Inmates fly mobile phones, drugs and porn into jail - via drone

6-18-17 National:

While large companies like Amazon test drone delivery systems, inmates in jails across the country are already using the devices to receive their own aerial shipments: smuggled contraband.

Documents obtained from the Justice Department by USA TODAY through a Freedom of Information Act request uncovered more than a dozen attempts to transport contraband - including mobile phones, drugs and porn - into federal prisons in the past five years. State facilities have also reported similar incidents.

Experts say current anti-drone technologies fail to protect jails against the unmanned aerial devices that transport dangerous items, including firearms, which are almost impossible to sneak in via traditional prison smuggling methods.

"Civilian drones are becoming more inexpensive, easy to operate and powerful. A growing number of criminals seem to be recognizing their potential value as tools for bad deeds," said Troy Rule, a drone legislation advocate and Arizona State University law professor.

While smuggling contraband into prison through any method violates federal law, no statute currently bars drones from flying near correctional facilities. ..Continue..

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

How to Register a Drone

See also: Less than a third of holiday drones sold have been registered according to FAA

1-18-16 National:

The days of flying your drone through the sky moments after ripping it from the box, completely carefree and beyond the reach of Big Brother are coming to an end.

Drones have become one of the hottest new technologies, part toy, part tool—they were one of the hottest holiday gifts this year, and garnered plenty of coverage at CES. Their growing numbers, not to mention more than a few near-misses with commercial aircraft and even firefighters, prompted the Federal Aviation Administration to declare last month that consumer UAVs must be registered.

Owners have until February 19 to get with the program. Will government regulation of drones hurt their popularity? Will a $5 fee take some of the UAVs magic away? (Pro tip: Register before January 21 and it’s free!) Those are valid questions. But first, let’s talk about just who needs to register, and how.

The New Rules

If your drone weighs less than 0.55 pounds, you don’t need to register it. (You can find a list of drones that do and don’t require registration here.) There are a few more specifics, though, worth noting: ..Continued.. by Wired

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

FAA confirms that drone registry info will be public record

See also: Meet the world's smallest camera-equipped drone

1-7-16 National:

Cue the breathless outrage from privacy advocates.

The Federal Aviation Administration confirmed Friday afternoon that information logged in its fledgling UAV registry will be searchable by the general public -- just not initially. In an email to Forbes, an FAA spokesperson stated, "Until the drone registry system is modified, the FAA will not release names and address. When the drone registry system is modified to permit public searches of registration numbers, names and addresses will be revealed through those searches."

There has been some confusion over the matter as the FAA's registry FAQ states that the agency, the contractor that it hired to operate the registry and law enforcement which had led some to believe that only those three entities would have access to the information. However, the FAA did state in its Department of Transportation filing that "all records maintained by the FAA in connection with aircraft registered are included in the Aircraft Registry and made available to the public, except email address and credit card information submitted under part 48 [of the registry]." ..Source.. by Andrew Tarantola

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

You now have to get a license to use consumer-grade drones

So far our stories on drones can be found HERE and HERE

12-17-2015 Washington DC:

Drones — the consumer type often featured at Android Area, not the big spy machines the governments use — have exploded in popularity in recent years, and many people are taking to the skies to fly their own small air vehicles. These drones tend to be safe in responsible hands and haven’t caused many problems yet, but the FAA wants to get a handle on this thing in the early going before air space is dominated by people exercising their right to enjoy their hobby.

It is now required to register for a license to operate any drone that weighs between .55 and 55 pounds, which pretty much covers the entire gamut of technology available. The licenses cost $5 and last for 3 years, and if you register before January 20th you’ll get your money back (but is anyone really fretting over $5?).

Registration requires giving your name, email address and mailing address to the FAA, though those are also small prices to pay to ensure you can continue flying without a problem. It may be annoying, but the government typically doesn’t mess around when it comes to ensuring public safety, and their desire to start regulating drone usage is a natural step as the technology matures and becomes more popular. Registration begins December 21st, and you can do so right here. ..Source..

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

DOJ lays down some privacy rules for feds flying drones

5-24-15 National:

The Justice Department promises to keep a closer eye on how its agencies are using drones from now on -- after all, they can be useful in nabbing suspects, but they can also be used as a tool to abuse power. In its new five-page policy guidance, the department has listed when its agencies can and can't use drones, with a focus on people's right to privacy.

For instance, they can't be deployed to monitor activities protected by the First Amendment, such as peaceful protests. Authorities will also have to secure warrants to use the machines in places where the subject of investigation has "reasonable expectation of privacy." Obviously, the drones can only be used for authorized investigations and never for engaging in discriminatory acts.

n order to make sure the whole department follows these policies, the DOJ plans to train all its drone operators, subject its agencies to annual reviews by the deputy attorney general, and require them to keep logs of every drone flight. The department will then publish a flight summary from those logs on its website. At the moment, only the FBI has an operational drone program (reportedly with 17 machines and two pilots) within the DOJ, though the ATF has a suspended one it might relaunch in the future.

Now that the department's agencies finally have a concrete idea of what they can use drones for, they can get ones fit for the job instead of wasting so much money (again) on shoddy pieces of equipment. ..Source.. by Mariella Moon

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Creeps Embrace a New Tool: Peeping Drones

5-5-15 National:

State laws start taking aim at drone users who snoop on their neighbors

It was the blinking lights outside the 10th-story window of her San Jose, California, condo that startled Elsvette Buenaventura from her bed last year. When she drew back the curtain, a small drone hovered a few feet away. In the days that followed, it returned at least three more times.

Such stories have prompted lawmakers in a half-dozen U.S. states to outlaw the use of drones to snoop on people’s homes. More states are set to follow.

“We don’t know what he was looking for with his camera-drone,” said Buenaventura, 32. “All we felt was a violation of our privacy.”

For less than $1,000, small, remotely operated aircraft are increasingly available on the Internet and at hobby stores, and some can be equipped with equally affordable high-definition cameras. At the same time, some of America's biggest companies — names like Chevron Corp. and BNSF Railway Co. — are pushing to use drones for everything from pipeline inspection to land surveys. Their use has pushed lawmakers to weigh the rights of drone pilots against the potential for nefarious intrusions.

Camera-equipped drones have commercial uses — they can inspect crops, photograph real estate and survey land. As the government figures out how to regulate that activity, it has begun rapidly granting waivers from federal rules to drones-for-hire. Scores of companies have obtained permission to fly them.

Rules differ for mere enthusiasts. Officially, small drones may be flown only by hobbyists who belong to community-based organizations such as the Muncie, Indiana, Academy of Model Aeronautics and follow its rules. But growing numbers of non-members are sending them aloft.

Conflict is on the rise. A New Jersey man last year shot down a drone flying over his neighborhood. Last June, a woman in Connecticut was arrested after she was accused of assaulting a young man flying a helicopter drone over a public beach.

Privacy Right

In the past two years, at least seven states have outlawed the use of drones to violate privacy, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. California is considering a bill that would expand trespassing laws to include piloting a drone within 350 feet above private property without permission.

“Drones have a lot of potentially useful and extremely innovative uses,” said Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, the California Democrat who introduced the bill. “Invading our privacy and property without permission shouldn’t be among them. When we’re in our backyards, with our families, we have an expectation that we have a right to privacy.”

The states’ efforts come as the federal government is preparing regulations for commercial use, and companies such as Amazon.com Inc. consider using them to make deliveries, reshape farmland management and make industrial inspections.

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration has convened a group to devise suggested privacy guidelines.

Profound Misconception

Other legal concerns have arisen. More than a dozen states regulate when and whether a warrant is required before police use a drone to gather evidence, according to the American Civil Liberties Union. This year, 44 states are considering another 147 drone-related bills.

Drone enthusiasts say the regulations are misguided and that their actions are misinterpreted by a nervous public unfamiliar with the technology and its promise.

States already protect citizens against Peeping Toms regardless of the technology involved, said Brendan Schulman, an attorney who specializes in drones at Kramer Levin Naftalis and Frankel in New York.

“Many of these state law proposals are an overreaction, because existing state privacy laws already cover the types of misconduct that people are most concerned about,” he said. “It shouldn’t matter if you use a tripod or a zoom lens or a hidden camera placed in a tree. If you’re invading someone’s privacy, it’s the misconduct that should be illegal, and not the technology.”

Police Use

Schulman added that because of drones’ use by the military and police, there is a misconception about how people use drones and what the devices can do.

“As soon as you introduce a drone, there is an irrational reaction where people think that there is an invasion of privacy happening,” he said.

In Seattle last year, a woman called police to say a drone was spying into her 26th-floor apartment. In fact, a building developer had hired an aerial photography company to make images property nearby and wasn’t peeping into homes.

In another case, a man from Ulster, New York, was arrested in July and charged with a felony for flying a small, camera-equipped drone outside the windows of examination rooms at a medical office.

The man, David Beesmer, said in an interview that he had taken his mother to the office for an appointment and while he waited was flying his drone to capture images of the recently constructed building in the town, which is about 100 miles (160 kilometers) north of Manhattan.

Beesmer, a drone hobbyist and videographer, said he wanted to give the images to the property owner so they could be used in marketing materials. He insists he wasn’t peeping on people and that his camera isn’t capable of shooting through tinted glass windows. He is fighting the charges, which have been reduced to a misdemeanor.

“My mistake was not asking prior to shooting, and had I gone in and asked first, this would never have happened,” he said. “Of course simply because you now have a moving flying camera, it will make it more challenging to protect privacy from those who want to break your privacy.” by Michael B Marois

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

UN Human Rights Committee finds US in violation on 25 counts

4-24-2014 Global:

While President Obama told the country to “look forward, not backward” when it came to Bush’s torture program, the United Nations has taken a different route. Recently, the U.N. Human Rights Committee issued a report excoriating the United States for its human rights violations. It focuses on violations of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which the country is party.

The report mentions 25 human rights issues where the United States is failing. This piece will focus on a few of those issues – Guantanamo, NSA surveillance, accountability for Bush-era human rights violations, drone strikes, racism in the prison system, racial profiling, police violence and criminalization of the homeless.

Accountability for Bush-era crimes; torture

The U.N. committee expressed concerned with “the limited number of investigations, prosecutions and convictions of members of the Armed Forces and other agents of the U.S. government, including private contractors” for “unlawful killings in its international operations” and “torture” in CIA black sites during the Bush years. It welcomed the closing of the CIA black sites, but criticized the “meager number of criminal charges brought against low-level operatives” for abuses carried out under the CIA’s rendition, interrogation and detention program. The committee also found fault with the fact that many details of the CIA’s torture program “remain secret, thereby creating barriers to accountability and redress for victims.” ..Continued..This is a very large article and includes violations with respect to homeless folks.. by Adam Hudson

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Smartphones help catch a terror suspect

4-24-2013 National:

Editor's note: Gary C. Kessler is an associate professor of homeland security at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University in Daytona Beach, Florida, teaching cybersecurity and digital forensics, and president of Gary Kessler Associates, a mobile device forensics and cybersecurity practice, training and consulting company. Kessler is a member of the North Florida and Vermont Internet Crimes Against Children Task Forces.

(CNN) -- The Boston Marathon bombing investigation made use of crowdsourcing to collect photos and video from cell phones and surveillance cameras at an unprecedented level. These pictures were made public a little more than 72 hours after the explosions and the second suspect was arrested 29 hours later.

Forensics is the use of scientific or technical information to answer questions in a court of law. Digital forensics is the branch that focuses on the identification, acquisition and analysis of information found on digital devices: computers, cell phones, digital cameras or any computer-based system.

The concept of law enforcement posting photos of wanted individuals in a public place and asking for assistance is hardly new; walk into any post office and you will still see the FBI Most Wanted poster. Why the post office? Because it used to be the social center of a town, a place where the government and the people regularly came together.

Fast forward to 2013 and we have thousands of people taking pictures and videos of what everyone expected to be an every day event. Law enforcement agencies were able to use these images to observe the comings and goings of hundreds of people at a certain site at a certain time in order to detect a pattern of behavior with which to identify the two suspects. And most of this imagery came from private citizens.

Personal computers have been around for nearly 30 years. The Internet has been commercially available for 20 years. Mobile phones have been pervasive for more than 10 years and smartphones, in particular, for more than five. Computers, networks and cell phones have increasingly become the record keeper, instrument or target of criminal activity over the last few decades.

Smartphones are everywhere and offer the equivalent of a portable Internet terminal. Not only do cell phones contain a phone book, call history and text messages, but also Web browser history, email, Global Positioning System and other location information. And surprisingly high-quality pictures and video.

All of this information will be of value to investigators. They will want to know who the suspects might have been communicating with in the immediate aftermath of the bombings and, again, in the aftermath of their pictures being posted in the media. The larger investigation will undoubtedly examine their text and email messages, social media postings, Web sites visited and calls made over the last few months and years. This digital forensic evidence will help piece together patterns of behavior that could provide insights into the suspects' thoughts and deeds, and even provide new leads.

What does this mean for privacy rights? Consider that when a municipality wants to put up a new camera at an intersection, or purchase a drone, there is often a public outcry. Is the camera an invasion of privacy? Where will it be looking? How will the government use the data? How long will the data be kept? Will it be used to track my movements? At some level, these are good and important questions because this kind of discourse is necessary to frame our Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches.

Yet, in Boston, a lot of the images came not from public-sector cameras but from private-sector cameras: our fellow citizens. Fellow citizens who voluntarily shared their information so that law enforcement could do its job.

Were these people violating the rights of others by sharing their pictures? Well, no, considering that the Bill of Rights was intended to protect us against a tyrannical government rather than from each other. Indeed, it is not clear that the government could have compelled these citizens to turn over their pictures just in case they might be useful; imagine persuading a judge to sign a search warrant on such pure speculation. ...continued... by Gary Kessler

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...