user data - for now

2024-06-20T16:04:00+02:00

Meta is postponing its plans to use EU user data to train its algorithms. The plans have drawn criticism from many sides.

The advocacy group Noyb has filed data privacy complaints in eleven countries against Meta’s plans. (Source: IMAGO / SOPA Images)

Meta won’t be using any data from users in the EU for machine learning purposes, at least not for now. The company made the announcement last Friday afternoon. In postponing its plans, the company is complying with an order from the Irish data protection authority, its lead regulator.

In the past weeks Meta had been informing users of Facebook, Instagram and Threads of upcoming changes to these services’ privacy policies. The changes were meant to go into effect on June 26.

The company is currently developing a system it calls Meta AI, which is meant to be able to generate text and images, a technology known as “generative artificial intelligence.” In order to teach the system language skills, the software is “trained” with vast quantities of data – like text written by human users. According to Meta, examples include “public posts, public comments, or public photos and their captions.”

Meta had no intention to ask for consent

The plans had drawn sharp criticism, owing to the fact that Meta did not intend to obtain express consent from users. In order to engage in this form of data processing, the company is required to have a legal basis in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Meta planned to claim a “legitimate interest.” The company did not plan to ask for consent; it only meant to allow users to object to the use of their data and opt out.

The Austrian data privacy advocacy group Noyb considers this measure insufficient, however. Earlier this month, the organization filed complaints with eleven national data protection authorities: in Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland and Spain. In its complaint, Noyb alleged additional GDPR violations. Meta is attempting to prevent those impacted by its policies from exercising their right to opt out, Noyb alleges. “This change is particularly worrying because it involves the personal data of about 4 billion Meta users.”

Verbraucherzentrale NRW, the consumer advisory body for the German state of North Rhine-Westphalia, also criticized Meta’s plans, finding that the opt-out process was very cumbersome and not user friendly. Last week the consumer watchdog issued a warning to the company.

Data protection officials deliberate

Top Hamburg data protection official Thomas Fuchs stated last week that European data protection authorities were currently weighing whether Meta could claim a “legitimate interest.” His office was in contact with the lead regulatory authority in Ireland, where Meta has its European headquarters.

The Irish authority, the Data Protection Commission (DPC), has issued a statement, saying that it “welcomes the decision by Meta to pause its plans.” The DPC characterized Meta’s decision as the result of “intensive engagement” between the company and the authority. According to the statement, the DPC “will continue to engage with Meta on this issue.”

The company meanwhile said it was “disappointed” by the authority’s demand that it delay the use of data from users to train its algorithms. In a blog post, Meta claimed that the European data protection authorities have been informed of its plans since March. The company still believes that “our approach complies with European laws and regulations.” For now, Meta AI will not be launched in Europe. Meta also defended its actions, saying that other companies also made use of user data to train their AI models. Meta’s approach is “more transparent than many of our industry counterparts,” the company wrote.

Criticism from Noyb

Max Schrems, chair of Noyb, said in a statement: “We welcome this development but will monitor it closely. So far, there has been no official change to the Meta privacy policy that would make this commitment legally binding. The cases we have filed are ongoing and will require an official decision.”

Noyb’s was also critical of Meta’s announcement that European users for the time being could not use its AI system. The GDPR allows for almost any manner of data processing, Noyb wrote, as long as users choose to opt in – Meta could simply ask users for their consent.

Said Schrems: “The Meta press release reads a bit like ‘collective punishment.’ If one European insists on his or her rights, the whole continent will not get our shiny new products. But Meta has every opportunity to deploy AI based on valid consent – it just chooses not to do so.” (dpa / js)

UN: 1.5 Percent of the World's Population Displaced

2024-06-18T15:29:00+02:00

The UN Refugee Agency warns in a new report of a steady rise in the number of displaced people worldwide. Both refugees themselves and the countries that host them need more support.

75 percent of displaced persons, whether displaced within the borders of their home countries or living abroad, reside in low- or middle-income countries. (Source: Julien Harneis – CC BY-SA 2.0)

Roughly 120 million people are currently displaced worldwide, fleeing violence, war, conflicts, and persecution. This is almost a ten percent increase from last year, as the UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, reported last Thursday. It was the twelfth consecutive year in which the number has risen. Roughly 1.5 percent of the global population has been forced to leave their home, as the UNHCR documents in a new report, “Global Trends: Forced Displacement in 2023”.

“Behind these stark and rising numbers lie countless human tragedies. That suffering must galvanize the international community to act urgently to tackle the root causes of forced displacement,” said Filippo Grandi, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees.

Nearly two thirds of refugees are displaced within the borders of their own home countries. The impression that migrants and refugees are streaming into primarily rich countries is false, Grandi said, noting that 75 percent of displaced persons, whether displaced within the borders of their home countries or living abroad, reside in low- or middle-income countries. For the most part, wealthy countries are not the ones affected. Most people, after fleeing to neighboring countries, hold out hope that they can quickly return home.

Refugees seek asylum in the US and Germany

For people without the option of returning home soon, the United States and Germany are highly sought after as places of refuge: the US has by far the most applications for asylum, with a total of 1.2 million. After that comes Germany, with roughly 330,000, followed by Egypt, Spain, and Canada.

It is difficult to compare numbers from year to year; record keeping in some countries continues to improve, and in some cases the surveying methods change. The records refer to the period since 1951, when the UNHCR first started keeping track of refugee numbers.

The power struggle between the army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces in Sudan and the war between Israel and Hamas are among the conflicts that forced millions of people to flee in 2023. Large-scale forced displacement also occurred in Myanmar and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

“For me, the dramatic rise in the number of refugees shows very clearly that right now we need more development work and not less,” said German Minister of Economic Cooperation and Development Svenja Schulze of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) in response to the report. Development policies, she said, create opportunities for refugees in their host country as well as opportunities for them to return home. “This is in the interest of Germany as well,” said Minister Schulze.

In debates over the federal budget for 2025, German Finance Minister Christian Lindner of the Free Democratic Party (FDP) has questioned Schulze’s aid policies.

Global Hotspots

The report’s analysis pertains to the 2023 calendar year. As of December 31, 2023, there were 117.3 million displaced persons worldwide – 8 percent more than at the end of 2022. 68.3 million people were displaced within the borders of their own country. This number is 50 percent higher than five years ago.

Germany has the fourth-highest number of refugees taken in, with 2.6 million, placing it behind Iran (3.8 million), Turkey (3.3 million), and Columbia (2.9 million).

In Sudan, more than 9 million people have been forcibly displaced since April 2023, including 1.9 million who have fled the country. In the Gaza Strip the number of displaced persons is 1.7 million, according to the UNHCR – roughly 75 percent of the population. Many in Gaza have been forced to flee more than once. In Myanmar, 2.6 million people were displaced – twice as many as in the preceding year.

“Syria remains the world’s largest displacement crisis, with 13.8 million forcibly displaced in and outside the country,” the UNHCR stated in its press release. The UNHCR puts the number of Afghan refugees at 10.9 million, of whom 6.4 million have sought refuge abroad. In Ukraine 9.7 million have been forced to flee their homes; 6 million have fled abroad.

Referring to the numerous conflicts at the root of the displacement crisis, UN High Commissioner Grandi said, “It is high time for warring parties to respect the basic laws of war and international law. The fact is that without better cooperation and concerted efforts to address conflict, human rights violations and the climate crisis, displacement figures will keep rising, bringing fresh misery and costly humanitarian responses.”

Climate crisis exacerbates situation

The effects of the climate crisis are particularly evident in regions already affected by conflicts, poverty, hunger, and poor governance, the report notes: “At the end of 2023, almost three-quarters of forcibly displaced people were living in countries with high-to-extreme exposure to climate-related hazards.” These included the Democratic Republic of Congo, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.

The struggle for resources in host countries that are strongly impacted by climate change could lead to new waves of displacement, the report argues, for example in places where drinking water is already scarce or where drought increasingly leads to crop failures and loss of livestock.

Though the situation is dire, High Commissioner Grandi nevertheless sees reasons for hope. Last year, throughout the world, five million internally displaced people and one million refugees were able to return to their homes. Said Grandi: “Refugees – and the communities hosting them – need solidarity and a helping hand. They can and do contribute to societies when they are included.” Solutions are out there, Grandi said, and pointed to countries like Kenya that had demonstrated how refugees could be integrated into the societies that take them in. (dpa / hcz)

Ransomware attack could impact London hospitals for months to come

2024-06-18T11:40:00+02:00

Medical services at London hospitals continue to be limited as a result of an IT security breech. Hospitals elsewhere in the UK are also affected.

At some hospitals, like St Thomas’, even urgently needed procedures had to be postponed. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Press Wire)

It could be months before several major hospitals in the British capital can return to normal operations, the Guardian reports. The cause is an IT security breech at an outside contractor used by the hospitals. The National Health Service (NHS) has issued a call for blood donors.

Last week, the contractor, Synnovis, confirmed that it had been the victim of a ransomware attack. The company analyzes blood samples for hospitals.

As the Guardian reported on Tuesday, there is no telling at this point how long the problem will persist. “It is unclear how long it will take for the services to get back to normal, but it is likely to take many months,” an NHS official told the newspaper. “Key to a return to normal will be clarity about how the hackers gained access to the system, how many records have been affected and whether these records are retrievable.”

Hospitals outside of London also affected

Among the facilities affected by the attack are King’s College Hospital, which provides care to roughly one million patients in London. Royal Brompton and Harefield Hospitals, the largest heart and lung clinic in the UK, have likewise been unable to operate normally. According to the Guardian, numerous private practices have also been impacted.

The Independent newspaper reported on Tuesday that hospitals in other parts of the UK such as Portsmouth in the south of England were also forced to dial back services. The effects of the attack were not so severe as in the capital, however.

Emergency operations postponed

Last week it came to light that London hospitals had had to postpone some operations. Over the weekend there were also reports that more than 200 operations had to be cancelled – including “emergency and life-saving operations” that “should be done within 24 hours.” According to media reports, cancer patients were among those affected.

The Independent reports that more than one third of all planned operations were cancelled. The list of cancelled procedures included organ transplants.

Stephen Powis, the medical director for NHS England, said that operations would be moved to nearby clinics.

Call for blood donors

Because of the ransomware attack, blood samples can’t be tested as quickly as usual, as the NHS reports in a statement released on Monday. According to the Independent, Synnovis, the company affected by the cyberattack, normally tests tens of thousands of samples per day.

Hospitals must now stock up on type O blood. The NHS has issued an urgent call for donations of O positive and O negative blood. People whose blood type is O negative are known as universal donors. Their blood can be given to any patient and is thus used in emergencies when there is no time to conduct a test to determine blood type. O positive is the most common blood type and is also highly sought after.

Not an isolated incident

Several ransomware attacks in the healthcare sector have come to light in recent years. In 2017 numerous companies and institutions around the world were infected with the malware known as WannaCry – British hospitals were among those affected. According to the National Health Service, at least 7,000 appointments, including operations, had to be canceled. But by the NHS’s own estimate, the figure could have been as high as 19,000.

In fall 2020 Düsseldorf University Hospital in Germany had to postpone operations and close its emergency department after data on the hospital’s servers was encrypted by ransomware.

A similar incident earlier this year impacted US pharmacies. And in February hospitals and other medical facilities in Romania were affected by a ransomware attack. (dpa / js)

Google Maps to start saving location data locally

2024-06-13T15:54:00+02:00

Location data collected by Google Maps will no longer be stored on the company’s servers. US civil liberties advocates see this as an important step towards protecting the data from sweeping government search warrants.

Google has renamed its “Location History” feature. It will now be called “Timeline.” (Screenshot: google.com)

In the future, Google will only store location data collected by its Maps app offline. Data currently saved on the company’s servers will be deleted. Civil liberties advocates have long demanded that Google take this step.

According to media reports, Google is currently alerting its users to the upcoming change. Users have until December 1 to save their current location history – after that date, the data will be deleted from Google’s servers.

Going forward, the data will only be stored locally on users’ devices. Location data will also be automatically deleted after three months by default, instead of eighteen months, as was previously the case. It will still be possible to back up data in the cloud, but according to Google such data will be automatically encrypted.

The change comes with the introduction of Google Maps’ new “Timeline” feature, formerly known as “Location History.” The feature, which users have the option to fully deactivate, saves information on what places users have visited and what routes they took to get there.

Using a test account with Google, we saw that some changes had gone into effect, while others had not. Under Settings we were advised that “When you turn on Location History, your precise device location is regularly saved – to your devices and Google’s servers.” The three-month auto-delete function was already in place, however.

Civil liberties advocates had demanded urgent implementation

Google first announced the impending changes in December 2023 – though without setting a specific date for their implementation. Users would be informed before the changes took effect for their Google accounts, the company said at the time.

Prior to the announcement, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a civil liberties group, had urged Google to implement the changes soon. Attention in the US has focused on this issue in particular because law enforcement officials in the country frequently demand the release of location data. The EFF has repeatedly warned of the risk that this information might be abused – especially given the restrictive abortion laws in many US states.

Location history data can be used to determine what places a person has visited – and can indicate whether a person has gone to an abortion clinic.

In June 2022 the US Supreme Court revoked the nationwide right to abortion. Since then, more than 20 states have banned or restricted access to abortion.

The EFF fears that law enforcement officials in states with particularly stringent bans could use location data to prosecute those who are impacted by the restrictions.

“Cautiously optimistic”

The switch to storing location data offline will make it difficult or even impossible to obtain this information from Google, according to the EFF. Following Google’s December 2023 announcement, the EFF declared that it was “cautiously optimistic” that the change would mark the end of so-called “Geofence warrants.” A geofence warrant issued by a court allows officials to demand from Google information on all devices detected in a given geographic area within a certain period of time.

Speaking to Forbes magazine, a Google employee confirmed that the changes were being implemented in order to put a stop to these demands from law enforcement.

Geofence warrants are highly controversial: civil liberties groups like the EFF argue that they violate the 4th Amendment of the US Constitution because, unlike a normal search warrant, “they are not targeted to a particular individual or device.” As a result, hundreds of people come under police scrutiny who have no connection to the crime under investigation.

Last year, the EFF successfully challenged one such warrant in court.

According to the EFF, geofence warrants are possible because up until now Google has stored location data on its servers. In the past Google has reported that such warrants made up more than a fourth of all court-issued demands to provide data that the company receives in the US.

Jennifer Granick of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) told Forbes: “The repository of everyone’s location data dating back months or years was a hazard, and Google is trying to clean up that hazard.” The changes are “a real benefit for people’s privacy,” because location data “is some of the most revealing information about us.”

Collecting location data

But other companies and apps collect location data as well. Authorities in the US for example also buy commercially available location data from data brokers. The EFF warns that it remains to be seen whether in the future the authorities will find other ways to obtain location data.

Google announcedin July 2022 its plans to automatically delete from users’ Location History any information about visits to medical facilities like abortion clinics or counseling sites. But an investigation by Accountable Tech revealed that in many cases this data continued to be saved by Google. (js)

London hospitals cancel operations after ransomware cyber attack

2024-06-07T16:31:00+02:00

A ransomware cyber attack affected medical care at hospitals. Operations were also cancelled.

Investigative authorities and external IT security experts are currently looking into the incident. (Source: IMAGO / Parsons Media)

Several large hospitals in the British capital, London, have reported a “critical incident” – and had to postpone operations. The background is an cyber security incident with a joint health provider.

According to media reports, seven hospitals that cooperate with the company, Synnovis, have been affected in total. Synnovis examines blood samples, for example.

Synnovis confirmed on Tuesday to have been victim of ransomware the day before.

The hospitals affected include King’s College Hospital, which is responsible for a million people in London. The hospitals Royal Brompton and Harefield, the largest cardiac and pulmonary clinics in Great Britain, have also been affected.

Operations postponed

As a result of the incident, the clinics had to postpone scheduled operations. Blood transfusions could not be performed. In part, emergency patients were transferred to other hospitals, reports the BBC. As reported by The Guardian, even some scheduled caesarean sections had to be performed in different clinics.

The BBC reports of a 70-year-old patient who was scheduled to have an operation at the Royal Brompton Hospital in the Chelsea district. He was notified approximately six-and-a-half hours after his actual appointment that the operation would not be happening.

“The staff on the ward didn’t seem to know what had happened, just that many patients were being told to go home and wait for a new date,” he said to the BBC.

A woman said: “My husband received a text message last night advising his appointment this morning had been cancelled due to circumstances beyond their control, and that all major south London hospitals are unable to take any bookings for an indefinite period of time.”

Restoration could take weeks

According to Synnovis, law enforcement agencies and IT experts are currently investigating the incident. The trade journal “Health Service Journal,” reported on Tuesday that is expected for the hospital impairments to persist for several weeks.

Director at Synnovis, Mark Dollar said: “This is a harsh reminder that this sort of attack can happen to anyone at any time and that, dispiritingly, the individuals behind it have no scruples about who their actions might affect.”

Former head of the British National Cyber Security Centre, Ciaran Martin, told the BBC on Wednesday that a criminal group from Russia that calls itself Qilin was likely responsible. According to Martin, they are only interested in money.

With ransomware attacks, criminals normally encrypt existing data on systems and demand a ransom for restoring the data. Offenders typically also obtain data and threaten releasing its details. However, ransoms do not guarantee that the extortioner will abstain from releasing the data or that they will actually restore encrypted data.

Not an isolated incident

In the past, several ransomware incidents have been made public in the health sector: In 2017, a number of international companies were infected with the malware, WannaCry – British hospitals were also affected back then. According to details provided by the National Health Service (NHS), approximately 7,000 appointments, some of which included operations, were cancelled as a result. However, it is estimated that perhaps even 19,000 appointments were affected.

Even the University Hospital of Düsseldorf had to postpone operations and close their emergency room in fall 2020 after data on the clinic’s servers had been encrypted by a trojan (German article).

The case attracted a great deal of attention because a patient had to be transferred to another hospital due to the system outage – and died shortly thereafter. The public prosecutor’s office had then started an investigation into involuntary manslaughter, which indeed was later abandoned (German article). This was because the autopsy revealed that the woman would have also likely died in the university clinic even if she had been treated more quickly.

Additionally, at the end of last year, a company that operates 30 hospitals in six US states had to transfer patients to different hospitals from some of their emergency rooms. The systems there were taken offline after ransomware was discovered.

Furthermore, a similar incident impaired pharmacies in the US earlier this year. (js)

United Kingdom: Faulty facial recognition prompts legal challenges

2024-06-06T13:34:00+02:00

Facial recognition software falsely identified two people in the United Kingdom as criminals. Now the victims are taking legal action in an effort to stop the use of the technology.

The civil liberties organization Big Brother Watch criticizes the expanding use of facial recognition in Great Britain. (Source: IMAGO / Offside Sports Photography)

Two people in London and Manchester were misidentified by facial recognition software in separate incidents. Now they have brought legal challenges against London’s Metropolitan Police and Facewatch, a company that sells facial recognition systems to retailers. Big Brother Watch is supporting the legal actions and demands that the controversial technology be banned.

One of the claimants is 38-year-old Shaun Thompson, who works to combat youth violence with the Street Fathers initiative. As Big Brother Watch reports, he was on his way home from a volunteer shift when the facial recognition system used by the London police falsely identified him as a wanted individual.

Officers held him for almost 30 minutes. Big Brother Watch reports that the officers repeatedly tried to take his fingerprints and threatened him with arrest. This even though Thompson was able to provide multiple forms of identification showing that he was not the person the police were searching for.

Said Thompson, “They were telling me I was a wanted man, trying to get my fingerprints and trying to scare me with arrest, even though I knew and they knew the computer had got it wrong.” He was angry, Thompson said, at being treated “as though I was guilty.”

“I’m bringing this legal challenge because I don’t want this to happen to other people. Facial recognition is like stop and search on steroids and doesn’t make communities any safer. It needs to be stopped.”

Police deploying the technology in public spaces

For several years now London’s Metropolitan Police has deployed mobile units that are equipped with facial recognition. Even in the testing phase there was criticism, however: researchers from the University of Essex accompanied police during trial runs and determined that the system had a failure rate of 81 percent. The researchers also pointed out that there was no legal basis for the use of facial recognition.

Big Brother Watch likewise stresses that “police use of facial recognition is not enabled by any specific piece of legislation and has not been authorized by parliament.”

According to a report by the BBC, the use of the controversial technology by police in London continues to increase. In 2023 police used the technology 23 times – this year they have already used it 67 times. But there have also been instances of misidentification.

Facial recognition used to fight theft

Some retailers in the UK are also using facial recognition to identify shoplifters. According to Big Brother Watch, in February a 19-year-old whom the NGO is calling Sara was trying to shop at a Manchester location of the Home Bargains chain. The store’s live facial recognition system, which is operated by Facewatch, falsely identified her as a shoplifter. She was searched by staff, called a thief and thrown out of the store. Staff also told her that she was banned from various stores throughout the UK.

Sara said in a statement: “I have never stolen in my life and so I was confused, upset and humiliated to be labelled as a criminal in front of a whole shop of people.” Stores should be prohibited from using facial recognition, she said. She has brought suit against both Facewatch and Home Bargains.

According to Big Brother Watch, Facewatch has admitted that its software misidentified Sara. Throughout the UK, retailers like Southern Co-op, Flannels, and Sports Direct also use the technology in their stores. Big Brother Watch reports that Facewatch customers can share photos of persons they suspect to be shoplifters. This is problematic, the NGO says, because “facial biometric data is as sensitive as passport data.” This case is only the “tip of the iceberg” – more and more people are seeking help from Big Brother Watch after being misidentified.

Data protection law violations

Big Brother Watch first filed a complaint against Facewatch with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) in 2022. The UK data watchdog found that the company had violated data protection laws on multiple fronts, including for unlawful data processing. Big Brother Watch however criticized the ICO’s finding that “no further regulatory action” was required.

According to an investigation by UK newspaper the Observer, officials at the Home Office interceded on the company’s behalf, pressuring the ICO to come to a favorable conclusion in their review.

Big Brother Watch urges ban

Silkie Carlo, director of Big Brother Watch and a co-claimant in the suit against the London police, said that Shaun Thompson and Sara’s experiences “are proof that facial recognition surveillance poses a real threat to the public’s rights and should be urgently banned.” Said Carlo, “These legal challenges are a landmark step towards protecting the public’s privacy and freedom from Orwellian live facial recognition.”

Carlo stated further: “Facial recognition is inaccurate and dangerously out of control in the UK. No other democracy in the world spies on its population with live facial recognition in the cavalier and chilling way the UK is starting to, and it is alarming that the Government is seeking to expand its use across the country.”

The British Home Office announced in April that it planned to invest millions in facial recognition. The money would be used in part to buy new mobile units for the police that could be equipped with live facial recognition and deployed in shopping districts.

In Fall 2023 the Home Office also announced a joint initiative with retailers, including large chains like Primark and Marks & Spencer, as well as the supermarket chain Co-op. The partnership includes the use of facial recognition: retailers are meant to provide footage from their surveillance cameras to the police, who will compare it against their database.

Human rights organizations have criticized facial recognition software’s tendency to more frequently misidentify people of color. Increased use of the technology could lead to already marginalized groups being stopped and searched by the police at disproportionately high levels, and to their being surveilled by retail workers while shopping. (js)

Journalists in exile targeted with Pegasus spyware

2024-06-05T08:07:00+02:00

Several activists and journalists living in exile in the EU were victims of spyware attacks. The attacks date back to 2020.

All over the world, activists and members of the press continue to be targeted with spyware. (Source: IMAGO / Pond5 Images)

Seven exile journalists and activists were targeted with Pegasus spyware within the European Union’s borders. Security experts have found evidence of the attacks, but are unable to identify the attackers.

The attacks were investigated by the NGO Access Now working in tandem with experts at the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab. The investigation found that the victims’ smartphones were infected with spyware between August 2020 and January 2023.

Pegasus is developed by NSO Group, an Israeli company. The spyware can be used to fully infiltrate devices like smartphones – those targeted are often completely unaware of the attack. After successfully infecting a device, attackers are able to gain access to all stored data, and can turn on the camera and microphone without the user’s knowledge. NSO Group claims to sell its surveillance software only to government clients.

Living in exile

According to Access Now and the Citizen Lab, all the individuals affected live in exile in EU countries. Many of them have criticized the Russian government and its war of aggression against Ukraine.

One of the people spied on is a member of Belarusian civil society who currently lives in Lithuania. The person, who was not named, had received a notification from Apple alerting them that their iPhone had been targeted by spyware. The company has been sending threat notifications since November 2021. After receiving the alert, the individual contacted the Citizen Lab, whose security experts were able to determine that the individual’s smartphone had in fact been infected with Pegasus spyware in March 2021.

A Russian journalist who also lives in Lithuania received similar warnings from Apple. According to Access Now and the Citizen Lab, the journalist’s smartphone was targeted in June 2023. At the time they were attending an event for exiled journalists in Riga, the Latvian capital. The event focused in part on digital security measures for journalists.

Three members of the press living in Riga were also targeted. One of them was Israeli-Russian journalist Evgeny Erlikh, former producer of the “Baltic Weekly” program for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

Maria Epifanova, general director of the Novaya Gazeta Europe newspaper, was spied on as well. Her phone was infected with Pegasus software in August 2020 – “the earliest known use of Pegasus to target Russian civil society,” Access Now reports.

Speaking to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), Epifanova said, “Regardless of who is behind this attack, invasion in private life is unacceptable. I am now working with a lawyer to decide on the next steps and will do my best to bring more light onto my own case and cases of my colleagues.”

Another victim was Belarusian opposition politician Andrei Sannikov, who lives in Warsaw. He ran for president of Belarus in 2010 – and was arrested after the election.

The Citizen Lab reports that critics of the Russian and Belarusian governments often face surveillance, threats, censorship, and other forms of repression. As a result, many choose to work in exile. Working abroad, however, they are more reliant on digital forms of communication – and this exposes them to new risks.

The joint investigation revealed that the same actor was likely responsible for the attacks on five of the seven victims. But the Citizen Lab and Access Now were unable to determine who specifically was behind the attacks. The groups report that there is no evidence that Russia, Belarus, or Lithuania are Pegasus customers or that they use Pegasus.

Last year, Access Now and the Citizen Lab were able to confirm that Galina Timchenko, founder of the exile media organization Meduza, was spied on with Pegasus. In Timchenko’s case as well, the groups were unable to determine who was behind the spying.

Call for a moratorium

Access Now is calling for a global moratorium “on the export, sale, transfer, servicing, and use of targeted digital surveillance technologies” like Pegasus.

Pegasus and similar surveillance tools have been criticized in the wake of reports that they have repeatedly been used to spy on government critics and members of the press. In the EU, journalists have been spied on in Hungary and Greece.

The United States has imposed sanctions on NSO Group and other software developers. US companies are prohibited from doing business with companies on the sanctions list without special authorization. (js)

Executions at a new all-time high in 2023

2024-05-31T13:08:00+02:00

This past year, the number of registered executions worldwide has risen, reports Amnesty International. In particular, more people were killed in Iran. However, China executed the most worldwide.

The number of countries that execute people is at its all-time historic low. (Source: IMAGO / Pond5 Images)

The human rights organisation, Amnesty International, has documented at least 1,153 executions in 16 countries in 2023. Furthermore, there is presumably a high number of unknown cases that would add to this number since no information exists from some countries. Such countries include China, where it is likely that more people are executed than in any other country.

According to the report, the number of globally documented executions has risen 31 percent, as 883 executions were documented in 2022 by Amnesty. Additionally, the number of executions this past year was higher than it had been for almost a decade: In 2015, 1,634 executions were registered.

According to the report, a few countries in particular were responsible for the increase in numbers. Almost three quarters of all registered executions took place in Iran: At least 853 people were killed there.

Amnesty accuses the Iranian authorities of making greater use of the death penalty to invoke fear and terror in the population and to consolidate their power. Furthermore, more than half of the executions are enforced for actions that are not punishable by death according to international law – in particular, drug offences. There were also public executions in the country – also a violation of international law. The organisation continues to criticise that the Baloch ethnic minority is often disproportionately affected by the death penalty. Although they only make up approximately five percent of the Iranian population, they account for 20 percent of all executions in Iran.

With 172 executions, Saudi Arabia is also responsible for a significant portion of the figures recorded by Amnesty – although there was a slight decrease compared to the 196 enforced death penalties from the previous year. Amnesty criticises that people in the country also receive death sentences for actions that should not be punished by death according to international law. Death sentences are imposed after unfair trials with extorted confessions.

Julia Duchrow, Secretary General of Amnesty International in Germany criticises: "The Iranian authorities showed a gross disregard for human life in 2023. Saudi Arabia, which repeatedly boasts its own reform efforts, imposes death sentences in part for trivial acts such as taking down social media posts critical of the government.”

Increasing numbers in Somalia and in the USA

The human rights organisation also recorded a dramatic increase of numbers in Somalia: The number of executions increased sixfold from six in 2022 to at least 38 in 2023. No other country in Sub-Saharan Africa imposed the death penalty – the number of sentences imposed in the region has, however, increased from 298 in 2022 to 494 in 2023.

And the USA also imposed more death sentences (24) in 2023 than in the previous year. In Florida, the first execution since four years was carried out. In the US states, Idaho and Tennessee, bills were introduced that would permit firing squad executions. In contrast, 23 states in the US have abolished the death sentence for all crimes.

For the 15th year in a row, the country is the only one in the region that carries out executions. Guyana as well as Trinidad and Tobago also impose death sentences – but have not carried them out.

Death penalty: A state secret

China is, however, missing from the figures published by Amnesty International since the government there treats information regarding the death penalty as a state secret. However, the organisation assumes that the most executions in the world occur there in the country – likely thousands of people. Therefore, Amnesty speaks of China being the world’s “leading executioner” and demands that authorities publish information about the use of capital punishment in the country.

For similar reasons, there are also no figures available from North Korea and Vietnam. However, the organisation also assumes that people in both countries are killed on a large scale by order of the state. Therefore, the organisation notes that the report only partially describes the actual extent of executions carried out globally.

Recorded global executions 2014 to 2023. (Source: Amnesty International)

Of the 1,153 killed, at least 31 were women: 24 were executed in Iran, six in Saudi Arabia and one in Singapore. Women were also killed in China as well – the number is, however, unknown.

In 2023, Amnesty International did not register any executions in Belarus, Japan, Myanmar and in South Sudan. These countries still allowed people to be killed in 2022.

Fewer countries carrying out the death penalty

According to the report, 16 countries in total carried out executions – in 2022 it was still 20. This is the lowest number of countries since Amnesty began recording global figures for executions.

In total, 52 countries imposed 2,428 new death sentences this past year. This is the highest amount since 2018 (then 2,531). In some countries in particular, there werevconsiderably more sentences imposed than in the previous year: Egypt sentenced 590 people to death and at least 248 new sentences were handed out in Bangladesh. There was also an increase in Iraq as well (at least 138) and Kenya (131).

At the end of 2023, there were at least 27,687 people sentenced to death globally.

Amnesty International fundamentally rejects the death penalty without any exceptions and demands that it be abolished globally.

Julia Duchrow explains: “More and more countries depart from the inhumane practice of the death penalty. For Amnesty International, the global abolishment of death penalty will only be over once no person falls victim to state executions.”

According to details provided by Amnesty, 144 countries had abolished the death sentence by law (112 countries) or in practice (32 countries) by the end of 2023. (js)

More internet shutdowns in 2023 than ever before

2024-05-23T14:34:00+02:00

More than 280 internet shutdowns were imposed worldwide in 2023, as documented by the NGO Access Now. The situation has never been this bad before.

Natural disasters were among the triggers for shutdowns – an “alarming new development,” says Access Now. (Source: IMAGO / Pond5 Images)

In 2023, governments in 39 countries imposed at least 283 internet shutdowns. Millions of people were affected, as Access Now documents in a report released last week. Since the organization began keeping track in 2016, the number of shutdowns has never been so high. The NGO warns of “an alarming and dangerous trend for human rights.”

According to the report, “Shrinking Democracy, Growing Violence: Internet Shutdowns in 2023,” more people in more places were affected by internet shutdowns than ever before. There were an additional 82 shutdowns this year compared to last – in 2022, there were 201 blackouts in 40 countries.

As in previous years, Access Now counted the highest number of shutdowns in 2023 in India, at 116. “Authorities in India continue to use shutdowns as a near-default response to crises,” the report notes. The restrictions are affecting larger areas than in previous years – Access Now gives as an example a shutdown of the internet in the entire state of Punjab which impacted roughly 27 million people in March 2023. In the state of Manipur, roughly 3.2 million people had no access to the internet for more than 200 days.

Many state services can only be accessed online in India; when the internet is down, people are cut off from these services. The economy also suffers under the restrictions.

The NGO documented 37 cases in Myanmar – but assumes that the real number is higher. The government in Iran also cut off access to the internet at least 34 times. In Kenya, Mozambique, Nepal, and Suriname, internet shutdowns were documented for the first time in 2023.

Felicia Anthonio, Campaign Manager at Access Now, said in a statement: “The year 2023 was one of sheer devastation invoked and intensified by internet shutdowns.” Governments had resorted to the measure “in precarious and frightening times.”

Internet shutdowns amidst active conflicts

For the first time, conflicts and wars were the most frequent context in which internet blackouts were imposed: warring parties in nine countries limited access to communication 74 times. Ever more frequently, armies are implementing this measure as part of a strategy to isolate the civilian population from the rest of the world. This puts the people affected in great danger.

People in Sudan, where a civil war has been raging since April 2023, were among those impacted. Even now, parts of the country continue to be completely cut off from telecommunications – while the war has brought on one of the largest humanitarian crises in the world at present.

In Myanmar the military junta in multiple instances disrupted internet and telephone connections in advance of airstrikes on residential areas. Access Now reports that the civilian population under attack was unable to receive information on potential evacuation routes – and attempts to contact family members were made more difficult. According to Access Now, at least eleven of the shutdowns in the country came in connection with documented severe human rights abuses or war crimes. Other countries had also attempted to mask similar abuses in this manner.

The Russian military deliberately destroyed infrastructure in Ukraine, damaging internet connections as well.

Protests and school exams

Access Now documented disruptions in 15 countries in connection with protests, including India and Iran. In Senegal the government blocked first specific platforms and finally the entire mobile internet in response to protests against the arrest of a prominent opposition figure.

In Pakistan as well there were protests following the arrest of former prime minister Imran Khan – which likewise prompted internet shutdowns.

Some governments even see internet shutdowns as a convenient measure for preventing cheating during school or university exams: Access Now documented twelve such cases in six countries, among them Algeria, India, Kenya and Iraq.

The organization documented five cases in connection with elections. It also praised an association of 38 governments that had condemned such measures.

Access Now also identifies an “alarming new development” in the fact that in 2023 at least four countries imposed restrictions in connection with natural disasters. After the devastating earthquake in parts of Turkey and Syria in early 2023 the Turkish authorities at times restricted access to X (at the time Twitter). Access Now criticizes the government’s actions, calling them an attempt to suppress criticism of the government’s response to the catastrophe.

Access Now includes such platform blocks in its count of internet shutdowns – and warns that such measures are increasingly used to cut off entire countries from important communications platforms. They also serve as a means of targeting marginalized groups – for example, people in 12 countries are unable to use the dating app Grindr.

Call to action

Access Now says that governments limit access to the internet in order to cover up human rights abuses and silence critics. This year’s report is meant to serve as a call to action. UN experts also criticize the shutdowns for their impact on human rights.

Access Now calls on warring parties to secure access to telecommunications channels for the civilian population so that people can receive advance warnings of impending danger and communicate with aid organizations and family members.

All countries worldwide should also “adopt legislation that clearly prohibits disruptions” to telecommunications networks and communication platforms. States that currently implement such measures should lift them.

Zach Rosson of Access Now said in a statement: “Access Now and the #KeepItOn coalition cannot underscore enough the gravity of the 2023 internet shutdown landscape. We are at a tipping point, so take this as a wake up call: all stakeholders across the globe – governments, civil society, and the private sector alike – must take urgent action to permanently end internet shutdowns.” (js)

Germany: Federal police used mugshots to test facial recognition, report says

2024-05-16T16:47:00+02:00

Germany’s federal police reportedly used millions of facial photos from an internal databank to test facial recognition systems. Experts cast doubt on the legality of the tests.

A man whose photo was presumably used in the tests is weighing a lawsuit against the BKA. (Source: IMAGO / Björn Trotzki)

The Bundeskriminalamt (BKA), Germany’s federal police, commissioned tests of facial recognition software using the photos of three million people. That’s according to a report from Bayerische Rundfunk (BR). Experts criticize the BKA’s actions.

As BR reports, in 2019 the Fraunhofer Institute for Computer Graphics Research evaluated facial recognition software from various suppliers at the behest of the BKA. The project, which bore the name “Fitness of BKA Facial Recognition Systems” (“Ertüchtigung des Gesichtserkennungssystems im BKA”), was meant to test how well the system used by the BKA stood up in comparison with four other products.

For the tests, the BKA provided the Fraunhofer Institute with roughly five million facial photos of around three million people from the central police information system INPOL-Z. The information comes from the project’s final report, says BR, which was released in response to freedom of information requests. In order to test how precise the facial recognition software’s capabilities were, the BKA also provided a list of 56,500 bearded individuals and 19,500 individuals who wear glasses.

When asked to comment, the BKA said that the test was necessary “in light of the great significance of facial recognition for law enforcement and danger prevention.”

Mark Zöller, professor of criminal justice and digitalization at the Ludwig Maximilian University in Munich, criticized the BKA’s actions. The case once again demonstrates how security agencies charge ahead without clear legal basis, he said. In his estimation this manner of data processing encroaches on fundamental rights – and could also affect individuals who have wound up in the INPOL system without being convicted of a crime.

Said Zöller: “I find it very risky, that they would be working with millions of people’s data without making sure to check the legal basis beforehand.”

BKA calls project research

In discussions with Ulrich Kelber, the Federal Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information (BfDI), the BKA declared the project to be “scientific research” and invoked the BKA-Gesetz, the law governing the BKA, BR reports. Commissioner Kelber however characterized the tests in a 2022 letter as problematic and wrote that they lacked a legal basis. “In light of the complexity of the legal situation,” however, the commissioner declined to raise an objection.

After further review, the commissioner’s office concluded that “the testing of software products does not fall under the purview of law enforcement and danger prevention, for which reason the GDPR applies here.” In response to a request from BR the BKA also invoked the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

Zöller, the criminal justice expert, told BR that the tests were conducted by the police in connection with their work. The BKA could not, Zöller said, invoke the GDPR with regard to law enforcement and danger prevention; rather the agency had to abide by the relevant laws pertaining to its specific mandate. In the case at hand that would mean the BKA-Gesetz – and that law does not stipulate which data security agencies are allowed to use for software tests.

Federal commissioner informed late

According to the report, the BKA repeatedly took months to respond to requests for information from the BfDI, and provided few details when it did. The commissioner’s office didn’t receive the final report until one and a half years after the project’s conclusion – and only then learned that millions of actual photos had been used.

The BKA told Bayerische Rundfunk that it was under no legal obligation to inform the BfDI. Nor was it technically necessary to do so.

In an interview with BR, Federal Commissioner Kelber called for clear rules for such tests and criticized the BKW: “Security agencies often have an interpretation of the legal situation which, from their perspective, is very broad.”

Criticism of misuse

In order to ensure the security of the data used in the tests, the data were analyzed on computers kept in a separate room, without an internet connection, at one of the BKA’s campuses. After the project’s conclusion the hard drives were destroyed.

But Matthias Marx, spokesperson for the Chaos Computer Club (CCC), nevertheless criticized the BKA, saying that the data were used for a purpose other than that for which they had been collected: “Even with measures taken to secure the data, misuse is misuse. The data were collected for the purpose of law enforcement and may be used only for that purpose.”

Marx has advocated against the use of biometric surveillance technology for years and had requested access to the final report on the project in accordance with Germany’s freedom of information law. It was interesting to see which actors were conducting which experiments “with our data,” he said.

The BR report also mentions an individual presumed to have been affected by the project: IT expert Janik Besendorf was booked under suspicion of domestic disturbance in 2018. The case was dismissed soon afterwards, but he assumes that the photos taken of him at booking were used in the tests of different facial recognition systems. He has filed a complaint with the BfDI – and according to BR, he is also considering filing a lawsuit against the BKA.

By its own admission, the BKA has been using a facial recognition system since 2008. The system, which is meant to identify unknown perpetrators, compares available images with photos stored in INPOL, the central police information databank. (js)

Amnesty uncovers spyware exports to Indonesia

2024-05-16T16:45:00+02:00

Companies from Europe, Israel, and Southeast Asia have been selling spyware to Indonesia for years. A new report shows which companies and authorities are involved – and reveals the lack of transparency surrounding the sales.

Software sold by the companies mentioned in the report has been used to spy on journalists, activists, and political opposition groups. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Wire)

The human rights organization Amnesty International on May 1 published a report on the international trade in surveillance technologies. Using Indonesia as a case study, the investigation shows how suppliers of digital surveillance technology based in various countries use complex networks of subsidiaries to circumvent regulatory authorities and export restrictions. Per the report, the lack of transparency makes it difficult to effectively implement regulatory mechanisms – to the extent that such mechanisms even exist.

The investigation is the result of a months-long collaboration between Amnesty and the media organizations Haaretz, Inside Story, Tempo, WAV research collective, and Woz. The research delved into commercial trade databases and public records. Amnesty and its partners uncovered evidence of “numerous spyware imports or deployments between 2017 and 2023 by companies and state agencies in Indonesia.” Human rights defenders, journalists, and activists in the country have been subject to repeated attacks – both digital and physical – in recent years.

According to research findings, some of the world’s leading producers of digital surveillance technology made sales to Indonesia. Products marketed by Q Cyber Technologies (NSO Group), the Intellexa consortium, Saito Tech (Candiru), Raedarius M8 Sdn Bhd (a subsidiary of FinFisher), and Wintego Systems were among those sold. Buyers included the Indonesian National Police and the National Cyber and Crypto Agency.

According to Amnesty, the investigation “showcases the continued failure of multiple countries to regulate and provide transparency on the exports of dual-use technologies.” These products can be deployed for both civilian and military purposes, and pose “serious human rights risks,” Amnesty says.

The imported surveillance programs give attackers unlimited access to a targeted device. On smartphones for example it is possible to turn on the cameras or activate the microphone and listen in on the user’s surroundings. The owner of the device is generally unaware of the installation of the software, and can have trouble ascertaining after the fact which data were compromised.

Repression in Indonesia

Amnesty describes the sale of surveillance technology to Indonesia as particularly worrying and points to a 2022 report documenting numerous human rights abuses. Amnesty reported at the time that attacks on freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, privacy, and sexual and reproductive rights had increased in previous years. Security authorities and the military had used violence against protestors and political dissenters; rights had been curtailed.

“Human rights defenders and activists have repeatedly faced repression online in Indonesia. The Electronic Information and Transaction (EIT) law and other restrictive laws have been used to prosecute and intimidate human rights defenders, activists, journalists, academics and others. The murky trade in spyware tools to Indonesia adds another dangerous tool for potential intimidation. This cannot be allowed to continue,” said Carolina Rocha da Silva, Operations Manager at Amnesty’s Security Lab.

Opaque Networks

The technology sent to Indonesia came from Israel, Singapore, and Malaysia, though only some of the actual suppliers are based in these countries. Sales are facilitated by a “murky ecosystem of surveillance vendors, brokers and resellers” operating locally and internationally. As a result, “it becomes exceedingly difficult to identify where such invasive tools are being sold and to control if the suppliers have followed legally mandated rules for export licensing or performed their human rights due diligence assessments.”

In Singapore, for example, imports passed through intermediaries that had previously supplied surveillance technology and spyware to state agencies in Indonesia. It can be difficult to identify the actual owners of these intermediary companies, Amnesty reports. “By covering the beneficial owner in this way, verification of end-to-end supply chains for dual-use goods becomes close to impossible.”

What is clear however is which companies developed the exported spyware: Q Cyber Technologies for example is part of the Israel-based NSO Group. The company was placed on the United States’ sanctions list after its Pegasus software was found to have been used to spy on activists, journalists, and members of political opposition groups around the world.

Since mid-2023 the supplier Intellexa and its subsidiaries have also been on the US Commerce Department’s sanctions list for “threatening the privacy and security of individuals and organizations worldwide.” Among other abuses, the company’s Predator surveillance software was allegedly used to spy on journalists and politicians in Greece.

Saito Tech, also known by the name Candiru, is likewise on the US sanctions list. In 2021, researchers at the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab found Candiru’s programs linked to more than 750 fake websites pretending to be affiliated with non-governmental organizations like Amnesty International or with the Black Lives Matter movement.

Raedarius M8 Sdn Bhd is a subsidiary of the surveillance software supplier FinFisher (now known as Vilicius Holding GmbH), the Amnesty report shows. In recent years its programs have been used against political opposition groups and activists in Turkey, Egypt, and Bahrain.

In addition to the exports, the research team also uncovered malicious web domains and network infrastructure. The websites mimic the home pages of news organizations or opposition parties. If targeted individuals open the webpages on their devices and interact with them, then the devices are infected with malware, such as Intellexa’s Predator spyware or malware from Candiru.

Amnesty’s recommendations

In order to prevent impunity for rights-violators and support prevention of rights abuses, Amnesty demands that governments better monitor the market and enforce adherence to existing regulations, including export regulations. Penalties should be “substantial enough to deter non-compliance.” What is needed is “a combination of technology, resources, and international cooperation to track and regulate exports effectively.”

Furthermore, Amnesty “calls on all countries to ban the sale, transfer, export, and use of highly invasive spyware,” which, it says, “is fundamentally incompatible with human rights.” There should be “a global moratorium – a halt on the sale, transfer, and use of surveillance technology – until there is a proper human rights regulatory framework in place that [protects] people from the misuse of these tools.” Export licenses for the companies involved must be audited.

From the suppliers of surveillance technology Amnesty demands that they put a halt to the development, sale, and use of the dangerous products so long as they do not contain technological safeguards that ensure lawful use under a regulatory framework that respects human rights. All activities that lead to human rights abuses should be stopped. “This includes immediately terminating the use, support, and sale of [suppliers’] technologies in states where state authorities have a history of digitally and/or physically targeting members of civil society or in which adequate legal safeguards against abuses are not present,” says Amnesty.

Amnesty also recommends that surveillance companies “provide remediation” to individuals who were targeted with their technologies and as a result became victims of unlawful surveillance. (hcz)

EU Agency warns of hazardous health conditions driven by climate change

2024-05-16T16:43:00+02:00

Floods and droughts show the effects of climate change in Europe. They lead to poorer water quality and are accompanied by disease, warns the European Environment Agency.

Extremes, not normalcy: droughts pose as much of a threat to public health as floods. (Quelle: (IMAGO / Joerg Boethling)

Climate change exacerbates floods and droughts and leads to worsening water quality, according to a report from the European Environment Agency (EEA). The trend represents an increasing threat to public health, claims the report published this month. The EEA is an agency of the European Union based in Copenhagen. It calls for swift action and better coordination between governments and responsible entities in order to limit or avoid health risks.

Today, according to the report, one in eight Europeans lives in a region that is prone to flooding. “The elderly, children, those in poor health, disadvantaged groups, rescue teams and clean-up professionals tend to suffer the most from” floods, droughts, forest fires, and diseases spread via water and pathogens. Death, injury, infection, and impacts on mental health are consequences of climate change that are already being felt throughout Europe, the agency argues.

In response, the EEA calls for increased engagement in the fight against the health hazards driven by advancing climate change. “Existing European climate, water and health policies offer a solid foundation for action, but they need to be implemented more broadly and systematically,” says EEA executive director Leena Ylä-Mononen.

Chemicals and disease

Between 1980 and 2022, 5,582 people across 32 European countries died in floods, according to the official figure. According to the EEA’s report, 53 million Europeans live in regions that are threatened by potential river flooding. This number rose to include 935,000 more people between 2011 and 2021. This is evidence of the continuing expansion of flood-prone regions. One in nine hospitals in Europe faces the threat of flooding.

As the EEA reports, flooding can also lead to a rise in environmental contamination in affected regions. Industrial pollutants are one cause of contamination. Nearly 15 percent of industrial facilities in Europe are located in flood-prone areas. 36 percent of municipal wastewater facilities are located in such areas. Floods can also help facilitate the outbreak of certain infectious diseases like the norovirus.

What’s more, ever larger segments of the European population live in regions with chronic or periodic water scarcity. This problem appears primarily – but not exclusively – in southern Europe. There roughly 30 percent of people live in areas with chronic water scarcity; 70 percent must contend with seasonal scarcity during the summer.

Farmers and those who rely on private wells are particularly at risk of suffering the negative health effects of droughts and water scarcity. Droughts take a toll on farmers’ livelihoods and their mental health. People reliant on wells suffer from poor water quality, as low water supplies increase the concentration of chemicals and medication runoff in water.

The risk of forest fires is also increased by water scarcity. In the past four decades, fires caused the deaths of 702 people in Europe.

Resolute action necessary

Faced with these growing problems, the EEA sees an urgent need to act. Existing EU regulations for climate, water and health absolutely must be implemented, the agency writes. Already existing solutions should be applied in all sectors and at every level of government. Measures are required not only in the public health sector but in all areas with potential consequences for health, like water management, land use, building design, and insurance policy.

In general, climate change considerations must be more strongly integrated into the health policy of member states. What is needed is “funding and competencies for climate change adaptation with a focus on health.”

“Quick wins include raising public awareness about the risks and solutions, while longer-term actions, including infrastructure improvements and nature-based solutions, require systematic planning and investment,” said the agency in a press release. Responsible entities like governments, water utilities and health services providers should better coordinate their efforts. (dpa / hcz)

London police charged with using controversial facial recognition

2024-05-13T08:13:00+02:00

London police officers can no longer access the controversial facial recognition site PimEyes on department-issued devices. Officers reportedly used the search engine thousands of times.

Critics say that PimEyes enables surveillance on a previously unimaginable scale. (Source: IMAGO / Science Photo Library)

Officers from London’s Metropolitan Police accessed the controversial facial recognition search engine PimEyes thousands of times. That’s according to a report published Monday by the British news site i-News in partnership with the NGO Liberty Investigates. The report draws on data available under Freedom of Information rules. The authorities have now blocked access to the site.

PimEyes compiles facial images online on a massive scale, analyzes them for individual characteristics, and saves the biometric data. When paying customers upload a photo, the search engine displays matching photos and links to the photos’ sources on the internet.

According to the report, officers viewed the controversial site a total of 2,337 times in the first three months of this year.

A spokesperson for the London police force told i-News that a visit to the PimEyes website was not proof that a facial recognition search was actually conducted. In response to the investigation, however, the Metropolitan Police had “blocked all access to the site from its devices.”

Police implement facial recognition

Police in Britain already use facial recognition: in London for example mobile facial recognition units are already deployed to search for wanted individuals in public spaces. As i-News reports, however, officers can also use PimEyes to search for individuals “without an official audit trail” or other safeguards: the systems used by the Metropolitan Police, for instance, “limit searches to watchlists of wanted people and their use is subject to approval by senior officers.” But with PimEyes officers can search for individuals at will.

British politicians criticize officers’ access to PimEyes. Former Conservative cabinet minister David Davis told i-News: “The police should only ever use tools that have been properly vetted, tested, and approved for use. PimEyes is none of those.” He demanded that all other police forces in the UK block access to the facial recognition search engine.

Jake Hurfurt from the British civil liberties organization Big Brother Watch said: “It is entirely inappropriate for police officers to use PimEyes.”

It remains unclear whether other law enforcement agencies in Britain use PimEyes. Forty-five other British police forces declined or did not respond to requests for information – some cited the risk of “revealing police tactics and hindering the prevention of crime,” i-News reports.

The National Police Chiefs’ Council meanwhile advised police forces to neither confirm nor deny the use of PimEyes – for fear of “negative press.”

Criticism of PimEyes

An investigation by the news site netzpolitik.org in summer 2020 was the first to draw attention to the service offered by PimEyes. At the time the company was based in Poland – but it has since been sold and has moved headquarters several times. The company’s website currently lists an address in Belize. The company also reportedly has an office in the Republic of Georgia.

The German Police Trade Union was among those that criticized PimEyes when it first gained notoriety, stating that the search engine posed “enormous dangers to citizens’ anonymity and [did] not belong in private hands.”

In late 2023 it was revealed that the Australian Federal Police (AFP) had also tested PimEyes – possibly for operational purposes, as APD representatives were forced to admit. One Australian senator criticized PimEyes as being “particularly dangerous.”

The tool has long faced criticism: Big Brother Watch warns that PimEyes processes the biometric data of people whose photos are visible online without their consent. The tool is severely intrusive and enables surveillance “on a scale previously unimaginable.”

Past studies have shown that the tool can be used to identify people who participate in political demonstrations. It was also revealed in August 2022 that men had used the search engine to track down women they didn’t know.

As i-News reports, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), Britain’s data watchdog, has investigated PimEyes but has not taken any action against the company. A spokeswoman for the ICO said its investigation had been concluded last year – but could be revisited “should any further information come to light.”

Meanwhile the use of facial recognition by police in Britain is expanding. In April the government announced plans to invest more than 50 million pounds in facial recognition systems. Civil liberties groups warn of mass-scale surveillance. (js)

Avast must pay fine for sale of user data

2024-05-13T08:11:00+02:00

Avast transferred data relating to roughly 100 million users. Now the company will have to pay a fine in the EU.

Earlier this year US regulators also imposed a fine on the company, which sells antivirus software. (Source: Avast)

The antivirus software developer Avast must pay a fine of 13.9 million euros for violating data privacy regulations. The ruling marks the conclusion of a years-long case pursued by the Czech data protection authority.

Avast sells antivirus software and browser extensions. According to the investigation, during the timeframe under review, between April and July 2019, the company used its products to gather data from users and then shared that data with its subsidiary, Jumpstart. As the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) reported last week, however, the company engaged in this data processing “without due legal title.”

Roughly 100 million users were reportedly affected by the data transfer.

Information on websites visited

Specifically, Avast was found to have transferred the browsing histories of individual users, whose data was tied to a unique identifier. The Czech Supervisory Authority came to the conclusion “that internet browsing history, even if not complete, may constitute personal data, since re-identification of at least some of the data subjects could occur,” the EDPB reported.

Avast also falsely informed its customers about the data transfer, claiming that it was transferring anonymized data solely for “statistical trend analytics.” In fact, the data were not anonymized, and were sold via the subsidiary.

The Czech Supervisory Authority (SA) emphasized that the company’s violation of the GDPR was all the more egregious given that Avast advertises its expertise in cybersecurity and sells products meant to protect users’ data and privacy. Customers “could not have expected that this company in particular would transfer their personal data,” said the head of the Czech authority, Jiří Kaucký. “That is, data based on which not only an identity of someone can be discovered but also their interests, personal preferences, residence, wealth, profession, and other data concerning their privacy.”

Practice uncovered years ago

The Czech Supervisory Authority has jurisdiction over Avast because the company is headquartered in Prague. The SA initiated its investigation after media outlets first reported on the data sales in late 2019 and early 2020. There was also an anonymous tip.

The US news site Motherboard reported in January 2020 that the transferred data included information like Google searches and GPS coordinates from Google Maps. Other companies had paid millions of dollars for the data.

Not long after the reports were published, Avast shut down its Jumpstart subsidiary.

The Czech authority first ruled on the case in 2020, but Avast appealed the decision. The fine imposed last month represents the final ruling in the case.

Penalty in the United States as well

Earlier this year, in February, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) imposed a fine of $16.5 million on Avast for its selling of data. The FTC likewise accused the company of having exploited its software to unlawfully collect and sell browsing activities which could be used to identify users. Between 2014 and 2020, the FTC charged, Avant’s Jumpshot subsidiary sold this data to more than 100 companies.

The company made it possible for certain clients to identify users via the data it provided. “In fact, some of the Jumpshot products were designed to allow clients to track specific users or even to associate specific users – and their browsing histories – with other information those clients had,” the FTC reported. The data revealed for example which websites were visited when, and on what device; the user’s location was also revealed.

According to the FTC, the sale of data affected users in the US, UK, Mexico, Australia, Canada, and Germany, among other countries. (js)

Saudi Arabia: Woman given lengthy prison sentence for online posts

2024-05-06T17:12:00+02:00

In Saudi Arabia a woman has been sentenced to eleven years in prison for demanding more rights for women online. Human rights advocates are sharply criticizing the ruling.

In recent years several women have been given lengthy prison sentences for expressing opinions online. (Source: IMAGO / NurPhoto)

In Saudi Arabia 29-year-old Manahel al-Otaibi was sentenced to eleven years in prison for her support of women’s rights and her choice of clothing, the human rights organizations Amnesty International and ALQST report. They demand her unconditional release.

According to Amnesty and ALQST, al-Otaibi, a fitness instructor, was sentenced by the Saudi Specialized Criminal Court (SCC) on January 9. The charges against her include calling for an end to the country’s “male guardianship system” on social media. She also went “to the shops without wearing an abaya” (a traditional dress) and published videos in which she was wearing “indecent clothes.”

According to Amnesty, the authorities had charged al-Otaibi’s sister with similar offenses – but she fled the country in 2022 after receiving a summons.

Saudi Arabia confirms sentence

UN representatives requested information on both cases from the Saudi authorities in December. In their petition they described Manahel al-Otaibi as a “woman human rights defender” with an “active social media presence.” In addition to promoting women’s rights online she had also shared content promoting the rights of other marginalized groups.

Saudi Arabia’s Permanent Mission to the UN in Geneva confirmed the sentence in January – claiming al-Otaibi had been found guilty of committing “terrorist offenses.” Amnesty International calls the accusations absurd. “Al-Otaibi’s family have not had access to her court documents, or the evidence presented against her,” the organization reports.

According to Saudi authorities, the sentence remained “under consideration before the courts” as of January 25.

Amnesty reports that the 29-year-old was first arrested in November 2022. While in prison she has faced physical and psychological abuse. For months, beginning in November 2023, she had no contact with the outside world. Only in April 2024 was she able to contact her family again and inform them that “she was being held in solitary confinement and had a broken leg as a result of physical abuse.” She had been denied health care, she said.

Sharp criticism

Al-Otaibi’s sentence is “an appalling and cruel injustice,” said Bissan Fakih, Amnesty’s Campaigner on Saudi Arabia. “With this sentence the Saudi authorities have exposed the hollowness of their much-touted women’s rights reforms in recent years and demonstrated their chilling commitment to silencing peaceful dissent.”

According to Amnesty, some restrictions for women have been lifted in recent years. But many discriminatory features of the male guardianship system remain in place.

Lina Alhathloul, of the organization ALQST, said that the sentence demonstrates the Saudi authorities’ “continuing determination to control Saudi Arabia’s women.”

Suppressing freedom of speech

Amnesty and ALQST view the sentence against Manahel al-Otaibi as part of an “intensified crackdown” on free speech in Saudi Arabia. “In the past two years, Saudi courts have convicted and handed down lengthy prison terms on dozens of individuals for their expression on social media, including many women,” Amnesty reports.

In August 2022, for example, Salma al-Shehab was sentenced to 34 years in prison for following women’s rights activists on Twitter and sharing their posts. In an appeal hearing in early 2023 the court reduced the sentence to 27 years – but the prison term is still followed by a 27 year travel ban.

Not long after al-Shehab’s original sentence was handed down, another woman was sentenced to 45 years for sharing her opinion on Twitter.

Amnesty International mentions two more women, Fatima al-Shawarbi and Sukaynah al-Aithan, who were sentenced to prison terms of 30 and 40 years, respectively.

Last year, the Specialized Criminal Court sentenced a man to death for his activities on social media. According to human rights groups, he mainly shared posts by critics of the government. (js)

Austria: Data Privacy Complaint Filed against ChatGPT for Giving False Information

2024-05-02T08:08:00+02:00

The chatbot ChatGPT violates the GDPR by incorrectly reproducing personal data – that’s according to a new complaint filed with the Austrian data protection authority.

Users can ask ChatGPT questions – but should make sure the answers are correct. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Wire)

The Austrian advocacy group Noyb on Monday filed a complaint against OpenAI, the developer of ChatGPT. The group claims that the chatbot violates the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) because it gives out false information on individuals. There is no procedure for correcting or deleting the false information, as required by law, says Noyb.

ChatGPT is a so-called chatbot that operates using artificial intelligence (AI). Users can ask the tool questions in plain conversational language, which it then answers.

Noyb filed its complaint together with an individual impacted by the tool. The complainant is a public figure whose identity has been withheld.

Noyb charges that when asked to give the complainant’s birthday, ChatGPT “repeatedly provided incorrect information instead of telling users that it doesn’t have the necessary data.”

The GDPR however requires that personal data be accurate. It also establishes a right to rectification of false information – and to the deletion of false information. According to the right of access enshrined in the GDPR, companies must also be able to disclose what data pertaining to individuals they have stored and what the sources of the data are.

OpenAI Must Follow Regulations

Maartje de Graaf, data protection lawyer at Noyb, said in a statement: “Making up false information is quite problematic in itself. But when it comes to false information about individuals, there can be serious consequences. It’s clear that companies are currently unable to make chatbots like ChatGPT comply with EU law when processing data about individuals. If a system cannot produce accurate and transparent results, it cannot be used to generate data about individuals. The technology has to follow the legal requirements, not the other way around.”

According to Noyb, OpenAI refused the complainant’s request to rectify or delete the data pertaining to him. The company argued that it wasn’t possible to correct data. “Open AI says it can filter or block data on certain prompts,” Noyb reports, “but not without preventing ChatGPT from filtering all information about the complainant.”

The company “failed to adequately respond to the complainant’s access request.”

Said de Graaf: “The obligation to comply with access requests applies to all companies. It is clearly possible to keep records of training data that was used at least [to] have an idea about the sources of information.”

Data Protection Authorities Should Impose Fines

Noyb and the complainant filed their complaint with the Austrian data protection authority (DSB) and have asked the authority to investigate OpenAI’s data processing. The complaint asks that the DSB seek to clarify which measures the company has taken to ensure the accuracy of personal data.

OpenAI must also “comply with the complainant’s access request” and “bring its processing in line with the GDPR.” Noyb also requests that the DSB impose a fine on the company.

Criticism of Chatbots

According to Noyb, OpenAI itself admits that its chatbot generates “responses to user requests by predicting the next most likely words that might appear in response to each prompt.” The company therefore cannot guarantee the accuracy of the answers ChatGPT gives.

“This is very much a structural problem,” the advocacy group says. According to a November 2023 report by the New York Times, “chatbots invent information at least 3 percent of the time – and as high as 27 percent.” The invention of false information is also known as “AI hallucination.”

OpenAI has already run into trouble with European data privacy regulations. Last year the Italian data protection authority imposed a temporary restriction to prevent ChatGPT from processing user data from Italy. The authority criticized OpenAI, saying “there appears to be no legal basis underpinning the massive collection and processing of personal data” used to train the company’s algorithms. (dpa / js)

Spain Reopens Investigation into Pegasus Surveillance

2024-05-02T08:04:00+02:00

A Spanish court has resumed its investigation into spyware attacks on politicians. The attacks first came to light in 2022. Spanish and French authorities are working together on the inquiry.

Both Spanish prime minister Sánchez (right) and French president Macron are believed to have been targeted with Pegasus. (Source: IMAGO / Le Pictorium)

Spain’s highest court ruled last week that it would reopen its investigation into spyware attacks on politicians. The list of individuals targeted is said to include Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez.

The Spanish government announced publicly two years ago that Sánchez had been spied on using Pegasus intelligence software. Defense Minister Margarita Robles, Interior Minister Fernando Grande-Marlaska, and Agricultural Minister Luis Planas were also allegedly spied on.

At the time the Spanish government did not speculate as to who was behind the surveillance of top politicians. Media outlets nevertheless reported that Morocco could have been responsible for the attacks.

Spain’s highest court began investigating the incidents – but shuttered its initial inquiry in summer 2023. In announcing the closing of the inquiry, the court complained of a complete lack of cooperation from Israel. Authorities in Israel had not replied to repeated requests for assistance, the court said. Pegasus is developed and sold by the Israeli company NSO Group. The company claims to sell the software only to government clients; exports are subject to a licensing requirement.

Cooperation with France

As Spanish media have reported, Judge José Luis Calama has now decided to reopen the investigation. The impetus apparently comes from a request from French authorities, who are also investigating possible spyware attacks on top politicians – and also on journalists, lawyers, and other public figures. An international group of media outlets first uncovered this abuse in 2021 in collaboration with Forbidden Stories, a French non-profit, and Amnesty International.

French authorities now want to find out who was behind these attacks – and hope to do so in collaboration with Spain. A list compiling the traces of infection found on devices was reportedly sent to Spanish authorities, and experts in Spain are now set to compare the list with the traces they themselves have found. Spanish investigators have plans to put together a report, among other possible steps.

Spanish defense minister Robles called the reopening of the investigation “good news.”

The use of Pegasus against Spanish politicians was detected during an analysis of their smartphones in 2022. The revelation came not long after cybersecurity experts had uncovered evidence of Pegasus attacks on numerous Catalonian politicians, lawyers, and journalists.

The Spanish intelligence agency CNI was responsible for at least some of these cases, for which it claimed to have obtained court authorization. Shortly after admitting to having conducted the surveillance, then-head of the intelligence agency Paz Esteban was removed from her post.

Investigation in Poland

Cases of spying involving Pegasus have come to light in other European countries as well. In some instances the ruling party is alleged to have been responsible. In Poland for example the former PiS government is alleged to have spied on opposition leaders. A parliamentary investigation is ongoing – nearly 600 people are said to have been surveilled between 2017 and 2022.

Justice Minister Adam Bodnar confirmed this number when speaking before parliament last Wednesday. “It is sad for me that even in this room I am speaking to people who were victims of this system,” Bodnar told the lower house of parliament, the Sejm.

Bodnar did not say who exactly had been spied on. In one known instance, the smartphone of former opposition leader and current member of European parliament Krzysztof Brejza was infiltrated by Pegasus several times during the 2019 election year.

Last week the Polish news site Onet also reported that two military police officers were spied on with Pegasus after making accusations of sexual abuse against superiors. Among the data the hackers gained access to were communications between the officers and their attorneys.

Human rights experts around the world have long criticized the use of spyware. Amnesty International, in its annual report published last Wednesday, again demanded an immediate ban on highly invasive spyware like Pegasus. (js)

U.S. Health Care Company Confirms Theft of Patient Data

2024-04-26T14:33:00+02:00

In February a cyberattack caused disruptions at pharmacies across the United States. Patient data were also stolen, the health care company targeted in the attack has now announced.

The company has also confirmed having paid ransom money to blackmailers to prevent publication of the data. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Wire)

Patient information was stolen as part of a cyberattack against health care services company Change Healthcare. Parent company UnitedHealth Group has now confirmed the data breach.

The attack occurred in February. As UnitedHealth Group said in a statement posted on Monday, “protected health information” and “personally identifiable information” were also stolen. The company has not yet said how many people were affected. Patients whose data was compromised could however represent “a substantial proportion of people in America.”

So far there is no evidence that “materials such as doctors’ charts and full medical histories” were stolen, the statement continues. The investigation is ongoing, however. UnitedHealth Group expects it to take several months before it is able to conclude the data review – and notify those impacted by the attack.

Change Healthcare provides services for the U.S. health care system. Pharmacies use Change Healthcare services to calculate medication costs covered by health insurance companies or check whether patients have been prescribed a particular drug. According to Reuters, the company processes roughly half of all medical claims in the U.S.

Pharmacies Unable to Process Prescriptions

U.S. media are describing the attack as one of the largest cyberattacks ever directed at the health care system. One consequence of the attack in February was that many U.S. pharmacies were unable to calculate the portion of prescription costs covered by insurance. Patients had to decide whether to pay the full cost of their medications themselves or go without.

Pharmacies inside the United States weren’t the only ones affected. U.S. military hospitals and pharmacies around the world experienced disruptions as a consequence of the attack. According to UnitedHealth Group, these problems have largely been resolved by this point: 99 percent of impacted pharmacies are now able to process insurance claims again.

The company also stated that it was working with “leading external industry experts” and “continues to monitor the internet and dark web to determine if data has been published.” To date 22 screenshots have surfaced that purported to show stolen data.

According to U.S. media reports, Change Healthcare is thought to have been a victim of a ransomware attack. Criminals typically use ransomware to encrypt data – and then demand a ransom to restore access. Another tactic attackers use is to steal data and threaten to publish it if their demands for payment aren’t met. Paying the ransom however does not guarantee that the blackmailers won’t go through with publication or actually restore encrypted data.

This is clearly evident in the present case: UnitedHealth Group has confirmed to several U.S. media outlets that it paid a ransom to prevent the publication of patient data. According to Wired magazine, the blackmailers received roughly 22 million U.S. dollars. Nevertheless, there is still a risk that patient data will be published. Wired reports that cybersecurity experts now fear that the attack’s success “will lead ransomware gangs to further target healthcare companies.”

According to media reports, a group known as AlphV or BlackCat was behind the blackmail campaign. The U.S. State Department has offered a 10 million dollar reward “for information leading to the identification or location” of any of the group’s members. According to the State Department, the group develops ransomware and works with affiliates to deploy it.

Targeting Health Information

Last year there were several cybersecurity incidents within the health care system in the United States. In late October the Department of Health and Human Services reported that more than 88 million people had been affected by data leaks in 2023.

In May 2023 for example the social security numbers and personal health information of millions of insurance holders were stolen. The information stolen included medical records like x-rays and prescription details.

In December criminals gained access to sensitive data belonging to millions of people in an attack on a hospital network.

And late last year a company that operates 30 hospitals in six states had to divert patients from its own emergency rooms to other hospitals. The hospitals’ network had been taken offline after ransomware was discovered. (js)

Amnesty Annual Report: Human Rights Increasingly Under Pressure Worldwide

2024-04-25T17:04:00+02:00

Amnesty International denounces increasing violations of human rights worldwide. The international community must take action immediately.

In the report, Amnesty also criticizes that the global trade of spy software has not been prevented. (Source: IMAGO / epd)

The rule of law and human rights have not been more threatened globally for decades. The human rights organization, Amnesty International, came to this conclusion in their annual report published on Wednesday that documents the state of human rights in 155 countries.

Amnesty criticizes that the universality of human rights is being called into question due to wars and conflicts but also because of increasing social inequalities and the climate crisis.

“We condemn the fact that nationalistic, racist and misogynistic forces are rising in popularity across the world because they attack the idea of equal dignity and rights for all people in both word and action,” said Secretary General from Amnesty International (Germany) with regard to publishing the report (German article).

Civilian Populations in Distress

As the human rights organization reports, governments, security forces and armed groups in many parts of the world are violating international laws – which could have devastating consequences for civilian populations. For example, Amnesty criticizes attacks made by the Russian army on densely populated civilian areas as well as on infrastructure for energy production and grain exports in Ukraine. Additionally, the organization has documented the torture and abuse of prisoners of war during the war.

The NGO also accuses the conflicting parties in Sudan of committing targeted attacks in which civilians were hurt and killed. The war has caused the largest displacement crisis in the world. According to Amnesty, more than eight million people have been forced to flee. Furthermore, the country is on the verge of famine.

Amnesty also deplores the attacks on civilians in Myanmar and the Gaza Strip.

Setbacks in Women’s Rights

According to the report, there were setbacks this year in many countries with regard to women’s rights. For example, the UN organization “UN Women” admonished the increasing inequality between genders.

Amnesty criticizes that some governments have further intensified discrimination against women and girls. In Afghanistan, for example, women are now prohibited from receiving education beyond primary school. They are also no longer allowed to work for United Nations institutions, in NGOs or in public service.

The authorities in Iran are relentlessly making headscarves compulsory. In both countries, women are threatened with “brutal state retaliation” if they exercise their rights.

With regard to sexual and reproductive rights, there was some progress in 2023. For example, the Supreme Court in Mexico deemed the criminalization of abortions as unconstitutional. France and Spain also facilitated access to abortions.

In contrast, 15 states in the USA have prohibited abortions entirely or only allow abortions in a few exceptional cases.

Death Penalties for Homosexuality

Additionally, numerous governments have restricted the rights of lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, trans and intersexual people (LGBTI+). For example, Uganda has made ‘aggravated homosexuality’ a criminal offence, punishable by death. The Supreme Court in India ruled against the legal recognition of same-sex marriage.

This past year, 62 countries across the world introduced laws that criminalize same-sex sexual acts.

In the current report, Amnesty investigates the effects of new and existing technologies on human rights. For example, the organization warns that artificial intelligence (AI) could intensify already existing inequalities. It could spread hate speech on an even larger scale. Given the amount of upcoming elections in 2024, the potential spread of incorrect and fake information around politics is a cause for concern. The NGO expects an increase of such cases.

A semi-automatic system for distributing social services was implemented in Serbia. As a result, thousands of people have potentially lost access to critical social welfare – Roma and people with disabilities have been affected in particular.

Surveillance Technology

Countries like Argentina, Brazil, India and Great Britain are increasingly implementing facial recognition to monitor public protests and sporting events.

Lena Rohrbach of Amnesty (Germany) said: “These technologies encourage discrimination, racism and disproportionate and therefore also unlawful surveillance. At the same time, spy software remains largely unregulated internationally even though there has been evidence for a long time of human rights being violated in connection with it.”

In 2023, security researchers exposed the surveillance of journalists and activists in civil society using spy software – for example, in Armenia, India, Serbia and in the Dominican Republic.

The organization demands that highly invasive spy software and facial recognition technology be forbidden immediately. The implementation of AI must be regulated.

Considering the steps backwards in human rights protection, Amnesty International demands action from the international community. For example, civilians need to be better protected in conflicts. Violence against women and marginalized groups must also be combated. Freedom of speech and assembly must also be strengthened. (js)

Poland: Nearly 600 Spied on with Pegasus

2024-04-25T08:04:00+02:00

Several hundred people in Poland were allegedly targeted with Pegasus. A parliamentary commission is investigating the use of the spyware by the previous government.

Security analysts had earlier found evidence that members of the political opposition had been spied on. (Image: Justice Minister Adam Bodnar) (Source: IMAGO / SOPA Images)

The Law and Justice (PiS)-led government voted out of office last year is alleged to have spied on nearly 600 people using Pegasus intelligence software. Poland’s prosecutor general made the announcement in Warsaw last week. Those targeted by the spyware will be asked to testify.

A parliamentary commission is currently investigating whether the PiS administration, which left office in December 2023, used Pegasus to target political opponents. Last week Justice Minister and Prosecutor General Adam Bodnar submitted a preliminary report to parliament, which finds that the spyware was used to target a total of 578 people between 2017 and 2022. The largest number of cases occurred in 2021, when 162 people in Poland were targeted.

Justice Minister Bodnar told Polish media that 31 people targeted by the spyware had already been called to testify. It would be left to the individuals subjected to surveillance to decide whether or not to disclose their identities, Bodnar said. The 31 witnesses represented only the first group of targeted individuals; more would be notified at a later date.

Pegasus isn’t named in the report; reference is made only to “operative end device surveillance.” A spokesperson for the prosecutor general’s office, however, speaking with Wirtualna Polska, confirmed that Pegasus was used to spy on the targeted individuals.

Surveillance of Political Opponents

Pegasus spyware was developed by NSO Group, an Israeli company that claims to sell it only to government clients. Attackers can use the surveillance tool to take complete control of a smartphone – while the phone’s owner remains unaware of the attack. Once a device has been infiltrated, the attackers can gain access to saved data, track the phone’s location and activate the microphone to listen in on the owner’s surroundings, all without the owner’s knowledge. For years there has been criticism of Pegasus.

Tomasz Siemoniak, minister and coordinator of security services in Poland, told broadcaster TVN24 that among the nearly 600 individuals targeted for surveillance, there were “certainly some justifiable cases.” But the temptation for politicians to deploy Pegasus against “troublesome politicians, lawyers, judges, and prosecutors” was too great – and there had been “too many” such cases.

Magdalena Sroka, head of the parliamentary commission, told the Gazeta newspaper she had expected the findings to be on this scale.

Plans to Investigate Abuse

Justice Minister Bodnar told the Guardian in early April that the complete list of surveillance targets contained “many more well-known people” than had previously been made public. The focus, Bodnar said, would be on investigating cases that seemed to be politically motivated or abusive.

Court authorizations were evidently obtained in individual cases where surveillance was used. In Bodnar’s judgement, however, the courts were not fully informed about the use of Pegasus.

Wojciech Klicki, a lawyer with the Panoptykon Foundation, an NGO, told the Guardian that the judges often wouldn’t even be told the names of the people to be targeted for surveillance. “The system is constructed in a way that encourages judges to make automatic approvals of surveillance requests,” Klicki said.

In February, new prime minister Donald Tusk announced that he had evidence of the illegal use of Pegasus by the previous administration – the list of victims was “very long,” he said.

Security Analysts Find Evidence of Attacks

In 2021 it came to light that opposition politicians in Poland were being spied on: security analysts at the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab were able to show that the smartphone belonging to current member of European parliament and former opposition leader Krzysztof Brejza had been infiltrated by Pegasus more than 30 times in the 2019 election year, when he was running the opposition coalition’s electoral campaign. Brejza has come forward as one of the 31 people who have been called to testify.

In late 2019, Citizen Lab’s evidence shows, the lawyer Roman Giertych was also repeatedly spied on using Pegasus. Giertych’s clients have included Tusk, who became prime minister of Poland in December 2023 (having held the post previously from 2007-2014) and before that was head of the Civic Coalition, an alliance of opposition parties.

Prosecutor Ewa Wrzosek was also spied on. She co-founded an independent association of prosecutors who criticized the changes to the Polish judicial system implemented by the former PiS government.

Later reports revealed that member of parliament Jacek Karnowski’s smartphone was hacked when he was mayor of the city of Sopot.

PiS Government Alleged to Have Spied on Lawmakers in Its Own Party

Polish media also reported in February that PiS lawmakers were among those targeted by Pegasus. The list of targets includes former Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development Jan Krzysztof Ardanowski and former Marshal of the Sejm Marek Kuchciński.

PiS has admitted to purchasing Pegasus, but has repeatedly denied having used the tool to spy on political opponents.

Last fall the Polish senate concluded that the purchase of the surveillance software was illegal. The 2019 elections were accordingly deemed unfair on account of the use of Pegasus against opposition candidates.

Elsewhere in the EU the use of spy software against political opposition members or journalists has also come to light in Hungary, Spain and Greece. (dpa / js)

Survey: Foreign Correspondents in China Obstructed, Surveilled, and Harassed

2024-04-25T08:02:00+02:00

Since the pandemic China has expanded its use of repressive measures against foreign journalists. Members of the press speak of surveillance, visa problems, and abuse. Reporting on the Chinese people is now hardly possible.

The authorities have even begun using drones to spy on foreign correspondents. (Source: IMAGO / CFOTO)

China uses harassment and restrictions to keep a tight rein on domestic news outlets – but as a new survey of foreign correspondents working in the country shows, reporting by international outlets was also massively obstructed by the authorities in 2023.

In the 2023 report issued by the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of China (FCCC), 99 percent of the journalists surveyed said that reporting conditions in China “rarely or never met international reporting standards.” Conditions have not returned even to the low level of press freedom that prevailed before the pandemic.

“The results of this year’s survey show significant obstacles remain for independent reporting in China, especially in the form of heightened intimidation and surveillance, both in-person and through more sophisticated digital means,” the FCCC writes in the report.

Four out of five respondents reported experiencing interference, harassment, or violence. More than half had been obstructed by police or other officials at least once; 45 percent had their reporting obstructed by unknown persons.

To create the report the FCCC polled its correspondent members in January and February of this year. Of 157 members, 101 responded. The journalists surveyed represent news organizations in Asia, Europe, Latin America, and North America. The FCCC publishes the survey once a year. Similar problems were reported in 2022.

Xinjiang and Tibet Off Limits

Obstruction of reporting was particularly common in parts of the country that the Chinese authorities regard as “politically sensitive.” Sensitive regions include Xinjiang, where the Uighur minority is subject to state repression and where the state likes to test out new surveillance technology.

According to the survey, 85 percent of foreign reporters who tried to report from Xinjiang encountered problems – such as surveillance and harassment. Foreign correspondents traveling to sensitive areas were subject to strict controls; access to Tibet in particular is restricted to state-organized tours.

A journalist working for a European news outlet claimed to have been followed by “half a dozen plainclothes” police during his trip to Xinjiang. Another journalist, also working for a European outlet, said, “During a week-long trip in Xinjiang, police officers came to my hotel to ask who I had interviewed and what I had asked them. They demanded I show them a letter from my embassy several times; otherwise I would not be allowed to work there.” The reporter subsequently decided to stop reporting in that area out of concern for the safety of those they were interviewing.

Foreign correspondents were subject to similar repressive measures in Tibet. Three of the reporters surveyed had attempted to report from the region – all three said they had experienced issues.

Reporters making research trips who didn’t encounter restrictions were the exception. The authorities have now also begun to regard areas bordering Russia, Mongolia, and countries in Southeast Asia as sensitive, and to prevent foreign reporters from freely reporting from these regions as well.

Journalists traveling to border regions were harassed by authorities or men in plainclothes. Film crews were ordered to stop filming and delete footage. Correspondents gave reports of being followed on trips through the countryside by several cars for hundreds of kilometers; others reported efforts to intimidate sources and interrupt interviews.

The authorities also deployed new forms of technology to monitor the reporting of foreign outlets. A journalist working for a European outlet reported: “On a recent trip to two different provinces covering the link between climate change and extreme weather events we were followed by multiple carloads of plain clothes officers. Drones were sent out to follow and observe us when we got out of our vehicle to film/collect interviews. When we moved on foot to a spot, the drones would follow us.”

No Visas for US Correspondents

Another way the Chinese authorities attempt to control who reports from the country is by granting (and refusing to grant) visas. Even though the borders are officially open again, many correspondents were refused the necessary journalist visa and residence permit. Journalists from the United States were particularly affected.

In some cases this has resulted in staffing shortages: when foreign reporters leave the country, they can’t always be replaced. Almost a third of survey respondents said their bureau was understaffed because they haven’t been able to hire enough new reporters.

Still, 87 percent of those respondents who were already accredited said that they were able to renew their press credentials and residence permits in 2023 without difficulty. Two respondents however spoke of attempts at intimidation made during the renewal process: “The person from the [Ministry of Foreign Affairs] told me that on several occasions I had crossed the red line, e.g. by saying that China has an authoritarian government. Also, the person said that I was involved in separatist activities – by interviewing a researcher who works on Xinjiang.” During the conversation the official repeatedly brought up BBC reporter John Sudworth, who was forced to leave China in 2021.

Chinese Colleagues Threatened

Chinese employees of foreign news organizations were subject to increased intimidation attempts, the FCCC reports. There was only a “slight uptick” in the number of such incidents, but the increase is still concerning, the FCCC notes. Chinese staff “do not enjoy the protection that a foreign passport lends, putting them at significantly higher risk” of encountering state pressure and intimidation.

49 percent of respondents said that their Chinese colleagues had been harassed or intimidated at least once in 2023. In 2022 the number was 45 percent, in 2021 40 percent. Finding Chinese staff has become increasingly difficult as a result.

Potential sources were also pressured. “A significant shift in recent years has been observed where academic sources, think tank employees and analysts either decline interviews, request anonymity, or don’t respond at all,” the FCCC writes.

82 percent of correspondents surveyed said their sources had refused to give interviews because they weren’t permitted to speak to foreign media or would need to obtain prior permission. 37 percent had reporting trips or confirmed interviews cancelled at short notice because of official pressure.

On the Press Freedom Index maintained by Reporters without Borders, Mainland China is ranked 179 out of 180 countries – followed only by North Korea. Hong Kong is ranked separately and has slid down to 140. (hcz)

Iranian Authorities Plan to Crack Down on Veiling Offenses

2024-04-18T16:17:00+02:00

The authorities in Iran have announced plans to move more aggressively against violations of the country’s veiling laws. Pictures posted online can also lead to prosecution.

Surveillance in public spaces has already expanded in the past months. (Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Wire)

Police in Iran plan to take more aggressive action against violations of the country’s veiling laws. In an April 10 announcement marking the end of Ramadan, the authorities outlined plans to pursue more strict enforcement, including country-wide checks, the Iranian news agency Mehr reported.

It remained unclear however in the wake of the announcement what the scope of the enforcement actions would be. Since the women-led mass protests in the fall of 2022, the notorious morality police have at times been less strict in enforcing regulations on the streets – in part because they have met with greater resistance. More recently however human rights watchdogs have reported that police checks are on the rise. The regime has also stepped up surveillance of public spaces, as Amnesty International reported in March.

Surveillance Cameras

One example of tightening enforcement is the use of surveillance cameras to track down women and girls who are driving or riding in cars without headscarves or with head coverings deemed “inappropriate.” Women who have been targeted have received text messages ordering them to surrender their vehicle to the so-called Moral Security Police. To date tens of thousands of women have had their cars confiscated on the grounds that they have violated compulsory veiling laws. In other cases women were criminally prosecuted and sentenced to flogging or prison time.

In summer 2023 Amnesty also reported that the Iranian authorities would be deploying facial recognition technology in pedestrian areas and possibly elsewhere.

Students Facing Prosecution for Dance Video

According to Amnesty, the authorities are also prosecuting women for posting images of themselves unveiled on the internet.

Last week it was revealed that a group of Iranian students were facing criminal prosecution for appearing in a dance video. In the video, several female students from Al-Zahra University in the coastal city of Bushehr can be seen dancing and riding a motorcycle.

As the Guardian reports, the president of the university told the media that the video was made without permission and constituted an “illegal activity.” Legal action would be taken against the students involved, the president said.

The president also stated that the student who produced the video had been identified. He would be held “accountable for this action along with his father.”

Criticism from Human Rights Groups

Human rights lawyers told the Guardian that the authorities had likely put pressure on the university. Hossein Raeesi, a Canada-based Iranian human rights attorney, said, “There’s no specific law banning them from dancing or riding motorcycles. This is an attempt to break the strong student movement in Iran, which showed during Woman, Life, Freedom protests that it’s stronger than ever.”

Jasmin Ramsey, deputy director of the Center of Human Rights in Iran, told the paper, “The chancellor’s threat to take legal action against these courageous young women for simply celebrating their graduation highlights the oppressive reality faced by women and girls throughout Iran.” With their dance, the students had “directly challenge the repressive diktats imposed by the state on women’s behavior.”

Last month two women were reportedly arrested after a dance video appeared on social media. It showed the women dancing in a public square in Tehran while dressed as an Iranian folk character.

In fall 2022 countrywide protests broke out in Iran, set off by the death of Jina Mahsa Amini, a young Iranian Kurdish woman. She was detained by the morality police for allegedly wearing an “improper” hijab. A UN fact-finding mission concluded that physical violence suffered after her arrest had led to her death.

Since fall 2022 more and more Iranian women are defying the country’s strict veiling laws. Religious hardliners are trying to combat this trend. A new law seeks to impose draconian penalties: In extreme cases up to 15 years imprisonment and the equivalent of more than 5,000 euros in fines. The law has made it through parliament, but has not yet gone into effect. In the coming weeks a revised version is expected to be presented to the arch-conservative Guardians Council. (dpa / js)

British Government to Invest Millions in Facial Recognition

2024-04-17T16:30:00+02:00

Police in Britain are set to increase their use of facial recognition technology. The government plans to spend more than 50 million pounds on the technology over the next four years – including on the purchase of mobile facial recognition units.

The use of facial recognition by police in Britain has been criticized for years. (Source: IMAGO / Offside Sports Photography)

The British government plans to invest more than 50 million pounds (64 million euros) in facial recognition systems. The Home Office made the announcement last Wednesday. Civil liberties groups criticize the move as a waste of public funds – and warn of consequences for citizens’ privacy.

The investment was announced by the Home Office as part of an effort to crack down on shoplifting and attacks on retail workers. The plan includes the increased use of facial recognition technology “to help catch perpetrators and prevent shoplifting in the first place,” the Home Office wrote.

According to the announcement, a total of 55.5 million pounds will be spent over the coming four years to enable police to deploy facial recognition. Four million are earmarked for “mobile units” that are equipped with live facial recognition capabilities and can be deployed to shopping districts. The units will be able to identify people wanted by the police – “including repeat shoplifters,” the Home Office stated.

Such units have been deployed in London for several years now. Criticism began as early as the testing phase, however: researchers from the University of Essex accompanied police during trial runs and assessed the system as having a failure rate of 81 percent.

The researchers also pointed out that there was no legal basis for the use of facial recognition.

Tracking the Movements of Repeat Offenders

Plans for the expanded use of facial recognition were announced along with plans for more severe penalties for serial shoplifters and other offenders. Committing assault against a retail worker will constitute a standalone criminal offense, punishable by up to six months in prison or an “unlimited” fine.

Repeat offenders can also be forced to wear devices that track their movements, and can be barred from visiting certain stores – facial recognition is meant to help identify violators.

Warnings of Mass Surveillance

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak stated that since 2010 violent crime has fallen in England and Wales. “Yet shoplifting and violence and abuse towards retail workers continues to rise.”

Pointed criticism of the government’s plans has come from the British civil liberties organization Big Brother Watch. Said the NGO’s director Silkie Carlo, “It is completely absurd to inflict mass surveillance on the general public under the premise of fighting theft.” Instead of providing police with the resources necessary to pursue criminals, Carlo said, the government was relying on them to walk in front of its cameras.

Carlo characterized the investment as “an abysmal waste of public money on a dangerously authoritarian and inaccurate technology that neither the public nor parliament has ever voted on.” It comes at a cost to the privacy and civil liberties of the people of Britain.

“Live facial recognition may be commonplace in China and Russian but these Government plans put the UK completely out of sync with the rest of the democratic world,” the head of Big Brother Watch stated.

More Deployment Scenarios Planned?

Meanwhile the use of facial recognition could expand even further beyond the parameters currently outlined. The British newspaper the Times, citing a government source, reported on April 5 that the government planned to present its strategy for use of the technology in the coming months. One idea under consideration is to equip cameras in train stations with the controversial technology.

In the fall of 2023 the Home Office announced a joint initiative with large retailers like Primark, Marks & Spencer, and the Co-op chain of supermarkets. The cooperative effort, dubbed “Pegasus,” includes the use of facial recognition: retailers will provide footage from their surveillance cameras to the police, who will compare it against their database. The project is financed in part by the companies themselves.

The plan has drawn substantial criticism. After it was announced, several human rights organizations demanded that the retailers withdraw from the project. They warned that the use of facial recognition technology could “amplify existing inequalities.”

Among the organizations’ criticisms was that facial recognition software more frequently misidentifies people with darker skin color, “meaning that already marginalized groups are more likely to be subject to an invasive stop by police, or at increased risk of physical surveillance, monitoring and harassment by workers” while shopping. (js)

Reporters without Borders: 41 Attacks on Journalists in Germany

2024-04-17T16:00:00+02:00

The press freedom organization Reporters without Borders recorded fewer attacks on members of the press last year than in 2022. But the numbers are still much higher than they were before the pandemic.

Most instances involved journalists being punched or kicked, but some were pelted with sand and rocks. (Source: IMAGO / Rolf Poss)

Reporters without Borders (RSF) has observed an atmosphere of rising hostility toward the press in Germany. The number of physical attacks on journalists went down in 2023 compared to the year before – but compared to the years before the pandemic, the number remains high, according to a report published last week.

In 2023 the organization documented and verified a total of 41 attacks on journalists and editorial offices. That number is significantly lower than it was in 2022, when RSF counted 103 attacks. In 2021 there were 80.

Nevertheless, “A stable reversal of the negative trend is not yet apparent,” the report notes. The numbers remain high compared to the years before the pandemic – in 2019, for example, RSF recorded only 13 attacks.

RSF executive board member Michael Radiske said in a statement: “Last year reporters were again beaten, had their equipment destroyed and received threats on the internet on a massive scale. 2024 began with the brutal injuries suffered by a journalist outside a demonstration in Leipzig, to name just one example.”

According to the “Country Report: Germany 2024,” the most common form of violence against journalists was kicks and blows, “including with objects such as torches.” RSF classified such incidents as attacks if physical contact was made with the journalists’ bodies or equipment.

Journalists also had their equipment forcibly taken from them. Some were thrown to the ground or pelted with sand and rocks. One theater critic was even smeared with feces.

Attacks at Demonstrations

The most dangerous places for journalists, according to RSF, were political gatherings like party meetings, demonstrations, or other protest actions. Of a total of 41 attacks, 31 were recorded in connection with such gatherings.

RSF cites as one example a demonstration in Munich in February 2023. There a participant attacked a reporter from behind, knocked him over and pinned him to the ground. According to the reporter, who pressed charges, the case went to trial and the court imposed a fine of 1,000 euros.

In May, at a torchlight march put on by a student fraternity association, a journalist was attacked with a burning torch, which hit the lens of his camera. Another marcher wielding two torches attempted to hit the journalist in the head.

During protests against the demolition of the town of Lützerath, which is being cleared to make way for a coal mine, a photographer from the DPA news agency was struck by a participant. And in the Hambacher forest a team from Westdeutsche Rundfunk was attacked by a masked assailant; a camera was damaged in the attack.

A large number of the attacks (18) took place in connection with coverage of conspiracy-minded and extreme right groups, per the report. These groups are united in their hatred of the so-called “lying press” (Lügenpresse) and their criticism of the democratic process.

Threatened at Home

In some cases journalists were even threatened at home. In Passau in March 2023 the home of local journalist Hubert Jakob Denk was vandalized. In his reporting Denk had been critical of protests against Covid restrictions. David Janzen, who writes about the extreme right milieu, found graffiti spray-painted on his front door – and chunks of meat stuffed into his mailbox.

Most of the confirmed attacks in 2023 took place in Saxony (12), followed by Bavaria (6), Berlin (5), and North Rhine-Westphalia (5).

Meanwhile in the first months of this year the organization has already received reports of incidents that it characterizes as “alarming.” In one instance, following a pro-Palestinian demonstration in Leipzig, a video journalist and his friend were beaten by three unknown assailants. Their injuries were severe enough to require hospitalization.

Outside a protest led by farmers in south Brandenburg in January a team from rbb24 was attacked while inside their news van. And in Halle a driver drove his car into a local reporter who was on site covering an action by the group “Letzte Generation” (Last Generation).

Newspaper Distribution Centers Blocked

In February 2024 the entrances to press distribution centers and printing plants were blocked using various means, including parked tractors, in an effort to prevent newspaper deliveries, a development RSF finds particularly worrying. This seems to be a new strategy for attacking the freedom of the press, the organization warns.

Michael Rediske commented: “This shows that the freedom to report independently is under threat in this country, and not just in the form of attacks on individual journalists. Dissatisfaction with what some claim is too-scant coverage of farmer protests is apparently sufficient grounds to further lower the bar for acceptable behavior in attacks against press freedom.”

Journalists are subject to digital violence as well. This includes, for instance, so-called doxing, the publication of private information like a person’s home address – but journalists also encounter hate speech, threats of violence, and deliberate and systematic online attacks. Those who report on topics like migration, right-wing extremism, and corruption are particularly affected.

In its report, RSF responds to the key points for a law against digital violence outlined by the German Ministry of Justice in April 2023. Among other demands, the organization would require that such a law explicitly name journalists as a protected professional group. The government has not yet approved a draft of the law. (js)

United Kingdom: Delivery Driver Awarded Settlement for Faulty Facial Recognition

2024-04-16T20:00:00+02:00

A delivery driver for Uber Eats was awarded a settlement after being locked out of his account. The app’s facial recognition software didn’t recognize him.

Uber’s use of facial recognition has been criticized in India as well. (Source: IMAGO / Michael Gstettenbauer)

The facial recognition tool in the Uber Eats driver app in the UK repeatedly failed to recognize a black driver, resulting in his being locked out of his account. Now he will receive a financial settlement.

The driver, Pa Edrissa Manjang, sued Uber Eats in 2021, accusing the company of racial discrimination for its use of facial recognition in the app. The lawsuit has now been settled out of court, as the British Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) reported last month. The EHRC, an independent public body, provided funding for Manjang’s suit alongside the App Drivers and Couriers Union.

The amount of the settlement was not disclosed.

Identity Verification in the App

Pa Edrissa Manjang started working as a driver for the food delivery service in Oxfordshire in November 2019. As the BBC reported, he initially had no problems with the app, which assigns deliveries to individual drivers. Over time however it increasingly demanded that he verify his identity when registering for a shift – and to do so by taking a photo of himself. Sometimes he had to take several selfies a day.

Again and again, the app’s facial recognition tool failed to recognize him. Finally, in 2021, he was automatically blocked as a driver after a failed verification. Uber Eats informed him that there were “continued mismatches” in the photos he had sent, the EHRC reported.

The commission criticized the use of so-called artificial intelligence (AI) and automated processes in the case, “particularly how it could be used to permanently suspend a driver’s access to the app, depriving them of an income.” Uber Eats neither informed Mr. Manjang as to why his account had been suspended, nor did the company provide “an effective route to challenge this decision.”

In a statement, Mr. Manjang said: “My case shines a spotlight on the potential problems with the use of AI, particularly for low paid workers in the gig economy who want to understand how decisions are being taken which affect their livelihoods.”

In a separate statement, Mr. Manjang’s lawyer Hannah Wright commented: “This has been a very important case. It is among the first to consider AI and automated decision making in the context of work and the potential for unfairness and discrimination.” The use of AI in the workplace “carries substantial risks,” Wright warned, and “current protections are inadequate.”

According to the EHRC, Mr. Manjang continues to work for Uber Eats. After his initial suspension from the app, his access was later restored – though as with the suspension, “the process that led to his access being restored was never fully explained to him.”

As the Times reported, Uber Eats initially attempted to have the case dismissed, claiming that it “had no reasonable prospects of success.” This motion was rejected by a judge. The case was set to go to trial in November 2024, but this has been averted by the out-of-court settlement.

Kishwer Falkner, chairwoman of the EHRC, said in a statement: “It is important to understand that as AI usage increases, the technology can lead to discrimination and human rights abuses.”

Problems with Facial Recognition

To date facial recognition technology has proven to be error-prone and unreliable. Past studies have established that the technology is less successful at recognizing people with darker skin color. In the United States there have been several cases of innocent black citizens being arrested after facial recognition software falsely identified them as criminals.

The App Drivers and Couriers Union has criticized the use of the technology by the ridesharing company Uber before. In London in 2021 there were several instances in which drivers were dismissed and had their taxi licenses revoked by Transport for London, the local transportation authority. Uber stated at the time that if problems arose with the automated system, verification was carried out by human reviewers.

There have been similar reports in India. There too drivers have been locked out of their accounts after the software failed to recognize them. (js)

Environmental Action Germany Accuses Apple of Greenwashing

2024-04-12T19:00:00+02:00

Apple advertises its smartwatches as carbon neutral. Environmental Action Germany calls this consumer fraud. An injunction filed in court is aimed at ensuring more transparency.

Experts have also found contradictions and unproven claims in Apple’s environmental progress reports. (Source: Apple – Screenshot Posteo)

Environmental Action Germany (Deutsche Umwelthilfe – DUH) has filed an injunction in state court in Frankfurt am Main against the Ireland-based subsidiary of the Apple corporation. The environmental organization accuses the tech company of failing to provide its customers with sufficient information about its claim that its new model of Apple Watch is carbon neutral.

According to Apple, emissions resulting from production of the watch are offset by compensation projects. DUH argues however that Apple has not adequately described what these projects involve. Also unclear is whether the projects are of sufficient duration to make up for the negative effects of the carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere – the greenhouse gas can potentially linger in the atmosphere for hundreds of years.

“Apple is giving its customers the false impression that buying and using an Apple Watch has zero negative effects on the climate,” said BUH director Jürgen Resch in an April 3rd statement.

Analysis Describes “Exaggerations”

The research institution New Climate Institute expressed similar criticisms after conducting an analysis of the Apple Watch series launched in September: to describe the products as climate neutral, the group concluded, was a “bold exaggeration” – even if the measures could be considered a good first step.

“Carbon credits from forestry projects and other carbon dioxide removals . . . are not in any way equivalent to the reduction of the remaining emissions,” wrote the institute. Detailed information on suppliers is also missing from Apple’s environmental reports. Many of the company’s main suppliers – like the multinational Foxconn corporation – get only a small portion of the energy they use from renewable sources. Nor can Apple ensure that its customers use the products exclusively with renewable energy.

The computer magazine c’t has also reported on “balance tricks” in the company’s environmental reports.

Bonus Income from Forestry

DUH characterizes a logo that Apple is using to advertise its products as a means of deceiving customers. It features green leaves and the words “Carbon Neutral” and functions “as a kind of official seal.” But the label is wholly a creation of the company, says DUH, and the underlying standards have not been sufficiently clarified.

DUH also criticizes Apple’s so-called Restore Fund, asserting that there is a great lack of transparency with regard to which projects receive support and how the funds are distributed. What’s more, the company does not provide information as to whether the projects it finances are successful.

Apple founded the fund in 2021 in partnership with the investment bank Goldman Sachs and the US environmental organization Conservation International. It boasts a budget of more than 100 million US dollars. DUH director of market supervision Agnes Sauter criticizes the company for generating income from forestry projects supported by the fund from which it is also obtaining carbon credits.

Apple itself writes in its 2023 environmental progress report that the goal of the fund is “to change carbon removal from a cost to a potentially profitable investment.” This leads DUH to conclude that “instead of fully investing in the reduction of CO2 emissions from its products, the global corporation worth many billions of dollars is actually making money off its hypocritical environmental measures.”

Carbon Neutral by 2030

Apple has officially committed itself to the goal of making all its products carbon neutral by 2030. Emissions are to be reduced through innovation in materials, clean energy, and low-carbon shipping. As for the remaining harmful greenhouse gases, the company intends to offset them with “nature-based projects.”

The environmental and climate promises facing criticism are a prominent component of Apple’s marketing. New product launches feature an increased emphasis on sustainability, with the company boasting, for example, that it no longer offers leather bands for its watches and no longer wraps products in plastic wrap. (hcz)

Amnesty: 853 Executions in Iran

2024-04-11T19:00:00+02:00

2023 saw a sharp rise in executions in Iran. A new report shows how the regime uses the death penalty to suppress mass protests and stoke fear among the population.

In an effort to suppress criticism of the regime, people were killed for such offenses as “insulting the Prophet” and “enmity against God.”(Source: Amnesty International – CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

Iran carried out more death sentences in 2023 than nearly any other country. According to a report published April 4th by the human rights organization Amnesty International, at least 853 people were executed in Iran in the previous year. That’s 48 percent more than in 2022 – and 172 percent more than in 2021.

2023 “saw Iran’s prisons transformed into sites of mass killings,” the organization declared in a press release. More than 56 percent of the executions were carried out for drug-related offenses and thus were directed primarily at poor and marginalized communities. Last year also saw a wave of executions of demonstrators, social media users, and other actual or suspected opponents of the regime. The death sentences were often handed down in unfair, politically influenced, or even secret trials, according to the report.

Not since 2015 has the Iranian state killed so many prisoners. Amnesty has observed a rise in the number of executions since the country-wide mass protests of the “Woman Life Freedom” movement that began in September 2022. The authorities use the death penalty “to instill fear among the population and tighten their grip on power.”

Christian Mihr, acting General Secretary of Amnesty International Germany, appealed to the German government and the international community with his demand that “The mass executions in Iran must have tangible diplomatic consequences – otherwise the Iranian authorities will feel emboldened to execute thousands more people in the coming years with impunity.”

Exactly how many people were killed is difficult to determine, says Amnesty: the authorities publish no statistics on the number of death sentences issued and carried out. Amnesty was able to investigate the cases documented in the report in collaboration with the Abdorrahman Boroumand Center, a human rights organization. Sources included reports from state and independent media outlets as well as other human rights organizations. Amnesty nevertheless assumes that the actual number is even higher.

Drug Policy Marginalizes Minority Groups

In light of the significant rise in the number of executions for drug-related offenses, Amnesty declared that Iran had returned to a deadly anti-drug policy – this even though international law prohibits the use of the death penalty for drug offenses. “The death penalty is abhorrent in all circumstances but deploying it on a mass scale for drug-related offenses after grossly unfair trials before Revolutionary Courts is a grotesque abuse of power,” said Diana Eltahawy, Deputy Regional Director for the Middle East and North Africa at Amnesty International.

Executions for drug-related offenses were often carried out in secret – not even family members and lawyers were informed. Typically relatives were contacted only afterwards, to allow them to collect the remains of the executed individual.

The government’s anti-drug strategy had a discriminatory effect on communities which were already among the most severely marginalized and impoverished populations in the country. “Iran’s Baluchi minority accounted for 29 percent (138) of drug-related executions in 2023 while constituting only about 5 percent of Iran’s population,” stated Amnesty. In 2022 the percentage of Baluchi individuals executed for drug-related offenses was even higher, at 42 percent.

A large part of the Iranian Baluchi population lives in Iran’s poorest provinces. Amnesty reports that Sistan and Baluchistan are chronically underfunded by the central government and are underdeveloped as a result. The authorities however deny that economic hardship and systematic marginalization are the root causes of drug-related offenses.

Fear as a Weapon

Amnesty also reports a “wave of executions” in the past year in connection with the mass protests of the “Woman Life Freedom” movement. In 2023 the Iranian authorities executed six men in connection with the mass protests of 2022 and one man in connection with the country-wide protests in November 2019. At least seven more individuals were sentenced to death in connection with protests and, according to Amnesty, find themselves in immediate danger of being executed. Some of those killed were sentenced for alleged offenses such as “insulting the Prophet,” “apostasy,” “enmity against God,” or “corruption on Earth.”

In these instances as well, Amnesty says, the executions often took place without prior notice to family members or attorneys, who as a result were denied a final visit. In one case the authorities reportedly informed the family a day before the execution that it had been called off and that a pardon was forthcoming.

“Protesters, dissidents and members of oppressed ethnic minorities are among those executed as the authorities have weaponized the death penalty in an orchestrated bid to sow fear among the public and suppress dissent,” said Diana Eltahawy.

Since January 2018, at least 13 people have been put to death in connection with protests. The individuals killed were sentenced to death following extremely unfair trials. Moreover, in every case there were accusations of torture which were not investigated.

Show Trials before Revolutionary Courts

Revolutionary Courts issued 61 percent of the death sentences carried out in 2023. These courts have jurisdiction over a wide spectrum of crimes, including drug-related offenses, which are considered by the authorities to be a threat to “national security.” Amnesty charges that the courts lack independence and were under the influence of the security and intelligence services. What’s more, “confessions” obtained through torture were routinely used to issue guilty verdicts in grossly unfair summary trials.

“Proceedings by such courts are inherently unfair with defendants being systematically denied fair trial rights, including to adequate defense, to meaningfully challenge the legality of their detention, to presumption of innocence, not to self-incriminate and to meaningful review,” Amnesty charged in its report.

Need for International Pressure

According to Amnesty, Iran also executed six people in 2023 who were under 18 when the crime of which they were convicted was committed; one of those sentenced to death was only 17 at the time of his execution.

This makes Iran one of the few remaining countries to use the death penalty against people who are under 18 at the time of the offense. This, said Amnesty, is a violation of international law and of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, of which Iran is a signatory.

Amnesty is appealing to the international community and the German government to press for a moratorium on executions. The goal must be the permanent abolition of the death penalty in Iran. Amnesty is also pleading for a renewal of the mandate of the Fact Finding Mission on Iran and the Special Rapporteur on Iran. The effort to gather evidence of human rights abuses in the country must continue, said Acting Amnesty General Secretary Mihr. The UN Human Rights Council will vote this week on whether to renew the mandate.

The German government, continued Mihr, should assert universal jurisdiction and hold those responsible in Iran to account in Germany. If applied, the principle of universal jurisdiction would make it possible to prosecute severe human rights violations regardless of where the crimes were committed or of the nationality of the perpetrators or victims.

The Iranian state has not strayed from its practice in 2024, either: since the beginning of the year, at least 95 people have been killed, according to Amnesty. The organization assumes that the actual number is higher.(hcz)

Florida: Law to exclude children from social media

2024-04-03T11:25:00+02:00

Florida has banned social media accounts by law for children under 14 years. Already existing accounts must be deleted. Similar laws in other states have already been overturned.

The law is likely to be a turning point for the (online) lives of the children and youths affected.(Source: IMAGO / Westend61)

The US state, Florida, has banned social media platforms from entering into contract with minors under 14 years of age. It is to be no longer possible for children to open or hold accounts. The maintainers of these sites must also delete already existing accounts if they belong to people under 14 years of age.

Florida’s governor, Ronald DeSantis (Republican), signed a law in this respect on Monday. It is expected to go into effect at the beginning of 2025. Consequently, Florida is the first US state to completely prohibit the use of social media for children under 14.

Even older youths are affected by the regulations: If 14 and 15-year-olds want to use social media platforms, they must provide platforms with permission from their parents. If they are unable to do so, maintainers of the site must delete existing accounts.

According to the law, platforms with pornographic content must additionally implement an age verification system.

Against mental health issues or free speech?

In a press conference on Monday, DeSantis portrayed the measures as a means for helping parents protect their children. In his statement, he said that social media hurts children in many ways.

Advocates anticipate that the law will curb the damaging effects social media has on the well-being of children. From their point of view, the platforms also bear responsibility for spreading mental health issues among children and youths like anxiety, depression or even suicidal thoughts.

In comparison, critics see the law as a violation of the first amendment in the US constitution that protects freedom of speech. Additionally, they view it as a violation of parents’ own rights for deciding their children’s online activities.

“This bill goes too far in taking away parents’ rights,” criticizes the Democratic representative, Anna Eskamani on Monday in a statement. “Instead of banning social media access, it would be better to ensure improved parental oversight tools, improved access to data to stop bad actors, alongside major investments in Florida’s mental health systems and programs.”

NetChoice, an industry association that also includes companies such as Meta, Snap and TikTok spoke out in disappointment against DeSantis’ agreement with the law. In particular, the organization criticized the required age verification and accompanying proof of identity on X: “This level of data collection will put Floridians’ privacy at risk while violating their rights.” There are better ways to protect the population and their data online.

According to the law, user accounts that are suspected of being used by children would also need to be deleted. It is sufficient for platforms to treat or categorize the account as if it belonged to a child – and display corresponding content and advertising. Should an account be unjustifiably deleted, the law gives users 90 days time to appeal.

Parents can apply to have the accounts deleted from their children who are 14 and under. The platform must then delete all information in connection with the account within ten days. This does not apply to data that must be retained by law. If a 14 or 15 year old wishes to have their account deleted, the social networks must comply within five days.

Convoluted definitions

It has only been defined in a non-specific way which services are to be affected by the law. At any rate, websites and apps are excluded whose main purpose is the exchange of messages between specific senders and recipients. Email providers and instant messengers (like WhatsApp) have explicitly been named as exceptions in the legal text.

The law defines which social media platforms are affected by the law based on four criteria that must all be met: Users must be able to upload content or see content from other users, at least one tenth of users under the age of 16 must have spent an average of at least two hours per day of use on the platform within the last 12 months, algorithms must analyze user data as well as select content for users based on this, and the platform must have addictive functions. For the latter, endless scrolling and loading overview pages, as well as autoplaying videos come into consideration.

Law still at a tipping point

The text of the law that has now been passed is already a watered-down version. The ultra-conservative DeSantis already vetoed an even more restrictive version of the text at the beginning of March. Originally, the Senate and House of Representatives envisioned that in general users would first be able to register a social media account starting at 16. The governor justified his objection with the right of parents to decide themselves whether and how their children use social media platforms.

Whether or not the law will remain in place is unclear. Because states like Utah, Arkansas, Texas and Ohio have already enacted similar but less strict regulations for protecting children and youths from the effects of social media platforms. US federal courts overruled some of them because they deemed them as a violation of freedom of speech.

Among other things, the law demands that user accounts can only be created with with a previous age verification or that certain social media platforms and apps already activate the strictest data protection options during account registration. (hcz)

US court: NSO must hand over spyware code

2024-03-08T08:15:00+01:00

A US court has ordered NSO to release information regarding its spyware products. However, the company does not have to reveal who it sold the surveillance software to.

Previously, NSO applied to invoke immunity during the proceedings – however, last year the US Supreme Court paved the way for the lawsuit.(Source: IMAGO / SOPA Images)

The Israeli company, NSO, must hand over code for its spyware Pegasus to WhatsApp. As revealed at the end of last week, this was ruled by a California court in the legal dispute between the two companies. The lawsuit has been ongoing for years.

According to the court, NSO must hand over “all relevant spyware” to WhatsApp. The decision from Judge Phyllis Hamilton is considered an important legal victory for Meta’s WhatsApp subsidiary. This is also important as the code is considered to be a closely guarded state secret as reported by the Guardian in Britain. NSO is regulated by the Israeli Ministry of Defence, which must approve all sales of licenses to foreign governments.

The background of the court order is a lawsuit from WhatsApp and Meta from 2019. The social media group accuses the spyware developer of being involved in an attack on 1,400 WhatsApp users.

According to the court order, at the time NSO exploited an already existing security vulnerability to infiltrate smartphones with its controversial Pegasus spyware. Devices that were called were also infiltrated even if the calls were not answered.

With the help of Pegasus, attackers could completely take over devices and obtain access to all data stored on the devices. Additionally, they could switch on the camera and microphone without being detected.

Attacks on members of the media and human rights activists

Those targeted on WhatsApp include members of the media, lawyers, dissidents, human rights activists, diplomats and government officials. According to the lawsuit, the servers that were used for the attacks were connected to NSO. Furthermore, WhatsApp found that many of the user accounts used for the attacks were associated with the Israeli company.

By doing so, the NSO broke US laws and also violated the terms and conditions of WhatsApp. WhatsApp is claiming damages and wants to deny NSO among others to register accounts with WhatsApp or Facebook.

The judge responsible has now decided that NSO must also “produce information concerning the full functionality of the relevant spyware” and hand it over to WhatsApp. With reference to “various U.S. and Israeli restrictions”, NSO filed a motion for protective order to refuse the disclosure.

However, NSO was successful with another application: The company must not disclose its client list nor information regarding its server architechture.

“Important milestone”

In response to the Guardian, a WhatsApp representative welcomed the decision: “The recent court ruling is an important milestone in our long-running goal of protecting WhatsApp users against unlawful attacks. Spyware companies and other malicious actors need to understand they can be caught and will not be able to ignore the law”.

NSO has not yet commented on the court order.

Donncha Ó Cearbhaill, Head of Security Lab at Amnesty International welcomes the court order as well. He said: “This court order sends a clear signal to the surveillance industry that it cannot continue to enable spyware abuse with impunity.”

It is, however, disappointing that NSO may continue to keep the identities secret of their clients who are responsible for the surveillance. Donncha Ó Cearbhaill continues: “NSO Group says that it only sells Pegasus to authorized government customers. Our Security Lab has documented the massive scale and breadth of the use of Pegasus against human rights defenders and journalists across the world. It is vital that targets of Pegasus find out who has purchased and deployed the spyware against them so that they can seek meaningful redress.”

NSO wanted to invoke immunity

Only last year was it decided that the WhatsApp lawsuit could go to court. The Israeli company attempted several times to invoke immunity – However, the NSO Group was denied this by the courts. In January 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected NSO’s appeal, clearing the way for the lawsuit.

Even the U.S. Department of Justice provided a statement to the Supreme Court, declaring that the appeal from the spyware developer should be denied. Among other things, the Department of Justice referred to the U.S. government already imposing sanctions on NSO in November 2021.

More lawsuits

The company is also being confronted with further lawsuits. At the close of 2021, Apple filed a lawsuit against NSO. The goal of the lawsuit is to hold NSO accountable for surveillance and targeted attacks on Apple users. The court should prohibit NSO among others from developing and distributing malware for Apple devices. NSO also requested to dismiss this lawsuit. However, at the end of January, the U.S. Federal District Court denied the motion and ruled that the case could proceed.

Media professionals from the El Faro news site in El Salvador are also filing a lawsuit against NSO in the USA. Security researchers from Canadian, Citizen Lab, proved in January 2022 that they were under surveillance by Pegasus. Among other things, the plaintiffs want NSO to reveal which government customer is responsible for the spying operation. (js)

USA: Pharmacies impaired by cyberattacks

2024-03-01T08:12:00+01:00

As a result of a cyberattack, many pharmacies in the USA are unable to bill insurances for prescriptions. In some cases, patients need to pay out of pocket for their medication.

Even large pharmacy chains like CVS and Walgreens are said to be affected by the problems. (Source: Anthony92931 – CC BY-SA 3.0)

Since last week, many pharmacies in the USA have been unable to fill prescriptions. The reason behind this is a cyberattack on the company, Change Healthcare. This attack has also resulted in worldwide effects on US military hospitals.

Change Healthcare offers services for the US health care system. For example, pharmacies can use the system to bill insurances for medication or to verify whether patients are entitled to a specific medication. According to their own statements, the company processes about 15 billion transactions within the health care system. According to the American Hospital Association, Change Healthcare is one of the largest tech companies within the health care system in the United States.

Already since days, a cyberattack on the service provider has affected the daily operations of US pharmacies. According to media reports, many pharmacies are no longer able to bill insurances for prescriptions. Patients are left with a decision: Either they pay for their medication out of pocket or go without treatment.

For example, CNN reports of a 32 year old woman from Detroit who unsuccessfully tried to fill a prescription at several pharmacies – including a CVS pharmacy. In the end, she had to pay 1,600 US dollars out of pocket to receive her medication. Although her insurance confirmed that they would reimburse the costs, she described the experience to CNN as “distressing”. Furthermore, many people would not have this this amount at their disposal and would need to go without treatment, she said.

Disruptions since Wednesday

Change Healthcare first reported of system failures on Wednesday and later confirmed a cyberattack, as shown in a status report. Once the incident was noticed, systems were shut down to prevent further repercussions. The company has not yet provided more details about the incident.

According to present knowledge, the attack did not have an effect on the systems of other companies that also, like Change Healthcare, belong to the parent company, UnitedHealth Group. Meanwhile, in a statement made to the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), an attacker with connections to a nation-state was presumably responsible. However, the company did not provide further details. Cybersecurity experts and prosecutors are involved with the case. According to details provided by the company, it is not foreseeable how much longer the interruption will continue.

In additional to normal pharmacies in the USA, this has impacted US military hospitals and pharmacies “worldwide” as communicated by the US military health care program, Tricare. Until the issue can be resolved, prescriptions need to be manually processed and urgent prescriptions prioritized.

Even the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Rhineland-Palatinate, the largest US military hospital outside the United States, reported on Facebook that they were affected by the problem. On Monday, they wrote that there would be delays with processing prescriptions – Patients should expect long waiting times.

Warnings of severe consequences

The health care industry trade group, American Hospital Association, warned at the end of last week of interruptions in all health care organizations as a result of the cyberattack. Therefore, the American Hospital Association has been in contact with the FBI and Department of Health and Human Services.

More experts of the health care system also warned of severe consequences should the interruption continue as reported by the Wall Street Journal (WSJ). Carter Groome, CEO of the consulting firm, First Health Advisory, told the newspaper: “It’s a mess, and I believe it’s our Colonial Pipeline moment in healthcare”. Groome is referring to a cyberattack in 2021 on the operator of a large pipeline in the USA. As the pipeline was shut down as a result of the attack, there were panic purchases in succession, leading to long lines at gas stations in the Eastern United States.

Security incidents in the health care sector

Over the past year, there were several cybersecurity incidents in the health care sector in the USA. At the end of October, the US Department of Health and Human Services stated that more than 88 million people were affected by data breaches in 2023.

For example, in May 2023 social security numbers and health data including X-rays and details regarding prescribed medication were stolen from millions of insured patients.

Also in December: Criminals gained access to millions of people’s sensitive data at Norton Healthcare, a hospital operator.

Additionally, at the end of the last year a company that operates 30 hospitals in six US states had to divert patients to other hospitals from some of their emergency rooms. The systems there taken offline after ransomware was discovered. (js)

Wireless webcams: Wyze users were able to see other people's feeds

2024-02-22T15:45:00+01:00

Users of Wyze surveillance cameras were able to see feeds from other users. There have already been such cases with other manufacturers of networked cameras.

Wyze also sells so-called smart doorbells and cameras that are specifically made for the surveillance of indoor spaces.(Source: Wyze)

Wireless cameras from the US provider, Wyze, gave users access to feeds from other people. According to information provided by the company, approximately 13,000 customers were affected by the problem. There have already been similar security incidents with the company’s other products in the past

Wyze confirmed the incident on Monday. According to Wyze, approximately 13,000 users had preview images displayed from other users’ cameras. About 1,500 users also clicked on these previews and viewed the feeds from other customers – in some cases, videos were also displayed.

According to their own statements, the US company informed affected users about the incident. Wyze explains that the issue occurred due to a software component from a third-party provider that was recent integrated into the system. As a result, they said some devices were mistakenly allocated to incorrect user accounts.

Informing those affected

At the end of last week, those affected reported the issue on the Reddit platform and in Wyze user forums. It was described, for example, that users were informed of movement on their property – but then opened a feed displaying someone else’s house. Others fear that they were monitored themselves.

Wyze also explicitly advertises their cameras for the surveillance of indoor spaces. The company currently only distributes their products in the USA.

Wyze first told US media outlets that about a dozen users were affected.

Another incident just a few months ago

This is not the first incident: Already in September 2023, some users were able to access strangers’ cameras. According to the company, approximately 2,300 users could access other people’s cameras.

Furthermore, a security vulnerability in an earlier version of Wyze could be exploited by attackers so that they could view other users’ feeds. Wyze is said to have known about the issue for three years before reacting.

Problems with other companies

These incidents make it clear once again that risks are associated with using surveillance cameras that can be accessed by users online. For example, the German specialist magazine, c’t, reported a problem with a camera from Netatmo (article in German) in December 2023. In this case, a user could look inside the house of another family.

Additionally, at the end of 2022 it was revealed that surveillance cameras and so-called smart doorbells made by the company, Eufy, stored recordings on cloud servers without user consent. According to reports, videos could also be opened remotely without authentication – one would only need to know the website address of the video.

Attackers were also able to use Google’s Nest Cams in the past to access surveillance cameras. In some cases, attackers even spoke to owners using the camera speakers. There were also similar incidents reported in 2019 with Amazon’s Ring Cams. The provider attributed this to inadequately secured user accounts and implemented two-factor authentication. Many users use the same login credentials for various services even though experts have been warning of the dangers for years.

German consumer advocates also warn of smart toys (German article) as attackers can eavesdrop on children. (js)

London: Algorithms used to detect crime in Underground stations

2024-02-15T16:56:00+01:00

A surveillance system used to detect crime among other things was tested in a London Underground station. However, there were issues with its recognition.

Privacy experts warn that it is easy to add more features to surveillance systems once they have already been set up. (Source: Sunil060902 – CC BY-SA 3.0 Deed )

In a London Underground station, thousands of people were under surveillance using algorithms designed to detect fare evaders and crime. This has been revealed by the research of US magazine, Wired. Train passengers were not informed of the tests.

The operator of the London Underground, Transport for London (TfL), tested the algorithms from October 2022 until the end of September 2023 in the Underground station Willesden Green, located in the north-west of the British capital. In response to the magazine’s Freedom of Information request, the TfL provided documents that reveal this. Wired has partially published these documents.

According to the transit operators, more than 110,000 people used Willesden Green station weekly in 2022.

Until now, it was only known that the algorithms were to be used in a test at the station for detecting whether guests could bypass entry barriers without a ticket.

Searching for weapons and smokers

As revealed in parts of the redacted documents, the algorithms were to detect several additional occurrences and situations: From “carrying or using a weapon” to smoking, people and animals on the platform as well as unattended luggage. Even littering at the station could be detected.

Staff was informed in real-time of conduct or situations deemed problematic – this included weapons or people on the platforms, for example. The Underground operator explained to Wired that existing surveillance cameras at the station were combined with algorithms and “numerous detection models” to identify behaviour patterns.

According to the report, the surveillance system issued 44,000 alerts during the test period. In 19,000 cases, staff was informed in real-time. The system most frequently sent alerts when a person potentially attempted to reach the platform without a valid ticket.

However, there were problems with recognising situations correctly. For example, when children followed their parents through the barrier entries and were reported as potential fare evaders. The software was also unsuccessful in differentiating between foldable and normal bicycles – the latter may only be taken on the train during certain hours.

According to the transit authority, the system was not used for monitoring staff. Furthermore, audio recording was not set up and facial recognition was not available.

Michael Birtwistle researches the regulation of artificial intelligence (AI) at the independent Ada Lovelace Institute. He stated to Wire that the implementation of AI in public spaces for identifying behaviour patterns “raises many of the same scientific, ethical, legal, and societal questions raised by facial recognition technologies”.

Warning of further upgrades

In response to Wired, privacy experts warn additionally that such surveillance systems could easily be expanded in the future – for example, with facial recognition.

Daniel Leufer from the NGO Access Now explains he always checks first such whether such systems are attempting to recognise aggression – because he is sceptical whether that it is even possible.

According to the report, the London system also attempted to recognise aggression – however, this could not be performed reliably. Therefore, it had to be adjusted so that a warning was provided whenever someone raised their arms – because this is a “common behaviour linked to acts of aggression”.

Madeleine Stone from the British NGO, Big Brother Watch, told Wired, algorithms for detecting aggressive behaviour are “deeply flawed” – additionally, the British data regulator has warned of the implementation of technologies for emotion analysis.

Furthermore, Stone says many passengers would be disturbed to find out that they were under surveillance. The Underground operator actually confirmed to Wired that the station did not provide any notice about the surveillance system test.

At first, people’s faces were made unrecognisable on recordings and the data was stored for a maximum of 14 days. However, after six months the TfL saved people’s faces who were suspected of evading fares – and stored the data longer.

Nothing has apparently been decided regarding the future of the system: TfL told Wired they were advised to run a second phase of the trial. Any additional implementation would be coordinated with “relevant stakeholders”, the company assured.

This past year, the operating company of the subway in New York City announced they would gather data in some stations with the help of algorithms for how many train passengers evade barriers without a ticket. Civil rights activists criticised the implementation of the system as a part of a growing surveillance apparatus in the city. (js)

YouTube deletes more than 1,000 AI-generated videos

2024-02-02T19:08:00+01:00

YouTube removed a large number of fake celebrity videos from its platform. Among other things, scammers advertised questionable services using AI-generated fake versions of Taylor Swift or Steve Harvey. This does not solve the problem.

10 US dollars for a MacBook directly from Jennifer Aniston – If it’s too good to be true, it’s almost always a scam. (Source: Reddit – Screenshot by Posteo)

What is real and what is computer-generated? As artificial intelligence (AI) is creating increasingly believable media, it’s becoming more difficult to distinguish this difference with images and videos. On the video platform YouTube, this has recently led a flood of fake ads and promotional videos in which AI-generated images and voices of celebrities attempt to lure web users into scams and, for example, selling questionable supplemental health insurance policies.

The video platform has now taken action against the fake videos and deleted more than 1,000 of them. The user accounts that were used to upload the videos were also blocked. This course of action from YouTube was a reaction to research made by the news site, 404 Media.

In the advertisements and videos, it’s said that AI-generated fake videos of US celebrities like Taylor Swift, Steve Harvey or Joe Rogan endorsed scams. YouTube users as well as the celebrities themselves apparently regularly complained to YouTube about the fake content. However, this media remained on the platform in part for months.

The problem continues

The problem has not been solved by deleting the videos: YouTube admits to being aware of emerging “trends” in which fake videos impersonate endorsement or a relationship with celebrities. 404 Media also reports of similar new ads on YouTube that misuse AI-generated voices and videos of celebrities.

In an example, a fake Jennifer Aniston advertised selling MacBooks for 10 US dollars – which is practically giving it away for free. All one needs to do is visit “her” website. Regardless of the unbelievable content, the image and sound are hard to distinguish as AI fakes without being an expert – both the depicted woman and her voice seem authentic.

In another video, a fake voice of former US president, Donald Trump, warned of an impending third World War and a silent, untraceable attack on America that would create a food crisis and would bring a collapse to civilisation. Trump can not be seen.

There is only solution to not falling victim to this horrific scenario and to protect your own family from this impending downfall: “Trump” recommends acquiring a meter of copper cable and listening to the podcast from Teddy Daniels, a former candidate for Pennsylvania governor. The video has already been online for two months and has been viewed more than 660,000 times.

The fake Trump videos also circulated on Facebook in connection with Daniels. And the Aniston fakes are also to have appeared in one form or another on other social-media platforms like Instagram and TikTok.

Google responds

A Google spokesperson explained to 404 Media that the company examined the reported ads and has already removed them several times. The AI videos violate the rules of the platform – such as the use of clickbait being prohibited. “We are constantly working to enhance our enforcement systems in order to stay ahead of the latest trends and scam tactics, and ensure that we can respond to emerging threats quickly”, Google promised.

YouTube is aware of the fake advertising with celebrities and fraud attempts. To fight this, the company is investing in automatic image recognition technology that is also supposed to verify the authenticity of celebrities in videos.

AI nude images

Meanwhile, the social-media platform X had no other ideas than to temporarily disable searching for “Taylor Swift” for all users this past weekend due to fake pornographic images. Computer-generated sexual depictions with an appearance of the singer emerged en masse on the platform. X manager, Joe Benarroch, told Bloomberg and the Wall Street Journal that they would keep an eye on continued attempts to publish images.

The images are said to have been generated using the AI program, Designer, from Microsoft. For the time being, Microsoft did not want to confirm this to 404 Media but pointed out that the terms and conditions of the software prohibit generating sexual content. Additionally, security measures are built in to the program that are regularly improved. (hcz)

NGO: Google does not delete location history related to abortion clinics

2024-01-26T08:24:00+01:00

In the USA, Google continues to save visits to abortion clinics in location history. Those affected could be in danger. Google actually wanted to delete such entries.

The NGO, Accountable Tech, conducted their study in seven US states. (Source: IMAGO / USA TODAY Network)

Google continues to store location history when users in the USA visit abortion clinics – even though the provider promised to delete such data. This can be seen in the current study made by the NGO, Accountable Tech. Google explains that some of the clinics had not been classified as especially “sensitive locations” since they were not only abortion clinics.

The US Supreme Court overturned existing abortion protection in June 2022. Since then, more than 20 states have forbidden abortions or restricted them.

Back then, civil rights activists warned of apps and online services collecting location data that could reveal visits to abortion clinics. Law enforcement agencies can demand that such data is released with a court order.

Google also collects location history from its users through the navigation app, Google Maps, which is frequently requested by US law enforcement agencies. As a result of the decision, the corporation announced in July 2022 that going forward they wanted to automatically delete information regarding visits to medical facilities such as abortion clinics or counselling centers from users’ “Location History”.

Tests in seven states

The NGO, Accountable Tech, is now criticising in a report that this only occurred in half of the cases.

For their study, in each case the organisation used a factory-reset Android smartphone with a new Google account and drove to eight abortion clinics with the help of Google Maps Navigation. In total, this test was conducted in seven states: Florida, Georgia, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Texas.

Finally, those who conducted the study verified whether the visit was visible in Location History. According to the report, the journeys could be accessed in four of the eight trials – however, the name of each clinic was hidden. As reported by Accountable Tech, search request data concerning clinic locations could be viewed in all cases in the activists’ Google accounts via “Web & App Activity”.

Accountable Tech has conducted such investigations with similar results over the past 1.5 years. In a test conducted at the beginning of 2023, the respective data was not deleted in 60 percent of the cases, for example.

Google contradicts itself

Nicole Gill, Executive Director of Accountable Tech, comments: “In post-Roe America, prosecutors are looking to Big Tech to help them build cases against abortion seekers by providing the data to track their every movement.” Google has not kept its promise to increase data protection.

The director of product of Google Maps, Marlo McGriff, commented to The Guardian: “We are upholding our promise to delete particularly personal places from Location History if these places are identified by our systems – any claims that we’re not doing so are patently false or misguided.”

In one of the listed examples in the report, Google’s system did not recognise the clinics of the organisation, Planned Parenthood, which is why the data was not deleted, McGriff explains. In another case, a clinic was visited that also provides other treatments – and therefore was not classified as a sensitive location.

Activity to be saved offline

Only in December did Google announce additional steps. Going forward, “Location History” would no longer be stored on the servers of the provider, but rather offline on user devices.

Accountable Tech considers this a “step in the right direction.” However, the organisation also explains that one can not depend on Google implementing its promise during the announced time-frame.

The civil rights organisation, Electronic Frontier Foundation, explained in December that the changes announced by Google would make it difficult or impossible for law enforcement to receive location history from Google. The NGO is cautiously optimistic that this would be the end of so-called “geo-fence warrants” – if US authorities obtain such a court order, they can demand information from Google regarding all devices that were located in a certain radius at a certain time.

However, other provides and apps also collect location history. For example, US authorities also purchase commercially obtained location data from data brokers. Only in mid-January did the U.S. Federal Trade Commission forbid the data broker, X-Mode, from sharing and selling “sensitive location data”. The authorities warned that such data could be used, for example, to provide information about which medical treatments a person has received.

At the end of last week, the authorities announced that also the data broker, InMarket Media, is also banned from selling such “sensitive location data” going forward.(js)

Human Rights Watch: 2023 was characterised by crises

2024-01-19T08:25:00+01:00

Critical voices are being suppressed in many countries across the world, leading to further human rights violations, Human Rights Watch reports. The organisation calls on governments to speak up for human rights.

Women’s rights have been massively restricted in many places as seen in Afghanistan, for example, HRW reports. (Source: IMAGO / Kyodo News)

2023 was characterised by some of the worst crises and challenges in recent history. This conclusion was made by the organisation Human Rights Watch (HRW) in their current “World Report 2024.” Heads of states and governments frequently failed to advocate for the protection of human rights.

The organisation documents in their 740 page long “World Report” the situation for human rights in over 100 countries. The 34th edition of the annual report was published this year.

HRW complains that the armed conflicts between the Israeli government and the terror organisation Hamas, in Ukraine, in Myanmar, in Ethiopia and in the Sahel region have caused immeasurable suffering. Additionally, 2023 was the hottest year since the beginning of globally recorded temperatures in 1880. Numerous forest fires, droughts and storms have caused devastating damage in countries like Bangladesh, Libya and Canada. Economic inequality has also increased across the world.

In her keynote essay, Tirana Hassan, Executive Director at HRW, criticises that 2023 has also been a year with selective outrage by governments and transactional diplomacy. For people whose voices were not heard, it could have far-reaching consequences.

“The international system that we rely on to protect human rights is under threat as world leaders look the other way when universal principles of human rights are violated,” said Hassan. “Every time a country overlooks these universal and globally accepted principles, someone pays a price, and that price is sometimes peoples’ lives.”

Repressive policy of the Chinese government

The fact that human rights sometimes fall victim to politics can be seen, for example, when many governments fail to address increasing oppression from the Chinese government.

According to HRW, the Chinese government continues to persecute Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims. This constitutes a crime against humanity – however, many governments, also in predominately Muslim countries, remain silent on the topic.

The Chinese government has imposed drastic measures for information control in Tibet, making it difficult to obtain news from the region. And in Hong Kong, civil rights have been abandoned with arbitrary arrests for alleged national security offences. Bounties were even offered for 13 exiled democracy activists. Throughout China, the government has placed civil society under even stricter control.

Education bans for Afghan girls

In Afghanistan, oppression has also increased, according to HRW. In particular, women are suffering under the Taliban. Additionally, the economic crisis in the country has resulted in about two-thirds of the population becoming dependant on humanitarian aid.

Fereshta Abbasi from HRW stated: “The Taliban have responded to demands from Afghans for rights and accountability with more repression, especially for women and girls”

According to the report, Afghanistan was the only country in 2023 where women and girls are officially banned from attending secondary and higher education. Furthermore, the Taliban also used excessive force against demonstrations by women and arrested protestors arbitrarily. In some cases, they were detailed for weeks without contact to the outside world.

It only recently became known that since the beginning of the year the Taliban also has imprisoned women and girls for violating strict dress codes.

Hundreds of executions in Iran

The authorities in Iran are also taking action against women who disobey the dress codes. Before the anniversary of nationwide protests – which broke out in September 2022 after the death of 22-year-old, Mahsa Jina Amini – the authorities detained activists, artists and students among others. Family members of the protestors who were killed in 2022 were intimidated and imprisoned.

The number of executions in Iran also increased in 2023 according to HRW. Between January and November 2023, human rights activists documented more than 700 executions. Death sentences are also imposed in connection with protests.

Saudi Arabia continues to impose the death penalty – even for drug charges, HRW reports. Social media users are also increasingly becoming targeted for voicing opinions and issued with decade-long prison sentences or even sentenced to death. International criticism was voiced last year against the death sentence that was imposed on retired teacher, Mohammed al-Ghamdi. He received the sentence because he allegedly violated anti-terrorism laws by voicing his opinion online.

Additionally, HRW accuses Saudi border guards of brutally killing hundreds of migrants at the border with Yemen. In order to conceal the systematic violations of human rights in the country, the government has invested billions in sporting events.

In Tunisia, the NGO documented attacks on migrants and asylum seekers made by the authorities. People have also been expelled to remote areas along the Tunisian border between Libya and Algeria – where they, in part, had to endure not having access to water, food or medical care for weeks.

Dissidents detained in Belarus and Vietnam

Additionally, the human rights organisation reports that the governments in Belarus and Vietnam have continued to take action against critical voices this past year. In Belarus, human rights activists, members of the media, lawyers, oppositionists and trade unionists were persecuted. In November, at least 1,462 people were in prison because of politically-motivated accusations.

Anastasiia Kruope from HRW comments: “Over the past year, Belarusian authorities doubled down to create an information vacuum around raging repressions by cutting political prisoners off from the outside world and bullying their lawyers and families into silence”.

In Vietnam, there are currently more than 160 people in prison because they exercised basic rights. In the first ten months of this past year, at least 28 activists were given long-term prison sentences.

And also in India, activists, members of the media, opposition politicians and other critics of the government have been arrested.

Additionally, Human Rights Watch also criticises that India is increasingly relying on a digital infrastructure for state services. Due to frequent net blocks, the country often could not utilise these services. The poorest parts of the population suffer the most from this – neither food rations can be distributed nor can wages be paid.

In the report, HRW also sharply criticises of migration policy of the European Union. Through this policy, the federation of States contributed to deaths, torture and human rights violations. Among other things, the EU has expanded repressive, dissuasive measures and alliances with countries that disregard human rights. Many member states participated in illegal push-backs at external borders.

Governments must stand up for human rights

Despite all setbacks, there were also positive developments in 2023. HRW appreciated, for example, that the International Criminal Court issued a warrant for Russian president, Vladimir Putin and his Children’s Rights Officers. The background for this is war crimes in connection with the forcible transfer of children from occupied territories in Ukraine to Russia.

The Supreme Court in Brazil confirmed the right of all indigenous people to their traditional land. According to HRW, this has also been an effective measure against deforestation in the Amazon region.

And in November, the International Court of Justice ordered the Syrian government to do everything in their power to prevent torture and other abuse. This effort is a decisive counterbalance for some countries to normalise the relationship to the Syrian government, although there are still human rights violations.

HRW Executive Director, Hassen explains: “Human rights crises around the world demonstrate the urgency of applying longstanding and mutually agreed principles of international human rights law everywhere. Principled diplomacy, by which governments center their human rights obligations in their relations with other countries, can influence oppressive conduct and have a meaningful impact for people whose rights are being violated.” (js)

Weather service reports almost 1.5 degrees of warming for 2023

2024-01-18T16:27:00+01:00

The 1.5-degree mark for global warming has not yet been surpassed. However, ocean warming and continually rising emissions could impede progress for global climate goals next year.

Although oceans are only warming gradually, they are also storing a tremendous amount of energy.(Source: ERA5)

The planet’s temperature continues to rise. As a result, temperature records are being broken, one after the next. According to the EU Copernicus Climate Change Service, the rise in average global temperatures remained barely underneath the 1.5-degree threshold. The average was 1.48 degrees Celsius higher than the average between 1850 and 1900 as Copernicus published in their report, Global Climate Highlights 2023, on Tuesday.

“Temperatures during 2023 likely exceed those of any period in at least the last 100,000 years,” said Samantha Burgess, Deputy Director of the Copernicus Climate Change Service (C3S). Climate researchers can indirectly reconstruct the historic climate using tree rings or bubbles in glaciers.

Copernicus already predicted that the year would be the warmest since the first records in 1850. This now means that it is probable that a 12-month period which ends in January or February will exceed the 1.5-degree threshold.

Experts consider it entirely possible that 2024 will be even warmer and the average increase of temperature may be over 1.5 degrees for the first time ever. However, the agreed upon 1.5-degree goal would (still) not be failed as long-term average values are evaluated.

However, the UN Environment Programme already warned at the end of November 2023 that CO2 emissions would need to be reduced by 42 percent more than the planned amount until 2030 in order to meet the Paris goals. Considering ongoing rising emissions, it seems like an unlikely scenario.

Every day is too hot

According to Copernicus, the global average temperature in 2023 was 14.98 degrees Celsius, being 0.17 degrees higher than in the previous record year of 2016. For the first time, every day this past year was at least one degree above pre-industrial levels – two days in November were even more than two degrees.

From June to December, each month was warmer than the previously measured record value for each month. Europe experienced the second warmest year since the beginning of records.

Ocean warming

"A critical driver of the unusual air temperatures experienced throughout 2023 were the unprecedented high surface temperatures in the ocean," according to Copernicus.

Throughout August 2023, the ocean surface temperature was 21.1 degrees on a global level for several weeks – this amount was never reached in 40 years of recorded temperatures until 2022. However, the oceans had already been exceptionally warm since April. The main reason for the warm oceans is the continuing rise of greenhouse gas concentration in the atmosphere.

Another factor is the recurring weather phenomenon, El Niño, which returned this past year.

“Era of climate instability”

“The extremes we have observed over the last few months provide a dramatic testimony of how far we now are from the climate in which our civilisation developed,” said Carlo Buontempo, Director of the Copernicus Climate Change Service. He called for advances in the decarbonization of the economy.

The human rights organisation, Amnesty International, reacted to the Copernicus report with a warning against its “serious consequences for human rights.” Humanity has now reached a worrying era of climate instability in which catastrophes like heat waves and droughts as well as intense rainfall and storms occur frequently – with disastrous effects for the environment, bio diversity and marginalised groups.

“Within eight years of the Paris climate agreement being signed, the 1.5 degrees Celsius rise in global temperatures this century it incorporated as a buffer against the worst impacts of climate change has been all but used up,” Amnesty warned on Tuesday.

The Copernicus Climate Change Service of the European Union regularly publishes data about the Earth’s surface temperature, Arctic sea ice and precipitation. The results are found using computer-generated analysis in which billions of measurements from satellites, ships, air crafts and weather stations are incorporated from all over the world. (dpa / hcz)

CO2 emissions reach new all-time high

2023-12-08T08:33:00+01:00

Global CO2 emissions are continuing to rise, according to the new Global Carbon Budget report. This threatens the 1.5 degree goal.

The continual rise in greenhouse gas concentration is leading to record temperatures on land and in the oceans, according to the World Meteorological Organization.(Source: IMAGO / Sven Simon)

Global CO2 emissions are continuing to rise: In 2023 they will likely reach a new all-time high of 40.9 gigatons (billion tons). Fossil fuel sources produce the majority with 36.8 gigatons and the rest comes from land utilisation. This comes from the report presented on Tuesday for the Global Carbon Budget. Compared to the previous year, CO2 emissions are rising 1.1 percent, according to the report. In comparison to the pre-Corona year 2019, it is 1.4 percent higher.

More than 120 researchers participated in the report published on Tuesday in the professional journal, Earth System Science Data.

Pierre Friedlingstein from the University of Exeter, who led the study said: “The impacts of climate change are evident all around us, but action to reduce carbon emissions from fossil fuels remains painfully slow.”

According to the report, the percentage of the greenhouse gas CO2 in the atmosphere is 419.3 ppm (parts per million) on average, making it 51 percent higher than in 1750.

Regional differences

The regional trends with CO2 emissions vary “dramatically” according to the report: For example, the researchers anticipate an increase of over 8 percent in India. CO2 emissions will likely increase by 4 percent in China while they will decrease in the EU (-7.4 percent), the USA (-3 percent) and the rest of the world (-0.4 percent).

Regional projections of CO2 emissions (Source: Global Carbon Project – CC BY 4.0)

Forests, soil and oceans can only absorb about half of the human-made CO2 emissions. However, without global warming, they would be able to absorb considerably more. “These effects will continue to be amplified with increasing global warming,” emphasized Judith Hauck from the Alfred Wegener Institute in Bremerhaven.

Climate goals under threat

“It seems inevitable that we will exceed the goal of 1.5 degrees – and the last years have drastically shown us how serious the effects of global warming already are now,” said Julia Pongratz from the Ludwig Maximilians University in Munich, one of the main authors of the study.

In the Paris climate agreement of 2015, countries across the globe committed to limit global warming to as close to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. For this to happen, only a limited amount of climate-damaging greenhouse gases like CO2 can be in the Earth’s atmosphere.

The global budget for CO2 that can be emitted to reach this goal with a probability of 50 percent will already be used up in 7 years, as experts write in the report. Starting in 2024, there are still 15 years to keep global warming to 1.7 degrees and 28 years to 2 degrees.

Hottest decade

The report was released during the UN Climate Change Conference COP28 in Dubai. The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) also presented a new report, according to which an increase of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere “turbo-charged a dramatic acceleration in ice melt and sea level rise.” According to the report, the years from 2011 to 2020 were the warmest decade since records began.

During this time, the global average temperature was 1.1 degrees above the values in the late 19th century. This phase when industrialisation began holds as a reference era for the goal for not letting the average temperate rise above more than 1.5 degrees.

WMO Secretary-General Petteri Taalas said: “Each decade since the 1990s has been warmer than the previous one and we see no immediate sign of this trend reversing.” This can clearly be led back to greenhouse gas emissions caused by humans – therefore, reducing these emissions should be of the highest priority. (dpa / js)

U.S. Senator criticises mass surveillance of phone records

2023-12-01T08:17:00+01:00

U.S. law enforcement agencies are also able to access phone records of non-suspects. A U.S. Senator has voiced doubts about the legality of its surveillance program.

Together with other Senators, U.S. Senator Wyden recently drafted a new bill in which a court order would be mandatory for accessing phone records. (Source: IMAGO / ABACAPRESS)

The Democratic U.S. Senator, Ron Wyden, called on the Department of Justice to make public documents related to a not well-known surveillance program. “Hemisphere” allows U.S. law enforcement agencies to search through trillions of telephone records – often without a court order.

As Wyden communicated this past week, the documents in question are classified as “Law Enforcement Sensitive”, which would prevent them from being published. In a letter, he urged Attorney General Merrick Garland to remove these restrictions.

Wyden stated that he has serious doubts about the legality of the program. Additionally, the documents from the Department of Justice contain “troubling information” that would “justifiably outrage” many citizens and members of Congress.

AT&T’s involvement

The background is the so-called project “Hemisphere”. Wyden writes in his letter that the White House’s Office of National Drug Control Policy pays the telecommunications provider, AT&T, so that law enforcement agencies can search through “trillions of domestic phone calls”.

As U.S. publication, Wired, reports, phone records were involved – authorities can also retrieve who phoned whom and when the call was placed. Such inquiries can also be made about people who are not suspected of a crime. Potentially all phone calls made using the AT&T’s infrastructure are affected.

With reference to internal police documents, Wired writes that although “Hemisphere” should actually be dedicated to fighting drug trafficking that law enforcement agencies also used it for other cases that had no drugs involved.

For example, an officer from the Oakland Police Department attempted to obtain the telephone number of a suspect by requesting phone records from their friends. According to Wired, it is, however, not revealed in the documents whether the police also received this information. It is also unclear in the report how far the records date back.

The documents also show that officers from U.S. Immigration, The National Guard as well as many smaller authorities have participated in training for obtaining phone records.

The New York Times first reported on “Hemisphere” in 2013. Additionally, Wyden writes that the Department of Justice that has already acknowledged the existence of the surveillance program in federal court.

Financing from federal funds

According to Wired, the program is now referred to as “Data Analytical Services”. Under Barack Obama, The White House suspended funding after the New York Times published their report. However, funding has now returned.

The White House has declined to speak with Wired about this and an AT&T speaker has refused to comment.

According to the Wired report, “Hemisphere” is not subject to oversight from U.S. Congress. Wyden criticises in his letter that although it is paid for using federal funds, the money is delivered to AT&T using a non-transparent financing structure which is why, for example, no data protection impact assessment was required. Such an assessment would have been mandatory if federal authorities paid the telecommunications provider directly.

At the beginning of November, Wyden with other Senators introduced a bill for protecting privacy. As Wired writes, if the legislation were adopted as it currently stands, it would make the surveillance program “explicitly illegal”. This is because, among other things, prosecutors would only allowed to access phone records with a court order. (js)

France: National Police to implement illegal facial recognition

2023-11-24T08:31:00+01:00

According to a report, the French National Police are implementing facial recognition software. The software was acquired without involving Data Protection Authorities, it states.

According to the researchers, police officers in other countries like Brazil, the USA and Singapore have also purchased Briefcam software. (Source: IMAGO / Daniel Scharinger)

The French National Police are said to have been using facial recognition software already since years. The investigative magazine, Disclose, reported this, citing internal documents of the Ministry of the Interior. French Data Protection Authorities now want to investigate the accusations.

According to the Disclose report, the software “Video Synopsis” from the Israeli company, Briefcam, was already acquired in 2015. The software is said to evaluate video material with the help of algorithms and offers options for surveillance. For example, vehicles can be tracked based on their license plate using recordings made by different cameras – the software also has facial recognition capabilities.

However, using facial recognition in France is only allowed in a few exceptional cases, according to Disclose. If it has been approved by a court, images can be compared with a police database that contained eight million photos in 2018.

In the case of the National Police, the implementation is, however, illegal. Citing an unnamed source within the police, Disclose reports that facial recognition is already actively being used without any control and without judicial requisition. Any policeman whose service is equipped can request to use Briefcam by transmitting a video or photo,” the person explained to the journalists.

No facial recognition during the Olympics

Indeed, the French government created a legal basis at the beginning of the year for analysing camera recordings using algorithms. The technology is to be implemented during the Olympic Summer Games in 2024. However, the French Senate rejected amendments to implement facial recognition.

According to the report, the police still did not conduct any evaluations of the software by May 2023 for potential consequences regarding data protection – which actually would have been a requirement for using it. However, the Briefcam software was already installed on computers at different police stations, including Paris and Marseilles, already since 2015. Even a police unit that was responsible for wiretapping for serious criminal offences was equipped with facial recognition software.

The provider, Briefcam, explained to the journalists that the authorities from more than 100 French cities are using the software.

The potential implementation of facial recognition has raised concerns even for the authorities themselves. In May 2023, an employee of the General Directorate of the National Police (DNSP) pointed out that it was forbidden to use facial recognition outside of strict legal boundaries. According to the report, already in 2020 a police officer wrote a message that it would be better to not speak about the usage of Briefcam – because it had not been registered with Data Protection Authorities.

However, the Ministry of the Interior wants to continue using the software, Disclose reports. According to Disclose, the expiring software license has already been approved for an extension – and was financed by funds that were confiscated in connection with drug trafficking. These funds should actually be used in the fight against drug trafficking and addiction prevention.

Data Protection Authorities and Ministry of the Interior announce investigation

The General Directorate of the National Police did not respond to inquiries about the situation, according to Disclose. The French Data Protection Authority (CNIL) stated that they have no information about any potential use of Briefcam software.

After publishing the report, the authorities stated on X, formerly Twitter, that an investigation had started.

The French Minister of the Interior, Gérald Darmanin, also told the newspaper Ouest France on Friday that he ordered an investigation for the claims.

The civil rights organisation, La Quadrature du Net, called the disclosure “shocking”. Leading members of the General Directorate of the National Police as well as the Minister consciously remained silent out of fear for controversy, knowing full well that with the practice they were outside the law.

Additionally, the NGO complains that the envisioned control mechanisms from the Data Protection Authorities to the police internal audit committee would not have worked. Furthermore, financing Briefcam software with “drug competition funds” could be considered misappropriation of public funds, based on the assessment from La Quadrature du Netz.

Philippe Latombe, French member of parliament and board member Data Protection Authority, CNIL, told the news website, Euractiv: “The real question is: How is facial recognition done and by whom?”. As matters stand, the police apparently used Briefcam software for subsequent investigations – potentially facial recognition as well. However, this was done under the supervision of a judge. There are also other scenarios: In the worst case faces were compared without judicial supervision. Latombe viewed as a serious violation of existing laws. (js)

USA: Hackers harvest data from 1.3 million people

2023-11-16T17:31:00+01:00

Criminals in the U.S. state of Maine have harvested sensitive data from more than a million people. The attacks are said to have resulted from security vulnerabilities in the software, MOVEit.

Companies in Germany were also affected by the security vulnerabilities in the MOVEit software that were exploited in Maine.(Source: IMAGO / agefotostock)

Hackers stole sensitive personal data from residents in the U.S. state of Maine. The local government confirmed this on Thursday. According to them, about 1.3 million people were affected – almost the entire population of Maine.

As the local government in Maine communicated, data such as names, social security numbers, birth dates, driver’s licenses and tax identification numbers were stolen in the attack. The stolen data differs from person to person – residents of Maine are to call a hotline to find out which data of theirs has been stolen.

In addition, for some individuals “certain types of medical information” and health insurance data may have been obtained from the theft.

In particular, social security numbers and driver’s licenses are sensitive information as they can also be used as a proof of identity – therefore, criminals could use these details for identity theft. The Social Security Administration warns that every year millions of Americans are victims of identity theft. Criminals can also find out additional information about those affected with the help of social security numbers.

Global attacks resulting from MOVEit security vulnerabilities

As a background to the attack, there were known security vulnerabilities in the data transfer software MOVEit since the end of May – the software has since been updated. The attack on systems in Maine occurred at the end of May. The MOVEit server was taken offline, updates were installed and external IT security experts were consulted. A subsequent investigation has now been completed so that residents could be notified of the data theft.

Across the globe, numerous organisations were attacked using the security vulnerabilities. As the news agency Bloomberg reported this past week, criminals accessed more than 630,000 email addresses at the U.S. Justice Department and parts of the Defense Department.

Additionally, criminals in U.S. states Louisiana and Oregon harvested data from millions of driver’s licenses. Sensitive data from millions of people was also taken from a service provider, Maximus, used by the U.S. government – including social security numbers and health data.

In Germany, it was also made known that security vulnerabilities in MOVEit were exploited to access data from the service provider, Majorel. Through their subsidiary company, Kontowechsel24.de, the provider wants to make it easier for bank customers to change from one financial institution to another. In the attack, data was stolen from thousands of customers from Deutsche Bank, Postbank as well as the direct banks ING and Comdirect.

Even the German price comparison website, Verivox, as well as an external service provider of Barmer-Krankenkasse (Barmer Health Insurance), exploited MOVEit vulnerabilities and stole personal data.

Data stolen from millions of people

The German Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) issued a security warning in the beginning of June and stated in it that there was a “need for immediate action” – the updates already made available by the manufacturer should be installed “promptly”.

According to data from the IT security company, Emsisoft, more than 2,500 organisations and the data from more than 69 million people have been affected. Among other things, the company analysed data leak reports and stock market reports for their statistics. (js)

New Delhi: Traffic restrictions and schools closing due to smog

2023-11-10T08:25:00+01:00

Due to the highly polluted air in India’s capital, New Delhi, traffic has now been restricted there. The city has some of the worst air quality in the world.

According to WHO estimates, seven million people die prematurely each year as a result of air pollution. There is currently thick fog in New Delhi (photo from 4 November). (Source: IMAGO / Hindustan Times)

Due to ongoing air pollution, the Indian capital, New Delhi, will restrict traffic this coming week. Schools have already been closed.

The air quality in the metropolis of Delhi, which also includes the capital, New Delhi, has already reached critical levels this past week. Now the capital city wants to take action against the increasing smog by restricting traffic. Starting next week, private cars may only be used depending their license plate. Cars with license plates ending even or odd numbers will drive on alternate days as Gopal Rai, Minister for Environment, announced on Monday. For now, these measures will be in effect until 20 November. According to the German Press Agency, this regulation is usually implemented in the capital when air pollution is particularly bad.

Primary schools remain closed for the time being

Additionally, primary schools were initially closed for two days in the city already at the end of last week. These measures have now been extended until 10 November. Students in higher grades are to attend courses online. An exception is only to be made for students in 10th and 12th grade who need to prepare for upcoming, important exams, Rai announced.

At the moment, construction sites must also be shut down due to the air pollution in the megametropolis. Furthermore, the city administration is having vehicles sprinkle water which should settle dust.

The fine dust pollution in and around New Delhi is one of the highest in the world – and is particularly intense in winter.

According to the Swiss company, IQAir, that monitors air quality globally, the “Air Quality Index” of the metropolis reached a level of over 400 on Tuesday afternoon – and therefore was put into the “hazardous” category.

Based on data from US authorities, a value between 0 and 50 is good and a value above 100 is already unhealthy. Initially, this only affects specific groups of people. The risk of health effects is increased for all people starting at values above 200. Values above 301 are considered as “hazardous”.

According to IQAir, the concentration of fine particles (PM 2.5) was about 60 times over the threshold set by the World Health Organization (WHO), which actually stipulates a maximum exposure of 5 micrograms per cubic meter. Fine particles labelled as PM 2.5 are those with a diameter of less than 2.5 micrometres. These particles can partly penetrate into the pulmonary alveoli and the bloodstream. Among other things, long-term exposure to fine particles can also lead to cardiovascular diseases and lung cancer.

WHO lowered the recommended threshold in 2021 because studies showed how much air pollution affects health. Next to climate change, air pollution is one of the largest environmental threats for human health, according to the organisation.

Based on a study by the Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago, air pollution could lower the life expectancy of Indians by up to to nine years.

Farmers burn remaining crops

The triggers for the smog in New Delhi and surrounding area include exhaust from automobiles, industry as well as dust from construction sites and waste incineration. Furthermore, farmers in surrounding states are currently burning their remaining crops despite a ban so that they can cultivate plants again quickly and cost-effectively.

Additionally, the important Hindu festival of lights, Diwali, is happening this weekend and many people will celebrate with fireworks despite the air pollution.

Ann Harrison, Amnesty International’s Climate Advisor, explains that the current situation in Delhi did not happen without warning signs – it is due to the government’s “repeated failure to protect” and people from exposure and would risk violating human rights to life and health.

She said: “Climate change and air quality are inextricably linked as the same pollutants that cause climate change harm air quality – putting at risk people’s rights to life and to health, as well as the right to a healthy environment.” Additionally, she criticised that population groups like daily-wage labourers or those with less access to healthcare are particularly affected by the risks. According to media reports (German article) many inhabitants of New Delhi are currently suffering from respiratory problems, coughing or headaches.

Harrison called on the Indian government as well as local governments to become more involved in order to implement their plan of action against pollution. (dpa / js)

Great Britain: Police to use facial recognition when searching for shoplifters

2023-11-03T08:10:00+01:00

In the Great Britain, retailers and the police want to take action against shoplifting together. The Police plan to use facial recognition in doing so.

Policing Minister, Chris Philp (pictured), called on the police to use facial recognition more frequently.(Source: IMAGO / ZUMA Wire)

The British police are to increase the use of facial recognition technology in the future to also search for shoplifting offenders. This is in part to be financed by retail groups. However, criticism has been made about these plans.

The UK Home Office officially presented a cooperation called “Project Pegasus” this past week. Among other things, it is planned for police to prioritise patrols to retail shops when violence is involved with staff in shoplifting cases or if offenders have been detained by security guards. Additionally, police are also to patrol areas that are seen as hot spots for theft. Furthermore, a new police unit is to be established that will be located in the department for organised crime gangs.

“Project Pegasus” is a jointly financed partnership between the Home Office and 13 retailers, including Primark, Marks & Spencer and the supermarket chain Co-op. In total, all parties involved have agreed on £840,000 for funding – according to BBC, the retailers alone have paid about £800,000.

However, clear criticism is now being voiced because the police are also to deploy facial recognition technology for investigations of shoplifting. As the Home Office communicated, retailers are to deliver CCTV recordings to the authorities. Afterwards, the images are to be compared using the help of facial recognition with the Police National Database in order to identify offenders. According to a report published in May by the organisation, Big Brother Watch, there are more than 16 million photos in this database. These photos are uploaded by individual departments, for example, when people are detained and processed for identification purposes.

Protests from human rights organisations

As the Guardian reported on Saturday, 14 human rights organisations – including Amnesty International, Liberty and Big Brother Watch – have now called on the retailers to withdraw from from the project. They warn that existing inequalities could become amplified through the use of facial recognition.

Among other things, the organisations criticise that facial recognition software often incorrectly recognises people with dark skin. This could lead to already marginalised groups being more likely to be stopped and checked by the police or to be monitored by retail employees in shops while they shop.

In the USA, for example, several cases were made public where Black people were wrongly accused of crimes after facial recognition systems had identified them incorrectly.

Additionally, the British organisations also call on the government to stop the project and fight the cause of shoplifting instead. From their perspective, the primary causes are poverty and the increasing cost of living. “The reality is that we cannot police and surveil our way out of a cost of living crisis, low wages, an inadequate social security system, soaring housing costs and rocketing food prices,” explained the NGOs according to the Guardian report.

As reported by the BBC, the police in England and Wales registered 365,164 cases of shoplifting between January and June 2023 – this is an increase of 25 percent compared to the previous year period. However, the numbers are still below the level before the coronavirus pandemic. Nevertheless, some retailers speak of a “shoplifting epidemic.” According to reports, there has been repeated criticism of the lack of a police presence in this context. Activists counter, however, that the current rise of theft can be attributed to the rising cost of living – people are stealing out of desperation.

NGOs criticise the lack of a legal basis

Emmanuelle Andrews of the human rights organisation, Liberty, explained to the Guardian that the use of facial recognition technology in supermarkets and other stores threatens the rights of individuals – and have “no place on our streets or in our shops.”

Additionally, according to the Guardian, activists criticise that there is no legal basis for the use of facial recognition by the police. In South Wales, a court ruled in 2020 that the use of the technology by the police there goes against the right to privacy and was, therefore, unlawful.

By contrast, the British Policing Minister, Chris Philp, wants to expand the use of the technology. As the Home Office communicated on Sunday, the police should double the amount of retroactive facial recognition searches by May 2024. Live facial recognition is also to be implemented on a larger scale.

Madeleine Stone from the NGO Big Brother Watch described live facial recognition to the Guardian as a “dystopian mass surveillance tool.” The organisation has criticised the use of the technology for a long time. (js)