Showing posts with label ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION. Show all posts

Friday, February 22, 2013

34 UNIVERSITIES ASK TO FLY SPY DRONES



http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/34-universities-ask-to-fly-spy-drones/





  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
A 2012 list off applicants for Federal Aviation Administration permission to fly drones overhead shows 34 universities want to operate the spy machines.
The list posted online by the Electronic Frontier Foundation also shows that the FBI, the city of Herington, Kan., the Mesa, Colo., sheriff’s office, the U.S. Air Force and U.S. Army, and the Forest Service applied for permission.
Also the U.S. Department of State, now run by John Kerry, as well as the Department of Energy, U.S. Marines and U.S. Navy also applied.
The educational requests were highlighted in a report by CampusReform.org, which said most of the requests were for “academic research.”
But EFF spokeswoman Rebecca Jeschke told Campus Reform  concerns remain about privacy.
“I think it is really important that no matter what you are using the drones for that there is an appropriate privacy policy,” she said. “You should think through what happens if you catch someone on video. How long do you keep that video? Do you cut that part out before you save it? What if someone is caught on camera doing something embarrassing.”
She also said schools need to let students know if they are being recorded and why.
Campus Reform reported just a few weeks earlier on a failed request from Georgia Tech University’s policy agency for such a permit to “follow individuals” and “locate threats.”
But bigger questions raised by the EFF are how many drones are in operation over the U.S., and what are they doing.
In a posting this week, EFF said some reports indicate the FAA has issued 1,428 permits to fly drones over the U.S. since 2007.
“This new number points out again how difficult it is to answer the most common questions EFF gets from reporters about drones – just how many agencies have applied for drone licenses?” wrote EFF’s Jennifer Lynch. “How many licenses has the FAA issued since it started issuing licenses … and how much has domestic drone use increased over the years?”
The EFF report said it’s really impossible to answer.
“We’ve been tracking drone flights in the United States for several years now through our two Freedom of Information Act lawsuits against the Federal Aviation Administration, and we currently have more information on domestic drone flights than anyone other than the FAA. But thanks to discrepancies among various drone numbers the FAA has released – to EFF, to the Government Accountability Office and to members of Congress – it’s anyone’s guess exactly how much drone authorizations have increased over the years,” the report said.
What has been made available is that in July 2010, the FAA said there were 71 experimental certificates active. Then, in April 2012, the FAA said 61 public “proponents” had applied for drone licenses. Three months later the GAO said the FAA had issued 201 Certificates of Authorization to 106 local, state and federal entities.
Last September, the GAO said from Jan. 1 to July 13, the FAA “issued 342 COAs to 106 federal, state, and local government entities.” In the same month the FAA told members of Congress 228 public drone license “sponsors” had a current, expired or disapproved COA.
In January, then, the FAA said 81 public drone license proponents had applied between July 2011 and October 2012. This month, the GAO reported the FAA has issued 1,428 permits since January 2007.
“There are other discrepancies,” the EFF report said. “Of the 228 entities on the list released to Reps. Markey and Barton in September 2012, at least 28 are not on either of the lists the FAA provided to EFF.”
They include disparate groups such as the Colorado Department of Transportation; El Dorado, Kan.; Minnesota’s Becker Soil & Water Conservation District; and the Texas Rangers.
“Is it that the FAA, itself, doesn’t know because it hasn’t kept track of its own program?” the EFF report questioned.
In just the past few weeks, the London Daily Mail reported the U.S. Air Force is developing fly-size drones that can sneak up on someone and execute him. The report said it was a project was of the Air Vehicles Directorate, a research center, that was working with Micro Air Vehicles.
The Hill also recently reported that 18 states have considered plans that would restrict the use of drones because of civil liberty and private protection concerns.

.99 

Thursday, August 30, 2012

Is this the kind of big brother school system we want?


A rebellion is developing in Texas against a plan by a school district in San Antonio that would monitor the exact location and activities of all students at all times through RFID chips they are being ordered to wear.
Katie Deolloz, a member of Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering, told WND today that parents and students from San Antonio’s Northside Independent School District confronted the school board last night, stating their concerns about privacy and other issues “clearly and passionately.”
A “position paper” from groups including the American Civil Liberties Union, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Big Brother Watch, Citizens’ Council for Health Freedom, Constitutional Alliance, Freedom Force International, Friends of Privacy USA, the Identity Project and Privacy Activism said no students should be subjected to the “chipping” program “unless there is sufficient evidence of its safety and effectiveness.”
“Children should never be used as test subjects for technology, no matter what their socio-economic status. If schools choose to move forward without complete information and are willing to accept the associated liability, they should have provisions in place to adhere to the principles of fair information practices and respect individuals’ rights to opt out based on their conscientious and religious objections,” the statement said.
The paper said RFID tracking is dehumanizing, since it can “monitor how long a student or teacher spends in a bathroom stall.”
The plans also violate free speech and association, since the presence of a tracking device “could dissuade individuals from exercising their rights to freedom of thought, speech and association. For example, students might avoid seeking counsel when they know their RFID tags will document their presence at locations like counselor and School Resource Officer offices.”
It argued that the technology also violates religious freedom and could be subject to unauthorized use.
“While RFID systems may be developed for use in a school, the RFID tags may be read covertly anywhere by anyone with the right reading device. Since RFID reading devices work by silent, invisible radio waves and the reading devices can be hidden, unauthorized or covert uses can be nearly impossible to detect,” the report said.
“A student’s location could be monitored from a distance by a jealous girlfriend or boyfriend, stalker, or pedophile.”
The San Antonio plan was reported by Spychips, a website run by RFID expert Katherine Albrecht and Liz McIntyre.
“San Antonio’s Northside Independent School District plans to incorporate RFID tags into mandatory student ID cards. One school district in Brazil has incorporated the tracking tags into uniforms. In both cases, the goal is to keep students, teachers and staff under constant surveillance,” the report said.
“RFID is used to track factory inventory and monitor farm animals,” said Albrecht, director of CASPIAN and co-author of “Spychips.” “Schools, of all places, should be teaching children how to participate in a free democratic society, not conditioning them to be tracked like cattle. Districts planning to use RFID should brace themselves for a parent backlash, protests, and lawsuits.”
According to the San Antonio newspaper, all students in the district’s John Jay High School and Anson Jones Middle School would be subject to chipping.
At that point, Supt. Brian Woods said, “We want to harness the power of (the) technology to make schools safer, know where our students are all the time in a school, and increase revenues. … Parents expect that we always know where their children are, and this technology will help us do that.”
WOAI television reported district spokesman Pasqual Gonzalez said the two schools have a high rate of truancy, and the district could gain $2 million in state funding by improving attendance.
However, student Andea Hernandez, with support from her father, has decided to challenge the district’s plan. The station reported she has decided to wear an older photo ID.
“With a smart phone you can use the option to use your locator, but this, I can’t turn it off,” she said.
Protests have been launched in front of the schools, and local stations are reporting the controversy:
Albrecht said in a statement to supporters the issue now is before the school district, and protesters are awaiting the superintendent’s response.
“We don’t give up or give in,” she said.