security |

Warning Signs of Covert Eavesdropping or Bugging. Part ll/ll

Posted on October 8, 2012 by Lina Maini

Motive. That is the first thing you should consider if you believe you may be a potential target of covert surveillance. If anything you write, say or do can increase someone else’s wealth or influence, that is more than motive enough.

Below are warning signs that you may be the target of a surveillance campaign.

Others seem to know more than they should about your confidential business or professional trade secrets.
Secret meetings, negotiations or bids seem to be open knowledge.
You have noticed strange sounds or volume changes on your phone lines. (Amateur wiretappers tend to use off-the-shelf equipment that is inferior to that used by professional eavesdroppers. Almost all surveillance devices cause slight anomalies on the phone line, such as volume changes and or drop-offs. This could also simply be a flaw in the line but definitely have the line checked.)
Static, popping or scratching sounds appear on your phone line. (This occurs when a poorly trained or amateur eavesdropper is messing with your line. When two conductors are connected together - such as a bug or wiretap on a line, there is an electrical discharge that causes these sounds.)
Your phone’s headset emits sounds when it’s hung up. (This is caused by a hook switch bypass which effectively turns the phone receiver into a microphone and a speaker. There is probably someone listening to everything being said within 15 – 25 feet of the telephone.)
Your phone rings often and there is either nobody there, a very faint tone or a high pitched squeal or beep which is heard for a split second. (This is indicative or a slave device or line extender being used on your phone line. )
Your AM/FM radio suddenly develops strange interference. (Many amateurs use eavesdropping devices that use frequencies within or just barely outside the FM radio band. These signals tend to drift and will “quiet” an FM radio in range of the bug. If the radio begins to squeal when slowed moved around the room, keep it in motion until the sound becomes very high pitched. You’ve now found you bug. Make sure that the “stereo” function is turned off so that the radio is operating only in “mono” as this will seriously increase the radio’s sensitivity.)
Your car radio suddenly becomes erratic. (The antenna of your car radio can be, and often is, used by eavesdroppers.)
Your television develops strange interference. (TV draws in a lot of bandwidth. Because of this they are very sensitive to any nearby transmitter – bugs.)
You have been burglarized but nothing was taken. (Professional eavesdroppers often repeatedly break into a target’s home or office, usually to reposition or replace malfunctioning or dead bugs. Rarely, however, can anyone reset furniture or room accents back to the exact position. If you feel it, test it.)
Electrical wall plates appear to be moved slightly. (One of the most popular places to hide bugs are inside electrical outlets, smoke alarms and lighting fixtures. This requires that the wall plate surrounding the device be removed and replaced. Look for small amounst of debris directly below the electrical outlet and note the repositioned screws.)
A dime-sized discoloration suddenly appears on the wall or ceiling. (This is a sure sign that a pinhole mike or small video camera has been recently installed.)
One of your vendors has gifted you with any type of an electronic device such a desk radio, alarm clock, iPod, small TV… (Many gifts of this type are Trojan horses. Know your gifter.)
A small bump or deformation appears on the baseboard near the floor. (Someone may have concealed covert wiring or a mike imbedded into the molding adhesive, causing the discoloration.)
Certain items just appear in your office or home, yet no one seems to know how they got there. (Typical items to watch for are clocks, exit signs, sprinkler heads. picture frames and lamps.)
You notice repair vehicles often now near your home or office.
Telephone, cable, plumbing or HVAC repair people show up to allegedly do work when they have not been requested. (A very common ruse is for eavesdroppers to pretend they need to repair a problem when in fact they are installing recording devices.)
Service or delivery trucks are often parked nearby your office or home with nobody (that you can see) in them. (These types of vehicles are often used as listening posts. Be especially wary of those vehicles with tinted windows and those carrying what appear to be ladders and pipe racks on the roofs. These are often sophisticated antennas.)
Your door lock suddenly doesn’t ”feel right”. (That is primary evidence that your door lock has been picked, manipulated or bypassed. Try to always use coaxial locks with sidebars – such as Medeco locks.)
Things seems to have been rummaged through but nothing taken. (The most common rummaging targets are the backs of desk drawers, the bottom of cabinets, closets and dresser drawers.)

And finally, if an eavesdropper sends you a copy of your private conversations, texts, chats…, all bets are off. You have been compromised and can expect to be blackmailed or terrorized. At this point, inform your local police department and immediately contact the FBI. If you believe that you have also been compromised/cyber defrauded, contact IC3 – The Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) is a partnership between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the National White Collar Crime Center (NW3C).

Our Operatives: Street smart; tech savvy.

As always, stay safe.

Surveillance device uses Wi-Fi to see through walls (stratrisks.com)
US DOJ Ordered Pen Register Surveillance 37,616 Times in 2011 (news.softpedia.com)
Surveillance Commissioner warns about significant RIPA failings, unregulated private sector surveillance, and surveillance using the Internet. (amberhawk.typepad.com)

Filed under: bug, bugging, burglar, camera, cell phone, cyber crime, surveillance, taped recordings, tapped | Tagged: Arts, bugs, Business, covert surveillance, Digital Audio Broadcasting, FM broadcasting, Formats, iPod, radio, security, wiretapping | Leave a Comment »

Operation Mickey Mouse? Facial Recognition & Disneyland

Posted on August 26, 2012 by Lina Maini

There’s a rumor sweeping the internet that a software engineer visited Disneyland, and went on a ride and that the theme park then offered him a photo of himself and his girlfriend to buy – with his credit card information already linked to it. The engineer emphatically stated that he had never entered his name or information into anything at the theme park, or indicated that he wanted a photo, or advised the human ride handlers as to who he and his girlfriend were. So, he stated, based on his professional experience, the system had to be using facial recognition technology. He had never signed an agreement allowing them to do so, and he declared that this use was illegal. He also stated that he believed Disney was sharing information related to facial recognition technology with the military.

As it turn out, he may not be wrong or very far of from his claim.

First, let’s define facial recognition technology: Facial recognition software (FRS) can pick someone’s face out of a crowd, extract the face from the rest of the scene and compare it to a database of stored images. In order for this software to work, it has to know how to differentiate between a basic face and the rest of the background. Facial recognition software is based on the ability to recognize a face and then measure the various features of the face.

Every face has numerous, distinguishable landmarks, the different peaks and valleys that make up facial features. FRS defines these landmarks as nodal points. Each human face has approximately 80 nodal points. Some of these measured by the software are:

•Distance between the eyes

•Width of the nose

•Depth of the eye sockets

•The shape of the cheekbones

•The length of the jaw line

These nodal points are measured creating a numerical code, called a faceprint, representing the face in the database.

Next, let’s review how facial recognition occurs. (In the past, FRS use was limited to 2D facial images, and subject to many environmental factors, such as lighting or blurring, that restricted its use to primary law enforcement agencies for comparative analysis v. existing pictures of the subjects of interest. We are now well past that stage and into comparing live 3D images to networked databases worldwide.)

3D Facial Recognition Facial recognition software uses a 3D model, which provides more accuracy than its 2D predecessor. Capturing a real-time 3D image of a person’s facial surface, 3D facial recognition uses distinctive features of the face — as outlined above — to identify the subject. These areas are all unique and don’t change over time.

Using depth and an axis of measurement that is not affected by lighting, 3D facial recognition can even be used in darkness and has the ability to recognize a subject at different view angles with the potential to recognize up to 90 degrees (a face in profile).

Using the 3D software, the system goes through a series of steps to verify the identity of an individual.

Detection

Acquiring an image can be accomplished by digitally scanning an existing photograph (2D) or by using a video image to acquire a live picture of a subject (3D).

Alignment

Once it detects a face, the system determines the head’s position, size and pose. As stated earlier, the subject has the potential to be recognized up to 90 degrees.

Measurement

The system then measures the curves of the face on a sub-millimeter (or microwave) scale and creates a template.

The system translates the template into a unique code. This coding gives each template a set of numbers to represent the features on a subject’s face.

Matching

If the image is 3D and the database contains 3D images, then matching will take place without any changes being made to the image. However, there is a challenge currently facing databases that are still in 2D images. 3D provides a live, moving variable subject being compared to a flat, stable image. New technology is addressing this challenge. When a 3D image is taken, different points (usually three) are identified. For example, the outside of the eye, the inside of the eye and the tip of the nose will be pulled out and measured. Once those measurements are in place, an algorithm (a step-by-step procedure) will be applied to the image to convert it to a 2D image. After conversion, the software will then compare the image with the 2D images in the database to find a potential match.

Verification or Identification

In verification, an image is matched to only one image in the database (1:1). For example, an image taken of a subject may be matched to an image in the Department of Motor Vehicles database to verify the subject is who he says he is. If identification is the goal, then the image is compared to all images in the database resulting in a score for each potential match (1:N). In this instance, you may take an image and compare it to a database of mug shots to identify who the subject is.

Facial Recognition Systems Uses

Law enforcement: Aside from the obvious background identification and history of arrested suspects, l.e. uses the system to capture random faces in crowds to match to their terrorist databases. .

Government agencies: Some government agencies have also been using the systems for

- security

- monitor voter fraud

- eliminate “buddy punching” (The practice of a coworker signing for a friend or displaying that friend’s id for UPC processing. )

- tracking foreign visitors and frequent flyers (The Department of Homeland Security has implemented a program called US-VISIT, United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology, aimed at foreign travelers gaining entry to the United States. When a foreign traveler receives his visa, he will submit fingerprints and have his photograph taken. The fingerprints and photograph are checked against a database of known criminals and suspected terrorists. Likewise, the TSA is runs its Registered Traveler program through FRS.

Other potential applications currently in use include ATM and check-cashing security and access to your own lap/desk top via the monitor’s FR program.

To get back to our irate software engineer, he is correct in identifying Disneyland’s use of facial recognition software and sharing it with the United States Department of Defense. This collusion is referred to as Operation Mickey Mouse (not joking) and has been in effect for decades. Who would suspect the family friendly theme park of being a de facto arm of the government? I say this laughingly in that no one questioned the origin of E-Verify’s (the government program to positively i.d. potential employees via collected data and through FRS, if necessary) massive database of personal information. Of course they have tapped into every record (address changes, DMV and SSA records, credit history…) to compile this uniquely comprehensive store of information.

Now the vast majority of us will never really notice how much facial recognition has creeped into our lives — but if there is a foul-up, you can expect it to be a big deal. ALL government FR dbases will have to be updated if an error (e.g., surgically enhanced faces) occurs. I’m not planning any changes to my face but this is going to be an interesting trend to follow.

Our operatives: Street smart, tech savvy.

As always, stay safe.

FBI sharing facial recognition software with police departments across America (EndtheLie.com)
FBI Sharing Facial Recognition Software With Police Departments Across America (theintelhub.com)
How To Beat Facial Recognition Technology (gizmodo.com.au)

Filed under: facial recognition | Tagged: biometric, Department of Motor Vehicles, Disneyland, Facial recognition system, Registered Traveler, security, United States, United States Department of Defense | Leave a Comment »

Electronic Crime Scene Investigations; Assessing & Documenting the Situation. I/II

Posted on July 17, 2012 by Lina Maini

When a computer crime is suspected in the workplace, action must be taken immediately. We’ll take you through a step by step computer crime scene investigation; the same protocol that we security and information specialists conduct.

When securing and evaluating the scene:
• Do not alter the state of an electronic device. If a computer or an electronic device is off, leave it off.
• Remove all unauthorized persons from the area where evidence is to be collected.
• Identify, seize and secure all electronic devices, including personal (have the employee sign a release or note the type of device, if s/he refuses) or portable devices.
• Recognize potential digital evidence in telephones, digital video recorders, other office appliances and motor vehicles.

If the computer is on or the power state cannot be determined:
• Look and listen for indications that the computer is on — e.g., fans running, drives spinning and lit light-emitting diodes (LEDs).
• If you cannot determine the power state of the computer, observe the monitor to determine if it is on, off or in sleep mode.
• Check display screen for signs of data destruction. Look out for words such as “delete,” “format,” “remove,” “copy,” “move,” “cut” or “wipe.”
• Look for indications that the computer is being accessed remotely and/or signs of ongoing com-
munications with other computers or users — e.g., Instant Messaging (IM) windows or chat rooms.
• Take note of all cameras and determine whether they are active.

Preliminary Interviews
•Separate and identify all adults of interest and record the location they occupied when you entered the scene. Obtain the following information from interviewee(s):
• Purpose of computers and devices.
• All users of the computers and devices.
• Type of Internet access and Internet service provider.
• Computer and Internet user information — e.g., login names, user account names and passwords, and Instant Message screen names.
• E-mail and Web mail (Web-based e-mail) accounts and Web pages.
• Account information for online social networking Web sites — e.g., Facebook, LinkedIn…
• All security provisions, data access restrictions, destructive devices or software in use.
• Any automated applications in use.
• Any other relevant information.

Documenting the Scene
Your documentation should include:
• The type, location, position, condition and power status of the device.
• A record of all activity and processes visible on the display screen(s).
• A record of all physical connections to and from the computers and other devices.
• A record of any network and wireless components capable of linking devices to each other and the Internet.
• The type, condition and power status of the device’s Internet and network access.
• Video, photos, notes and sketches to assist in recreating/conveying the details of the scene.
(Some computer systems and electronic devices — and the information they contain — may be protected under applicable laws, agency policies or other factors, that may prohibit collection of these devices or components. That’s when you call in a pro. However, do include the location, condition and power state of these devices in your documentation.)

Movement of a running computer or electronic device may cause changes or damage to the computer or device or the digital evidence it contains. Computers and electronic devices should not be moved until it is determined that they are powered off.

In Part II/II we will get into the meat of Evidence Collection. The instructions we will impart will not be generalizations but rather, actual, working directions.

Our Operatives: A step ahead.

As always, stay safe.

DHS Warns Hackers Targeting Millions Of Machines And Home Electronic Devices (alexanderhiggins.com)

Filed under: Computer Security, crime, cyber crime, invasion of privacy, investigation | Tagged: Collecting Evidence, Computer crime, Crime Scene Evidence, Electronics, ICloud, Internet service provider, security, smartphone | 2 Comments »

Top Ten Security/Investigation Predictions for 2012. Part I of II.

Posted on January 2, 2012 by Lina Maini

Hoping to give our readers an edge on awareness and combatting security and investigation concerns in 2012, below are our top five predictions in the area of information and data security management. (Next week, in II of this two-part series, we will cover the remaining five predictions, focused on evolving investigation concepts.)

1. Social networking redefining “privacy”.

Confidential user information is ending up online, in large part by the users themselves. We’ve grown into a society that maintains a different attitude toward protecting and sharing information. We are now more likely to reveal personal data and unlikely to take steps to keep information restricted. Within several years, privacy-conscious individuals will be in the minority.

2. Hackers will attack nontraditional targets.

To date, hackers’ goals have been mainly to steal money, obtain valuable data for resale, disrupt services and intimidate targets ranging from individuals to large corporations and governmental agencies. The new hack attacks will now concentrate on network-connected systems, such as medical equipment, actively controlling devices from external locations by unauthorized users. (This may explain the decision to not enable online election voting as within a networked system there is a 100% probability of its vulnerability to outside hacking attacks, which may include data interruption or manipulation.)

3. Smartphone and tablet platforms, especially Android, will suffer greater cybercriminal attacks.

As smartphone usage continues to grow worldwide, so will mobile platforms attacks. The Android platform, in particular, due to its open app distribution model, is and will continue to be, a favored cybercrminal’s target.

4. Virtual and cloud-based computing systems will encounter the same cybercriminal vulnerabilities as do physical systems.

The inevitable, using and or interacting with virtual and cloud-based computing systems, renders them just as vulnerable by conventional attack methods that hackers have used in the past. They see no need to change their criminal methodology as virtual and cloud platforms are just as easy to attack as physical systems but more difficult to protect. The burden will thus fall on IT admins to secure their company’s critical data as they adopt these technologies.

5. Bring-Your-Own-Device (BYOD) data breaches will dramatically increase.

The BYOD Era is here and, if anything, mobile device usage will only increase. As more and more corporate data is stored or accessed by mobile devices that are not fully controlled by IT administrators, the likelihood of data loss incidents will rise. The massive uptick expected in this area is directly attributable to improperly secured personal devices.

Just my thoughts: In the past decade+, I’ve noticed the wide range of expertise among IT administrators. Operating an entity’s internal information engine is one thing, securing it is an entirely different matter. Given the cost that security breaches can and have caused, perhaps it is time to upgrade the post-certification requirements for IT admins. Continuing education classes and annual re-certification may be viable solutions to the rapidly rising level of cybercriminality.

Our Operatives: Street smart; Tech savvy.

As always, stay safe.

Cyber criminals targeting mobile devices (premierlinedirect.co.uk)
Cloud Computing: Predictions For 2012 (cloud-computing.learningtree.com)
Social networking sites vulnerable to attacks in 2012 (thehindu.com)

Filed under: cyber crime, data, information, security | Tagged: Android, breach, Cloud computing, Computer crime, Computer security, data, Mobile operating system, security, smartphone | Leave a Comment »

Asset Searches – How Far is Far Enough?

Posted on August 15, 2011 by Lina Maini

Generally, an asset search investigation is requested to determine a subject’s tangible assets (or, quite often, to satisfy the court that there are no other recoverable assets beyond policy limits, albeit the injuries sustained may be valued at a much higher award).

Balancing the public’s privacy with informational needs is challenging but ultimately, very doable.

A basic checklist for the legal professional is to:

1. Relay the need-to-know reason to your investigative specialist. A business partnership dissolution v. a medmal case requires a very different focus.

2. Obtain as much lead information from your client as possible. The more information the investigative specialist is given, quite often, the more she can return and in a more cost-effective manner.

3. Local is often more reliable than generalized information. The first step in recording any asset begins at a local level. Many information companies provide “nationwide” information, which can widen the asset search scope. The drawbacks to commencing an asset search on a nationwide basis first, however, are

a) record update lag (delays up to 18 months),

b) incorrect data collection errors (many nationwide databases can return results only with exact names – misspellings will often register “no hit” status) and

c) incomplete information.

So now you, the attorney, have the subject’s tangible assets information. The subject owns a Chelsea duplex, a home in Hyde Park and a boat docked at the Bayside Marina. The next step, from an investigative standpoint, can range from determining if the subject has any liens, judgments, bankruptcies and other pending litigation to a full criminal background check.

In answer to our premise question then: Asset Searches: How Far is Far Enough? Assess the potential settlement/judgment and the likelihood of the subject having seizable assets. For a large settlement/judgment, request a full background and asset search (certain convictions can prohibit a person from holding officer position in a business); medium settlement/judgment: basic background and asset search and for a small judgment: a basic asset search.

BNI Operatives: One step ahead.

As always, be safe.

Personal finance 101: What is an asset? (csmonitor.com)

Filed under: asset search, background checks | Tagged: Asset, asset search, background check, Business, Business Services, criminal background check, Financial Services, investigation, security | Leave a Comment »

WordPress is experiencing tech issues. We will be up shortly.

Posted on May 16, 2011 by Lina Maini

Filed under: Spying Equipment | Tagged: Business, DropCam, High-definition video, Logitech, Motion detection, security, Skype, Webcam | Leave a Comment »

Investigation Urban Myths Debunked

Posted on April 11, 2011 by Lina Maini

Image via Wikipedia

At social events or during casual introductions, invariably the question is raised (sometimes politely), “So, what do you do?” Presumably, the person is requesting my career field information.

I’m dual-careered - investigations/security and animation development/production (proprietary property only) and occasionally, marketing (for clients as diverse as Domino’s Pizza to law firms to Sony). This career combination may appear odd but it’s a personal balance. Which field I initially disclose is based on the requestor’s behavior. I tend to be more restrained on discussing the investigative field. The reason? Urban myths about private investigations. Whether generated by common lore, CSI or playing junior detective at home (we’re all curious), the majority of non-investigative specialists really do believe that products, concepts and forensics methods, exist in reality. For that reason, I’m debunking one in each category today in Myth/Reality/Explanation format:

1. Untraceable cell phones. NO SUCH THING.

We’ve all seen the ads for “throw-a-way” phones, “turn your electrical jack into an instant phone – no number necessary” and the latest hi-tech “soft phone” (software download that is run through your ISP.) If law enforcement has the reason and can show cause – all of these untraceables are locateable. Manufacturers know which numbers are shipped to specific stores, the electrical jack converter does have a hidden (from you) tracker and rule-of-thumb and common sense, if it is downloadable, it is traceable. The factors of whether l.e. decides to go through the effort depends on the case and cause.

2. Unlocateable person. FALSE.

(The following information does not apply to certain people in law enforcement or under protective cover – although, they too can be flushed out, the expenditure – i.e., money and time – is not usually individually undertaken.)

Every person leaves a trail – including when they go off the grid. There is a lot of advice from so-called experts on how to hide your identity. It is no longer possible, given our existence in the Information Age.

What can be done to cloud your whereabouts, assets and history is a) plant red herrings/false information, b) protect assets association (if you have to ask, don’t even try it. It can be done – LEGALLY – just hire an expert.) and c) employ a good, tech-savvy P.I. and/or reputation saver provider. (Be very careful with the latter. Ask for specifics on data for which they will search. Provide as much info yourself. Unless you have money to toss around or think this is a “test the investigator” game, you have to know why you want information withheld from the public. You may not know which information will come back to haunt or trip you up or even that it is out there, but your investigator must be told the reason for your request. A party photo of you holding a glass of wine is not a big issue if you realize your assets are being researched – but it can make one heck of a difference in a child custody case. Also, when the results of what amounts to your own background check are provided to you, request the identification of the sites, databases, deep drills… that returned a ”no hit” status. What you think may be lurking out there just might be but you may have unwittingly misinformed your investigator. Conversely, you want to ensure that information that is returned was run through a comprehensive investigative wringer.)

3. DNA is incontrovertible proof. WRONG.

While extremely effective, forensics scientists have proven that DNA can be modified with false markers and it can also be manufactured. There is always Option Three for those with true intent – plant their target’s DNA at the designated scene.

This is the proper forum to ask these questions. And they are very welcome here. If any of our loyal readers have any questions on any other urban investigation myths, please, query as to your curiosity. Either myself, an expert partner or contact will provide you with the truth – as we know, experience (we are actively in the field) and test it. Ask away.

BNI Operatives: A step ahead.

As always, stay safe.

Filed under: background checks, cell phone, DNA | Tagged: background check, DNA, information, investigations., people locate, reputation saver, security, untraceable phone | Leave a Comment »

How To Crack Forgotten PDF Password

Posted on February 28, 2011 by Lina Maini

Image via Wikipedia

We deliver our client reports mostly in PDF format. For several reasons, mainly to avoid modification, we have set passwords to all of our pdf docs. There are two types of security passwords that are utilized with PDFs: the user password which will prevent anyone from opening the document and the owner password with which one can avoid having the document copied, modified or printed.

PDF security may present problems however if you or anyone in your firm/company loses the user password for your own files or you are accessing someone else’s files and they have forgotten their owner password.

WARNING

Be careful. Depending on the country in which you reside/work, attempting to crack any encryption software could be illegal, even if you own the content. Make sure you are legally entitled to access the data before attempting any of the below methods.

When you cannot copy or modify the PDF file, try a non-Adobe Print to PDF

If the file you’ve downloaded from your library is locked, you may not be able to mark-up the electronic copy.

Try printing the document to PDF again, but using a non-Adobe PDF converter. It should look the same, and you will be able to modify the new version, so you need not print it out before reading it.

When you cannot copy or print the PDF file, try Gmail

To extract the text from a protected PDF file, mail it to your Gmail account, then use the “View as HTML” option. This should allow you to copy the text and (most of) the images, and to print a version of the file, though the layout may not be similar. This may not work with very large files.

When you cannot copy or print the PDF file, try a Password Remover

You can often remove the owner password using AnyBizSoft PDF Password Remover or similar software.

When you can not open the PDF files, try Password Recovery

Cracking the user password is very difficult and time-consuming. There is password recovery software that typically will use a brute force approach, trying all possible combinations. These methods of cracking could take days or even longer, but should produce results eventually.

BNI Operatives: Street smart; Web savvy.

Our thoughts and prayers are with the people of Haiti and all affected by the horrific earthquake that struck the island this past Tuesday afternoon. The loss of lives is in the tens of thousands; the suffering incalculable. May their pain be eased.

As always, stay safe.

Unlock Secured PDF Files Online For Free (tesarn.blogspot.com)
Wondershare Launches the First PDF Converter on Mac App Store (prnewswire.com)

Filed under: Computer Security | Tagged: Adobe Acrobat, brute force, Data Formats, Document, documents, encryption crack, format, Haiti, owner passwword, passowrd, password, pdf, Portable Document Format, Publishing, security, user password | Leave a Comment »

Lights, Camera, Actionable?

Posted on December 6, 2010 by Lina Maini

Image via Wikipedia

Rarely.

A recent survey by the American Management Association revealed that more than half of the employers who responded use video surveillance at work to counter theft, violence, or sabotage. Also, 16% of the employers surveyed used video surveillance to monitor employee performance.

Most states have passed at least some privacy-related laws. Many of these laws are intended to protect consumers by, for example, limiting the ways companies may use personal information or requiring businesses to maintain the confidentiality of medical information or Social Security numbers. (See HIPAA, FACTA, specifically the Red Flag regulations.)

So where does the employee’s expectation of privacy end and the employer’s right to monitor his/her business begin? Pretty much as soon as the employee steps onto company owned property (including corporate vehicles).

Privacy for Certain Employee Activities

Even if your state hasn’t passed laws that specifically protect workplace privacy, you almost certainly can’t be taped or filmed while doing certain things at work, such as using the restroom or changing clothes.

If there’s no state law that specifically allows or prohibits surveillance, courts determine whether an employee’s privacy has been violated by looking at two competing interests: the employer’s need to conduct surveillance and the employee’s reasonable expectation of privacy. An employee who is using the bathroom or getting undressed has a very strong, and very reasonable, expectation of privacy — and few (if any) employers will have a substantial enough need to film employees doing these things to override the employee’s interest. (African blood diamond mines aside.)

Other activities may also be off-limits for employer surveillance. For example, employers may not secretly film or tape union meetings. Also, new litigation is emerging regarding women expressing breast milk at work. Many women involved in this activity believe a separate area (surveillance free) should be established in companies of reasonable sizes to afford to do so, space-wise.

What and Where Can An Employer Place Surveillance Cameras

(The below information applies to NYS. Please contact your state’s Department of Labor for state-specific rules regulating workplace electronic surveillance.)

- Hidden and in-view cameras can be installed at the workplace.

- The electronic cameras may not contain audio capture.

- Surveillance cameras may not be placed in locker rooms, shower rooms, bathrooms or employee lounges.

Bear in mind also that a full 66% of employers now monitor internet usage at the workplace.

BNI Operatives: Steps Ahead.

It’s Getting So a Stalker Can’t Have a Reasonable Expectation of Privacy Anymore (michellemalkin.com)

Filed under: cameras | Tagged: American Management Association, Business, cameras at work, CCTV, Closed-circuit television, Employment, Expectation of privacy, privacy, security, Surveillance | Leave a Comment »

How to Read Fingerprints

Posted on November 15, 2010 by Lina Maini

No two fingers have ever been found that are identical. No two fingerprints have been found that are anywhere near identical. So the best evidence is empirical. But there has always been an intrinsic appeal to develop a mathematical basis, a statistical basis for fingerprint uniqueness. And this interest commenced almost at the dawn of fingerprints as a means of personal identification with Sir Francis Galton. Now all of us here identify Galton with fingerprints but before he became interested in fingerprints, Galton was already established as one of the foremost anthropologists and statisticians in the world. He had enormous stature in the scientific world, which was one of the reasons that fingerprints were so readily accepted worldwide. Once Galton gave fingerprints his stamp of approval, all systematic skepticism ceased.

The FBI produced a mathematical model in which 50,000 fingerprints were compared with 50,000 other fingerprints. And their model told them that it was mathematically impossible, one chance in ten to the 16th, that’s one in 10 million billion, for two fingerprints to agree in more than four Galton characteristics. In the United States is a very loose convention, basically 12 points of similarity , that is 12 Galton characteristics would constitute a bomb proof identification. The British were more conservative and insisted on 16 points. The FBI laboratory has taken the position that eight characteristics was enough, particularly if they were clear. Bear in mind that here in the U.S., the court-acceptable number of fingerprint points varies per jurisdiction. Below is the Galton model from which fingerprint point are defined.

Island Dot Bifurcation Ending Ridge

Print with points highlighted:

Point Key:

Basic and composite ridge characteristics (minutiae)
Minutiae	Example	Minutiae	Example
ridge ending		bridge
bifurcation		double bifurcation
dot		trifurcation
island (short ridge)		opposed bifurcations
lake (enclosure)		ridge crossing
hook (spur)		opposed bifurcation/ridge ending