ICE ‘now operates as a domestic surveillance agency,’ think tank says

Although it’s supposed to be restricted by surveillance rules at local, state and federal levels, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has built up a mass surveillance system that includes details on almost all US residents, according to a report from a major think tank. Researchers from Georgetown Law’s Center on Privacy and Technology said ICE “now operates as a domestic surveillance agency” and that it was able to bypass regulations in part by purchasing databases from private companies. 

“Since its founding in 2003, ICE has not only been building its own capacity to use surveillance to carry out deportations but has also played a key role in the federal government’s larger push to amass as much information as possible about all of our lives,” the report’s authors state. “By reaching into the digital records of state and local governments and buying databases with billions of data points from private companies, ICE has created a surveillance infrastructure that enables it to pull detailed dossiers on nearly anyone, seemingly at any time.”

The researchers spent two years looking into ICE to put together the extensive report, which is called “American Dragnet: Data-Driven Deportation in the 21st Century.” They obtained information by filing hundreds of freedom of information requests and scouring more than 100,000 contracts and procurement records.

The agency is said to be using data from the Department of Motor Vehicles and utility companies, along with the likes of call records, child welfare records, phone location data, healthcare records and social media posts. ICE is now said to hold driver’s license data for 74 percent of adults and can track the movement of cars in cities that are home to 70 percent of the adult population in the US.

The study shows that ICE, which falls under the Department of Homeland Security, has already used facial recognition technology to search through driver’s license photos of a third of adults in the US. In 2020, the agency signed a deal with Clearview AI to use that company’s controversial technology. In addition, the report states that when 74 percent of adults hook up gas, electricity, phone or internet utilities in a new residence, ICE was able to automatically find out their updated address.

The authors wrote that ICE is able to carry out these actions in secret and without warrants. Along with the data it acquired from other government departments, utilities, private companies and third-party data brokers, “the power of algorithmic tools for sorting, matching, searching and analysis has dramatically expanded the scope and regularity of ICE surveillance,” the report states.

Spending transactions reviewed by the researchers showed that, between 2008 and last year, ICE spent around $2.8 billion on “new surveillance, data collection and data-sharing initiatives.” It spent approximately $569 million on data analysis, including $186.6 million in contracts with Palantir Technologies to help it make sense of its vast troves of data. Records showed that ICE also spent more than $1.3 billion on geolocation tech during that timeframe and $389 million on telecom interception, which includes tech that helps the agency track someone’s phone calls, emails, social media activity and real-time internet use.

In addition, the findings suggest the agency started engaging in certain surveillance activities much earlier than previously believed. The researchers found a contract from 2008 that granted ICE access to the Rhode Island motor vehicle department’s facial recognition database. Prior to that, it was understood that ICE started conducting facial recognition searches on state and local data sets in 2013.

The authors claim that ICE has been able to sidestep congressional oversight and bypass attempts at state level to curtain its surveillance capabilities. They included a list of recommendations that may help rein in the agency’s surveillance dragnet, such as Congress reforming immigration laws to “undercut ICE surveillance authority” and blocking ICE’s use of DMV data. The recommended measures also include protecting people who trust federal, state and local authorities with their data and blocking the use of utility records for immigration enforcement.

Engadget has contacted ICE and the Department of Homeland Security for comment.

Elon Musk says he would ‘reverse’ Donald Trump’s Twitter ban

Elon Musk has finally confirmed what many have long suspected: that he would allow Donald Trump back on Twitter.

In an interview with The Financial Times, Musk said that he would reinstate Trump when his deal to acquire Twitter closes. “I guess the answer is that I would reverse the perma ban,” Musk said in response to a question about whether he would allow the former president back on the platform. “Obviously, I don’t own Twitter yet. So this is not a thing that will definitely happen because what if I don’t own Twitter.”

Though Musk has long made it clear he disagrees with Twitter’s decision to ban Trump, it’s the first time he has explicitly said he would “reverse” it. “I think bans just fundamentally undermine trust in Twitter as a town square where everyone can voice their opinion,” Musk said. He added that permanent bans should be reserved for “accounts that are bots or spam scam accounts.”

Whether Musk would bring back Trump has been a major question and the company’s own executives have told employees they don’t know what direction Musk will take the company. Employees have been concerned that Musk could reverse many of the company’s policies around trust and safety and reverse progress they have made in combatting online abuse and misinformation.

Musk said that accounts that are “destructive to the world” could still be punished with temporary suspensions or having individual tweets deleted. But he said that he and Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey believe that permanent bans “should be extremely rare.”

Twitter didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. The company banned Trump in the wake of the January 6th insurrection, saying that the president had broken its rules around incitement of violence. Then-CEO Dorsey said at the time he believed permanent bans could set a “dangerous” precedent, but that the company had made the right decision in the face of “extraordinary and untenable circumstance.” On Tuesday, following Musk’s comments, Dorsey called Trump’s ban a “business decision.” “We should always revisit our decisions and evolve as necessary,” Dorsey said. 

Musk was more explicit. He called the ban a “morally bad decision,” and cited the Trump-backed Truth Social as proof Twitter’s ban did not have the intended effect. The former president has stated that he would not rejoin Twitter even if his ban is lifted. 

“He is now going to be on Truth Social, as will a large part of the right in the in the United States,” Musk said. “Banning Trump from Twitter didn’t end Trump’s voice. It will amplify it among the right and that is why it is morally wrong and flat out stupid.”

Updated with comments from Jack Dorsey.

Russia’s war on Ukraine began with a satellite internet cyberattack

Russia’s alleged cyberattack campaign against Ukraine appears to have continued up to the very minutes before the invasion. Reutersreports the US, UK and European Union have formally blamed Russia for a large-scale cyberattack that disrupted Viasat’s satellite internet service an hour ahead of the February 24th assault. The hacking efforts permanently destroyed “tens of thousands” of satellite terminals, Viasat said, while the UK noted that the attack affected central European internet users and wind farms in addition to the Ukranian military and some civilian customers.

The accusations come in response to “new UK and US intelligence” linking Russia to the cyberattack, according to the UK’s Foreign Office. Russia hadn’t responded to the claims as of this writing, but has historically denied cyberattacks regardless of evidence.

The hack targeting Viasat likely had its intended effect. Ukraine cybersecurity official Victor Zhora disclosed in March that the anti-satellite effort led to a “huge loss” in communications at the very start of the war. With that said, Ukraine has been better-prepared in at least some instances. It claims to have fended off an attack against an energy provider in April, for example. While this latest attribution won’t dissuade Russia from conducting more attacks, it might signal that Ukraine and its allies are more aware of how to defend themselves online.

Hackers deface Russian platforms and smart TVs to display anti-war messages

On the same day Russia celebrated its role in defeating Nazi Germany, many of the country’s online platforms were defaced in protest of the war in Ukraine. The Washington Post reported on Monday that Russians with smart TVs saw channel listings replace…

Clearview AI agrees to limit sales of facial recognition data in the US

Notorious facial recognition company Clearview AI has agreed to permanently halt sales of its massive biometric database to all private companies and individuals in the United States as part of a legal settlement with the American Civil Liberties Union, per court records.

Monday’s announcement marks the close of a two-year legal dispute brought by the ACLU and privacy advocate groups in May of 2020 against the company over allegations that it had violated BIPA, the 2008 Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act. This act requires companies to obtain permission before harvesting a person’s biometric information — fingerprints, gait metrics, iris scans and faceprints for example — and empowers users to sue the companies who do not. 

“Fourteen years ago, the ACLU of Illinois led the effort to enact BIPA – a groundbreaking statute to deal with the growing use of sensitive biometric information without any notice and without meaningful consent,” Rebecca Glenberg, staff attorney for the ACLU of Illinois, said in a statement. “BIPA was intended to curb exactly the kind of broad-based surveillance that Clearview’s app enables. Today’s agreement begins to ensure that Clearview complies with the law. This should be a strong signal to other state legislatures to adopt similar statutes.”

In addition to the nationwide private party sales ban, Clearview will not offer any of its services to Illinois local and state law enforcement agencies (as well as all private parties) for the next five years. “This means that within Illinois, Clearview cannot take advantage of BIPA’s exception for government contractors during that time,” the ACLU points out, though Federal agencies, state and local law enforcement departments outside of Illinois will be unaffected. 

That’s not all. Clearview must also end its free trial program for police officers, erect and maintain an opt-out page for Illinois residents, and spend $50,000 advertising it online. The settlement must still be approved by a federal judge before it takes effect.

“By requiring Clearview to comply with Illinois’ pathbreaking biometric privacy law not just in the state, but across the country, this settlement demonstrates that strong privacy laws can provide real protections against abuse,” Nathan Freed Wessler, a deputy director of the ACLU Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, said in Monday’s statement. “Clearview can no longer treat people’s unique biometric identifiers as an unrestricted source of profit. Other companies would be wise to take note, and other states should follow Illinois’ lead in enacting strong biometric privacy laws.” 

Monday’s settlement is the latest in a long line of privacy lawsuits and regulatory actions against the company. Clearview AI was slapped with a €20 million fine by Italian regulators in March and £17 million in November by the UK, both for violations of national data privacy laws. Australia has been investigating the company’s scraping schemes since 2020 and, currently, a small group of US lawmakers are lobbying to ban Federal agencies from using Clearview’s services entirely. But given that the company boasted in February that it had amassed 100 billion images in its “index of faces,” the right to anonymity in America remains deeply in peril.

White House agreement sees ISPs cap broadband prices for low-income households

A key component of the Biden Administration’s $1 trillion US Infrastructure Bill was ensuring that people of all means had access to reliable high-speed internet. Now, twenty internet providers including AT&T, Comcast and Verizon have agreed to offer high-speed broadband internet plans for no more than $30 per month via a subsidy, the White House announced.

The ISP’s, which cover 80 percent of the US population, agreed to “either increase speeds or cut prices, making sure they all offer ACP-eligible households high-speed, high-quality internet plans for no more than $30/month,” The White House wrote. Biden has previously highlighted the challenges not having broadband poses to some families. “Never again should a parent have to sit in their car in a McDonald’s parking lot… so that their child can get access to high-speed Internet to do their homework,” he said in a speech last month. 

The subsidy is part of a $65 billion program for expanding broadband primarily through fiber-optic cable installations. $14 billion of that is earmarked for subsidies in the Affordable Connectivity Program aimed at lowering internet costs. It’s available to any families with income 200 percent or less than federal poverty guidelines, or for those who qualify for certain assistance programs.

Some 11.5 million households have signed up for the subsidy, but there are as many as 48 million eligible households. To that end, the administration is launching a site called GetInternet.gov that will provide details on how to sign up. It’s also reaching out to people through federal agencies, partnering with states and cities and collaborating with public interest organizations like the United Way and Goodwill. 

Federal judge dismisses Trump’s lawsuit against Twitter

San Francisco federal district court Judge James Donato has tossed the lawsuit Donald Trump filed against Twitter last year in a bid to get his account back. The social network permanently suspended the former president’s account after his supporters stormed the Capitol in January 2021. In the company’s announcement, Twitter cited two of his tweets in particular that it believes were “highly likely to encourage and inspire people to replicate the criminal acts that took place at the US Capitol” on January 6th last year.

Trump filed a lawsuit in October, seeking a preliminary injunction on the ban and arguing that it violates his First Amendment rights. Donato disagreed and noted in his ruling that Twitter is a private company. “The First Amendment applies only to governmental abridgements of speech,” he explained, “and not to alleged abridgements by private companies.” The judge also rejected the notion that the social network had acted as a government entity after being pressured by Trump’s opponents and had thereby violated the First Amendment when it banned the former President. 

In his lawsuit, Trump asked the judge to rule the federal Communications Decency Act, which states that online service providers such as Twitter can’t be held liable for content posted by users, as unconstitutional. The judge shot down that claim, as well, and ruled that the former President didn’t have legal standing to challenge Section 230 of CDA. Trump is a known critic of Section 230 and proposed to limit the protections social media platforms enjoy under it during his term.

The former President was an avid Twitter user before his suspension and formed his own social network called Truth Social after he was banned. Just recently, he told CNBC that he won’t be going back to Twitter even if Elon Musk reverses his suspension and will stay on Truth Social instead. According to a recent report by the Daily Beast, Truth Social has 513,000 daily active users compared to Twitter’s 217 million.

US Treasury issues first-ever sanctions against a cryptocurrency mixer

Cryptocurrency mixers are sometimes used to help online criminals launder their stolen money by hiding its true origins, and the US Treasury is now ready to clamp down on them when hostile governments are involved. The department has issued its first sanctions against a Bitcoin mixer, Blender.io, for allegedly and “indiscriminately” helping North Korea launder over $20.5 million in crypto from the $620 million Axie Infinity heist and other crimes. 

The measures block all Blender property in the US (or controlled by US residents), as well as US-linked transactions and any entities where blocked people have majority control. On a basic level, blocks create an audit trail and prevent sanctioned entities’ funds from changing hands.

The sanctions come after officials pinned the Axie Infinity theft on Lazarus Group, an outfit frequently linked to the North Korean government’s cybercrime and cyberwarfare efforts. North Korea has been repeatedly accused of hacking banks and cryptocurrency holders to evade international sanctions and finance its weapons programs.

The Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control also used the opportunity to identify four digital wallets Lazarus reportedly used to launder the rest of the Axie Infinity crypto. The perpetrators relied on one “getaway” wallet for the crime itself.

The agency stressed that most cryptocurrency activity was legal, and that it was only targeting mixers that aid criminals. However, there’s a not-so-subtle warning here: the US is willing to sanction crypto service providers if they tolerate state-backed hackers, not just the nations directing those hacks. 

ISPs end fight against California net neutrality law

In a win for net neturality, ISPs agreed to end their legal challenge to a 2018 Californa law that bars providers from throttling service. Telecom groups and California Attorney General Rob Bonta today jointly agreed to dismiss the case, reportedReuters. 

It’s fair that say that luck hasn’t exactly been on the telecom industry’s side. Earlier this year, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to reconsider its ruling that California’s law be upheld. And last year, the US DOJ dropped its own lawsuit over the net neutrality law, which the agency had filed during the Trump administration.

“Following multiple defeats in court, internet service providers have finally abandoned an effort to block enforcement of CA’s net neutrality law. This is a win for California and for a free and fair internet,” wrote Bonta in a tweet.

After Trump-appointed FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai overturned the agency’s net neutrality rules in 2017, California’s legislature decided to enact its own law. The state’s net neutrality law, which went into effect in August 2018, expanded on previous federal rules by banning the use of “zero-rating” by ISPs in an anti-competitive manner. Zero-rating occurs when an ISP exempts any of its affiliated services from eating away at a customer’s data caps. For example, AT&T Wireless once exempted HBO Max from the data caps of its internet customers. The company dropped this practice last year, and blamed the impact of California’s law. Digital rights groups like Electronic Frontier Foundation have argued that zero-rating is hostile to consumers, especially those from low-income households.

Federal net neutrality rules that were blocked under the Trump administration have yet to be restored by the FCC under President Joe Biden. That’s because the five-member panel is currently short one member, which they’ll need in order to vote on net neutrality. The agency is awaiting the Senate confirmation of Gigi Sohn. But thanks to intense lobbying from telecom groups and a number of Republicans (and moderate Democrats) in Congress, Sohn’s confirmation is stalled at present.

New York lawmakers want to limit warehouse productivity quotas

New York State Senator Jessica Ramos and Assembly Member Latoya Joyner have introduced a new bill meant to limit production quotas for warehouse workers. The bill, called the Warehouse Worker Protection Act, takes aim at Amazon’s labor practices. It expands upon and strengthens the language of a similar bill in California that was signed into law back in 2021, making the state the first in the US to have legislation that regulates warehouse quotas.

Productivity quotas prevent workers from complying with safety standards and contribute to rising injury rates in warehouse, Ramos notes in a statement. She explains that if the bill passes, it can “ease the bargaining process” for workers seeking to make demands for health purposes in their workplace. Warehouses will have to go through an ergonomic assessment of all tasks if the bill becomes a law, and companies could face penalties if they’re found to be lacking. The New York State Department of Labor will enforce rules established under the bill. 

As Motherboard reports, the Warehouse Worker Protection Act will require employers with at least 50 employees in a single warehouse or 500 workers statewide to describe their productivity quotas in a written description. They also have to explain how their quotas are developed and how they can be used for disciplinary purposes. If the bill passes, it can make sure employees are giving their workers bathroom breaks and rest periods, as well.

Amazon made it to the National Council for Occupational Safety and Health’s most dangerous workplaces in the US for the third time this year. The advocacy group included Amazon for having an injury rate more than double the industry average and highlighted the deaths that took place in its facility in Bessemer, Alabama. Workers’ rights advocates also recently accused the e-commerce giant of using its charity work placement scheme to conceal true injury rates in its warehouses.