privacy rights

Bilingual

San Francisco: Don't Fall for Industry Defense of Surveillance Pricing
2 months ago
- Surveillance pricing is a practice where corporations set different prices for the same product based on harvested personal data, invading privacy.
- EFF supports A.B. 2654, which bans surveillance pricing, and is disappointed that the San Francisco Board of Supervisors stalled a vote on a resolution supporting the bill after criticism from the Chamber of Commerce.
- The FTC found examples of companies charging higher prices based on personal information, such as new parents seeing higher-priced baby thermometers.
- EFF argues that privacy is a human right, not a commodity, and opposes surveillance pricing as another form of pay-for-privacy schemes.
- Surveillance pricing may lead to lower prices for some but often relies on false data and creates winners and losers; EFF opposes it regardless.
- A.B. 2654 clearly defines surveillance pricing and includes carveouts for loyalty programs, discounts based on cost, termination discounts, and uniformly available discounts.
- EFF compares surveillance pricing to online behavioral advertising and urges the Board of Supervisors to support the bill.
US citizen charged after GrapheneOS phone wipes during airport search
2 months ago
- A federal case in Atlanta involves the use of GrapheneOS, a privacy-focused mobile OS, which prosecutors claim was used to wipe evidence, raising legal questions about its features.
- The case targets Sam Tunick, who used GrapheneOS on a Google Pixel phone; experts say this is an unusual legal move that may criminalize the OS by default.
- The incident occurred at Atlanta airport in January 2024, where Tunick was questioned about suspected terrorism ties, denied a lawyer multiple times, and his phone was wiped after providing a passcode.
- Prosecutors view the wipe as intentional destruction of evidence, while the defense argues it violated constitutional rights and that the search was a pretext related to Cop City protests.
- The case highlights broader constitutional issues at US borders, with a ruling expected after October; GrapheneOS supporters emphasize its legitimate privacy protections.
- Similar profiling of GrapheneOS users in Spain and France shows authorities treating the OS as suspicious, linking it to criminal activity, but activists argue for the right to use privacy tools.
An Explosion of Surveillance Towers Is Coming to US Borders, Costing $1B+
2 months ago
- The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) plans to nearly triple surveillance towers along U.S. borders from 830 to 2,300 by 2034, costing $1 billion.
- The expansion, funded by the 2025 'One Big Beautiful Act,' includes AI-based autonomous towers with radar, thermal, and optical systems that surveil towns, schools, and backyards.
- Additional surveillance technologies like drones, aerostats, ground sensors, and license plate readers also threaten privacy in border communities.
- Since 2022, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has mapped and documented these technologies through public records and open-source intelligence.
- EFF provides tools such as an interactive map, a zine, and legal support to defend against device searches, biometric collection, and digital security risks.
- EFF vows to continue investigating and fighting the expansion of surveillance that endangers human rights and civil liberties.
Texas spent $4.5M in Spy SUVs that scan phones in 3 minutes
2 months ago
- Texas Department of Public Safety spent $4.5 million on four Chevy Tahoes equipped with Cognyte's FalcoNet cell-site simulator technology.
- FalcoNet mimics a cell tower, forcing all phones in range to connect, collecting data without warrants or user consent.
- Texas has no state law requiring warrants for this surveillance, unlike federal agencies which must obtain them.
- The purchase contrasts with unresolved state issues like the unstable electric grid, water shortages, and underfunded public services.
- Cognyte is an Israeli company with ties to surveillance used against journalists, activists, and occupied populations.
- Similar technology is being adopted by other U.S. police departments, expanding surveillance capabilities nationally.
- The article criticizes Texas's political hypocrisy, advocating for individual freedom while funding warrantless surveillance.
- Recommendations include reading investigative reports, contacting legislators, voting for specific candidates, and raising public awareness.
The Carney government's expanding power to identify Canadians online
3 months ago
- Bill C-22 (Lawful Access Act, 2026) expands government legal tools to identify and track Canadians online, potentially chilling free speech.
- The bill passed with limited parliamentary debate and amendments, raising alarms among civil liberties groups, lawyers, and opposition MPs.
- The UK's similar legal framework results in high arrest rates for online speech, serving as a cautionary example for Canada.
- Bill C-22 allows production orders on 'reasonable grounds to suspect' and mandates service providers to build surveillance capabilities and retain metadata for up to six months.
- Critics argue key provisions are unconstitutional, may weaken encryption, and infringe on privacy without sufficient need demonstrated.
- The bill is part of a broader legislative pattern including Bills C-8 (cybersecurity) and C-9 (hate speech), enhancing state powers over digital activity.
- Privacy advocates warn that foreign data-sharing provisions could facilitate U.S. access to Canadians' data through agreements like the CLOUD Act.
- The Senate review is seen as the final check on the bill, determining its impact on digital rights and alignment with democratic norms.
US Supreme Court rules geofence warrants require constitutional protections
3 months ago
- The US Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that geofence warrants, which collect smartphone location data, require Fourth Amendment privacy protections, as individuals have a reasonable expectation of privacy in such records.
- Justice Elena Kagan wrote the majority opinion, stating that accessing location data from third-party tech companies constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment, even if data is collected only for a limited time or from public areas.
- The case, Chatrie v US, involved a bank robber tracked via Google's location history, with lawyers arguing the warrant was overly broad and violated constitutional rights against unreasonable search and seizure.
- The court rejected government arguments that short-term location data access does not qualify as a Fourth Amendment search, noting that voluntary use of smartphone services does not equate to consent for government surveillance.
- Privacy advocates and justices expressed concerns that geofence warrants can reveal sensitive personal associations and be overly broad, potentially monitoring places like protests, clinics, or religious gatherings without proper cause.
- While affirming the search occurred, the court left it to lower courts to determine if it was reasonable, with law enforcement defending the warrants as necessary for investigations when other leads are exhausted.
- The ruling builds on a 2018 precedent requiring warrants for cellphone location tracking, marking a significant step in applying traditional privacy rights to digital-era challenges.

privacy rights

San Francisco: Don't Fall for Industry Defense of Surveillance Pricing

US citizen charged after GrapheneOS phone wipes during airport search

An Explosion of Surveillance Towers Is Coming to US Borders, Costing $1B+

Texas spent $4.5M in Spy SUVs that scan phones in 3 minutes

The Carney government's expanding power to identify Canadians online

US Supreme Court rules geofence warrants require constitutional protections