Moscow police officers stop people, request their phones to read their messages
twitter.com
twitter.com
https://meduza.io/en/podcasts/the-naked-pravda or https://meduza.global.ssl.fastly.net/en/podcasts/the-naked-p...
Also perhaps https://meduza.io/en and https://meduza.global.ssl.fastly.net/en for text—though that has much less material than in Russian, and I can't personally vouch for it.
As a gentle reminder: after being declared a ‘foreign agent’ and losing risk-averse advertisers, Meduza lives on direct contributions from readers. Given both the devaluation of the ruble and the financial sanctions (as Meduza is not incorporated in Russia), these contributions will likely shrink, and we might lose one of the last outlets with actual good journalism.
That's ironic because Meduza is apparently based in Latvia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meduza:
> Meduza (Russian: Медуза, lit. 'jellyfish')[2][3] is a Russian- and English-language independent[7] news website, based in Latvia.
[1] https://news.sky.com/story/ukraine-invasion-russia-passes-la...
Yes, sure, in a democratic country it's absolutely impossible that a person reporting things that disagree with the official govt line may spend even a single day in prison.
Julian Assange can confirm.
I recently read the book "American Muckraker" by James O'Keefe. It has quite a few examples of that in modern US.
Based on unconfirmed rumors, similar things do happen here in Montenegro as well.
If he made an effort to truly remain separate from the sourcing of information, as most reputable reporting agencies do, then he’d likely not be in prison.
Look at the release of the Pentagon Papers.
It's relocated to Latvia and founded by a former main editor of lenta.ru (a pretty big news agency) after it was raided by government.
A covert foreign agent, also known as a secret agent of a foreign government, may in some countries be presumed to be engaging in espionage. Some countries have formal procedures to legalize the activities of foreign agents acting overtly. An example is the 1938 United States law, the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), the governing statute of which contains a wide-ranging and detailed definition of "foreign agent."[1]
Looks like those stupid Russian barbarians are just silly copycats. They have simply stolen everything from their intelligent democratic predecessors.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Agents_Registration_Ac...
I want to see what the Russian propaganda is saying to their people. I haven't been able to find a site.
At the human level there are probably plenty of low-tech techniques to keep yourself safe like deleting messages or using coded language.
It’s sad to watch Russia descend into totalitarianism.
Let's rephrase it then: Putin can't jail everyone and still expect to have any semblance of support.
Sorry, where?
Descend INTO? Excuse me, but what part of Russia isn't already totalitarianism?
The propaganda is strong and it’s not clear to me that the veil is becoming more transparent.
Down here when children break something and the parents ask "Who did that?", they will often reply "It was already like that". With a bad excuse like that everybody knows the children broke it. Strangely enough, almost always the discussion comes to an immediate end with that, except the parents will have a certain smile like "I have been fooled here".
There are sometimes even court cases that are hopelessly lost and this happens. The lawyer is pressured to do anything he can, and comes up with such bizarre stories, that lawyers and judge will know how the situation is.
In the case of a single party dictatorship, I think it also exists to show party members what the approved line is, which allows local authorities to operate with some degree of autonomy, as long as they can tie it back to the general narrative the leadership wants to promote. This can be used as a way of allowing some degree of variation in governance while still providing the party leadership with plausible deniability if a policy fails (or the ability to claim ownership if it succeeds).
People are fooled though. There are people in and outside of Russia who firmly believe the Russian narrative. (If you don't believe that, check the recent manifestations in Serbia)
Not the type of book you asked for, but i can recommend Propaganda by Edward L. Bernays. A hugely influential (series) of book(s).
In India, I recall laughing at the so called "love jihad" conspiracy theories that claimed that massive number of Muslim men are conspiring to wed hindu women to convert them to Islam. But now, this is a hot button election topic and anti-miscegenation laws are being passed and married couples are being harrassed and forcibly separated. The marital data contradicts this conspiracy but no one gives a shit.
It's worth noting that anti-semitism in nazi Germany emerged after 1920 on the basis of 2 separate absurd conspiracy theories. Jewish complicity with the allies and racial origin theory around the sunk island of Atlantis. It took only about 10-15 years for this theory to be bought by an entire nation.
> The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them. For quite six years the English admirers of Hitler contrived not to learn of the existence of Dachau and Buchenwald. And those who are loudest in denouncing the German concentration camps are often quite unaware, or only very dimly aware, that there are also concentration camps in Russia. Huge events like the Ukraine famine of 1933, involving the deaths of millions of people, have actually escaped the attention of the majority of English russophiles. Many English people have heard almost nothing about the extermination of German and Polish Jews during the present war. Their own antisemitism has caused this vast crime to bounce off their consciousness. In nationalist thought there are facts which are both true and untrue, known and unknown. A known fact may be so unbearable that it is habitually pushed aside and not allowed to enter into logical processes, or on the other hand it may enter into every calculation and yet never be admitted as a fact, even in one’s own mind.
https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwel...
Pretensions are part of totalitarianism.
Their borders are still pretty open, no? Just watch as they will close them down soon.
Some people I know are leaving (though panic is never a good thing). Some told bizarre stories of how they were questioned at the border. And yes, some were asked to unlock and hand over their phones.
The borders are open all right, no reason to close them. People opposing the regime are going away, the best possible outcome for dictator. No need to waste a lot of time and manpower on finding dissent if it just disappears on their own. And so population becomes a bit more docile, ignorant or even cooperating.
This was happening in former communist countries too - not everybody who spoke up against the regime went to jail. Some were just thrown to western Europe and forbidden to come back.
The active and popular rebels only.
The common dissident, was not free to leave, he had to shut up and work.
When all young ambitious people leave, your country goes even more to shit than the shit it's already in. Of course they block the borders!
A country can be non-democratic without being totalitarian.
If what you are doing does not bother the government you may be able to say "see, it is not that bad, they are not telling me what to do in the totality of social, economic and political life"; if, on the other side, you do something they disagree with, the distinction between totalitarism and non-democracy disappears.
In other words, to me the difference between being able to control and attempt to control are not that different. If it is possible, eventually somebody will attempt it. This is where checks and controls, division of power, etc. are useful.
On the contrary, this is evil genius. Once the rumour spread that happens, people stop communicating about the war.
At the human level there are probably plenty of low-tech techniques to keep yourself safe like deleting messages or using coded language.
99.9% of the population wont take any risks (e.g. even receiving text messages about the war). They will closely monitor their phone and block anybody who dont do the same.
Fear, as you say, is the purpose.
I would add that multiple aspects of Putin's attack plan for Ukraine relied heavily on its ability to instill fear.
Putin's regime expected Zelenski to flee at the sight of Russia's military at the border, they expected border cities to promptly fold at the sight of Russia's army, they expected Ukraine's army to surrender once Russia's army gained some ground, they expected all NATO and neighboring countries to stay quiet and did nothing when threatened, implicitly or explicitly, by them.
But thankfully their bluff was called, and Putin's regime was exposed as the fascist paper tiger they are.
Second, it is supposed to intimidate others and force the to unsubscribe from telegram channels that post alternative view on current events. Hence, effectively blocking people from getting info.
No, it is a terror approach. Random people will get the news and panic about being the next to be catch in a police round-up.
I agree. I wonder how many times they found what they're looking for?
Maybe slow and clumsy is part of the goal. It's a deliberate interruption that signals someone is paying attention. They probably have all sorts of classified network capture whatever, but that's not visible. It's the difference between your boss monitoring your email, and your boss sitting down at your desk and scrolling through your email.
Russia will only prosper when Putin is gone, which is at least 10 years from now.
Also, I predict that Russia may be allowed to sell its oil and gas again, but the proceeds will not go to Russia: they will be directed towards rebuilding Ukraine.
Purchasing two flight tickets out of Russia right now, using rubles that have now devalued 50%, will cost a monthly salary of a senior developer. Booking hotel for two weeks abroad will cost the same. Half of all the flights out were now shut down.
Those who are lucky to still keep their jobs (many people are not) — those are competing the clock as their chances to get out reduce every single minute. People who lost jobs and have no liquid money investments are totally f*d.
I closely know at least two people who have relatives in Ukrain and now have no resources to support them, and they get fear-mongered into submission by new criminal laws and these random border controls.
Me and many others write more about it here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30580767
https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/migration-dilemmas-h...
then there came various confirmations lately by IT people that they could not buy tickets (eg to Dubai or Egypt) anymore, and had to leave via Georgia on the landline.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30568698
the train to Helsinki is now $9000
This is also the finest example of the shortcomings of biometric security I’ve seen: all they need is part of your body, and it’s a password you can never change.
While them not being able to just use your face or fingerprint makes it harder for them to just unlock your phone, when you consider that what they're doing is already illegal, are you really willing to suffer the potentially highly unpleasant consequences for not unlocking the phone for them?
So unless you're someone prepared to suffer potential consequences for making a stand on principle, using a password instead of biometric access is probably not going to change the outcome here.
For those prepared to make such sacrifices, yes, pay attention to operational security such as not using biometrics.
If you need to unlock your phone to show someone, unlock the day 2 day account.
It's not fool proof but might fool someone who is not aware of the feature.
That said, the cops will probably not take a smartphone without contents at face value. You've got to add some realistic enough (fake?) texts at least, or be careful to only communicate about protests, homosexuality and other banned subjects through your alternative user account.
Unless you have something to hide, trying to mislead armed officers of an authoritarian regime this way may not be advisable. They'd probably be fooled by simply carrying around a second phone, though, because most people only carry around a single phone. Do your revolutionary talk through an old banged-up second hand device, and talk about other stuff using your fancy phone.
police arrests you if you try to be a "leader" - shouting, organizing others, or if you have a poster, or stand out in some other way. If there are no such people they arrest at random to keep everyone scared.
Their approach is working. We've configured our "watercooler" chat to auto-delete messages after 24 hours, and deleted all history.
I didn't comb through my private messages yet, but that increasingly seems like a good idea.
This was via flight, I'm not even sure there are international flights still available as of today though. Is it still possible to fly out of Russia right now?
I get that Canadian law may differ on the topic, but it shouldn't. It's a natural right and any just government would respect it.
No government will just let you waltz on through when they have even the slightest suspicion that you’re doing something illegal. It’s daft to expect otherwise, just plain dumbassery to even suggest it.
If your adversary knows about work mode though and checks if it's available, this won't help you much.
Ideally you'd use credential derived encryption for each user's storage area on the device, and avoid leaking the number of profiles on the device. The UX for that is "hard" - even a single login screen that (with a naive implementation) accepts 1 of N PINs would be vulnerable to a timing attack as the PIN is tested against each "profile".
There's a few gotchas around carrier services like SMS and voice calls (do these go only to the main user account?), but maybe in future you could see an eSIM per profile... Doesn't protect you against a colluding mobile operator though - ultimately it all comes down to your threat model.
So, my Normal pin is 1234 but if I enter 5678, phone unlocks to a dictator safe mode.
https://github.com/nuvious/pam-duress
So insane that something like this isn’t available natively on all of our phones
I imagine some gov agents have this sort of thing.
Of course, if it’s popular it won’t be as useful.
That way you can give nice Officer Dibble here your sanitized passcode and he can see all the messages to your Grandma, photos of that cute puppy you downloaded from Unsplash, and your latest Candy Crush high score, and not the Signal and Telegram apps you have open to your friends in Ukraine.
Then they won't know when to stop beating you.
If I know I'm going to leave the country, I'll back up my phone to Google Drive (or wherever), factory reset my phone, and leave nothing for the investigators. If they'd kept this surveillance under wraps, they might have found something. Now, everyone knows to clear their phone before crossing the border (and the ones who don't know probably don't have anything worth finding on their phones).
Of course, this could just be a tactic to increase queue times at the border.
Seems like a good time for the Green revolution? Would it have the same tangible support from the West as the Orange revolution had, or will the West be afraid of angering CCP with what Xi might consider a coup in his newest satellite state?
How is he doing that with gloves on?
Random link I found for you https://www.everprogloves.com/how-do-touch-screen-gloves-wor...
Unless the ephemeral part refers to the user's own side of the conversation, i.e., delete messages from my history some time after I read them. Together with a secure storage that prevents messages from being easily recovered from memory dumps, this protects the user in scenarios of devices being captured by the adversary, exactly like this one.
AFAIK is what Signal advertises for it's timed messages; Telegram, OTOH, advertises its self-destructing messages as something magical that works even for the other side.
[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop-and-frisk_in_New_York_C...
[1] https://www.nyclu.org/en/cases/sultan-v-kelly-et-al-challeng...
There are a lot of issues in USA (and many other countries around the world!) But here you can see that the world doesn't know how to respond to one country attacking a neighbour in another continent in XXI. Which is very concerning taking into account we are in a world with very advanced (and expensive) weaponry and bureaucrats who just warm their seats.
It is obviously not enough to tweet or TikTok... all the respect to HN where we learn, and have great and deep discussions oriented to action, even if they are oriented mainly to startups. Startups are just an example of confronting and transforming realities.
The comparison is between two things, the police forcing you to give them access your phone for no explicit reason, or the police forcing you to allow them to physically and invasively search your whole body for no explicit reason. You are conflating that comparison with a bunch of other things happening external to the specific actions the police are allowed to do.
The reasons why both are happening doesn't mean you can't objectively compare whether what the police are doing is acceptable outside of the larger situation that is causing them to do it. The question is if one seems unacceptable, shouldn't the other be too? If you want to talk about levels of violence between these two, stop and frisk certainly seems to be something closer to approaching physical violence, or at least the greater potential for it, then searching your phone.
Your argument is completely valid except there is a missing [postmodern?] point at a meta level: you are changing the focus of a terrible event that should be solved at a global scale to an event that could be handled at a local scale, AND in US it should be much simpler than in Russia.
In US you have a lot of ways you can do that and I am always amazed that the US democracy is failing at a basic level when I compare with righteous US people who achieved amazing stuff in the US past. If you don't show your mobile founds you can protect you by the law.
In Russia there are much fewer options and civilians are risking their life at an amazing level. Law does not exist.
I also think that the statement "software is eating the world" have not touch politics enough but will happen. Not talking about FB and social media in general.
I didn’t intend to. Just that the land of the free isn’t so free when police are charged with randomly (or not so randomly) searching people.
> There are a lot of issues in USA
Why can't you compare? A number of people in minority communities are concerned that US stop-and-frisk stops are used to incarcerate them, kill them, or rob from them. What is the difference?
https://www.africanamerica.org/topic/civil-asset-forfeiture-...
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2015-11-12/stop-a...
The stop and frisk program was directed towards reducing gun crime. This is a crime that is understood to be a negative for society.
Moscow is trying to reduce dissent over an invasion of another country.
Do you not see the difference here?
If you shoot at someone, it makes a difference if your goal is to stop him from shooting you, or if you're trying to kill him to steal his car.
Ends justify means. Though ends need to be justified, too.
Going through a phone to check what you are thinking / saying is seen as more intrusive. So even in a stop and frisk, going through someone's phone would not generally be justified.
The rules here are very clear. In particular, even in a terry stop police generally are not authorized to seize / search your cell phone. But they can pat down your outer clothing for weapons.
People talk about stop and frisk in such an abstract sense, because it happened in poor minority neighborhoods, so most people talking about didn't have to go through. Imagine strangers being able to legally frisk your whole body for no apparent reason. It is such a huge violation of personal space and privacy and it's so demeaning, especially when you know it's being specifically targeted at your community.
Asking to reviews your phone is.
One is a much more serious invasion of privacy in my view.
This is clear generally. We ALREADY walk through metal detectors at airports. We walk through body scanners. We do NOT expect to have to turn over our phones (unless going through a country border perhaps and if I expected it I'd just have a blank phone for that).
So we have already made the distinction here and it's not unreasonable (even if you don't agree that removing an assault weapon from a felon with a restraining order is different from going through someone's phone messages).
Are you claiming that when the Russian cop asks if he can see your phone, he says "Excuse me, this is to reduce dissent over an invasion of a foreign country?"
The difference I see is that for the US case you accept the stated purpose ('reduce gun crime') and ignore the outcome as felt by the person on the receiving end, and for Russia, you reverse these.
Anti terror laws and powers are abused and applied to a general population. The declared goals and real intention / outcome are 2 different things.
>"Do you not see the difference here"
Yes and no. There is less fig leaf in case of Russia telling people fuck you and your freedoms but either is still deeply disgusting.
You can legally refuse a subway bag search, leave and enter the subway through another entrance. I've done so a few times, and the officers just roll their eyes and act like you're being unreasonable.
Stop and Frisk was a TERRIBLE rights violation though and we should never bring it back.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/23/nyregion/nypd-arrests-rac...
Meet the new boss…
In so far as that arrest disparity is above and beyond the difference in 911 call volume, it needs serious scrutiny. We absolutely need to keep reforming the way we do policing here. We have a serious problem of simultaneously over and under policing some neighborhoods. I don't have much faith in Adams on this, but I think public sentiment has shifted a lot in the last 3 years, so hopefully some progress can be made.
The Russian Federation and/or USSR have been doing it since long before the Stasi existed.
Just a few months ago, the police in the city of Hyderabad, India (where companies like Google and Microsoft have a large presence) were stopping and searching people’s phones to check for messages related to drugs on WhatsApp. This was their way of addressing drug trades, and even one of the top officials said that it’s not illegal when people cooperate and hand over their phones. [1]
If you’re on the streets and the police stop you in such places, you’d be better off unlocking and handing over your phone. People spoiled by western TV shows may talk about probably cause, privacy, rights etc. (which may exist on paper in these places too), but you’d be in a lot of trouble if you’re not very rich and know powerful people. These checks can also take an ethnic or other angle where only certain people are stopped.
I’m not saying that everybody should turn over their phones and that it’s futile to fight, but there are no instant solutions for such issues for many people.
[1]: https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/hyderabad-cops-are-ill...
EFF also have a nice guide called "Digital Privacy at the U.S. Border" (PDF): https://www.eff.org/files/2018/01/11/digital-privacy-border-...
Both of these can be found at US airports with international flights(and most countries have equivalents). Going on an international trip you will encounter both, for a domestic flight you will only deal with the TSA.
The EFF article is aimed exclusively at people crossing the border so it about the CBP, not about the TSA. If you never leave the USA or never travel to it then you will encounter none of this.
Went to secondary to get more information on my trip, then just routinely searched my bags and electric devices. I was allowed into the country after they got more information.
Not really? In the same guide it says
>If you later want to remove this restriction you can Remove -> Profiles... in Configurator, analogous to step 15.
Basically, you're just hoping that the minimum wage employee at the TSA doesn't know about removing the profile.
Earlier the article says
> This setting controls when someone can remove the profile from within the phone itself. If it’s left as the default value of “Always” then anyone with access to your unlocked phone could remove the pair lock (which would defeat the entire purpose). You can either set it to Never to never allow removing the profile, or With Authorization and set a password to allow removing the profile with the given password (this might be useful to remove the pairing restriction if you do lose access to your laptop).
So if you don't plan to commit crimes or otherwise confront the authorities, you can leave that blank, or use throwaways. Just don't give your real info, because they will use it to analyse you for real.
https://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/foreign-travelers-soc...
Whether it was actual policy or not, I'll leave to you to work out.
As for the format of my response, I was genuinely not 100% sure, so felt it respectful to post thusly. Does that satisfy your needless suspicion?
You would in the short term, if you're a coward and unable to stand up to this kind of abuse. In the long term, if everyone stood up to this abhorrent behavior, it would stop.
Yeah in a better world we could all just not be "cowards" and stand up against unjust searches, but most of us don't want to spend couple nights in lock up over this kind of shit.
Are you just living in the "second OS"? Meaning you don't actually use your phone while you are outside? Or are you going to just casually reboot your phone and boot into the "second OS" while the officer is standing there demanding your phone?
Simpler would be a 2nd way to unlock the phone into a fake user account...
The main thing is it is nice to get away from the main phone on a trip and enjoy the trip. Losing it would not be the end of the world.
All these other aspects you get for free.
The point is really that a lot of people are intimidated and compliant and will hand a device over when requested. This is never a good thing. Even if you’re legitimately a victim, you shouldn’t even let them at your stuff.
That's addressed by the OP
>People spoiled by western TV shows may talk about probably cause, privacy, rights etc. (which may exist on paper in these places too), but you’d be in a lot of trouble if you’re not very rich and know powerful people. These checks can also take an ethnic or other angle where only certain people are stopped.
There's a strong legal system (eg. due process, habeas corpus) that protects you in uk. No such system exists in Russia. Similarly, if you tried pulling this in china, and you're a Uyghur, that's just going to end up with you in a reeducation camp.
Sometimes the authorities appear to have the law on their side, examples included people detained under the Terrorism Act(s)[0] and those who are singled out by the police under "stop and search" powers[1]
[0] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/18/glenn-greenwal...
[1] https://www.statewatch.org/media/documents/analyses/no-105-u...
Did you read the parents comment? Resistance might work in the UK but in places like India, unless you’re well connected the police can make your life miserable.
Really most people don’t have the ability to defend themselves from this and the police know that.
The problem is that this is where the downward spiral starts.
and https://ico.org.uk/media/about-the-ico/documents/2620095/ico...
I’ve been there, I’ve done that, I keep a €50 in my passport when travelling in those parts, it’s acceptable identification if it’s what they’re after, if it isn’t, it was in there accidentally.
I think it’s a mistake to think that as a foreigner you can just do as the locals do when it comes to bribery. It could end very badly. Doing it to avoid some inconvenience is a bad idea.
It’s also worth noting that if you are an obvious foreigner, you will be a bribe magnet, and will be accosted only in the hope of a bribe.
It’s not so much about avoiding inconvenience, it’s about moving freely in a police state.
[1] https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/policies/schengen-borders-...
> 23(a) the exercise of police powers by the competent authorities of the Member States under national law, insofar as the exercise of those powers does not have an effect equivalent to border checks; that shall also apply in border areas. Within the meaning of the first sentence, the exercise of police powers may not, in particular, be considered equivalent to the exercise of border checks when the police measures:
> (i) do not have border control as an objective;
> (ii) are based on general police information and experience regarding possible threats to public security and aim, in particular, to combat cross-border crime;
> (iii) are devised and executed in a manner clearly distinct from systematic checks on persons at the external borders;
> (iv) are carried out on the basis of spot-checks;
This check likely broke both 23(a)(i) and 23(a)(iii), as at the first train stop past the border everyone was asked to present ID.
[1] Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code)
That depends on what would have happened had you not complied. In France if you are unable to produce an acceptable ID, you're taken to a police station where you're held until your identity is established. Once established, you'd have been allowed to go your way.
It would only constitute "the exercise of border checks" if the response to your non-compliance was to escort you back to the country where you boarded the train.
I'd be surprised if that's what generally happens. One instance I observed on a train going through Switzerland involved an English-speaking student. It took a while but after some discussion and the police making a few phone calls seemingly to their satisfaction, warning her to carry appropriate ID in future.
Not true according to the regulation:
> ‘border control’ means the activity carried out at a border, in accordance with and for the purposes of this Regulation, in response exclusively to an intention to cross or the act of crossing that border, regardless of any other consideration, consisting of border checks and border surveillance;
Note, it covers "response to crossing a border" and includes "border surveillance".
edit:
For full context:
> ‘border checks’ means the checks carried out at border crossing points, to ensure that persons, including their means of transport and the objects in their possession, may be authorised to enter the territory of the Member States or authorised to leave it;
> ‘border surveillance’ means the surveillance of borders between border crossing points and the surveillance of border crossing points outside the fixed opening hours, in order to prevent persons from circumventing border checks;
Would this not be the case in the US?
Since checking phones is legal, when you try to complain about it, it's like trying to find someone who cares that a cop made rude remarks when he pulled you over.
It's a great system.
been there. done that.
you simply cannot refuse. i have tried that and have marks on my back to prove it. you hold your head down while a dumb illiterate Sepoy goes through your phone and there is absolutely nothing you can do. don't try to act smart because they will see that as a sign that your are their enemy and by that point, your goose is cooked. they label you a terrorist and jail you sans recourse.
there are 12 year olds who are in jail for "waging war against india" and the circumstances are not much different. there is a concept of "preventive detention" whereby the police and the security aparatus is authorised to arrest and hold you behind bars BEFORE you commit a crime or even if they think you might or had but they have no evidence of it and they can still get you. no habeas corpus, no hearings, no chargesheets, no trial. you are condemned unheard and the judiciary can all but cheer for the police.
This second account could have an innocuous looking call history and social media profile.
- But I got spammed by some idiot in Ohio.
- Unlikely. To the gulag. Next!
Although maybe that action will suddenly motivate SMS companies to find ways of actually dealing with SMS spam properly.
What Russia in that case would do they would probably either implement some spam detection or just flat out disable SMS messaging in the country.
Whole lotta people ended up in gitmo that were actually innocent that way.
This is obviously going to be a very dark decade for Ukraine but less obvious is how bad things are going to get in Russia if they can pull the curtain over it like this.
Worst thing US did to Iraq invasion protestors domestically was put them on the "no fly" list which is abusive but trivial in comparison.
I wonder who is waiting in the wings after Putin and if they are going to be better or worse.
‘Tis not a friendly place.
The US has had a medley of surveillance scandals over the years, but none of them involved anything nearly as drastic as what’s shown in the video.
Edit: drastic for regular American citizens and residents. America’s foreign surveillance is inexcusable.
FWIW I agree with your basic point--rights are rights, no matter who you are--but if you try to find that idea in anything "the founders" did, you're going to be extremely disappointed.
Telco's see plenty, but your phone sees a whole lot more.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1500153323495866372
He wants to pass Bill C36 and Bill C11 that would further monitor the internet and censor information. This is a western country not Russia. I think people need to get back to fighting this Authoritarian bend.