Category Archives: FBI

Is Anyone Taking a Long Look at Gab Sterling, Voting Implementation Mgr for Georgia?

Posted on by

His job was/is to supervise Georgia’s (new) voting system.

Gabriel Sterling in Georgia gives Trump a Joe McCarthy moment - Los Angeles Times

So, here are some tips (facts) to consider.

Remember that consent decree where signatures and voter registrations were not to be verified? It is said that this agreement was between Stacey Abrams and Brad Raffensperger. Actually, those two are the conspirators but on the decree itself, neither of them signed the agreement. In fact, the agreement has the inferred signatures of Bruce V. Spiva of Perkins Coie (the law firm that Hillary Clinton and the DNC hired that later hired Fusion GPS) and Vincent R. Russo of Robbins Ross Alloy Belinfante Littlefield, LLC (Office of the Georgia Attorney General, /Counsel for State Defendants).

Vincent Russo:

Vincent has been appointed as a Special Assistant Attorney General for the State of Georgia and regularly represents Georgia officials in voting rights and election litigation. He has also been tapped to represent the Governor and the Secretary of State of Georgia in matters before the Committee on Oversight and Reform in the U.S. House of Representatives, including inquiries by the Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties and the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis. Prior to joining the Firm, Vincent was the General Counsel for the Georgia Secretary of State’s Office, where he served as the chief legal counsel in the administrations of Brian Kemp and Karen Handel.

Vincent’s practice regularly involves issues at the intersection of law, politics, and public policy. He also has significant experience advising federal and state campaign committees, PACs, and other political organizations, including representing clients in investigations by the Federal Election Commission and the Georgia Government Transparency & Campaign Finance Commission. Vincent served as legal counsel to Georgia Governor Brian Kemp’s campaign committee in 2018. He is the General Counsel for the Georgia Republican Party and has represented the National Republican Congressional Committee in recent election cycles.

Josh Belinfante:

Outside of litigation, Josh has significant experience in in campaign finance and election law matters. He represents entities governed by federal and state campaign finance laws, including campaigns and political action committees.  He also has specific experience drafting laws governing Certificate of Need, gaming, the Georgia Lottery, restrictive covenants and non-compete agreements, and eminent domain.

Seems to have the hallmarks of a good ol boy network.

During Sterling’s time on the City Council, the city came under investigation by the Georgia Secretary of State’s office for possible violations in the way it ran an election. In 2016, the council approved the city running its own special election — rather than hiring the county to do it as usual — to fill a council vacancy. The election for the District 3 seat was held the same day as a county primary election, but at a separate polling place that was not within the district.

That confusing situation led to the state investigation about a possible polling place notice violation. But more than four years later, the case remains unheard by the State Election Board for unexplained reasons, a situation a local legislator once called “insane.” The case has dragged on so long that since it began, Sterling has left office, made the Fulton commission run, and joined the office that began the investigation.

Well not actually All good ol boys, as we have Jordan Fuchs, Deputy Secretary of State.

Fuchs was quoted in a Politico story in 2019 that reported a variety of groups were concerned that “Raffensperger and his staff are pushing ahead with a $150 million plan to switch the state to new voting machines (Dominion Voting Systems) that an array of experts warn would be susceptible to hacking.” That story says that Fuchs “scolded the tea party-aligned group FreedomWorks, which also opposes the machines,” by telling them, among other things, that they did not “fully comprehend the climate of our state, the demands of our communities, or the objectives of this office.”

Another press release reported that Raffensperger had appointed Fuchs to “serve on the Board of Directors for the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC). Fuchs will serve as Georgia’s national representative within the organization’s governing body,” the release said.

“Our office has led the charge to reform Georgia’s elections with common-sense solutions that prioritize efficiency and promote integrity – and our immediate action to join ERIC was a major victory for all of Georgia’s voters,” said Fuchs. “I am honored to represent our state at the national level as we continue to aggressively pursue solutions that ensure a better experience at the polls for our voters and election officials alike.”

What is ERIC? “ERIC is a multistate partnership that uses a sophisticated and secure data-matching tool to improve the accuracy and efficiency of state voter registration systems. Through ERIC, states share voter registration information to improve the integrity of voter lists,” the release says. “The national non-profit uses cross-state data matches to flag voters who may have registered in multiple states, moved out of state, or passed away – alerting election officials so that they can update voter rolls accordingly, consistent with federal and state law.”

ERIC is a multistate partnership that uses a sophisticated and secure data-matching tool to improve the accuracy and efficiency of state voter registration systems. Through ERIC, states share voter registration information to improve the integrity of voter lists. The national non-profit uses cross-state data matches to flag voters who may have registered in multiple states, moved out of state, or passed away – alerting election officials so that they can update voter rolls accordingly, consistent with federal and state law. Exactly, how is that working out?)

“I have no doubt that Deputy Secretary Fuchs will continue to advance the best interest of our state and work with national stakeholders and industry leaders to make elections more secure, accurate, and accessible for every Georgia voter,” said Secretary Raffensperger.

Fuchs has been appointed as an ERIC board member for the 2019-2020 term and will continue to carry out her regular duties as Georgia’s Deputy Secretary of State for the duration.

A 2019 article by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution found that “the Georgia secretary of state’s office acknowledged…that a vendor had improperly redacted a purchasing document detailing security features of the state’s new $107 million voting system.” Fuchs is quoted in that article as saying, “Our new voting system, including new Poll Pads, are our most secure system to date.” The article notes that “the iPads will be provided by a company called KnowInk, which is working with Dominion Voting Systems to install the new voting technology statewide.” More here.

The consent decree is here. 

Now here is where it gets more interesting. The man who oversees Georgia’s voting system, Gabriel Sterling, negotiated a $200,000 per year contract for himself last year, quit his state government job and has worked as an independent contractor ever since.Under the arrangement, Sterling’s pay increased from his $114,000 government salary since November 2019, when he took on the role of project manager for the purchase and rollout of the state’s new voting equipment. State election officials say as a contractor, the government didn’t have to pay benefits, such as health insurance.

Sterling, a lifelong Republican, even drew praise from Democrats for his comments, and he received flowers and handwritten notes from voters across the country.

But his independent status prompted questions from state legislators and critics who have asked why oversight of the state’s voting machines is being managed outside Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger’s payroll.

Just a month before the November general election, there was a panel discussion, hosted by Gab Sterling on Georgia voting rights and elections. Really? Yes and imagine the panel roster…..Vasu Abhiraman, an ACLU of Georgia policy counsel; Josh Belinfante, an attorney specializing in election law at the Robbins Law Firm; and Gabriel Sterling, the voting system implementation manager for Georgia Secretary of State and a former member of the Sandy Springs City Council. The discussion, called “Fair Voting: Make It Count,” as part of its “Live Learn Lead” series.

Oh, did you know that Georgia Secretary of State Raffensperger formed an election task force? Yup, the task force met weekly until the end of the year to “further the discussion on the election this Fall and to address the challenges in election administration.” Called, the Safe, Secure and Accessible Elections task force had bipartisanship and included figures such as Amb. Andrew Young, Georgia state NAACP President Rev. James Wooddall, and Carter Center CEO Paige Alexander. And, other members of the task force included Republican former U.S. Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, ACLU of Georgia counsel Vasu Abhiraman, Georgia Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Chris Clark, Georgia Tech professor Angelos Keromytis, MIT professor Charles Stewart, Center for Election and Innovation Research Founder and Executive Director David Becker, Jake Evans, the chairman of the Georgia chapter of the Republican National Lawyers Association, Bartow County Elections Supervisor Joseph Kirk, DeKalb County Director of Voter Registration and Elections Erica Hamilton, Cobb County Director of Elections and Registration Janine Eveler, Fulton County Elections Director Rick Barron, Monica Childers of VotingWorks, as well as Sec. Raffensperger and Deputy Secretary of State Jordan Fuchs.

“Our teams are keeping Georgia voters the focal point of all of our elections,” Raffensperger said in a statement. “I am grateful that these leaders, from various professional and ideological backgrounds, are coming together to help meet that goal; not just for this election, or the next, but for elections in years to come. Improving the integrity of our elections and increasing voter confidence in their outcomes is vital.”

Thoughts?

 

Where are the FBI Reports for the 2020 Election Monitoring?

Posted on by

As a collection of Republican members of the House and the Senate are formally challenging the electors from the 2020 results, investigations continue by a wide and deep group of legal professionals for many states. The challenges are not just about the presidential results but certainly deal with all down ballot candidates and measures.
Some audits are complete while others are underway.
Consider all the varieties of voter, ballot and reporting fraud. In fact, while the State of Georgia is the most contested so far, should there even be a run-off senate race in the first place?
Meanwhile, no one is challenging the FBI on their assignments and work during the 2020 election cycle. Question is…where are those reports?
***

Election Crimes

Election crimes threaten the legitimacy of elections and undermine public confidence in our democracy. Election crimes fall into four broad categories:

  • Ballot fraud
  • Campaign finance violations
  • Patronage offenses
  • Civil rights violations, such as voter suppression or voter intimidation

While individual states and localities have the constitutional authority and responsibility to manage elections and have their own election laws, an election crime becomes a federal crime when one or more of the following occurs:

  • A ballot includes one or more federal candidates
  • Election or polling place officials abuse their office
  • The conduct involves false voter registration
  • The crime is motivated by hostility toward minority protected classes
  • The activity violates federal campaign finance law

Examples of federal election crimes include, but are not limited to:

  • Giving false information when registering to vote
  • Voting more than once
  • Changing ballot markings or otherwise tampering with ballots
  • Compensating voters
  • Threatening voters with physical or financial harm
  • Intentionally lying about the time, manner, or place of an election to prevent qualified voters from voting
  • Political fundraising by federal employees
  • Campaign contributions above legal limits
  • Conduit contributions
  • Contributions from foreign or other prohibited sources
  • Use of campaign funds for personal or unauthorized purposes

Distinguishing between legal and criminal conduct is critical for ensuring the integrity of U.S. elections. The following activities are not federalelection crimes; however, states have their own election laws. If you are concerned about a possible violation of a state or local election law, contact your local law enforcement.

  • Giving voters rides to the polls or time off to vote
  • Offering voters a stamp to mail a ballot
  • Making false claims about oneself or another candidate
  • Forging or faking nominating petitions
  • Campaigning too close to polling places

The FBI plays an important role in preventing violations of your constitutional rights, including your right to vote. Report any instances of potential election crimes to your local FBI field office as soon as possible.

According to the FBI website:

Election Crimes and Security

Fair elections are the foundation of our democracy, and the FBI is committed to protecting the rights of all Americans to vote.

The U.S. government only works when legal votes are counted and when campaigns follow the law. When the legitimacy of elections is corrupted, our democracy is threatened.

While individual states run elections, the FBI plays an important role in protecting federal interests and preventing violations of your constitutional rights.

An election crime is generally a federal crime if:

  • The ballot includes one or more federal candidates
  • An election or polling place official abuses their office
  • The conduct involves false voter registration
  • The crime intentionally targets minority protected classes
  • The activity violates federal campaign finance law

    Protect Your Vote

    • Know when, where, and how you will vote.
    • Seek out election information from trustworthy sources, verify who produced the content, and consider their intent.
    • Report potential election crimes—such as disinformation about the manner, time, or place of voting—to the FBI.
    • If appropriate, make use of in-platform tools offered by social media companies for reporting suspicious posts that appear to be spreading false or inconsistent information about voting and elections.
    • Research individuals and entities to whom you are making political donations.

    Voter Suppression

    Intentionally deceiving qualified voters to prevent them from voting is voter suppression—and it is a federal crime.

    There are many reputable places you can find your polling location and registration information, including eac.gov and usa.gov/how-to-vote. However, not all publicly available voting information is accurate, and some is deliberately designed to deceive you to keep you from voting.

    Bad actors use various methods to spread disinformation about voting, such as social media platforms, texting, or peer-to-peer messaging applications on smartphones. They may provide misleading information about the time, manner, or place of voting. This can include inaccurate election dates or false claims about voting qualifications or methods, such as false information suggesting that one may vote by text, which is not allowed in any jurisdiction.

    • For general elections, Election Day is always the first Tuesday after November 1.
    • While there are some exceptions for military overseas using absentee ballots by email or fax, you cannot vote online or by text on Election Day.

    Always consider the source of voting information. Ask yourself, “Can I trust this information?” Look for official notices from election offices and verify the information you found is accurate.

    Help defend the right to vote by reporting any suspected instances of voter suppression—especially those received through a private communication channel like texting—to your local FBI field office or at tips.fbi.gov.

    Stock image depicting a person placing a ballot into a ballot box with an American flag background

    Report Election Crime

    If you suspect a federal election offense, contact the election crimes coordinator at your local FBI office, or submit a tip online at tips.fbi.gov.

     

 

VP Biden Briefed on Burisma and Zlochevsky in 2015

Posted on by

JTN: Vice President Joe Biden’s office was warned in 2015 that the Obama State Department believed the Ukrainian gas oligarch whose firm hired Hunter Biden was corrupt and that some of the evidence supporting that conclusion had been gathered by the U.S. Justice Department, newly released diplomatic memos show.

Then-U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt in Kiev alerted Biden’s top advisers to the concerns about Burisma Holdings founder Mykola Zlochevsky shortly before the vice president visited with Ukrainian officials in December 2015.

“I assume all have the DoJ background on Zlochevsky,” Pyatt wrote in an email to top Biden advisers in the White House. “The short unclas version (in non lawyer language) is that US and UK were cooperating on a case to seize his corrupt assets overseas (which had passed through the US).”

Pyatt added that the asset forfeiture case “fell apart” when individuals in the Ukrainian prosecutor general’s office “acted to thwart the UK case.”

The memos were released last week by Senate committees investigating Hunter Biden’s global business dealings.

By the time Pyatt had written the email, one of his deputies in the Kiev embassy, George Kent, had already alerted the FBI that State officials believed Ukrainian prosecutors had been paid a $7 million bribe to thwart the asset forfeiture case. Kent recounted his efforts in an email to a fellow ambassador a year later.

A year later, Pyatt’s successor as U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, wrote her superiors in Washington that the American embassy believed Burisma had paid another bribe in the form of cheap gas to get Ukrainian prosecutors to drop remaining cases against the gas firm.

***Zlochevski photo.jpg

In 2014, Britain’s Prime Minister and the U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder know more than they are telling with regard to Ukraine, Biden and Burisma.

.Theresa May and US attorney general Eric Holder (left) at the Ukraine Forum on Asset Recovery in 2014. Theresa May and US attorney general Eric Holder (left) at the Ukraine Forum on Asset Recovery in 2014. Photograph: Getty Images

Per the Congressional Record:

On April 16, 2014, Vice President Biden met with his son's business 
partner, Devon Archer, at the White House. That is kind of a big deal--
anybody meeting with the Vice President at the White House. Hunter 
Biden's business partner got to do that.
  Five days later, Vice President Biden visited Ukraine. The media 
described him as the public face of the administration's handling of 
Ukraine. The next day, April 22, Archer joined the board of Burisma.
  Again, Burisma is this company that is owned by what George Kent from 
the State Department called an ``odious oligarch,'' Mykola Zlochevsky. 
It is hard to say Ukrainian names
Six days later, after Archer joined the board, British officials 
seized $23 million from the London bank accounts of Burisma's owner, 
Mykola Zlochevsky. Fifteen days later, on May 13, Hunter Biden joined 
the board of Burisma. And over the course of the next, approximately, 4 
to 5 years, Hunter and his firms were paid more than $3 million for his 
and Archer's board participation.
  Again, Ukraine had just gone through a revolution. Their leadership 
was desperate for U.S. support. We all have to believe that Mr. 
Zlochevsky, an odious oligarch, would have made those Ukrainian 
officials well aware of the fact that the son of the Vice President of 
the United States, the public face of the administration's handling of 
Ukraine, was sitting on his board.
  So what kind of signal did that send to Ukrainians who were trying to 
stand up and were being pressured by U.S. officials to rid their 
country of corruption? It basically said: If you want U.S. support, 
don't touch Burisma
  The fact is, when all was said and done, Burisma and Mykola 
Zlochevsky were never held to account. The investigation, the 
prosecution of him was ceased. It never occurred.
  In terms of Russian disinformation, these false charges, these wild 
claims against me and Senator Grassley--I was way ahead of the curve 
when it came to Russian disinformation. Back in 2015, as chairman of 
the European Subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I 
held three hearings focusing on what Russia does to destabilize the 
politics in countries--an attempted coup in Montenegro and other places 
in Eastern Europe. So I am well aware of what Russia is doing--well 
aware. I don't condone it. I condemn it. I am not having any part of 
pushing it
“Hi Andrii! I’m doing ok. Yes, definitely got some rest over the weekend. How about you?” Zentos wrote April 4, 2016 to Telizhenko from her official White House email account. “Survive the visit ok? Also, should we still plan for coffee this week? Maybe Wednesday or Friday? Hope all is well! Liz.” A month earlier, a planned beer outing with Zentos got changed. “Would you be up for doing coffee instead of beer though? I’m realizing that if I drink beer at 3 p.m., I will probably fall asleep while attempting to work afterward,” Zentos wrote. Zentos and Telizhenko also discussed the sensitive case of Burisma and its founder, Mykola Zlochevsky, in a July 2016 email exchange with the subject line “Re: Z,” the shorthand Telizhenko used to refer to the Burisma founder. Their email exchange did not mention Hunter Biden’s role in the company but showed the Obama White House had interest in the business dealings of Hunter Biden’s boss. “Hi Liz, Yes, It would be great to meet, tomorrow whatever works best for you 12:30pm or 6pm–I am ready,” Telizhenko wrote the NSC staffer, adding a smiley face. Zentos eventually replied when he suggested a restaurant: “Ooh, that would be wonderful–thanks so much!” Attached to Telizhenko’s email was an org chart showing the structure of some foreign companies that had been connected at one point to Zlochevsky‘s business empire. The memos show Zentos first befriended Telizhenko when she worked at the U.S. embassy as far back as 2014. The memos show that officials at the Obama Justice Department, the NSC, and the State Department enlisted Telizhenko for similarly sensitive diplomatic matters dating to 2013 including: Arranging for senior members of the Ukraine Prosecutor General’s Office to travel to Washington in January 2016 to meet with NSC, State, DOJ and FBI officials to discuss ongoing corruption cases. At the time, the Ukraine prosecutors had an escalating corruption probe of Burisma, where Hunter Biden served on the board. Within weeks of the Washington meeting, Vice President Joe Biden had pressured Ukraine’s president Petro Poroshenko to fire the lead prosecutor, Viktor Shakin. Securing a meeting in February 2015 at the U.S. embassy in Kiev with a deputy Ukrainian prosecutor whom U.S. officials wanted to confront about a bribe allegedly paid by Burisma. Facilitating a draft statement in November 2013 from members of the Ukrainian parliament to President Obama denouncing then-Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, whom the Obama administration would help oust from power a few weeks later. “We, people of Ukraine, appeal to you with request to support Ukrainian people in their standing for freedom, justice and democracy,” the November 2013 draft statement from Telizhenko to the U.S. embassy in Kiev read. “The President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych proved that he is not the guarantor of constitutional rights and freedoms of citizens, freedom of choice and right for free expression.” The draft statement was fielded by a military attache at the U.S. embassy who urged Telizhenko to get it to the embassy’s political section for consideration. “The ambassador has not shared with me what the position of the US government would be on such a statement, other than his message yesterday morning,” the attache wrote. “. . . I’m sure once you pass this statement to Ambassador Pyatt’s political section, they will render a timely response.” Photos taken by U.S. and Ukrainian government photographers show Telizhenko facilitated meetings between 2014 and 2016 with key lawmakers in Washington, including Democrat Reps. Engel and Marcy Kaptur and then-GOP Sen. Bob Corker, as well as other U.S. agencies. And the emails show U.S. embassy officials in Kiev routinely sought advice and insights from Telizhenko about happenings inside the Ukrainian government. “Andriy, we have heard that there may be a briefing today. Do you know the specifics?” embassy political officer Stephen Page asked in a January 2014 email.

***
This reads like a Hollywood spy script, but for context and a time-line go here.

China Used ‘Mass Surveillance’ on Thousands of Americans’ Phones

Posted on by

Is the Caribbean Smartphone Market Closer to Asia than America? - Droid Island

Newsweek reports: A mobile security expert has accused China of exploiting cellphone networks in the Caribbean to conduct “mass surveillance” on Americans.

China Regional Snapshot: The Caribbean - Committee on Foreign Affairs

Gary Miller, a former vice president of network security at California-based analytics company Mobileum, told The Guardian he had amassed evidence of espionage conducted via “decades-old vulnerabilities” in the global telecommunications system.

While not explicitly mentioned in the report, the claims appear to be centered around Signaling System 7 (SS7), a communications protocol that routes calls and data around the world and has long been known to have inherent security weaknesses.

According to Miller, his analysis of “signals data” from the Caribbean has shown China was using a state-controlled mobile operator to “target, track, and intercept phone communications of U.S. phone subscribers,” The Guardian reported.

Miller claimed China appeared to exploit Caribbean operators to conduct surveillance on Americans as they were traveling, alleging that attacks on cell phones between 2018 to 2020 likely affected “tens of thousands” of U.S. mobile users in the region.

“Once you get into the tens of thousands, the attacks qualify as mass surveillance,” the mobile researcher said, noting the tactic is “primarily for intelligence collection and not necessarily targeting high-profile targets.” Miller continued: “It might be that there are locations of interest, and these occur primarily while people are abroad.”

A previous analysis paper covering 2018-2019, also titled Far From Home, contained a series of similar espionage claims about SS7, alleging that “mass surveillance attacks” in 2018 were most prevalent by China and Caribbean mobile networks. More here.

But hold on…. it does not stop there….we also have the Channel Islands…

Pin on Guernsey Island

Remarkable investigative details here.

The Bureau: Private intelligence companies are using phone networks based in the Channel Islands to enable surveillance operations to be carried out against people around the world, including British and US citizens, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism can reveal following a joint reporting project with the Guardian.

Leaked data, documents and interviews with industry insiders who have access to sensitive information suggest that systemic weaknesses in the global telecoms infrastructure, and a particular vulnerability in Jersey and Guernsey, are being exploited by corporate spy businesses.

These businesses take advantage of some of the ways mobile phone networks across the world interact in order to access private information on targets, such as location information or, in more sophisticated applications, the content of calls and messages or other highly sensitive data.

The spy companies see phone operators in the Channel Islands as an especially soft route into the UK, according to industry experts, who say the attacks emanating from the islands appear to be targeted at individuals rather than cases of “mass” surveillance. The Bureau understands that the targets of this surveillance have been spread across the globe, and included US citizens as well as people in Europe and Africa.

Ron Wyden, the Oregon senator and privacy advocate, described the use of foreign telecom assets to spy on people in the US as a national security threat.

“Access into US telephone networks is a privilege,” he said in response to the Bureau’s findings. “Foreign telecom regulators need to police their domestic industry – if they don’t, they risk their country being cut off from US roaming agreements.”

Markéta Gregorová, the European Parliament’s chief negotiator on trade legislation for surveillance technology, called for “immediate regulatory, financial and diplomatic costs on companies and rogue jurisdictions” that enabled these practices.

“Any commercial or governmental entity, foreign or domestic which enables the facilitation of warrantless cyber-attacks on European citizens deserves the full force of our justice system,” she told the Bureau.

Stop Using Zoom, Second Warning

Posted on by

The first warning came last March.

March: As remote work surges amid the coronavirus pandemic, the FBI issued a public bulletin Monday warning Zoom and other video teleconferencing services may not be as private, or as secure, as users may assume.

Use of Zoom and similar services has exploded in recent weeks as companies, schools, governments, and individuals increasingly turn to its teleconferencing as ways to keep businesses and classrooms afloat while sheltering in pace or working from home. However the shift also represents an opportunity for attackers, as white supremacists, hackers and other trolls barge into digital meetings, a phenomenon known as “Zoombombing.”

In Massachusetts, there have been several incidents, including an unintended participant joining a high school’s virtual classroom only to yell profanities and reveal personal information about the teacher, according to the FBI. Another unwelcome participant with swastika tattoos joined a separate Massachusetts school’s Zoom meeting, the FBI reports.

“The FBI has received multiple reports of conferences being disrupted by pornographic and/or hate images and threatening language,” the FBI cautioned. “As individuals continue the transition to online lessons and meetings, the FBI recommends exercising due diligence and caution in your cybersecurity efforts.”

It’s not just private businesses and children whose meetings could be Zoombombed. Privacy and security issues in conferencing software may also pose risks to national security, as world leaders convene Zoom meetings. In some cases, world leaders such as U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson have shared screenshots of their teleconferencing publicly only to reveal Zoom meeting IDs, raising concerns that sensitive information could be compromised. More here.

Stupidly, government officials at all levels are using Zoom including the Biden presidential team. How dangerous is that? Those officials are not reading the warnings or the news? Yeesh

 

Zoom Biden Rally

For more proof, again this month…

Justice Department/December 2020: China-Based Executive at U.S. Telecommunications Company Charged with Disrupting Video Meetings

It is not only the U.S. that is sounding the warnings. The Telegraph reports warnings that “opportunistic criminals” (a formulation that’s practically redundant), can be expected to use bogus invitations to sessions in their social engineering efforts.

Connecticut Teen Arrested for Allegedly 'Zoom Bombing ... source

A security executive with the video-tech giant Zoom worked with the Chinese government to terminate Americans’ accounts and disrupt video calls about the 1989 massacre of pro-democracy activists in Tiananmen Square, Justice Department prosecutors said Friday.

The case is a stunning blow for Zoom, one of the most popular new titans of American tech, which during the pandemic became one of the main ways people work, socialize and share ideas around the world. The California-based company is now worth more than $100 billion.

But the executive’s work with the Chinese government, as alleged by FBI agents in a criminal complaint unsealed Friday in a Brooklyn federal court, highlights the often-hidden threats of censorship on a forum promoted as a platform for free speech. It also raises questions about how Zoom is protecting users’ data from governments that seek to surveil and suppress people inside their borders and abroad.

Prosecutors said the China-based executive, Xinjiang Jin, worked as Zoom’s primary liaison with Chinese law enforcement and intelligence services, sharing user information and terminating video calls at the Chinese government’s request.

Jin monitored Zoom’s video system for discussions of political and religious topics deemed unacceptable by China’s ruling Communist Party, the complaint states, and he gave government officials the names, email addresses and other sensitive information of users, even those outside China.

Jin worked also to end at least four video meetings in May and June, including video memorial calls with U.S.-based dissidents who’d survived the crackdown by Chinese military forces that killed thousands of students and protesters. The Chinese government works to censor any acknowledgment of the massacre, including on social media outside China.

A Zoom spokesperson said in a statement Friday that the company has cooperated with the case and launched its own internal investigation. Jin, the company said, shared “a limited amount of individual user data with Chinese authorities,” as well as data on no more than 10 users based outside China. Jin was fired for violating company policies, the statement said, and other employees have been placed on administrative leave until the investigation is complete.

In an updated statement on Zoom’s website, the company said it “fell short” by terminating the meetings instead of only blocking access to participants in China, to abide by Chinese law. The company said it has reinstated the victims’ accounts and will no longer allow requests from the Chinese government to affect users outside mainland China.

“As the DOJ makes clear, every American company, including Zoom and our industry peers, faces challenges when doing business in China,” the company said in its statement. “We will continue to act aggressively to anticipate and combat ever-evolving data security challenges.”

Jin could not be reached for comment. Though Jin lives in China and is not in U.S. custody, officials said he could be transferred to the United States to face prosecution if he travels to a country that has an extradition treaty with the U.S.

A spokesperson for the Chinese embassy in Washington did not respond to requests for comment.

Human-rights activists this summer said their Zoom accounts had been abruptly terminated shortly before or after they’d hosted video calls commemorating the 31st anniversary of the Tiananmen Square protests, a bloody crackdown captured in the iconic photo of a man standing in front of a Chinese tank.

Zoom said in a statement then that the company “must comply with laws in the countries where we operate.” While the company said it regretted “that a few recent meetings with participants both inside and outside of China were negatively impacted,” the statement said it was not in the company’s power “to change the laws of governments opposed to free speech.”

Zhou Fengsuo, a student leader during the Tiananmen Square protests who had his paid Zoom account terminated this summer, told The Washington Post on Friday that he had worked with the FBI on the case and saw the charges as “tremendous news.”

“It’s so eye-opening to me how this U.S. company, having this connection, would report directly to” the Chinese Communist Party and “disrupt our meetings regularly on behalf of the CCP,” he said. “This executive was working for the government and police as an agent of persecution, and Zoom was paying this guy for doing that job.”

Prosecutors charged Jin, also known as Julien Jin, with conspiracy to commit interstate harassment and to transfer a means of identification. Jin, 39, had worked at the company since 2016, most recently as a “Security Technical Leader,” the complaint said.

Quoting from electronic messages between Jin and other Zoom employees, FBI agents outlined a months-long, high-pressure campaign by China’s “Internet Police” to view users’ video calls and suppress unwanted speech. In one April message, Jin said he had been summoned to a meeting with Chinese government officials who demanded that Zoom develop the capability to terminate any “illegal meeting” within one minute. In others, Jin sent meeting passwords and other sensitive internal data directly to Chinese law enforcement.

In the complaint, FBI agents said that Zoom employees in the U.S. had agreed to a Chinese government “rectification” plan that entailed migrating data on roughly 1 million users from the U.S. to China, thereby subjecting it to Chinese law. Zoom also agreed, the complaint states, to provide “special access” to Chinese law enforcement and national-security authorities. In one message cited in the complaint, Jin wrote that the authorities had wanted him to share detailed lists of the company’s “daily monitoring” of “Hong Kong demonstrations, illegal religions” and other subjects.

To terminate the Tiananmen Square calls, the complaint alleges, Jin’s co-conspirators fabricated evidence that they were intended to discuss child abuse, racism, terrorism and violence. Jin’s co-conspirators also entered some calls with fake accounts that used pornographic or terrorist-related profile images, and Jin pointed to those images as evidence to terminate the meetings and suspend the hosts’ accounts.

John Demers, the assistant attorney general for national security, said the firm had, like many others that do business in China, put itself in a difficult position by operating in an authoritarian country whose laws and practices often “run antithetical to our values.”

“The company was focused on complying with Chinese law and the expectations of Chinese law enforcement,” Demers said. “But what happened over time is those expectations increased. So it goes from, ‘Well, respond to our lawful requests,’ to ‘You must take action within a minute to shut down any action on your platforms’ – not just in China, but outside – that hits upon topics of sensitivity to the Chinese government.”

That pressure, he noted, spans many industries: He cited the controversy last year involving the National Basketball Association, in which the general manager of the Houston Rockets tweeted in support of Hong Kong protesters, leading to a backlash in China.

“The case is an illustration of the choices that companies are forced to make when they do business in China . . . [and] how the Chinese government will take advantage of the leverage they have over you to push their agenda,” he said. “You’ve got a consistent pattern of the Chinese government using economic leverage – the opportunity to access markets, foreign investments – in order to further political goals.”

John Scott-Railton, a researcher at the Citizen Lab in Toronto, said the filing showed how authoritarian governments have increasingly looked at major tech companies as top-priority intelligence targets ripe for infiltration and recruitment.

He pointed to another case last year against two former Twitter employees charged with spying on behalf of Saudi Arabia, including by sending the personal information of thousands of people, including Saudi critics and prominent dissidents.

The charges were announced on the same day that the Trump administration added four Chinese companies to the Commerce Department entity list for enabling human rights abuses within China by providing DNA-testing materials or high-technology surveillance equipment to the Chinese government. They were among 59 Chinese companies Commerce add to its export control entity list, including companies that have been accused of stealing trade secrets and using U.S. exports to support the Chinese military.

Zoom has faced questions before about how it guards against the potential misuse of video data by the Chinese government, which censors major news and social media websites beneath what’s known as a “Great Firewall.”

This spring, Scott-Railton and another researcher found the company had routed American users’ data through Chinese servers, potentially opening it to Chinese-government data requests. The company later said it had “mistakenly” sent American video calls to Chinese data centers amid a flood of calls.

Zoom employs more than 2,500 people around the world, including, as of last year, more than 500 in China who develop the software installed in computers around the world.

The company’s billionaire chief executive, Eric Yuan, was born in China but moved to Silicon Valley in the late ’90s, where he worked for the video start-up WebEx before founding Zoom in 2011.

The Federal Trade Commission last month reached a settlement with Zoom, in which the company resolved allegations that it had misled users about their data privacy and encryption measures by agreeing to new security rules.

Questions over business dealings in China have become more commonplace as a new wave of Chinese tech start-ups has gained international popularity and acclaim. TikTok, the wildly popular short-video app owned by the Beijing-based tech company ByteDance, drew suspicions of censorship from users last year because searches on the site related to topics suppressed by the Chinese government, such as the Tiananmen Square massacre or the Hong Kong pro-democracy protests, showed few or no videos.

Internal guidelines for the site also mimicked Chinese-government censorship policies, and former employees for the company told The Post last year that key content-moderation decisions for international users were made in China. TikTok has said it has worked in recent months to distance its U.S. operations from the company’s Chinese headquarters.

Wang Dan, a Chinese dissident whose Zoom call on Tiananmen Square was also disrupted this spring, said the case showed how China could threaten free expression for people in the West.

“Interfering with the freedom of speech of those who have settled and lived in the United States in exile is . . . a serious attack to American sovereignty,” he told The Post on Friday. “The American people should also pay more attention to the [Chinese Communist Party’s] threat of American democracy.”