Abuse of Power Thread (Cops, Governments, Etc.) - Part 1

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

If you want to post it and their is bad language I always just post the name of the vid so people can search it on YT

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

NYPD Officer Hacks NYPD in Ballsy Side-Hustle Scam

An NYPD officer has been arrested for hacking NYPD and FBI databases so he could pose as a lawyer and profit off tricking traffic victims.

Yehuda Katz, an NYPD Auxiliary Deputy Inspector based in Brooklyn, allegedly hacked into restricted databases and ran thousands of queries to find out enough information to start hardcore conning people:

The complaint further alleges that, after the defendant accessed the NYPD computer and law enforcement databases, he contacted individuals who had been involved in traffic accidents and falsely claimed to be, among others, an attorney with the fictitious "Katz and Katz law firm" who could assist them with potential legal claims. Letters sent by the defendant to accident victims included claims such as "I can advise you with 100% confidence that I can resolve this claim in your favor," and "My fee is 14 percent only when you collect. And I know that you will collect."​

Weird fact: Yehuda Katz, cop con artist, is actually not the most tech-savvy Yehuda Katz in the game. He shares a name with a prominent ex-Google computer engineer. (His moderate-to-high levels of Scam Swagger, however, are unmatched.)

Katz installed hidden electronics around the NYPD's Traffic Safety Office in the 70th precinct so he could effectively get his hack on. He set up a system so he could remotely control an office computer, and then installed a hidden camera to live-stream what was going on in the office over the internet, so he'd know when it was safe to log in.

Eventually someone in the office found his hidden camera, kicking off an internal investigation that led to his arrest. I know it's a Traffic Safety Office and not, like, an elite squad of investigators dedicated to fighting internal cybercrime, but how did no one notice that Katz had such an elaborate smattering of gadgets hidden around the office for so long?

http://gizmodo.com/nypd-officer-hacks-nypd-in-ballsy-side-hustle-scam-1692479948

Balls of steel on that cop

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

The DOJ Is Sneaking in a Policy That'd Crap All Over the 4th Amendment

The rules for how the Department of Justice tracks down criminals in the digital age are woefully arcane, but the DoJ's recent proposed changes to update those rules go way too far, using vague terms to grant sweeping remote search powers that would radically undermine the Fourth Amendment.

Under the auspices of probable cause, it'd give FBI agents the power to install tracking malware on computers all over the world, without telling people they've started surveillance. Even though it looks like a minor rule change, the proposal would make it much easier for FBI agents to get warrants on computers without first figuring out their exact location. It gives judges much more flexibility on handing out remote search warrants outside of their jurisdictions. And that would give federal agents way more power to search computers.

This proposal isn't just the DOJ being Big Brothery for no reason. Remote computer searches are difficult to execute right now and that's an obstacle for combating digital crime and hunting criminals who use anonymizing software. This is a real problem, and something that needs to be addressed. But not this way. This is like using a nuke instead of a sniper rifle, and it's going to blow up our privacy rights.

Hiding a privacy bomb under the veil of BORING

I'm not going to lie, I didn't think I'd ever write an article about a DOJ procedural change because frankly, that sounds like comically dull policy housekeeping. And comically dull is what they were going for: It's a lot easier to slip in a major expansion of power if no one cares enough to pay attention.

But this proposal is way too big not to notice, no matter how boring-sounding and rote the DOJ tries to make it.

"Basically, we think this is a substantive legal change masquerading as a mere procedural rule change," Electronic Frontier Foundation staff counsel Hanni Fakhoury told me via email. "The government is essentially pushing for approval of the idea that it should have the power to deploy malware and execute remote searches. To us, it seems like that's a decision Congress should make."

The vague language of these rules could galvanize an avalanche of covert government surveillance by making it totally OK in certain situations to search peoples' computers without ever letting them know. And that's a violation of the Bill of Rights hidden inside a wonky-sounding procedural adjustment.

Have warrant, will spy (and won't bother telling you)

Right now, law enforcement officials can get a warrant to search computers remotely, as long as they have probable cause. But, apart from rare, limited circumstances, they need to find the right jurisdiction to petition for a warrant, and they need to give notice of their searches to whoever they're investigating. Notice is an important part of our Fourth Amendment privacy right. It's generally not legal for FBI agents to search you and never tell you. Except this change would make it so.

"The rule itself would be an acknowledgement that remote access searches are valid without notice, without special justification," Electronic Privacy Information Center general counsel Alan Butler told me. "Notice is one of the essential procedural protections of the Fourth Amendment. Validating a rule that implies that notice will never happen does not comport with the Fourth Amendment."

No rights for zombies?

One of the primary reasons given for the DOJ's rule change is that it will help in hunting down botnets, or "robot networks." Criminals infect other peoples' computers with malware that lets them remotely control their machines; most of the time, people don't even know their computers got hijacked (hijacked computers are called "zombies"). Botnets can be huge and hard to trace, so the proposal is supposed to make things easier by giving law enforcement more room to search.

This is messed up because it'll allow law enforcement to dig around the computers that belong to the victims of botnets. So on top of getting invaded by criminals, now botnet victims would get invaded by the government too, without any heads up. And as botnets grow more sophisticated, the FBI and other law enforcement will have a hard time limiting the scope of their searches, since malware could spread to unexpected places. Oh, and did I mention that even if your computer wasn't directly part of a botnet, but had a tangential connection, it could be fair game for covert searches?

Basically, if you have a computer that is in any way vulnerable to a botnet, you have a computer that'll be vulnerable to the FBI installing tracking software on your zombified computer, and that software could poke around any number of personal files trying to sniff out other malware. This gives the government an excuse to play cat-and-mouse with cybercriminals using your laptop as the game board.

The Fourth Amendment should matter more to the government

To make matters worse, the FBI won't have to confirm that a computer is within the US before it starts digging. If someone is using Tor and there's no way to figure out where their computer is actually located, the rule change will let agents search first, without notification. And if it turns out a computer is in, say, Iceland? Well, the search will already be carried out, sovereignty be damned.

That's going to piss off other countries. This whole thing is a mess.

A mess that might become official business, and soon: Judicial committee has already approved of the changes to what's known as Rule 41. Since the proposal got its first approval, it's now subject to a review by something called the Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure. From there, the Supreme Court will have a look, and unless Congress acts, the changes could go into effect as soon as December 2016.

In response to a deluge of comments arguing against the new rules, the DOJ issued a memo that said groups that saw this as an expansion of warrant powers as "misreading the text of the proposal or misunderstanding the current law." Right.

Just as Congress pushed through the Patriot Act by using terrorism as a catchall bogeyman, proposals like these are using fear of faceless, havoc-wreaking cybercriminals to justify invasive and unconstitutional changes. It's important to contest these changes loudly and to push for big power expansions like this to at least be debated in Congress and not pushed through by the very agencies that will benefit from looser privacy rules.

http://gizmodo.com/the-doj-is-sneaking-in-a-policy-thatd-crap-all-over-the-1692253192

Well this is certainly a disturbing development

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

The Government Is Testing Myriad Invasive Biometric Surveillance Methods

Government agencies are currently in the process of secretly testing new surveillance and monitoring at points of entry into the United States, according to leaked documents obtained by Motherboard. You're going to want to hear about this.

The leaks detail three programs that use different parts of your body to identify you. One of the "biometric recognition" programs is currently underway at Washington Dulles International Airport, while the other two are planned experiments.

Facial recognition in Washington, D.C.

According to Motherboard, US Customs launched a secret facial recognition program at Dulles Airport outside Washington on March 11th. For the next two to three months, officers will randomly select travelers and take their photo as part of the "1:1 Facial Recognition Air Entry Pilot." The snapped photo will be run through a facial recognition algorithm and compared to the photo stored on the chip in their passport. The officer will be given a "match confidence score," which they can use to determine whether a person needs additional inspection to confirm their identity.

The whole program, including a subsequent evaluation period, will run a total of 19 months.

Fingerprint scans in Atlanta

Meanwhile, a forthcoming "Biometric Exit (BE) Mobile Experiment" at Atlanta-Hartsfield International Airport will use handheld devices to record both the entrance and exit of people from the United States. According to Motherboard's reporting, this is most likely a fingerprint scanner. The goal of the program is to "confirm with certainty that a foreigner traveler has departed the United States."

Iris scans and facial recognition at the US-Mexico border

But wait, there's more. Customs and Border Patrol will be installing iris scanners and facial recognition cameras at entry kiosks in several locations at the US-Mexico border. It's called the "Pedestrian Biometric Experiment," and according to leaked documents, the biometric scanning will be limited to the entry and exit of the Otay-Mesa border point at the United States-Mexico border to start. That'll be coupled with increased biographical info—i.e. your passport info—to track entrances and exits across the border.

It appears the purpose of this study is to test the systems we have for enhanced data collection at the border. What kind of threats do they want to target? It's pretty vague.

What do we make of it?

OK, so these are just tests, but the bigger picture is that increased data collection and surveillance is increasingly the norm across government agencies. In the coming years we'll certainly see technologies of this sort implemented everywhere—not just at borders, but on the street and at government buildings. Pervasive surveillance and data capture will be the norm.

If you find that upsetting, you should! But it's not clear what can be done to stop it.

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/le...-upcoming-biometric-experiments-at-us-customs

Well this is a scary prospect

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Here's a good article from the guys over at Cracked

http://www.cracked.com/article_22208_6-things-i-learned-broke-police-force-in-lawless-town.html

 

[Slushy]

So after being in San Francisco for the past month, I got a notice in the mail for with blurry pictures of my face and car running a red light according to a traffic camera. It was actually yellow when I crossed the intersection.

I refuse to pay the $480 fine and was willing to contest it when I realized it was a fake ticket as evidenced by it saying

This is not a ticket.

and

Do not contact court.

Its a trick to get you to admit to the accused crime and shell out a lot of money so I'm not going to respond and the police can't do sh** about it.

Thank you, Google!

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

That's pretty shady. They stopped issuing tickets from the street cams here in FL because there is a law on the books which states any citations have to be witnessed by an officer

 

[Docker2.0]

You had me until you said Florida. Florida sucks!

Kidding, I'm actually from the Tallahassee area and miss it. But there have been a ton of crazy stories coming out of that state lately. Also, NJ has banned the traffic cameras as well so we shouldn't be getting any more tickets but I believe they will be back. There's way to much money to be made from it. Politicians are all crooks!

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

I lived in Tallahassee for awhile, fun town. Tons of hotties there. Funny thing is if it wasn't for FSU that town would be nothing haha

 

[Docker2.0]

FSU, FAMU, TCC......Panama City around the corner.........those were the good old days!

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

I used to be the assistant production manager at the Moon out there. FAMU nights were always crazy haha

 

[Docker2.0]

I remember the Moon! The only club in town for miles! Good ole times!

 

[Asgard]

So after being in San Francisco for the past month, I got a notice in the mail for with blurry pictures of my face and car running a red light according to a traffic camera. It was actually yellow when I crossed the intersection.

I refuse to pay the $480 fine and was willing to contest it when I realized it was a fake ticket as evidenced by it saying and

Its a trick to get you to admit to the accused crime and shell out a lot of money so I'm not going to respond and the police can't do sh** about it.

Thank you, Google!

What the hell? Are cops allowed to do this?

 

[Teelie]

It isn't so much the cops as it is whoever they leased the cameras from I think. The cameras have been found to be so ineffective and defective in many cities that they are no longer being used and contracts allowed to expire on them. The main company behind them is on the verge of bankruptcy so it doesn't surprise me such tactics are being tried.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Woman Allegedly Sent to Psych Ward for Saying Obama Follows Her Twitter

A Long Island woman claims she was drugged and locked in a hospital psych ward for 8 days because a doctor didn't believe Barack Obama followed her on Twitter.

Kamilah Brock's lawyer told the New York Daily News that the horrible ordeal started last September when the NYPD pulled her over in Harlem and seized her BMW after accusing her of being high on marijuana. Her lawyer says no weed was found in the car.

Brock, 32, says that when she went to the station to get her vehicle back the next day, she was forcibly sedated and sent to Harlem Hospital as an "emotionally disturbed" person. She admits she may have acted emotional, but denies the "disturbed" part.

She says she told doctors that she works at a bank and that the president follows her on Twitter—both of which are true, and neither of which the doctors believed. According to her lawsuit, they thought she was delusion and bipolar, so they sedated her and kept her in treatment for more than a week.

According to the NYDN, Harlem Hospital's treatment plan for Brock read, "Objective: Patient will verbalize the importance of education for employment and will state that Obama is not following her on Twitter," and "patient's weaknesses: inability to test reality, unemployment."

In reality, Barack Obama's Twitter account—which is not actually run by President Obama, or even the White House—follows 640,000 people, including Brock. One way to "test" that reality might have been to look at Brock's Twitter account, which is public.

Brock's employment is also pretty easy to verify. She posted several photos on her Instagram account last year, when she apparently worked at Citibank, showing company emails announcing the most productive personal bankers of the month. She was proud to be consistently at the top of the list.

She now works for Astoria Bank.

But instead attempting to confirm what she was telling them, Brock's lawyer says, the hospital made her go through 8 days of group therapy and dosed her with lorazepam, lithium, and sedatives.

She says when she finally got out, nobody told her why they were releasing her. She did get a $13,000 medical bill, though.

New York City's Law Department told the Daily News they're current reviewing Brock's lawsuit.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...ch-ward-obama-twitter-claim-article-1.2159049

That is seriously messed up

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Yup, Police Can Search License Plate Scans to Find Your Favorite Bar

The license plate reader (LPR) cameras installed in most cities allow police to track cars and their drivers who are potentially engaged in criminal activities. But depending on the way police store the data, as Ars Technica found out, anyone might be able to access this information.

We've been following this story closely, from the ACLU's report on how police departments collect data to a federal DEA-sponsored program that likely has millions of plates (probably yours!) in its database. Over at Ars Technica, Cyrus Farivar managed to use California's Public Records Act to obtain 4.6 million scans of 1.1 million unique plates from the Oakland Police Department after attempting to find out how his own car had been tracked by several police departments.

To illustrate just how much information police are gathering on the cars in their city, Farivar enlisted data visualization designer Mike Tahani to take the 18 Excel documents from OPD and build a tool which plotted all the geotagged scans on a map, allowing him to search the scans by plate number. Farivar then went to city councilmembers and asked them if he had permission to run their plates through the tool. For those who complied, the data told quite a complete picture of their movement through the city: Scans were clustered around their homes and workplaces—even their favorite restaurants and bars.

The scanning of plates isn't really the issue. Police have used these kinds of surveillance techniques for years, and were manually tracking cars and plates long before cameras. The problem is that all this data is accumulating at police departments, and very little of it is being used to bust criminals. The "hit rate" is less than one percent in most cities. Yet police often refuse to destroy the other 99.5 percent of the information because they claim it might be used in ongoing or future investigations. The ACLU thinks that 48 hours is an adequate amount of time to search and scrub the data, which would eliminate the problem of anyone being able to access it later, much in the way Ars Technica has illustrated it can be.

Meanwhile, tens of thousands of cameras are rolling, collecting and storing one of the largest databases in the country of very personal, highly specific location-based information. If Farivar could access the data for his journalistic experiment, then anyone could do the same for more nefarious purposes. It's scary to think what might happen to this data the wrong hands.

http://gizmodo.com/yup-police-can-search-license-plate-scans-to-find-your-1693366576

It's amazing how fast cameras popped up all around us and record us 24/7 and yet nobody seems to mind

 

[Tempest]

So...Not sure if this fits, since it's not the government, but it is about the ultimate abuse of power.

I also can't link to the article, because it contains some text messages that are so graphic, I don't think they can actually be posted on here.

Spoiler

Basically, a woman who was a babysitter for friends and coworkers and such, spent her time sexually abusing the children in her care. She took photos. Then she texted pictures and details of the assaults to her boyfriend. Who really enjoyed them, and gave her ideas, encouragement, and gratitude for sharing with him.

They also shared a fantasy of wanting to kidnap and rape a four-year-old girl.

The worst part? This has been going on for nearly three years.

If anyone wants to read the article, google Ashley Dack, Texas babysitter. I do want to stress, however, that some articles may contain the actual text messages, which, as I mentioned previously, are extremely graphic and disturbing.

So...that kind of broke me for the evening. I am going to play Baldur's Gate until I'm too tired to stay up any more.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Dear God that's horrific. And yes it fits here, you can post any kind of abuse of power here not just government stuff, but man that's disturbing. I hope anyone involved with that gets a life sentence.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Pennsylvania Cop Charged with Homicide After Shooting Unarmed Man

On Tuesday, a Hummelstown, Pennsylvania police officer was charged with homicide in the shooting death of an unarmed man, The Associated Press reports. Officer Lisa J. Mearkle stands accused of shooting David Kassick, 59, twice in the back as he lay on the ground after a traffic stop.

From the AP's report:

Authorities said Mearkle had attempted to pull over Kassick for expired inspection and emissions stickers before he sped away. She caught up to Kassick near his sister's home where he had been living for a short time.

He got out and ran before Mearkle incapacitated him with a stun gun, held in her left hand. He was on the ground when she shot him twice in the back with the gun in her right hand, police said.

Mearkle, 36, told investigators she fired because he would not show her his hands and she thought he was reaching into his jacket for a gun. Perry said she did not know Kassick before the shooting.​

A 15-year-veteran of the Hummelstown Police Department, Mearkle had never fired her weapon in the line of duty before, her attorney, Brian Perry, said at a press conference. "[Mearkle] did what she felt she had to do."

According to the AP, the arrest affidavit describes the video thusly: "At the time Officer Mearkle fires both rounds from her pistol, the video clearly depicts Kassick lying on the snow covered lawn with his face toward the ground... Furthermore, at the time the rounds are fired nothing can be seen in either of Kassick's hands, nor does he point or direct anything toward Officer Mearkle."

District Attorney Ed Marsico said that the stun gun contained a camera that recorded a 1.5-minute video of the incident. In it, the DA said, it appears that Kassick was trying to remove the stun-gun probe from his back. Marsico called the shooting death "a tragedy for all involved."

"Mr. Kassick is now dead as a result of a traffic stop, a routine traffic stop," one of the victim's family's attorneys, Christopher Slusser, said. "He should not be dead. He should not have died as a result of that traffic stop. And the manner in which he was shot—you can infer from that what you will."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/24/lisa-j-mearkle-charged_n_6934540.html

Glad to see she is being held accountable for her actions

 

[Kar]

Cops Shown Violently Beating Black Man During Traffic Stop

 

[Asgard]

Cops Shown Violently Beating Black Man During Traffic Stop

What a bunch of thugs. You have to watch the video to see how viciously that one cop punched his head for absolutely no reason.

They also lied numerous times about Dent's actions to make their assault seem justified.

 

[Tempest]

Pennsylvania Cop Charged with Homicide After Shooting Unarmed Man

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/24/lisa-j-mearkle-charged_n_6934540.html

Glad to see she is being held accountable for her actions

Hopefully this isn't an over-reaction to all the protests that have been going on, and that this is a justified prosecution.

Also, I just want to point out how ridiculous the statement is from the family attorney. This wasn't ever a routine traffic stop. Routine traffic stops do not involve a person fleeing from the police.

The shooting may not have been justified, but come on. He didn't die because of a traffic stop; he died because he ran and made himself look suspicious. Every action he took after that had the officer on high alert.

Assuming that there is evidence that he actually fled the scene when he was initially pulled over. I don't see any reports that mention if that part was verified or not.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Are Colombian Prostitutes Part of Some Sort of Government Benefit Plan?

Secret Service agents: not the only government men letting it all hang loose in Colombia. Turns out their DEA brothers from another budget also have a habit of flying south for a little DCP&P (drug cartel parties and prostitutes).

In fact, the two agencies are intricately linked in the growing scandal. According to a new DOJ report, a Secret Service agent reportedly told investigators he met one of the prostitutes at the heart of the hookers-and-blow scandal at an "informal" DEA party.

The details, via the Washington Post:

Drug Enforcement Administration agents allegedly had "sex parties" with prostitutes hired by local drug cartels overseas over a period of several years, according to a report released Thursday by the Justice Department's watchdog.

Seven of the 10 DEA agents alleged to have participated in the gatherings — most of which took place at an agent's "quarters" leased by the U.S. government — admitted to having attended the parties, the report found. The agents, some of whom had top secret security clearances, received suspensions of two to 10 days.

Former police officers in Colombia also alleged that three DEA supervisory special agents were provided with money, expensive gifts and weapons from drug cartel members, according to the report.​

The FBI, US Marshals Service, and ATF were also implicated in misconduct and harassment issues. In addition to the DEA suspensions, 10 Secret Service agents were fired or forced to resign.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...ce-3941fc548f1c_story.html?wprss=rss_homepage

Ya that war on drugs is working out so well

 

[KevanG]

Go DEA, yeesh. Gotta love how often these things come to light these days.

 

[DJ_KiDDvIcIOUs]

Amazon Forces Workers to Sign Sinister Non-Compete Agreements

If you take a temporary factory job at Amazon, you have to sign away your ability to work almost anywhere else, for 18 months after your gig is finished.

The Verge recently got one of the non-compete agreements Amazon makes its low-paid warehouse laborers sign, and they're absurdly vague and wide-reaching:

Amazon is requiring these workers — even seasonal ones — to sign strict and far-reaching noncompete agreements. The Amazon contract, obtained by The Verge, requires employees to promise that they will not work at any company where they "directly or indirectly" support any good or service that competes with those they helped support at Amazon, for a year and a half after their brief stints at Amazon end.​

Uh, Amazon sells pretty much everything. It sells Confederate flags! It sells gigantic tubs of lube! And it sells lots of normal things like books, furniture, clothes, beauty products, sports equipment. If you're banned from working at a company that "directly or indirectly" sells something that competes with Amazon, you're basically banned from working at most retailers. And for what?

In many industries, non-competes are standard on contracts. It's a way to make sure that people don't leak trade secrets when they switch employers. It'd be one thing if Amazon (and I'm sure Amazon does) made its highly skilled, full-time employees sign non-competes. But these are for people who are sometimes just signing on to make some extra cash over Christmas by moving stuff around the warehouse.

What secret Amazon sauce is the company afraid workers have gleaned from moving boxes around in a vast labyrinthine storage facility? There is none. These manual labor jobs are low-paying and designed for just about any able-bodied person to step into because they do not require advanced skills or subject knowledge. This isn't an example of a company looking to safeguard its secrets. It's an example of a company exerting control over a labor force because it can.

Amazon is known for "releasing" its seasonal workers without warning or explanation, so that adds a whole extra layer of trash sauce on this garbage policy.

If this blue-collar exploitation sounds familiar, you may be remembering how Jimmy John's made its sandwich-making employees sign non-competes in a similarly overreaching fashion. But at least Jimmy John's had the decency to limit the non-compete to other sandwich shops within three miles. Amazon's geographic boundaries for the non-compete are considerably bigger. Like, the whole world bigger:

Employee further recognizes that the geographic areas for many of Amazon's products and services — and, by extension, the geographic areas applicable to certain restrictions in this Section 4 — are extremely broad and in many cases worldwide.​

The only glint of a silver lining is that so far, there's not much evidence that Amazon is enforcing these agreements. As The Verge pointed out, Amazon has gone after its white-collar workers for skirting their non-competes, though, so it wouldn't be shocking if it took an aggressive stance with its warehouse workers too. I've asked Amazon what it's policy is on enforcing and will update if I hear back. (In some states, like California, non-competes aren't enforceable.)

http://www.theverge.com/2015/3/26/8280309/amazon-warehouse-jobs-exclusive-noncompete-contracts

Damn Amazon, you shady as hell