The Intercept

Três mulheres, três países, o mesmo crime: a luta feminina contra a violência do Estado

8 March 2017 - 5:00pm

Mulheres fortes, posicionadas na linha de frente de grupos e movimentos sociais em todo o mundo, seja por bandeiras abertamente feministas ou não. São mães, filhas, irmãs, amigas que se levantam contra as injustiças que tiraram a vida de alguém que elas amavam.

The Intercept Brasil conversou com três mulheres ativistas do Brasil, da Jamaica e dos Estados Unidos, em fevereiro durante um encontro da Anistia Internacional, no Rio de Janeiro. Nos três casos, seus familiares foram vítimas do Estado. A forma como foram mortos e o fracasso da Justiça em responsabilizar os agentes do Estado pelos assassinatos têm um impacto profundo e duradouro sobre essas mulheres, que se tornaram forças-motoras de luta social.

“Naquele dia, tinha 23 policiais militares que estavam em fase de formatura, eles precisavam de diploma para entrar na Polícia Militar, fazer o ‘batismo’. Aquele era o último dia deles. E eles resolveram naquele dia fazer o holocausto do meu filho e o meu também. Eles abordaram Davi, ele estava conversando com uma pessoa, foi comprar alguma coisa às 7h da manhã. A testemunha disse assim: Não, ele mora aqui, é meu vizinho, tem nada a ver com isso não. E ele [o policial] fez: Bom, já que não tem ninguém, vai ele mesmo.”

O caso de Davi Fiúza — jovem de 16 anos sequestrado e morto por agentes da Polícia Militar da Bahia em 2014 — corre até hoje no Ministério Público, que segue prorrogando o prazo de entrega do inquérito desde 2016. Foram acusados 23 policiais, então formandos.

Sua história reflete a de tantos outros jovens, negros, moradores de periferias: o perfil apontado pela Anistia Internacional em seu relatório anual como os mais “desproporcionalmente afetados pela violência por parte de policiais”. Segundo o relatório final da CPI do Senado sobre o Assassinato de Jovens, a cada 23 minutos, um jovem negro é morto no Brasil.

Índices similares se repetem em outros países, onde histórias parecidas com a de Fiuza não cansam de se repetir. Nos Estados Unidos, um jovem negro de 15 a 34 anos corre um risco 9 vezes maior de ser morto pelas mãos de agentes policiais do que os demais. Na Jamaica, entre 2005 e 2013, mais de 200 pessoas foram mortas por policiais a cada ano. No entanto, desde 2000, apenas dois policiais foram julgados culpados por assassinato no país.

“Formamos essa coalizão, e é incrível, porque te dá força, te motiva a continuar. Eu, pessoalmente, sou uma líder. É simplesmente automático, foi intuitivo para mim começar a liderar essas mulheres, a ser a fonte da força delas. Eu sempre fui a fonte de força na minha família, agora sou uma fonte para elas. Porque muitas delas estão destruídas, muitas delas não têm o apoio de suas famílias. Então nós somos a família. Nós nos vemos como irmãs.”

A fala de Marion Gray-Hopkins retrata uma dificuldade que ela mesma observa entre outras mulheres: a dificuldade e a falta de apoio familiar na decisão de militar por uma causa.

A pesquisa “Feminismo e igualdade de gênero pelo mundo” perguntou, entre outras coisas, se as mulheres teriam medo de defender a igualdade de direitos por algo que pudesse acontecer com elas em represália ao ativismo. Foram entrevistadas 17.551 pessoas de 24 países, entre elas 8.822 mulheres. Das brasileiras entrevistadas, 41% disseram ter medo de defender os próprios direitos – a média mundial é de 26%. Dos 24 países participantes, o Brasil ficou em terceiro lugar neste quesito, perdendo apenas para Índia e Turquia.

São dados como este que confirmam a importância de grupos como os formados pelas três entrevistadas que figuram nesta matéria. É da troca de experiências e do apoio em rede, presentes nos relatos das três, que surge a força para buscar justiça.

“Quando você abraça uma mãe que perdeu um filho, tem quase uma transferência de emoções, de força. Não é apenas um abraço, é algo que transcende até a barreira linguística pela qual passei no Brasil. Nós conversamos sem precisar falar muito. Aquele olhar; aquele punho que está cerrado; a maneira como elas te encaram; a maneira como elas te garantem, na forma como acariciam a sua mão, para dizer ‘eu te entendo’. Estamos nessa juntas, mais fortes juntas.”

The post Três mulheres, três países, o mesmo crime: a luta feminina contra a violência do Estado appeared first on The Intercept.

CIA’s New “Digital Innovation” Division Can’t Seem to Keep Its Own Secrets

8 March 2017 - 4:48pm

Two years ago, John Brennan, who was then director of the Central Intelligence Agency under President Obama, announced a far-reaching and controversial reorganization of the CIA. Before, most agency employees were assigned to one of four “directorates.” The Directorate of Operations, the agency’s eyes and ears, handled espionage in the field. The Directorate of Intelligence was the brains, processing and synthesizing raw intelligence, then writing it up into “assessments” and “estimates,” which percolated all the way up to the Oval Office. The Directorate of Science and Technology made the gear. The Directorate of Support managed the back office and kept the ships running on time.

Brennan’s reorganization added a brand-new Directorate of Digital Innovation, or DDI. Officially, the new directorate was responsible for “the integration of our digital and cyber capabilities.” This meant retrofitting the CIA for cyberwar, where victory depends on hacking other peoples’ secrets and protecting your own. Now, with the “Vault 7” release from WikiLeaks, it looks as though the youngest wing of the CIA is surprisingly porous. While it remains to be seen exactly what the rest of “Vault 7” will bring, the first batch of files appear to come almost exclusively from within the new directorate.

Of course, has CIA long engaged in cyber-espionage. Before Brennan established a new digital directorate, offensive cyber operations were undertaken by the CIA’s Information Operations Center. One of the Vault 7 files, called “Fine Dining,” gives a detailed overview of how the CIA’s cyber capabilities support operations in the field. Spies could request support to digitally surveil everyone from foreign governments to system administrators to their own “assets” or sources, even if their contact with the target was less than one minute long.

Unlike the Snowden disclosures, the initial Vault 7 release does not have much to say about exactly who the CIA was targeting and whether it have engaged in domestic spying. The techniques described in the files—surreptitiously implanted malware, hoarded “zero day” attacks,” and eavesdropping to smart TVs—are advanced but not mind-blowing. What is more surprising is how an agency charged with protecting the nation’s secrets apparently failed to keep track of its own. Vault 7 figures to be the most serious public breach of CIA secrecy since 1969, when case officer Philip Agee resigned and wrote a firsthand exposé on covert CIA activities in Latin America.

Last summer, the new directorate’s deputy director told Bloomberg that a “well-meaning but incompetent insider” is at fault for cyber breaches. That the WikiLeaks documents would come from within the new DDI is especially embarrassing for Brennan, who served as Obama’s White House counter-terrorism advisor during years when the administration pursued multiple investigations into journalists and their sources. Even as Brennan was publicly blaming Edward Snowden for the 2015 Paris attacks, he appears to have had some trouble mopping up the leaks in his own house. According to WikiLeaks, the CIA’s “hacking arsenal” was “circulated among former U.S. government hackers and contractors in an unauthorized manner.” While it is possible that the unauthorized circulation occurred after Brennan’s departure, in January 2017, the documents themselves date from 2013 to 2016, years when Brennan was pushing through his internal overhaul.

In November, Reuters published a long report on Brennan’s re-organization plan, which concluded the plan would involve “weakening the role of the Directorate of Operations.” The CIA has long had internal friction between Operations and Analysis. The Intercept reported in November last year that Trump’s national security team is considering reversing Brennan’s reforms. The most controversial part of Brennan’s re-organization is the creation of ten new “mission centers,” based around individual issues and regions, that brought analysts and career case officers together on a single staff. Some in Operations saw Brennan as representative of perceived defects in the analyst culture—data-driven, risk-adverse, with an increasing bias for signals intelligence over on-the-ground human sources.

A former CIA employee from the directorate of operations, who asked not be named because of the classified nature of their work, said many inside the agency were critical of Brennan’s reforms. “The joke we’d tell about Brennan was that big ops carry big risk, little ops carry little risk, and no ops carry no risk.”

The post CIA’s New “Digital Innovation” Division Can’t Seem to Keep Its Own Secrets appeared first on The Intercept.

Em pleno século XXI, “história” insiste em apagar a produção das mulheres negras

8 March 2017 - 4:20pm

Já não me lembro como cheguei à tese “Os Segredos de Virgínia: Estudo de Atitudes Raciais em São Paulo (1945-1955)”, de Janaína Damaceno Gomes. Janaína é professora da Faculdade de Educação da Baixada Fluminense, doutora em Antropologia Social pela USP e Mestre em Educação e Bacharel em Filosofia pela Unicamp. Virgínia foi normalista, educadora sanitária, visitadora psiquiátrica, psicologista, socióloga e psicanalista, desafiando não apenas o lugar que se propunha ou se esperava para uma mulher – principalmente uma mulher negra – na primeira metade do século passado, mas também o pensamento dominante em relação a temas como educação e relações raciais.

O trabalho de Virgínia quase foi mantido em segredo, como nos conta Janaína, “pelo roubo de arquivos, pelo mofar literal da tese da autora, por entrevistas não publicadas, por citações não feitas, por textos extirpados de compêndios, pela eleição de uma bibliografia canônica que se perpetua e muito pouco é revisada…”. Qualquer semelhança com algumas situações atuais não é mera coincidência.

Virgínia Leone Bicudo nasceu em São Paulo, em 1910, filha de Giovanna Leone, imigrante italiana, e de Theofilo Júlio Bicudo. Giovanna trabalhava como criada na casa do Coronel Bento Bicudo, em Campinas, onde conheceu o jovem Theofilo, nascido do ventre livre da escrava Virgínia Júlio. Apadrinhado pelo coronel, Theofilo foi bastante ambicioso para um jovem negro, e seu sonho era cursar a Faculdade de Medicina de São Paulo, onde foi barrado por um professor que acreditava que aquele não era lugar para negros. O casal teve seis filhos e resolveu investir na educação deles.

Virgínia gostava de estudar e seguia a recomendação dos pais de ser bastante aplicada, “para evitar ser prejudicada e dominada pela expectativa de rejeição… por causa da cor da pele”. “Olha, a ideia de meu pai era que as pessoas valem pelo estudo, pelo preparo que têm, estudando, isso era meu pai. Então, meu pai pôs todos na escola”, disse, em entrevista a Marcos Maio, em 1995. Mas logo veria que isto não era verdade, pois era seguida pelos colegas aos gritos de “negrinha, negrinha, negrinha”.

Em 1930, Virgínia Leone se formou na Escola Normal e, em 1932, depois de concluir o curso de Educação Sanitária, começou a trabalhar como educadora sanitária e depois como visitadora psiquiátrica, chegando ao cargo de supervisora das visitadoras na Clínica de Orientação Infantil de São Paulo. Durante esse tempo, circulou bastante pela cidade, conhecendo a realidade de várias crianças que eram tratadas como “problemáticas” pela campanha higienista e as ideias eugênicas que tomavam conta da política de implantação da escola pública brasileira. Talvez tenha se reconhecido nelas.

Em 1936, foi a única mulher a ingressar no curso de Ciências Políticas e Sociais da recém fundada Escola Livre de Sociologia e Política, onde em formou em 1938. “Eu fui para a escola de sociologia porque eu tinha sofrimento, tinha dor, e eu queria saber o que me causava tanto sofrimento. E eu colocava que eram condições exteriores a mim. Então eu pensei que a Sociologia iria me esclarecer sobre os motivos do meu sofrimento.”

Durante o curso, Virgínia tomará contato com ideias novas que, mais tarde, darão um novo rumo à sua carreira: “…pela primeira vez em minha vida, eu ouvi falar de Freud, em sublimação e fatores internos. Então eu disse, bem, não é sociologia que eu tenho que estudar, eu tenho que estudar é psicanálise e Freud.”

Menos do que “embranquecer”, a ascensão social cria consciência da cor.

Seu interesse pela psicanálise vai levá-la a ser a primeira mulher a fazer análise na América Latina, em 1937. E é bastante interessante pensarmos que uma mulher negra, querendo entender as dores causadas pelo racismo, tenha sido a primeira a se deitar no divã de uma mulher alemã judia que veio para o Brasil a convite da recém fundada Sociedade Brasileira de Psicanálise, a Dra. Adelheid Koch, que também fugia do nazismo.

Continuando seus estudos, integrante da primeira turma de pós-graduação em Ciências Sociais no Brasil, sob a orientação de Donald Pierson, Virgínia Leone Bicudo é a primeira pessoa a defender uma tese sobre relações raciais no Brasil, em 1945, “Estudo de atitudes raciais de pretos e mulatos em São Paulo”. Neste mesmo ano, é contratada como professora da faculdade de Higiene e Saúde Pública da Universidade de São Paulo. Em 1949, foi convidada a integrar a projeto de pesquisa sobre relações raciais da UNESCO, sob coordenação de Roger Bastide e Florestan Fernandes. Seu trabalho, que depois será mantido fora da publicação dos resultados de tal projeto, em 1957, é o único a concluir que o Brasil não é a democracia racial que todos gostariam que fosse, contrariando, inclusive, as conclusões de seu orientador, Donald Pierson. Segundo ele, existia preconceito no Brasil, mas ele era mais de classe do que de raça.

Ao estudar negros e mulatos que tinham conseguido alguma ascensão social em São Paulo, Virgínia conclui que, menos do que “embranquecer”, a ascensão social cria consciência da cor, porque mesmo tendo condições financeiras para frequentar certos locais, como clubes e hotéis, os negros que podiam pagar eram rejeitados por causa de sua cor.

Aprofundando seus estudos em psicanálise, Virgínia Leone Bicudo se torna a primeira psicanalista não médica no Brasil, sendo acusada de charlatã. Indignada com o tratamento recebido, parte para Londres em 1955, onde tem contato e estuda com os analistas mais importantes de sua época, como Melanie Klein, Ernest Jones, Winnicott, Bion e Anna Freud. A partir de Londres, para divulgar a psicanálise, Virgínia transmite várias palestras para o Brasil, através da BBC.

Quando retorna, em 1959, já está com um nome consolidado para retornar a atividade clínica, atendendo a elite paulistana, como o atual senador Eduardo Suplicy. É uma das fundadoras do Instituto de Psicanálise da SBPSB, em Brasília, teve um dos programas mais ouvidos e comentados da Rádio Excelsior, onde comentava e dramatizava casos enviados para ela via carta, o “Nosso Mundo Mental”. Com o mesmo nome, que também batizou seu livro, tinha uma coluna no jornal Folha da Manhã. Virgínia ficou rica com a psicanálise, sendo uma das primeiras mulheres a dirigir o próprio carro pelas ruas de São Paulo, na década de 1950, e adquirindo vários imóveis pela cidade. Mas, de acordo com Janaína Damaceno, teve uma morte negra, em 2003, aos 93 anos de idade: esquecida, enlouquecida, abandonada em uma instituição para doentes mentais.

A tese de Virgínia somente foi resgatada e publicada em 2010, no centenário de seu nascimento. Virgínia estava certa em relação ao racismo quando a escreveu e foi silenciada por seus pares, que não concordavam com ela. Janaína Damaceno nos conta que encontrou sua tese, a primeira sobre questões raciais no Brasil, úmida e mofada, nos arquivos da Escola de Sociologia e Política da USP.

Ainda é bastante atual este processo de apagamento da produção intelectual de mulheres negras, e ilustro com um caso narrado pela própria Janaína na tese: “Enquanto realizava o doutoramento, prestei a seleção para uma bolsa de doutorado sanduiche de uma fundação americana. Quando fui entrevistada, um dos membros da banca, um cientista social, me interpelou acerca da veracidade de haver brasileiros estudando psicanálise e sendo psicanalisados no Brasil já nos anos 1940, e observou que isso deveria ser um erro crasso de minha pesquisa visto que os argentinos tinham uma tradição em psicanálise anterior à nossa, e pelo fato de que, sendo gaúcho, ficava óbvia essa tradição. Contestou também a existência de Virgínia Bicudo enquanto mulher negra, já que havia trabalhado com Florestan Fernandes e conhecia bem do assunto. Não recebi a bolsa.”

Ao longo dos tempos, é exatamente o que continuamos a ver: nosso conhecimento e trabalho sendo contestados por quem não os conhece. Racismo e machismo trabalhando juntos para nos manter na posição de meros objetos de estudo, como gostaria o sociólogo Luiz Aguiar Costa Pinto, ao ser acusado de distorção de fatos e plágio por Abdias do Nascimento e Alberto Guerreiro Ramos. Autor do livro “O negro no Rio de Janeiro”, Costa Pinto não gostou de ser interpelado pelos seus “objetos de estudo”, e que era uma ameaça às ciências sociais que um pesquisador pudesse. 

Resposta dada por Costa Pinto a um jornal carioca da época, em trecho do livro “O sortilégio da cor: identidade, raça e gênero no Brasil”

Para quem desafiou e continua desafiando este lugar de “material de laboratório”, meus profundos agradecimentos. Em honra a todas as mulheres negras que lutam por respeito, espaço e reconhecimento, deixo o meu muito obrigado a Dona Virgínia Leone Bicudo e a Dra. Janaina Damaceno Gomes. Elas nos representam!

The post Em pleno século XXI, “história” insiste em apagar a produção das mulheres negras appeared first on The Intercept.

Trump Picks Hawkish Critic of Russia as NATO Ambassador, Veering From One Extreme to the Other

8 March 2017 - 3:27pm

President Trump has reportedly tapped as his ambassador to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) a hawkish critic of Russia who wants the U.S. to arm Ukraine. It’s the latest sign that the administration is reacting to criticism that it is too soft on Russia by pivoting to the other extreme.

Richard Grennell is a former Bush-era U.S. spokesperson at the United Nations who also served as a foreign policy spokesperson for Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign. He frequently appears on Fox News and other conservative outlets saying President Obama appeased Russia.

Following Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the conflict in eastern Ukraine, Obama resisted political pressure from hawks in Congress to provide lethal arms to the Ukranian government, fearing that doing so would only cause Russia to escalate its own military involvement.

Writing in The New York Times’s Room for Debate section in 2014, Grenell said that Obama’s belief that the U.S. could “support Ukraine but not antagonize Russia” represented “a naïve and dangerous world view.” In a Fox News op-ed, he proposed military escalation: “Offer advice and training to Ukraine, and sell it the lethal weapons required to contend with Russian armored personnel carriers, tanks and missiles,” he wrote, adding that the U.S. should also restart missile defense shield programs in Poland and the Czech Republic.

Grennell also counseled Obama to leave directly military confrontation with Russia over Ukraine “on the table.”

“The Obama doctrine only persuades Putin that he need never fear the U.S. military — the world’s most powerful deterrent,” he wrote. “Even if Obama would never start a war with Russia, he should stop swearing off military action in public. Instead, President Obama, through his inexhaustible number of speeches and statements, should rhetorically leave military action on the table.”

Although his support for arming Ukraine stretches back years, Grenell was continuing to advocate for lethal aid for Ukraine as recently as Tuesday via his Twitter account, which he frequently uses to opine on world affairs:

then you should be advocating for selling Ukraine weapons. https://t.co/OeULdcm1WL

— Richard Grenell (@RichardGrenell) March 7, 2017

Grenell is not the only Russia hawk to step into Trump’s orbit recently.

His new national security adviser, H.R. McMaster, holds more moderate views on Islam than his bigoted predecessor Michael Flynn — but also has a more adversarial view of Russia. In May, he described the Russian annexation of Crimea as an attempt “to collapse the post-World War Two, certainly the post-Cold War, security, economic, and political order in Europe and replace that order with something that is more sympathetic to Russian interests.” While Trump has been critical of NATO — at one point in early January calling it “obsolete” — McMaster is a strong supporter of the alliance.

Trump’s UN Ambassador Nikki Haley has also taken a tough line with Russia during her first month on the job. “The dire situation in eastern Ukraine is one that demands clear and strong condemnation of Russian actions,” she said of Russian-allied forces there. She also affirmed continued support for U.S. sanctions on Russia that were enacted in response to the annexation of Crimea, saying: “The United States continues to condemn and calls for an immediate end to the Russian occupation of Crimea. Crimea is a part of Ukraine. Our Crimea-related sanctions will remain in place until Russia returns control over the peninsula to Ukraine.”

Some Russian government officials, including those who were initially openly supportive of Trump, are starting to grow uneasy with the president’s approach, reported Moscow-based journalist Amie-Ferris Rotman for Foreign Policy. “We were too early in our decision, made with absolute sympathy towards President Trump’s constructive rhetoric, that he would somehow be pro-Russian,” Leonid Slutsky, who is head of the Russian parliament’s foreign affairs committee, said in February. “But he turned out to be pro-American.”

Top photo: A Ukrainian soldier stands at the front line of the ATO operation in Artemovsk, Ukraine, in 2015.

The post Trump Picks Hawkish Critic of Russia as NATO Ambassador, Veering From One Extreme to the Other appeared first on The Intercept.

WikiLeaks Files Show the CIA Repurposing Hacking Code To Save Time, Not To Frame Russia

8 March 2017 - 2:28pm

Attributing hacking attacks to the correct perpetrators is notoriously difficult. Even the U.S. government, for all its technical resources and expertise, took warranted criticism for trying to pin a high-profile 2014 cyberattack on North Korea, and more recently faced skepticism when it blamed Russia for hacks against top Democrats during the 2016 election.

In those cases, government officials said they based their attribution in part on software tools the hackers employed, which had been used in other cyberattacks linked to North Korea and Russia. But that sort of evidence is not conclusive; hackers have been known to intentionally use or leave behind software and other distinctive material linked to other groups as part of so-called false flag operations intended to falsely implicate other parties. Researchers at Russian digital security firm Kaspersky Lab have documented such cases.

On Tuesday, Wikileaks published a large cache of CIA documents that it said showed the agency had equipped itself to run its own false-flag hacking operations. The documents describe an internal CIA group called UMBRAGE that Wikileaks said was stealing the techniques of other nation-state hackers to trick forensic investigators into falsely attributing CIA attacks to those actors. According to Wikileaks, among those from whom the CIA has stolen techniques is the Russian Federation, suggesting the CIA is conducting attacks to intentionally mislead investigators into attributing them to Vladimir Putin.

“With UMBRAGE and related projects, the CIA can not only increase its total number of attack types, but also misdirect attribution by leaving behind the ‘fingerprints’ of the groups that the attack techniques were stolen from,” Wikileaks writes in a summary of its CIA document dump

It’s a claim that seems intended to shed doubt on the U.S. government’s attribution of Russia in the DNC hack; the Russian Federation was the only nation specifically named by Wikileaks as a potential victim of misdirected attribution. It’s also a claim that some media outlets have accepted and repeated without question.

“WikiLeaks said there’s an entire department within the CIA whose job it is to ‘misdirect attribution by leaving behind the fingerprints’ of others, such as hackers in Russia,” CNN reported without caveats.

It would be possible to leave such fingerprints if the CIA were re-using unique source code written by other actors to intentionally implicate them in CIA hacks, but the published CIA documents don’t say this. Instead they indicate the UMBRAGE group is doing something much less nefarious.

They say UMBRAGE is borrowing hacking “techniques” developed or used by other actors to use in CIA hacking projects. This is intended to save the CIA time and energy by copying methods already proven successful. If the CIA were actually re-using source code unique to a specific hacking group this could lead forensic investigators to mis-attribute CIA attacks to the original creators of the code. But the documents appear to say the UMBRAGE group is writing snippets of code that mimic the functionality of other hacking tools and placing it in a library for CIA developers to draw on when designing custom CIA tools.

“The goal of this repository is to provide functional code snippets that can be rapidly combined into custom solutions,” notes a document in the cache that discusses the project. “Rather than building feature-rich tools, which are often costly and can have significant CI value, this effort focuses on developing smaller and more targeted solutions built to operational specifications.”

Robert Graham, CEO of Errata Security, agrees that the CIA documents are not talking about framing Russia or other nations.

“What we can conclusively say from the evidence in the documents is that they’re creating snippets of code for use in other projects and they’re reusing methods in code that they find on the internet,” he told The Intercept. “Elsewhere they talk about obscuring attacks so you can’t see where it’s coming from, but there’s no concrete plan to do a false flag operation. They’re not trying to say ‘We’re going to make this look like Russia’.”

The UMBRAGE documents do mention looking at source code, but these reference widely available source code for popular tools, not source code unique to, say, Russian Federation hackers. And the purpose of examining the source code seems to be for purposes of inspiring the CIA code developers in developing their code, not so they can copy/paste it into CIA tools.

It’s not unusual for attackers of all persuasion — nation-state and criminal — to copy the techniques of other hackers. Success breeds success. A month after Stuxnet was discovered in June 2010, someone created a copycat exploit to attack the same Windows vulnerability Stuxnet exploited.

Components the UMBRAGE project has borrowed from include keyloggers; tools for capturing passwords and webcam imagery; data-destruction tools; components for gaining escalated privileges on a machine and maintaining stealth and persistent presence; and tools for bypassing anti-virus detection.

Some of the techniques UMBRAGE has borrowed come from commercially available tools. The documents mention Dark Comet, a well-known remote access trojan, or RAT,  that can capture screenshots and keystrokes and grab webcam imagery, among other things.  The French programmer who created Dark Comet stopped distributing it after stories emerged that the Syrian government was using it to spy on dissidents. Another tool UMBRAGE highlights is RawDisk, a tool made by the commercial software company Eldos, which contains drivers that system administrators can use to securely delete information from hard drives.

But legitimate tools are often used by hackers for illegitimate purposes, and RawDisk is no different. It played a starring role in the Sony hack in 2014, where the attackers used it to wipe data from Sony’s servers.

It was partly the use of RawDisk that led forensic investigators to attribute the Sony hack to North Korea. That’s because RawDisk had been previously used in 2011 “Dark Seoul” hack attacks  that wiped the hard drives and master boot records of three banks and two media companies in South Korea. South Korea blamed the attack on North Korea and China. But RawDisk was also used in the destructive Shamoon attack in 2012 that wiped data from 30,000 systems at Saudi Aramco. That attack wasn’t attributed to North Korea, however; instead U.S. officials attributed it to Iran.

All of this highlights how murky attribution can be, particularly when focused only on the tools or techniques a group uses, and how the CIA is not doing anything different than other groups in borrowing tools and techniques.

“Everything they’re referencing [in the CIA documents] is extremely public code, which means the Russians are grabbing the same snippets and the Chinese are grabbing them and the U.S. is grabbing,” says Graham. “So they’re all grabbing the same snippets of code and then they’re making their changes to it.”

The CIA documents do talk elsewhere about using techniques to thwart forensic investigators and make it hard to attribute attacks and tools to the CIA. But the methods discussed are simply proper operational security techniques that any nation-state attackers would be expected to use in covert operations they don’t want attributed to them. The Intercept wasn’t able to find documents within the WikiLeaks cache that talk about tricking forensic investigators into attributing attacks to Russia. Instead they discuss do’s and don’ts of tradecraft, such as encrypting strings and configuration data in malware to prevent someone from reverse engineering the code, or removing file compilation timestamps to prevent investigators from making correlations between compilation times and the working hours of CIA hackers in the U.S.

Researchers at anti-virus firms often use compilation times to determine where a malware’s creators might be located geographically if their files are consistently compiled during work hours that are distinctive to a region. For example, tools believed to have been created in Israel have shown compilation times on Sunday, which is a normal workday in Israel.

The bottom line with the CIA data dump released by Wikileaks is that journalists and others should take care to examine statements made around them to ensure that they’re reporting accurately on the contents.

Top photo: Shadows are cast on the wall at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) headquarters in Langley, Va., in 2011.

The post WikiLeaks Files Show the CIA Repurposing Hacking Code To Save Time, Not To Frame Russia appeared first on The Intercept.

Video: 13-year-old Who Filmed Father’s Arrest by ICE Struggles with His Absence

8 March 2017 - 12:57pm

On February 28, Romulo Avelica-Gonzalez drove to Academia Avance, a small charter academy, to drop off two of his daughters at school. Academia Avance is located in Highland Park, a predominantly Latino, rapidly gentrifying neighborhood in Northeast Los Angeles, where pupuserias and undercover garment factories have struck an uneasy truce with gourmet bakeries and vintage vinyl record stores. After dropping one daughter, Romulo was pulled over by ICE agents, who were unaware that 13-year-old Fatima was still in the backseat. Over uncontrollable sobs, Fatima filmed the arrest with her cell phone.

Romulo Avelica-Gonzalez has a DUI charge from eight years ago, which had long been resolved, at least according to the rules that existed before Trump took office, and he was once charged with driving without a license. (Prior to 2015, undocumented immigrants could not obtain driver’s licenses in California.) He also purchased a used car nearly 20 years ago, without knowing it bore a registration sticker that had been stolen from another car. For this he was charged with “receipt of stolen property.”

These details of Romulo’s life have come to define him in the eyes of the government, rather than other more meaningful details such as the fact that he gets up at 5 a.m. every morning, often after returning from work well after midnight, to take his daughters to running practice. Or the fact that his niece, who views him as her father, is both class president and valedictorian, and thanks to his coaching will be running the Los Angeles Marathon later this month along with Fatima. In the Trump administration’s view of the world, an undocumented immigrant who has committed any legal infraction, however frivolous and however long ago, is a “bad hombre” — even one whom anyone else in the world would recognize only as a hard worker and an exemplary father.

Romulo’s story has received international media attention, probably because of the video Fatima shot from the back seat of her dad’s car. Thanks to that attention (and due to a quarantine in response to a chickenpox outbreak at the detention facility where he’s being held), he has not yet been deported. Attorneys are fighting for his release, and his fate is still up in the air. In the meantime, many more men like Romulo are being shipped away in the night outside of the media’s fickle gaze, without access to legal counsel, often without even appearing in court. Romulo’s family is both lucky and unlucky.

The post Video: 13-year-old Who Filmed Father’s Arrest by ICE Struggles with His Absence appeared first on The Intercept.

Já conhece a vasta literatura produzida por mulheres negras?

8 March 2017 - 12:37pm

Em 2009 a escritora nigeriana Chimamanda Adichie falou sobre “O perigo de uma única história”, no TEDx. Ela discorreu sobre o erro que é conhecer histórias sob apenas um aspecto e de como isso contamina nossas percepções de mundo.

Hoje conhecida mundialmente, Chimamanda aprendeu a ler e a viajar pelas linhas dos livros lendo os autores que tinha à mão, que eram geralmente americanos ou britânicos. Devido a colonização britânica, o inglês é a língua oficial da Nigéria e, claro, a influência cultural inglesa é massiva no país.

Quando foi apresentada à literatura africana de Chinua Achebe e Camara Laye, a autora mudou sua perspectiva, sua narrativa e sua vida. Começou a ver – e ler – as coisas fora da perspectiva do observador e, no caso, do “vencedor”. “Eu percebi que pessoas como eu, meninas com a pele da cor de chocolate, cujos cabelos crespos não poderiam formar rabos-de-cavalo, também podiam existir na literatura. Eu comecei a escrever sobre coisas que eu reconhecia.”

É importante que as pessoas se identifiquem nas histórias, porque elas não são únicas e, claro, elas podem estar lá. Chimamanda amava aqueles livros americanos e britânicos que lia. “Eles mexiam com a minha imaginação, me abriam novos mundos”, disse. Mas com um porém: “a consequência inesperada foi que eu não sabia que pessoas como eu podiam existir na literatura. Então o que a descoberta dos escritores africanos fez por mim foi: salvou-me de ter uma única história sobre o que os livros são”.

O que Chimamanda passou, muitas mulheres negras passam. E homens negros também, embora menos. No ano passado, mulheres protestaram contra a ausência de escritoras negras na Festa Literária de Parati (FLIP). O curador da Flip, Paulo Werneck, fez um mea culpa ao reconhecer a falha.

Carolina Maria de Jesus com Clarice Lispector

Foto: Acervo de divulgação/Editora Rocco

Quantas pessoas sabem que uma das maiores escritoras do Brasil é uma mulher negra e favelada? O livro Quarto de Despejo: Diário de uma Favelada, de Carolina Maria de Jesus, publicado em 1960, vendeu mais de 100 mil exemplares, foi traduzido para 13 idiomas e vendido em mais de 40 países. Mesmo com essa biografia, Carolina foi lembrada em um trecho da biografia de Clarice Lispector – escrita por Benjamin Moser – de uma forma que foi duramente criticada: “Carolina parece tensa e fora de lugar, como se alguém tivesse arrastado a empregada doméstica de Clarice para dentro do quadro”.

Nesse Dia Internacional da Mulher é preciso que as mulheres negras não sejam apagadas e reduzidas como Carolina Maria de Jesus e ampliem sua visão de mundo para além da versão única, como fez Chimamanda Adichie. Por isso The Intercept Brasil preparou uma lista de dicas de autoras negras para quem quer se ver e reconhecer na literatura:

 

  • Alzira Rufino: primeira escritora negra a ter seu depoimento gravado no Museu de Literatura Mário de Andrade, em São Paulo/SP
  • Ana Maria Gonçalves: Prémio Casa de las Américas? (2007) pelo livro “Um Defeito de Cor” (e colunista do The Intercept Brasil)
  • Geni Guimarães: Prêmio Jabuti de Literatura (1990) pela novela “A cor da ternura”
  • Eliana Alves Cruz: Prêmio Oliveira Silveira (2016), pelo livro “Água de Barrela”
  • Livia Natalia: O livro “Água Negra” foi premiado pelo Concurso Literário de Banco Capital (2011)
  • Lélia Gonzalez: Seu livro “Festas Populares no Brasil” recebeu um prêmio internacional na categoria “os mais belos livros do mundo”, na Feira de Leipzig/Alemanha Oriental – uma das mais importantes do mercado editorial
  • Miriam Alves: Publicou seu primeiro livro, “Momentos de Busca” (1983) com o dinheiro de seu 13º salário

The post Já conhece a vasta literatura produzida por mulheres negras? appeared first on The Intercept.

Is Trump Adviser Carl Icahn an Illicit Lobbyist or a Corrupt Official?

8 March 2017 - 11:59am

Watchdog group Public Citizen asked Congress on Wednesday to investigate whether billionaire investor and unofficial Trump administration adviser Carl Icahn has engaged in illegal, unregistered lobbying in conjunction with his public bid to change an ethanol rule that would save one of his affiliated businesses $200 million annually.

Icahn raised eyebrows last week for getting the Renewable Fuels Association to reverse its position on a key proposal that would benefit him personally. The association, which lobbies for ethanol producers, agreed to a proposal to shift the responsibility for ensuring that gasoline contains a minimum volume of renewable fuels — from oil refiners to gasoline wholesalers. Icahn is the majority shareholder in CVR Energy, a refiner that cannot blend ethanol on its own, and which therefore must buy over $200 million in “renewable fuel credits” each year to follow the law. By shifting the responsibility to wholesalers, CVR would no longer have to make that purchase.

Trump tapped Icahn as his deregulatory czar in December. But as an unofficial adviser to the Trump administration, Icahn was able to maintain his prodigious financial holdings. The renewable fuels proposal struck many as an example of Icahn self-dealing — recommending changes in regulation that benefit him financially.

Now, Public Citizen is accusing Icahn and CVR of violating the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995. Any nongovernmental entity that crosses certain thresholds must register all lobbying activities with the government. Congress oversees compliance with this law.

Since the Trump administration insists that Icahn is a private citizen who receives no compensation as a government official, he would fall into the category of needing to register any lobbying work, according to a complaint sent to the clerk of the House and secretary of the Senate. Public Citizen argues that Icahn’s formal proposal to change the renewable fuel standard regulation, along with his reported assistance in vetting candidates for the Environmental Protection Agency, comprises lobbying activity.

“It is not lobbying to advise a candidate, but once Trump became president, Trump then became a covered official subject to the lobbying disclosure law,” energy program director Tyson Slocum wrote in the letter. “All of this has occurred with no record of any [Lobbying Disclosure Act] filings by or on behalf of Mr. Icahn, Icahn Enterprises or CVR Energy.”

In other words, either Icahn is a Trump administration official, and therefore profiting from his government service, or a private citizen, and therefore lobbying.

Failure to comply with the Lobbying Disclosure Act “may be subject to a civil fine of not more than $200,000,” according to the law’s text. And if an individual “knowingly and corruptly” fails to comply, they face a federal prison sentence of up to five years.

Icahn rebutted charges of conflict of interest in an interview with Bloomberg, saying, “I own a refinery. Who knows it better than me? Why shouldn’t I advocate?”

Top photo: Carl Icahn, in a red scarf, in the VIP seats behind Donald Trump at his presidential inauguration.

The post Is Trump Adviser Carl Icahn an Illicit Lobbyist or a Corrupt Official? appeared first on The Intercept.

Encrypted App Used By White House Staffers Suffered From Serious Security Flaws

8 March 2017 - 10:52am

Confide, a three-year-old messaging app reportedly favored by  White House official, and supposedly boasting “military-grade end-to-end encryption,” was so insecure it allowed attackers to impersonate friendly contacts, spy on contact information, and even alter messages in transit, according to a cybersecurity firm.

While Confide, dubbed the “Snapchat for business”, has since mostly fixed these insecurities after the firm, IOActive, contacted the company with its research, an attacker could have taken full advantage before this month, according to a report from IOActive security researchers Mike Davis and Ryan O’Horo.

Axios last month reported that paranoid White House staffers and top Republicans were shielding their communications using the app, which offers a disappearing message feature. The application also requires the user to scroll over each line of text individually to see the hidden message beneath—making it hard to screenshot the full text. Buzzfeed confirmed that White House press secretary Sean Spicer and White House director of strategic communications Hope Hicks had downloaded the app at some point in time.

After those reports emerged, Confide’s download numbers surged. Google Ventures, Billy Bush, SV Angels, and other big investors had already doled out more than $3 million to help create the app, which also syncs with iMessage for Apple users.

The application’s erasing messages raised concerns about whether or not federal employees who use the app for official business were breaking public records laws—which require them to preserve communications sent in their professional capacity.

But use of the app also raised security concerns, as raised by the Buzzfeed report, and which O’Horo and Davis have now explained in detail.

A malicious actor, according to the report, could hijack an app in use and pretend to be the account holder, change the contents of a message traveling to its recipient, gain access to someone’s Confide address book, easily guess a user’s password, or decrypt messages in transit.

That’s because of several technical flaws—including a failure to require a legitimate SSL certificate, which ensures that the server the app is communicating with is not an impersonator. Without the checks on SSL certificates, sensitive information could be intercepted by anyone sharing a network with a Confide user, for example on a public WiFi network at a coffee shop.

The report also says Confide allows for brute force attacks—allowing someone to automate attempts to guess a password as many times as they want before cracking it, an attack that can be performed remotely. According to the report, the application also allowed messages to be delivered unencrypted.

The researchers were also able to gain access to 7,000 account records created over the span of  two days, out of a database they estimated to contain between 800,000 and one million records. That gave them access to email addresses and real names. Out of just that 2-day sample, O’Horo and Davis were able to find a Donald Trump associate and several Department of Homeland Security employees who downloaded the application.

“What we can say is that some of these attacks can be performed remotely. Some can be performed in a coffee shop near the victim. Some of them require Confide to act in bad faith or for an attacker to compromise Confide’s infrastructure,” O’Horo wrote in a text message to The Intercept. “None of which would be reasonably sophisticated,” he concluded.

In a statement to The Register, Confide said that “not only have these issues been addressed, but we also have no detection of them being exploited by any other party.”

Top photo: White House advisors Kellyanne Conway and Hope Hicks use their phones during the daily press briefing at the White House in Washington on Jan. 30, 2017.

The post Encrypted App Used By White House Staffers Suffered From Serious Security Flaws appeared first on The Intercept.

The “Dutch Trump” Is Even More Toxic Than the Real Thing

8 March 2017 - 9:58am

PITY THE DUTCH, if you can. The party led by a far-right, anti-immigrant, anti-Islam populist named Geert Wilders is on course to gain the most votes in next week’s parliamentary elections in the Netherlands. But the journalists who have dubbed Wilders “Holland’s Trump” and “the Donald Trump of the Netherlands” may owe the U.S. president an apology.

Yes, Wilders is running as a divisive outsider who wants to “make the Netherlands great again,” and he rails against his opponents on Twitter. Yes, he has been lauded by a range of far-right U.S. conservatives, from Republican legislators Michele Bachmann and Steve King to “counter-jihad” activists Frank Gaffney and David Horowitz. And, yes, there’s his bleached-blonde bouffant hair.

Nonetheless, when it comes to Islam and Muslims, the bombastic leader of the Party for Freedom makes the president of the United States look positively moderate. Trump, remember, is trying to ban immigrants from six Muslim-majority countries; Wilders wants to stop all Muslim immigration. Trump plans to surveil mosques; Wilders wants to ban mosques. Trump says he will eradicate “radical Islamic terrorism” from “the face of the earth;” Wilders wants to eradicate Islam, period.

Think I’m exaggerating? Wilders claims Islam “is not a religion, it’s an ideology… the ideology of a retarded culture” and a “totalitarian” ideology. “Islam is the Trojan Horse in Europe,” he has declared. “If we do not stop Islamification now, Eurabia and Netherabia will just be a matter of time.” For the Dutch politician, “there is no such thing as ‘moderate Islam’.”

Consider also his tweet from late last year: “#2017in3words. No More Islam.”

#2017in3words

No More Islam

— Geert Wilders (@geertwilderspvv) December 30, 2016

No more Islam? How do you get rid of a religion without getting rid of the 1.6 billion people who follow it? This is the language of genocide, plain and simple. Wilders has always claimed that he hates Islam, not Muslims, but his explicit targeting of Muslim immigrants and institutions suggests otherwise.

Trump may have surrounded himself with anti-Islam ideologues but Wilders is an anti-Islam ideologue — and has been, according to his elder (and estranged) brother Paul, for a long time. He visited a kibbutz in Israel in his late teens and more than 40 subsequent visits to the Jewish state helped convince him that Islam wants to “dominate” Western civilization.

There is also another fundamental and very important difference between Wilders and Trump. I asked former member of Parliament Fadime Orgu, who knew Wilders when they were both members of the center-right People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy between 1998 and 2004, about the constant media comparisons between Wilders and Trump. “He is not like Trump,” laughs Orgu, one of the first Muslims elected to parliament in the Netherlands. Wilders, she tells me, is a “real politician” — the third-longest serving member of the Dutch parliament — and he “is clever”.

Indeed he is. Unlike other far-right firebrands, Wilders cloaks his anti-Muslim bigotry in the language of liberalism and the Enlightenment. The Dutch demagogue has won over voters on the left by arguing that the Netherlands’ tolerant stance on social issues such as same-sex marriage is threatened by an “Islamic invasion”.

His attachment to liberalism, however, is as superficial as it is opportunistic. How can you support freedom of speech while calling for a ban on the Quran? How can you support freedom of worship while pledging to close down all mosques? How can you claim to be fighting Islamic extremism in the name of gay rights while allied with France’s Marine Le Pen and Italy’s Matteo Salvini, both of whom oppose gay rights?

And how can you claim not to be a racist or xenophobe while smearing and threatening immigrants from Morocco and their Dutch-born children? Wilders launched his election campaign in February by denouncing “Moroccan scum” whom he blamed for making “the streets unsafe.” Earlier, in December, a court in Amsterdam found him guilty of public insult and incitement to discrimination over remarks he made at a rally in March 2014. As Newsweek’s Winston Ross reported in a profile of Wilders:

Flanked by two bodyguards, he walked to a small podium as “Eye of the Tiger” played on a cheap PA system, to scattered cheers. “I ask all of you,” he said, waving his finger at the crowd, “do you want in this city, and in the Netherlands, more or less Moroccans?” His audience gleefully chanted, “Less! Less! Less!,” to which Wilders replied with a smile, “Then we will arrange that.”

Again, is this not the language of genocide?

Wilders has insisted that he isn’t advocating violence. Yet words have consequences, because hate speech can lead to hate crimes. Look at Anders Breivik, the self-described fascist who murdered 77 people in Norway in 2011 as part of his fantasy “civil war” against the “ongoing Islamisation of Europe”. Breivik approvingly cited Wilders 30 times in his online manifesto and is reported to have attended a Wilders rally. Wilders may have denounced Breivik’s crime but he implicitly acknowledged the latter as an ideological fellow-traveller when he condemned him for “violently” distorting “freedom-loving, anti-Islamization ideals.”

As in the U.S., the UK and (so it seems) France, “anti-Islamization” is a vote-winning platform in the Netherlands. Astonishingly, Wilders’ party is polling neck and neck with Prime Minister Mark Rutte’s People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy. Can ‘Captain Peroxide’ pull off one of the biggest political upsets in Europe since the Second World War and secure the Dutch premiership? For now, all of the major Dutch political parties have pledged not to form a coalition government with Wilders’ party. Cas Mudde, a professor at Georgia University and an expert on populism, tells me it is therefore “unlikely” Wilders will be prime minister come next Wednesday, but concedes that “everything is possible.”

Whether or not he becomes prime minister, Wilders has already succeeded in pushing the Netherlands — and by extension, the wider European Union — to the extreme right on issues such as Islam and immigration. “For a long time, Wilders has been able to set the Dutch political agenda,” notes Mudde. In January, for example, in a shameless attempt to woo Wilders’ supporters, Prime Minister Rutte published a full-page newspaper ad calling on people who “refuse to adapt, and criticise our values” to “behave normally, or go away.” Across the continent, and even across the Atlantic, politicians from across the spectrum have begun to follow his lead and borrow from his playbook.

As a result, it is difficult to disagree with Wilders’ own assessment of the future. “Even if I lose this election,” he said last month, “the genie will not go back in the bottle again.”

Top photo: Geert Wilders, leader of the Dutch PVV political party speaks at a conference of European right-wing parties on Jan. 21, 2017 in Koblenz, Germany.

The post The “Dutch Trump” Is Even More Toxic Than the Real Thing appeared first on The Intercept.

Intercepted Podcast: Ready to Lie

8 March 2017 - 6:01am

Subscribe to the Intercepted podcast on iTunes, Google Play, StitcherSpotify, and other platforms.

 

The Notorious B.I.G. famously alleged that federal agents were mad because he was flagrant. President Donald Trump also believes he has a beef with the feds. This week on Intercepted, Trump accused Obama of tapping his phones, causing FBI director James Comey to lose his shit. Obama officials are denying it up and down and Trump’s surrogates are trying to figure out if their boss knows something they don’t. It sounds crazy, but is there anything to Trump’s tweets? We talk with Intercept investigative reporter Matthew Cole and muckraking journalist Marcy Wheeler of emptywheel. Never count WikiLeaks out — the group just published a massive cache of CIA hacking secrets. The Intercept’s Sam Biddle and Josh Begley discuss what the revelations can teach us about our “smart” TVs and appliances and the security of chat apps like Signal and WhatsApp. As ICE raids intensify and deportations accelerate, independent journalist Aura Bogado confronts the opening stages of Trump’s assault on undocumented immigrants. Legendary punk band Anti-Flag performs for Intercepted from a garage in Pittsburgh. Plus, Donald Trump “stars” in “Goodfellas,” where he’s chased by the mob and the FBI. Can he get out of Mar-a-Lago alive? Tune in to find out!

Transcript coming soon.

The post Intercepted Podcast: Ready to Lie appeared first on The Intercept.

EXCLUSIVO: Autoridade internacional pede que Fernando Pimentel não privatize Circuito das Águas em MG

8 March 2017 - 6:00am

O estado de Minas Gerais abriu licitações para que a gestão das fontes de água mineral siga o modelo de parcerias público-privadas em duas das dez cidades do Circuito das Águas. A privatização é criticada pela presidente do conselho Food and Water Watch e ex-conselheira da Assembléia Geral da ONU, Maude Barlow, em carta enviada ao governador Fernando Pimentel (PT-MG), a qual The Intercept Brasil teve acesso. A especialista lembra ao governador que a demanda por água vai superar a oferta em 40% em menos de uma década e que, por isso, é preciso proteger as reservas hídricas como um patrimônio público e um direito humano — e não enxergá-las como mercadoria.

Barlow foi procurada por cidadãos de Cambuquira (MG) organizados na ONG Nova Cambuquira, cidade que recebeu em 2014 o certificado de “Comunidade Azul”. O mérito é dado a municípios que sigam três regras: reconhecimento legal da água como direito humano, serviços de água com gestão e financiamento 100% públicos e banimento da venda de água engarrafada em instalações e eventos públicos.

Apenas 22 cidades no mundo (entre elas Paris, na França, e Berna, na Suíça) possuem o selo dado pelo Conselho dos Canadenses, do qual Barlow é presidente. Cambuquira é a única cidade brasileira a receber o selo. Colocar suas fontes sob gestão de PPPs fará o município perder não apenas o reconhecimento internacional, como também o controle sobre um recurso extremamente valioso.

Vista superior da cidade de Cambuquira, em Minas Gerais.

Foto: Circuito das Águas (divulgação)

“Estou profundamente decepcionada em ver um patrimônio hídrico tão único ser encarado como uma mercadoria a ser engarrafada e vendida.”

Essas são algumas das palavras de Barlow na carta. A canadense também é conselheira do World Future Council, com sede em Hamburgo e, entre 2008 e 2009, atuou como Conselheira Sênior de Água do Presidente da Assembléia Geral das Nações Unidas. Ela liderou a campanha que fez a ONU reconhecer, em 2010, a água potável como um direito humano.

No documento enviado ao governador mineiro, Barlow pede que Pimentel “proteja as águas de sua região” pelo bem das próximas gerações:

Clique aqui para ler o documento original, em inglês, ou leia abaixo a tradução:

2 de março de 2017

Sr. Fernando Pimentel

Governador

Estado de Minas Gerais, Brasil

Prezado Sr. Fernando Pimentel,

Em 2014, tive a oportunidade de visitar a cidade de Cambuquira e conhecer a maravilhosa região do circuito das águas.  A meu ver, é uma região única no mundo com diversas fontes de água mineral.  Em minha visita a Cambuquira, tive a honra de premiar a cidade com o certificado “Comunidade Azul”, colocando Cambuquira junto às 18 Comunidades Azuis do Canadá, às cidades de Saint Gallen e Bern na Suíça e a Paris. Fico feliz em ver uma comunidade tão pequena como Cambuquira envolvida com a defesa da água como um direito humano e bem público sob controle público. É um exemplo para outras comunidades do mundo.  Também é uma combinação rara de um lugar especial em termos de fontes de água mineral com um grupo dedicado de cidadãos locais comprometidos com sua proteção. Seu empenho e entusiasmo me inspiram.

Através desse grupo de cidadãos, fui informada de que a empresa estatal proprietária dos parques hídricos — CODEMIG — anunciou a abertura de uma licitação para uma Parceria Público-Privada para que uma empresa privada possa então explorar, engarrafar e vender a água mineral desses parques hídricos. Estou profundamente decepcionada em ver um patrimônio hídrico tão único ser encarado como uma mercadoria a ser engarrafada e vendida.

Cambuquira e outras cidades do circuito das águas, com seus parques hídricos, merecem um futuro melhor, um futuro azul. Peço que reconsidere a decisão dessa PPP e, pelo contrário, dê total apoio a um projeto regional de desenvolvimento sustentável que possa vir a se tornar um exemplo para o mundo. Fui informada de que a Universidade Federal de Lavras e a Universidade de Bern da Suíça — ambas “universidades azuis” — estão dispostas e já estudam propostas para a região em cooperação com os cidadãos interessados de Cambuquira. Da minha parte, gostaria de apoiar da forma possível todos os esforços por uma cooperação internacional mais ampla em torno de Cambuquira e da região do circuito das águas.

Prezado Governador, as fontes hídricas do planeta enfrentam uma situação terrível de acordo com um relatório da ONU que revela que, em menos de uma década, a demanda por água vai superar a oferta em 40%. Precisamos nos mobilizar agora para proteger as preciosas águas de nossas comunidades como um patrimônio público e um direito humano, e precisamos que o senhor proteja as águas de sua região.  As gerações futuras lhe agradecerão.

Obrigada por seu tempo e atenção,

Maude Barlow

Presidente Nacional, Conselho de Canadenses, Ex-consultora sênior da Assembleia Geral da ONU

Superexploração de água em cidade vizinha acendeu o sinal de alerta

A Companhia de Desenvolvimento Econômico de Minas Gerais (Codemig) é detentora da concessão das fontes de águas minerais das marcas Araxá, Caxambu, Cambuquira e Lambari, extraídas e produzidas nos municípios com os mesmos nomes. É a Codemig que está liderando as negociações para a PPP.

Parte do Parque das Águas da cidade de Caxambu, em Minas Gerais.

Foto: Roberto Seba/Circuito das Águas (divulgação)

A privatização do serviço de exploração das águas minerais de Cambuquira e de sua vizinha Caxambu começou a ser negociada em fevereiro. As águas produzidas nos dois municípios participam de festivais gastronômicos internacionais, como o Madrid Fusion. A água Cambuquira se encaixa no conceito de “água exclusiva”, premiada como uma das melhores do mundo e vendida a preços acima da média, fazendo concorrência com a francesa Perrier.

Preocupados com problemas recentes na cidade vizinha de São Lourenço — que vendeu suas fontes à Nestlé e deixou de fazer parte do Circuito das Águas — os moradores procuraram as autoridades de defesa da água como direito humano. O Circuito das Águas é um conjunto de 10 municípios ricos em fontes naturais de água mineral. No lugar de São Lourenço, hoje figura o município de Maria da Fé.

O caso São Lourenço

É observando o ocorrido em São Lourenço — localizada a 63 km de distância — que se entende o medo dos moradores de Cambuquira. Ali é produzida a água que leva o nome da cidade, hoje uma marca pertencente ao grupo Nestlé.

Vista do Parque de Águas de São Lourenço antes da venda.

Fonte: Circuito das Águas (divulgação)

 Problemas com as fontes geridas pela empresa suíça no Parque das Águas levaram os cidadãos de São Lourenço a entrarem na justiça contra a Nestlé. A empresa chegou a espionar ativistas locais que defendiam a água como direito humano.

A polêmica ganhou um capítulo próprio no livro-reportagem francês “Affaire classée. Attac, Securitas, Nestlé” (em português, Caso arquivado, Attac, Securitas, Nestlé) que revela as investigações feitas pela empresa Securitas, contratada pela Nestlé para infiltrar agentes na ONG Attac (sigla em francês para Associação pela Tributação de Operações Financeiras e pela Ação Cidadã).

Franklin Frederick, carioca, ativista pela água apoiado pela Attac, foi o alvo das investigações da Securitas a mando da Nestlé, como conta o livro:

“Quando Sara Meylan começa sua atividade de espionagem na Attac, Franklin Frederick estava na Suíça. Fazia certo tempo que ele lutava para atrair a atenção de apoiadores da alterglobalização para o combate que ele mesmo e mais 3 mil habitantes da pequena cidade brasileira de São Lourenço travaram ao assinar, em 2000, uma petição contra as ações da Nestlé em sua cidade. Ele se encontrava na Suíça para mobilizar as igrejas, alertar a imprensa, sensibilizar tantos quanto possível. Franklin Frederick pertence àquela categoria de gente combativa que não se intimida pela multinacional.”

O abaixo-assinado fez com que o Ministério Público de São Lourenço ajuizasse uma Ação Civil Pública ambiental contra a Nestlé em dezembro de 2001. Ao passarem para as mãos da Nestlé, as águas de uma das fontes da cidade começaram a ser tratadas segundo um processo conhecido como osmose reversa, proibido pelo Código de Águas Minerais. Os minerais eram completamente retirados, depois apenas sais selecionados eram adicionados — artificialmente — à composição da água, que era embalada sob a marca Pure Life.

A empresa já enfrentou problemas similares em outros lugares no mundo, como nos Estados Unidos:

O problema de São Lourenço ficava mais evidente nos relatos dos moradores da região, que começaram a denunciar que as águas estavam perdendo o sabor, as fontes estavam diminuindo a vazão e novas rachaduras apareciam no chão em torno de alguns pontos onde a água brotava do solo.

A razão dos relatos foi apontada na denúncia do ministério público: superexploração das águas. A média de 6,2 milhões de litros extraídos em 1972 saltou para 27,6 milhões em 1999. A Nestlé assumiu em 1994 a Perrier Vittel do Brasil e desde então passou a ter direito de explorar o subsolo e as águas minerais no município.

O resultado final do embate jurídico foi um Termo de Ajuste de Conduta onde a empresa se comprometeu, entre outras ações, a acabar com as atividades ilegais, interrompendo a produção de Pure Life, e a reflorestar 26m² do parque com mata nativa. No entanto, moradores estão novamente na justiça denunciando a empresa por ter secado os lençóis freáticos de todo o parque.

É o tipo de problema que a carta endereçada ao governador tenta evitar que se repita nas cidades vizinhas.

The post EXCLUSIVO: Autoridade internacional pede que Fernando Pimentel não privatize Circuito das Águas em MG appeared first on The Intercept.

Senate Democrats Blow Best Chance to Demand Special Russia Prosecutor

7 March 2017 - 6:53pm

Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee briefly possessed some power to nudge Rod Rosenstein, President Trump’s nominee for deputy attorney general, to publicly commit to appointing a special prosecutor to investigate any Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election.

Their opportunity came — and went — during Rosenstein’s confirmation hearing Tuesday.

It’s true Democrats hold only nine of the 20 seats on the committee, and would only have been able to condition Rosenstein’s approval on his willingness to appoint a special prosecutor if they had stood together and persuaded at least one Republican to join them. But had the parties been reversed, the Republican Party would have formed a united phalanx to demand that Rosenstein, as a patriotic American, must look beyond party and promise to give the country a truly independent, non-partisan investigation. There would have been press conferences with all nine senators wearing flag pins and looking stern, a major media offensive asking which Democrat on the committee cared enough about this nation to join them, and possibly the composition of some songs about brave deputy attorneys general.

Instead, the Democrats only managed some grumbling and a few uncoordinated questions at the hearing.

California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the Democrats’ ranking member, said in her opening remarks that “It’s vitally important that the American people have trust in this investigation and that there is not even the appearance of a conflict of interest or political influence.”

But Rosenstein deftly parried her questions about a Russian investigation by pointing out that Obama’s attorney general Loretta Lynch did not decide to appoint a special prosecutor, nor has Dana Boente, the acting attorney general who now holds the power to do so, after Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself. “I certainly wouldn’t be able to overrule them,” said Rosenstein, “without having the facts that were the basis for their decisions.”

Feinstein folded without making the obvious point that the actions of Lynch and Boente are irrelevant. Lynch worked for Obama, making such a decision politically impossible; Boente, who was an Obama appointee, is simply a seat-filler. And the plot is thickening daily.

The Republican committee chair, Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley shrewdly framed the question of the day as whether the nominee is personally trustworthy, stating that “Any insinuation that Mr. Rosenstein lacks the impartiality or professionalism necessary to handle these matters is out of line.”

But it’s not necessary to impugn Rosenstein to demand he appoint a special prosecutor. The relevant regulations state that a special prosecutor can be appointed if an investigation “would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances [emphasis added]” and that “it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.” Certainly the current circumstances — where Rosenstein’s boss might be questioned during any investigation — qualify as extraordinary.

Rosenstein may in fact be capable of overseeing a legitimate investigation, but it’s preposterous to ask Americans to accept that on faith – especially because if any such investigation is closed by the Justice Department without further action, nothing about it will ever officially be made public.

The approach of the committee Democrats other than Feinstein was similarly weak and disorganized.

Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal delivered a long soliloquy about the critical importance of a Russia investigation, only to trail off into questions about whether Sessions should return to answer further questions from the Judiciary Committee. After a back and forth with Rosenstein, Blumenthal finally asked not whether Rosenstein would appoint a special prosecutor, but whether if he didn’t if he would come back to the committee and explain why. Rosenstein wouldn’t even answer that question.  “I view it as an issue of principle that as a nominee for deputy attorney general, I should not be promising to take action on a particular case,” he said. “I believe that if I were to do this in this case, some future deputy attorney general nominee would be here and asked to make a similar commitment, and they’d say, “Rosenstein did it, why won’t you?’”

Blumenthal did not point out that there is in fact direct historical precedent for such a commitment: In 1973, Richard Nixon’s nominee for attorney general, Elliot Richardson, was held up by the Judiciary Committee until he agreed not just to appoint a special prosecutor to examine Watergate but to find one whom committee members found satisfactory.

Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont did at least mention this Watergate history, and said that “I think this Russian interference is one of the worst things I’ve seen in the Senate …  I cannot remember anything in my years here that has troubled me more.” But his main question to Rosenstein was a softball — “Are you willing to appoint a special counsel to examine Russian interference?” — giving Rosenstein the opening to reply, “I am willing to appoint a special prosecutor, senator, whenever I determine that it is appropriate.”

The Democrats faced an uphill battle to get a special prosecutor commitment from Rosenstein. But based on Tuesday’s performance they came nowhere close — and gave the impression that Senate Democrats are generally incapable of acting together to use whatever leverage they have.

Top photo: Deputy U.S. Attorney General nominee Rod Rosenstein introduces Rachel Brand, nominee for associate attorney general, before the Senate Judiciary Committee March 7, 2017 in Washington.

The post Senate Democrats Blow Best Chance to Demand Special Russia Prosecutor appeared first on The Intercept.

The CIA Didn’t Break Signal or WhatsApp, Despite What You’ve Heard

7 March 2017 - 5:06pm

There’s been one particularly misleading claim repeated throughout coverage of CIA documents released by WikiLeaks today: That the agency’s in-house hackers “bypassed” the encryption used by popular secure-chat software like Signal and WhatsApp.

By specifically mentioning these apps, news outlets implied that the agency has a means of getting through the protections built into the chat systems. It doesn’t. Instead, it has the ability, in some cases, to take control of entire phones; accessing encrypted chats is simply one of many security implication of this. Wikileaks’ own analysis of the documents at least briefly acknowledges this, stating that CIA “techniques permit the CIA to bypass the encryption of WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, Wiebo, Confide and Cloackman by hacking the ‘smart’ phones that they run on and collecting audio and message traffic before encryption is applied.”

The claim was then taken out of what little context WikiLeaks provided and repeated by widely read outlets like the New York Times:

the Boston Globe:

WikiLeaks says its CIA disclosures indicate agency can bypass encryption on popular messaging services https://t.co/ezNp0oX87B https://t.co/2knXpoknG5

— The Boston Globe (@BostonGlobe) March 7, 2017

Mashable:

and this AP reporter retweeted by the AP itself:

Are you worried about WikiLeaks' revelations that confidential messaging apps are not actually secure? Or not? Email me at bortutay@ap.org

— BarbaraOrtutay (@BarbaraOrtutay) March 7, 2017

Contrary to the clear implication from these journalists and news sources, the documents WikiLeaks published do not appear to show any attack specific Signal or WhatsApp, but rather a means of hijacking your entire phone, which would of course “bypass” encrypted chat apps because it thwart virtually all other security systems on the device, granting total remote access to the CIA.

The Wikileaks dump also includes information about CIA malware that can hack, and remotely spy on and control, computers running Windows, macOS, and Linux. Which means that it’s also true that the CIA can bypass PGP email encryption on your computer. And the CIA can bypass your VPN. And the CIA can see everything you’re doing in Tor Browser. All of these things can be inferred by the documents, but that doesn’t mean using PGP, VPNs, or Tor Browser isn’t safe. Basically, if the CIA can hack a device and gain full control of it — whether it’s a smartphone, a laptop, or a TV with a microphone — they can spy on everything that happens on that device. Saying Signal is bypassed because the CIA has control of the entire device Signal is installed on is akin to saying the diary you keep in your bedside table is vulnerable because the CIA has the ability to break into your house. It’s true, technically, but not exactly a revelation, and odd to fixate on to the exclusion of other vulnerable items.

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/839161021369573378/photo/1

To its credit, the Times deleted its tweet and changed the language it used in its article, but there’s probably going to be some lingering damage in the form of people now under the impression that using Signal or WhatsApp could make them less safe, when the reverse is true.

The CIA/Wikileaks story today is about getting malware onto phones, none of the exploits are in Signal or break Signal Protocol encryption.

— Open Whisper Systems (@whispersystems) March 7, 2017

It of course remains possible (as it always has and always will) that the CIA has cracked the encryption of Signal, WhatsApp, or any other piece of software. But WikiLeaks hasn’t provided any evidence of that here today.

The post The CIA Didn’t Break Signal or WhatsApp, Despite What You’ve Heard appeared first on The Intercept.

Rep. Jason Chaffetz Is Wrong. A $700 iPhone Can’t Cover Your Health Insurance.

7 March 2017 - 4:04pm

Utah Republican Congressman Jason Chaffetz said in a CNN interview on Tuesday morning that low-income Americans will be able to afford health insurance under a Republican plan to replace Obamacare — as long as they don’t spend so much on things like iPhones.

The comparison is ridiculous and callous; smart phones are much cheaper than health care, and both can be a necessity, not a luxury, in modern life.

“You know what, Americans have choices. And they’ve got to make a choice,” he said. “And so maybe, rather than getting that new iPhone that they just love and they want to spend hundreds of dollars on, maybe they should invest in their own health care.”

GOP Rep. Jason Chaffetz: Low-income Americans will have to choose health care over iPhones https://t.co/orZVA7OoCS pic.twitter.com/Lt5vnKAPeg

— CNN (@CNN) March 7, 2017

While iPhones are among the priciest smartphones, they don’t come anywhere close to the cost of health insurance. Even the newest iPhone, off-contract, will cost someone around $700. The online health insurance dealer eHealth estimates that the average individual premium is currently about $393 a month — which means the cost of the brand new iPhone will on average net you less than two months worth of health insurance premiums.

And that’s assuming you don’t get sick. Especially with high-deductible plans, the cost of co-pays and deductibles can quickly become astronomical.

Unfortunately, the refrain that if the poor can afford basic consumer goods then they should be able to afford necessities is common among right-wing ideologues in the United States.

For example, the Heritage Foundation, a think tank that provides the basis of much of intellectual conservatism in the United States, put out a report in 2011 noting that the “typical poor household, as defined by the government, has a car and air conditioning, two color televisions, cable or satellite TV, a DVD player, and a VCR.” It used these data points to conclude that “government surveys show that most of the persons whom the government defines as ‘in poverty’ are not poor in any ordinary sense of the term.”

This ignores a fundamental reality of the modern age: consumer electronics like televisions have dramatically declined in price over the past few decades, becoming highly affordable, even as basic necessities like health care, child care, and housing have grown much more expensive.

Economist Mark Perry illustrated this divergence in price between necessities and products that were once luxuries:

Price Changes for Selected Goods and Services, 1996 to 2016 pic.twitter.com/c38oEs7WxA

— Mark J. Perry (@Mark_J_Perry) August 16, 2016

The cell phone example Chaffetz used is particularly problematic because it ignores how important owning a smartphone can be to Americans who don’t otherwise have access to the internet.

For some Americans, a smart phone is a necessity to apply for jobs or pay bills. Pew Research Center data from 2014 found that 13 percent of Americans with incomes under $30,000 were “smartphone-dependent” — meaning their smartphone was their primary device to access the internet — as opposed to just 1 percent of people whose household income was over $75,000.

As for Chaffetz, my colleague Lee Fang pointed out that his Political Action Committee (PAC) pays the phone bill for his campaign, which totals over $300 a month to Verizon Wireless, and spent $738 at an Apple store.

Lol are you kidding me? Chaffetz also spent $738 of his campaign donor's money at the Apple Store. Hmm https://t.co/SNb7X7VNEz pic.twitter.com/LDLgKnivKK

— Lee Fang (@lhfang) March 7, 2017

Top photo: Chaffetz speaking to reporters after leaving a meeting on Capitol Hill on Feb. 14, 2017.

The post Rep. Jason Chaffetz Is Wrong. A $700 iPhone Can’t Cover Your Health Insurance. appeared first on The Intercept.

CIA Has an “Impressive List” of Ways to Hack Into Your Smartphone, WikiLeaks Files Indicate

7 March 2017 - 3:29pm

A concerted effort by the CIA produced a library of software attacks to crack into Android smartphones and Apple iPhones, including some that could take full control of the devices, according to documents in a trove of files released by WikiLeaks Tuesday.

The attacks allow for varying levels of access — many powerful enough to allow the attacker to remotely take over the “kernel,” the heart of the operating system that controls the operation of the phone, or at least to have so-called “root” access, meaning extensive control over files and software processes on a device. These types of techniques would give access to information like geolocation, communications, contacts, and more. They would most likely be useful for targeted hacking, rather than mass surveillance. Indeed, one document describes a process by which a specific unit within the CIA “develops software exploits and implants for high priority target cellphones for intelligence collection.”

The WikiLeaks documents also include detailed charts concerning specific attacks the CIA can apparently perform on different types of cellphones and operating systems, including recent versions of iOS and Android — in addition to attacks the CIA has borrowed from other, public sources of malware. Some of the exploits, in addition to those purportedly developed by the CIA, were discovered and released by cybersecurity companies, hacker groups, and independent researchers, and purchased, downloaded, or otherwise acquired by the CIA, in some cases through other members of the intelligence community, including the FBI, NSA, and the NSA’s British counterpart GCHQ , the documents indicate.

One borrowed attack, Shamoon, is a notorious computer virus capable of stealing data and then completely destroying hardware. Persistence, a tool found by the CIA, allows the agency control over the device whenever it boots up again. Another acquired attack, SwampMonkey, allows CIA to get root privileges on undisclosed Android devices.

“This is a very impressive list,” tweeted former GCHQ analyst Matt Tait, noting that at least some of the attacks appeared to still be viable.

Matt Green, cryptographer at Johns Hopkins University, agreed the leak was “impressive,” but concluded there weren’t many “technically surprising” hacks. This lack of originality may have stemmed from a desire on the part of the agency to avoid detection, judging from one document contained in the trove, in which apparent CIA personnel discuss an NSA hacking toolkit known as Equation Group and its public exposure. It was also previously known that the CIA was targeting smartphones; drawing on top-secret documents, The Intercept in 2015 reported on an agency campaign to crack into the iPhone and other Apple products.

In addition to the CIA’s efforts, an FBI hacking division, the Remote Operations Unit, has also been working to discover exploits in iPhones, one of the WikiLeaks documents, the iOS hacking chart, indicates. Last February, while investigating the perpetrator of a mass shooting in San Bernardino, the FBI attempted argued in court that Apple was obligated to give the FBI access to its phones by producing a weakened version of the device’s operating system. If the WikiLeaks documents are authentic, it would appear FBI and other elements of the intelligence community are already deeply involved in discovering their own way into iPhones. The compromise of the documents also calls into question government assurances in the San Bernardino case that any exploit developed by Apple to allow the FBI access to the killer’s phone would never be exposed to criminals or nation states.

The CIA and FBI hacking revelations originate with a trove of more than 8,000 documents released by WikiLeaks, which said the files originated from a CIA network and date from 2013 to 2016. The CIA declined to comment on the documents, which also disclose techniques the CIA allegedly developed to turn so-called smart televisions into listening devices. Apple did not respond to a request for comment, and Google declined to comment, though indicated it was actively investigating the revelations.

It’s unclear who might have given WikiLeaks access to the documents; a summary of the material hosted on the site implies it came from a whistleblower who “wishes to initiate a public debate about the security, creation, use, proliferation and democratic control of cyberweapons.” But the leaker could also be an outsider, including one employed by a foreign power.

“This could be as much about Russia as CIA or WikiLeaks,” tweeted Jason Healey, Senior Research Scholar at Columbia University’s School for International and Public Affairs “A continuation of teardown of U.S. government.”

German iOS security researcher Stefan Esser, according to a chart in the file database, developed an iOS exploit named “Ironic,” which gives access to the operating system kernel — though the hack “died” when iPhones were updated to iOS8, the chart appears to indicate. Esser, in an email to The Intercept, said he is not one to comb through classified documents or comment on them — but noted CIA had apparently “used public research of mine about a vulnerability that Apple required four attempts at fixing” in iOS. Esser’s bug was already public when CIA included it in its database. He also noted that a training slide he presented during a security conference in 2015 was also included in the dump.

WikiLeaks discussed, without referring to any specific document, access levels CIA has to encrypted applications, including popular Open Whisper Systems’ application Signal — though the documents do not indicate CIA has broken the app’s end-to-end encryption. Rather, it suggests the CIA can “bypass” the encryption by hacking into the phone itself, then reading everything on it, including data stored within any app — including messages from Telegram, WhatsApp, and other secure messaging apps. If a phone itself is compromised, there’s little to be done to prevent an attacker from accessing what’s on it.

Some of the attacks are what are known as “zero days” — exploitation paths hackers can use that vendors are completely unaware of, giving the vendors no time — zero days — to fix their products. WikiLeaks said the documents indicate the CIA has violated commitments made by the Obama administration to disclose serious software vulnerabilities to vendors to improve the security of their products. The administration developed a system called the Vulnerabilities Equities Process to allow various government entities to help determine when it’s better for national security to disclose unpatched vulnerabilities and when it’s better to take advantage of them to hunt targets.

At least some civil liberties advocates agree with the WikiLeaks assessment. “Access Now condemns the stockpiling of vulnerabilities, calls for limits on government hacking and protections for human rights, and urges immediate reforms to the Vulnerabilities Equities Process,” Nathan White, senior legislative manager for digital rights group Access Now, wrote in response to the new leak in a press release.

The post CIA Has an “Impressive List” of Ways to Hack Into Your Smartphone, WikiLeaks Files Indicate appeared first on The Intercept.

WikiLeaks divulga documentos mostrando que a CIA usa smart TVs como grampos

7 March 2017 - 3:18pm

É difícil comprar uma TV nova que não venha com um software “smart” (geralmente medíocre) oferecendo ao seu home theater as funções normalmente encontradas em telefones e tablets. Mas trazer esses recursos adicionais para sua sala significa trazer também um microfone — o que está sendo explorado pela CIA, segundo novo conjunto de documentos publicados hoje pela WikiLeaks.

De acordo com os documentos, o programa da CIA chamado “Weeping Angel” (Anjo Choroso) deu aos hackers da agência acesso às TVs Samsung Smart, permitindo que o microfone embutido do controle por voz fosse manipulado remotamente enquanto a TV aparentemente permanecia desligada. O recurso é conhecido como “Fake-Off mode” ou “Modo Desligado Falso”. Embora a tela esteja desligada e os LEDs indicadores desativados, o hardware interno da televisão continua a operar sem o conhecimento do dono. O método, que foi desenvolvido em parceria com a inteligência britânica, conta com a implantação de um malware em uma determinada TV — não está claro se o ataque pode ser executado remotamente, mas a documentação faz referência à infecção através de uma unidade USB contaminada. Uma vez que o malware esteja dentro da TV, ele pode transmitir dados de áudio gravados para terceiros (supostamente um servidor controlado pela CIA) por meio da conexão de rede da TV.

A WikiLeaks disse que o arquivo inclui mais de 8 mil documentos da CIA e foi obtido através de uma fonte, não identificada pela organização, que estava preocupada com os “recursos de hackeamento da agência terem excedido seus poderes mandatados” e que queria “iniciar um debate público” sobre a proliferação de armas cibernéticas. A WikiLeaks acrescentou que os documentos também demonstram um grande número de hackeamentos de smartphones, incluindo os iPhones da Apple; uma biblioteca considerável de ataques a computadores supostamente graves que não foram comunicados às empresas do setor tecnológico, como Apple, Google e Microsoft; malwares de grupos hackers e outros estados-nação, incluindo a Rússia, segundo a WikiLeaks, que poderiam ser usados para ocultar o envolvimento da agência em ataques cibernéticos; e o crescimento substancial de uma divisão de hackers dentro da CIA, conhecida como Centro de Inteligência Cibernética, inserindo ainda mais a agência no tipo de guerra cibernética tradicionalmente praticada pela agência rival, a NSA.

A invasão de smart TVs é apenas o exemplo mais recente de um problema de segurança oriundo da chamada “Internet das Coisas”, um catálogo cada vez mais extenso de produtos que incluem (ou precisam) de uma conexão de internet para usar funcionalidades “smart”. No ano passado, o jornal britânico The Guardian revelou que o diretor de Inteligência Nacional dos EUA, James Clapper, disse ao Senado que a invasão de dispositivos “smart” era uma das prioridades de espiões americanos. “No futuro, os serviços de inteligência deverão usar a [internet das coisas] para identificar, vigiar, monitorar, localizar e recrutar informantes, ou ganhar acesso a redes e credenciais de usuário.”

O pesquisador de segurança e criptografia Kenneth White disse ao The Intercept que as smart TVs são “historicamente um alvo fácil” e “uma bela plataforma para ser atacada”, já que TVs costumam estar em salas e quartos”. White acrescentou que “a chance de a [CIA ter] comprometido apenas a Samsung é zero. É muito fácil modificar outros sistemas operacionais” encontrados em smart TVs vendidas por outros fabricantes.

O novo vazamento da WikiLeaks não contém informações aparentes sobre quem foi atacado pelo Weeping Angel ou quando os ataques ocorreram. Também não ficou claro quantos modelos de TV da Samsung estão vulneráveis ao Weeping Angel — os documentos da CIA publicados pela WikiLeaks mencionam apenas um modelo, o F8000 (ainda que seja um modelo muito popular e com boas resenhas, descrito pelo site Engadget como “o melhor sistema de smart TV que você vai encontrar por aí”). Depois de algumas dúvidas quanto ao reconhecimento de voz das TVs Samsung terem se espalhado em 2015, a empresa divulgou um documento com Perguntas Frequentes visando acalmar os clientes apreensivos. Na pergunta “como sei se estou sendo ouvido?”, a Samsung garante a usuários que “se o recurso de reconhecimento de voz da TV estiver ativado para receber comandos, será exibido um ícone de microfone na tela”, mas, “se não houver um ícone na tela, o recurso de voz está desativado”.

Essa afirmação sobre ícones exibidos na tela, é claro, não serve de nada se a CIA tiver invadido a TV. O que a Samsung parece ter tomado como certo foi que a empresa e seus clientes teriam controle absoluto sobre a operação de seus televisores. Como comprova a exploração do “Modo Desligado Falso”, as garantias da empresa de que os controles de reconhecimento de voz da TV operariam de forma transparente não são reais quando espiões (e outros hackers em potencial) estão envolvidos.

A Samsung não respondeu aos pedidos de comentário imediatamente. Um porta-voz da CIA respondeu que “nós não comentamos a autenticidade ou conteúdo de supostos documentos de inteligência.”

Foto principal: Convidados assistem a uma apresentação no estande da Samsung na feira International CES, em Las Vegas, EUA, em 8 de janeiro de 2015.

The post WikiLeaks divulga documentos mostrando que a CIA usa smart TVs como grampos appeared first on The Intercept.

GOP Lawmaker Shaping Obamacare Repeal to Address Delighted Insurance Lobbyists

7 March 2017 - 3:16pm

The powerful trade group that lobbies on behalf of the health insurance industry, America’s Health Insurance Plans, has much to celebrate as it holds its national health policy conference at the Ritz-Carlton in Washington this week.

Among other changes long sought by the industry, the draft Republican proposal for a health care overhaul released on Monday would allow insurers to charge older American more for their premiums and rewrite tax law to make it easier for insurance firms to pay executives even higher pay.

Not surprisingly, one of the AHIP conference’s keynote speakers on Thursday will be Congressman Kevin Brady, the Texas Republican who chairs the House Ways and Means Committee, which starts marking up the bill on Wednesday morning.

The trade group represents the largest health insurance companies in America, including Cigna, Humana, Kaiser, Blue Shield of California, and Anthem.

Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, is scheduled to appear before America’s Health Insurance Plans

The new Republican legislation, called the American Health Care Act, includes sweeping changes sought by health insurance companies.

The proposal, for instance, shifts the age ratio for premiums, allowing insurance companies to charge older Americans up to five times as much as young people. The AARP, in a letter to legislators, notes that the new 5:1 ratio could cost the average 64-year-old on a silver plan an additional $2,100 per year. Under the Affordable Care Act, the premium cap was 3:1.

AHIP specifically recommended a move to the 5:1 ratio.

The GOP legislation would replace Obamacare’s individual mandate — the requirement that all Americans purchase health insurance — with an idea that similarly penalizes people who go without health coverage. But under the Republican legislation, the penalty will be paid to insurance companies instead of the federal government. Insurers, under the bill, are granted the ability to require a premium surcharge of 30 percent for any individual who loses coverage for a period of at least two months.

The proposal also includes a direct handout to the chief executives of health insurance companies. The Affordable Care Act contained a provision that limited health insurance firms to deducting only $500,000 in taxes of the pay of executives and other employees. The provision was designed to rein in out-of-control health insurance executive compensation, and to encourage insurance firms to pay for health care instead of bonuses for company leadership.

Before the Affordable Care Act, insurance company executives had little incentive not to steer company revenue to executive leadership. UnitedHealth Group chief executive Stephen Hemsley received $109 million in pay in 2009 alone.

The Republican health legislation repeals the Affordable Care Act’s cap. “The Republican plan calls for allowing insurers to write off as a business expense the entire amount of their executives’ salaries on their taxes, and not just the first $500,000, as is the case now under the Affordable Care Act,” CNBC reported. Taking away the limit on corporate pay tax deductions will not only encourage higher executive pay, but will mean companies will pay way less in taxes. The Institute for Policy Studies estimated that the cap generated $72 million in additional revenue in 2014.

AHIP has written to Congress to complain about the cap on deducting executive compensation. The Ways and Means Committee draft of the Republican health overhaul provides for the elimination of the cap on the first page of the bill.

Finally, the legislation creates a backhanded financial giveaway to health insurance companies by nearly doubling the amount individuals and families may save in a tax-free health savings accounts — an idea originally designed by insurance companies as a source of additional income. The accounts are used to pay for out-of-pocket expenses, such as deductibles. But as Los Angeles Times columnist Michael Hiltzik has explained, HSAs primarily benefit wealthy individuals, by shielding their income from taxation, while the accounts themselves are often managed by insurance companies, allowing them to collect revenue by charging fees.

The health insurance lobby has long played a pivotal role in American health care. In 1993, AHIP’s predecessor, the Health Insurance Association of America, helped sink President Bill Clinton’s health reform proposal through a national advertising campaign called “Harry and Louise.”

In 2009, then-AHIP president Karen Ignagni promised President Barack Obama that her group would not repeat its behavior from the early ’90s, telling an audience at the White House that her industry would work towards a positive solution. “You have our commitment to play, to contribute and to help pass health care reform this year,” Ignagni declared.

But the pledge was quietly broken. While Democrats debated the Affordable Care Act, AHIP secretly funneled at least $86.2 million to a third-party business group to air relentless negative campaign commercials and lobby against the plan. Inadvertent filings later revealed that insurance company Aetna also provided at least $7 million in covert funds to groups airing anti-health reform ads.

AHIP, meanwhile, has consistently enjoyed friendly relations with Capitol Hill.

New York Rep. Joe Crowley, the former chair of the conservative New Democrat Coalition and current chair of the House Democratic caucus, is slated to speak before AHIP on Wednesday. AHIP’s political action committee sponsored a $1,000 per person fundraiser for House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, who is currently working to win over GOP support for the draft bill, shortly after the inauguration. AHIP’s largest disclosed donation in 2017 has gone to Rep. Kevin Brady, the chairman helping to lead the Republican health repeal effort this week.

Top photo: House Speaker Paul Ryan seated to the left of Ways and Means Committee Chair Kevin Brady.

The post GOP Lawmaker Shaping Obamacare Repeal to Address Delighted Insurance Lobbyists appeared first on The Intercept.

Você também deve conhecer uma mulher que já abortou

7 March 2017 - 2:17pm

Até completar 40 anos, uma em cada 5 brasileiras já terá feito pelo menos um aborto durante a vida. Somente em 2015, aproximadamente 416 mil recorreram a um dos procedimentos de interrupção da gravidez. Boa parte são de classe média, já tiveram filhos e, muitas vezes, pertencem a famílias religiosas.

A Pesquisa Nacional de Aborto 2016 (PNA) demonstra que o aborto é “um fenômeno frequente e persistente entre as mulheres de todas as classes sociais, grupos raciais, níveis educacionais e religiões”. Apesar de ser uma prática comum, o aborto é crime no Brasil. A mulher que aborta pode cumprir uma pena de até três anos de prisão, e o médico que realizar o procedimento, até quatro anos – as exceções são para casos de estupro, risco de morte da mulher ou feto anencéfalo.

“A mulher que faz aborto no Brasil é uma mulher comum. É jovem, tem um companheiro e já tem filhos. Ao pensarmos nessa mulher comum, talvez os nossos afetos acalmem esse fanatismo que denuncia a mulher por crime e permitam cuidarmos dessas mulheres”, defendeu Debora Diniz, coordenadora da PNA, em entrevista ao The Intercept Brasil em dezembro.

Nesta segunda-feira, dia 6, chegou ao Supremo Tribunal Federal a primeira ação que pode descriminalizar o aborto para qualquer gestação de até 12 semanas. Segundo a OMS, 47 mil mulheres morrem por ano em decorrência de abortos clandestinos. No Brasil, abortos inseguros são a quarta causa de morte materna, principalmente entre mulheres mais pobres.

Mesmo criminalizado, o aborto está presente em todas as camadas da sociedade e atinge até mesmo setores que tradicionalmente são contra, como o religioso. De acordo com a PNA 2016, 56% das mulheres entre 18 e 39 anos que abortaram são católicas e 25% são evangélicas.

De acordo com o Ministério da Saúde, quanto maior a renda e a escolaridade da mulher, maiores são as chances da primeira gestação resultar em aborto. De acordo com o levantamento nacional, 45% possuem ensino médio completo e 23% nível superior. E, dessas  78% tiveram filhos.

The Intercept Brasil conversou com quatro mulheres que decidiram abortar para entender melhor suas razões e o quão próximas elas estão. Levando em consideração as estatísticas, é muito provável que, mesmo sem saber, todo mundo conheça alguma mulher que já abortou.

“Não me senti bem com o que tinha feito, sou uma super mãe”

“Já tinha dois filhos, na situação em que eu me encontrava estava fora de cogitação um terceiro. Minha vizinha conhecia uma clínica em Madureira. Com muita dor no coração, mas decidida, liguei para a clínica e marquei. Fui na data marcada, apavorada. São muitos sentimentos que tomam conta da gente. O pai do bebê que me levou. Só contei para as minhas irmãs e, mesmo assim, poucos dias antes de fazer o procedimento.

Tudo feito, vim pra casa, comprei os remédios indicados, fiquei em repouso. Fiquei sozinha cuidando de mim e dos meus filhos, que eram pequenos. O parceiro nem os remédios comprou. Não me senti bem com o que tinha feito, sou uma super mãe. A decisão foi muito difícil, mas na época não vi outro jeito.”

“Ele era muito surtado, não tinha compatibilidade para ter um filho”

“Era um relacionamento completamente abusivo. Ele trabalhava embarcado, me acusava de traição, de dar mole para todo mundo. Era muita pressão psicológica na minha cabeça. Eu comecei a ficar neurótica.

Quando a gente já tinha terminado, aconteceu essa gravidez. Eu estava passando muito mal e ele me levou ao hospital. Ele queria ter esse filho, chegou a colocar nome e ficava na minha barriga, mas eu tinha a plena certeza que não tinha condições psicológicas pra ter essa criança.

Nós brigávamos todos os dias por qualquer coisa. Tudo era muito bobo e virava uma coisa bizarra. Eu falei: não tem como. Não queria ter esse filho, eu teria um vínculo eterno com ele.

Aí ele arranjou o lugar e pagou, uns 4 mil reais. Foi em uma clínica em Botafogo indicada por amigos dele. Depois de dois anos, o médico acabou sendo preso.

Ele me levou, mas eu entrei sozinha. Ele ficou na portaria. Me largou em Botafogo sozinha e foi contar para a minha mãe que eu tinha abortado. Pelo método feito, eu não precisaria fazer nenhum outro procedimento. Ela esperou três dias e me expulsou de casa.

Ele era muito surtado, não tinha compatibilidade para ter um filho.”

“A criminalização é que te faz passar por um desespero desnecessário”.

“O que me motivou foi que estava no último ano da faculdade e não tinha dinheiro para ter um filho no momento, também o fato de o menino não ser meu namorado, apenas dormimos juntos três vezes, e também porque eu não queria ser mãe. Não foi uma decisão conjunta, eu decidi e comuniquei a ele. Então ele contou aos pais.

A mãe dele queria que eu tivesse, mesmo sem me conhecer. Apesar disso, ela entendeu e ajudou. Todas as clínicas do Rio haviam fechado.

Eu ia fazer em um quintal em Campo Grande que a empregada de um amigo indicou (uma van levava todas as mulheres, eu não sei o método de lá). Eis que a mãe do menino arrumou um médico.

Fiz em um consultório em Copacabana, com anestesista, o método foi a aspiração. Custou R$6 mil. Eu e ele dividimos o valor, ele tinha muita grana. Um dos motivos também de eu não manter é que ia parecer golpe, o que estava longe disso. Ele quis pagar tudo, mas a minha vaidade não deixou. Peguei emprestado uma parte com a minha irmã e dividimos.

Estava em 8 semanas, eu só faria até a 12ª. Se passasse, acho que não faria. Deu tudo certo, me recuperei em dois dias, não tive nenhuma complicação. Depois fiquei sem ir a ginecologista, voltei só mais de um ano depois e vou fazer exames agora.

Se eu faria um aborto de novo? Sim. O procedimento é tranquilo, rápido e seguro. Se eu não tivesse dinheiro para pagar o método da aspiração, eu daria um jeito de arrumar de qualquer forma.

A criminalização é que te faz passar por um desespero desnecessário. E também as pessoas que dizem “ah, eu vou te ajudar a criar” e fazem você se sentir um monstro.”

“O processo, em si foi, rápido, mas ainda estou me recuperando, pelo menos, emocionalmente”

“Demorei um pouco para falar com meu parceiro. Apesar de ser uma pessoa legal, que sempre teve um papo aberto e cabeça comigo, eu não sentia confiança para contar. Resolvi falar porque não tinha como resolver sozinha.

Ele não concorda com o aborto, mas expliquei que eu não tinha emocional para levar outra gravidez solteira. O pai da minha filha não me ajuda, nem reconhece a paternidade. Não queria ter que passar por isso novamente. Eu não estou trabalhando, meu pai que arca com todas as despesas da minha filha.

Então ele disse que aceitaria minha decisão e me apoiou. Ele prontamente me deu dinheiro para comprar o remédio, só que não tinha o valor total. Eu não estava trabalhando e não teria como pagar também.

Então pedi ajuda em um grupo de feministas onde me deram total apoio. Foi reconfortante. Eu estava com tanto medo, tão insegura, quase pirando… Muitas mulheres que já passaram pela experiência rapidamente vieram conversar comigo. Com algumas conversei por dias e tirei o máximo de dúvidas que tinha sobre como foi com elas e o que sentiram. Troquei muitas experiências e me senti mais segura e confiante da minha decisão.

Na hora de tomar o remédio, preferi ficar sozinha. Não contei para ninguém da minha família, principalmente para a minha mãe, que é muito evangélica. O processo em si foi rápido, mas ainda estou me recuperando, pelo menos, emocionalmente.”

Os nomes das entrevistadas foram modificados para que suas identidades fossem preservadas.

 

The post Você também deve conhecer uma mulher que já abortou appeared first on The Intercept.

Wikileaks Dump Shows CIA Could Turn Smart TVs into Listening Devices

7 March 2017 - 12:46pm

It’s difficult to buy a new TV that doesn’t come with a suite of (generally mediocre) “smart” software, giving your home theater some of the functions typically found in phones and tablets. But bringing these extra features into your living room means bringing a microphone, too — a fact the CIA is exploiting, according to a new trove of documents released today by Wikileaks.

According to documents inside the cache, a CIA program named “Weeping Angel” provided the agency’s hackers with access to Samsung Smart TVs, allowing a television’s built-in voice control microphone to be remotely enabled while keeping the appearance that the TV itself was switched off, called “Fake-Off mode.” Although the display would be switched off, and LED indicator lights would be suppressed, the hardware inside the television would continue to operate, unbeknownst to the owner. The method, co-developed with British intelligence, required implanting a given TV with malware—it’s unclear if this attack could be executed remotely, but the documentation includes reference to in-person infection via a tainted USB drive. Once the malware was inside the TV, it could relay recorded audio data to a third party (presumably a server controlled by the CIA) through the included network connection.

Wikileaks said its cache included more than 8,000 documents originating from within the CIA and came via a source, who the group did not identify, who was concerned that the agency’s “hacking capabilities exceed its mandated powers” and who wanted to “initiate a public debate” about the proliferation of cyberweapons. Wikileaks said the documents also showed extensive hacking of smartphones, including Apple’s iPhones; a large library of allegedly serious computer attacks that were not reported to tech companies like Apple, Google, and Microsoft; malware from hacker groups and other nation-states, including, Wikileaks said, Russia, that could be used to hide the agency’s involvement in cyberattacks; and the growth of a substantial hacking division within the CIA, known as the Center for Cyber Intelligence, bringing the agency further into the sort of cyberwarfare traditionally practiced by its rival the National Security Agency.

The smart TV breach is just the latest example of a security problem emerging from the so-called “Internet of Things,” the increasingly large catalog of consumer products that include (or require) an internet connection for contrived “smart” functionality Last year, the Guardian reported that Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told the Senate that breaching smart devices was a priority for American spies: “In the future, intelligence services might use the [internet of things] for identification, surveillance, monitoring, location tracking, and targeting for recruitment, or to gain access to networks or user credentials.”

Security and cryptography researcher Kenneth White told The Intercept that smart TVs are “historically a pretty easy target” and “a pretty great attack platform,” given that TVs are typically located in a living room or bedroom.” White added that “there is zero chance the [CIA has] only targeted Samsung. It’s just too easy to mod other embedded OSes” found in the smart TVs sold by every other manufacturer.

This new Wikileaks dump contains no apparent information about who exactly was targeted by Weeping Angel, or when. It’s also unclear how many models of Samsung TVs were vulnerable to Weeping Angel — the CIA documents published by Wikileaks only mention one model, the F8000 (albeit a very popular and well-reviewed model: Engadget described it as “the best smart TV system you’ll find anywhere.”) After privacy concerns about Samsung’s TV voice recognition feature spread in 2015, the company released an FAQ meant to soothe worried consumers. Addressing the question of “How do I know it’s listening or not?,” Samsung assured users that “If the TV’s voice recognition feature is turned on for a command, an icon of a microphone will appear on the screen,” but “if no icon appears on the screen, the voice recognition feature is off.”

This assurance about displayed icons is of course worth nothing if the CIA has hijacked the TV. What Samsung seems to have taken for granted was that the company, and its customers, could fully control the operation of its televisions. As the CIA’s Fake-Off exploit shows, the company’s assurances to consumers that a TV’s voice recognition controls would operate in a transparent manner do not hold true once spies and (potentially other hackers) get involved.

Samsung did not immediately return a request for comment. A CIA spokesperson replied “We do not comment on the authenticity or content of purported intelligence documents.”

Top photo: On Thursday, Jan. 8, 2015, attendees watch a presentation at the Samsung booth at the International CES, in Las Vegas.

The post Wikileaks Dump Shows CIA Could Turn Smart TVs into Listening Devices appeared first on The Intercept.

Pages