Tuesday, March 25, 2025
Wednesday, March 19, 2025
Tuesday, March 18, 2025
Archives: 1986 - The Schzophrenic: A Police Problem
Police response to persons suffering from mental illness...
Monday, March 17, 2025
Archives: 2023 - Online Education Risks and Challenges
Discussion of issues involving online education..
Archives: 1995 - Apprehending Mental Patients: A Law Enforcement Challenge
Some issues still exist today...
Thursday, March 13, 2025
Examination of: Discretion in Police Use-of-Force Decision-Making: A Scoping Review
Dr. Frank Kardasz, MPA, Ed.D.
March 13, 2025
A 2024 scoping review by De Buck, Raes, and Verhage in the Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology (2024) 39:454–468 provides an overview of empirical research on factors influencing police discretion in use-of-force decision-making. The study synthesizes findings from 102 articles published between 2006 and 2023, covering various research methodologies.
What is a Scoping Review?
A scoping review differs from a literature review. While both types of reviews assess existing literature, literature reviews are more in-depth and focused on specific research questions, whereas scoping reviews provide a broader overview to identify gaps and suggest future research directions.
The following report highlights the complexity of police discretion and identifies multiple factors at individual, situational, organizational, and community levels that affect use-of-force decisions.
KEY FINDINGS
Individual Officer Characteristics:
- Gender and Ethnicity: Research shows mixed results regarding the impact of officer gender and ethnicity on use-of-force decisions. Female officers tend to exhibit less extreme controlling behaviors, while findings on ethnicity are inconsistent. Some studies suggest white officers may use more force than officers of color, but other research indicates no significant relationship between ethnicity and force use.
- Education and Training: Better-educated officers are less likely to use force, and training is crucial for appropriate decision-making under stress. Younger officers are more likely to use force, but controlling for age, experienced officers tend to use more force.
- Emotions and Cognitive Skills: Anger control and cognitive skills are important in reducing the likelihood of shooting. Stress can impair decision-making, leading to potential errors.
Situational Factors:
- Suspect Behavior: Aggressive civilian behavior increases the likelihood of force use. The presence of weapons and proximity to officers are significant predictors of force decisions.
- Location and Context: Public visibility and the number of people present can influence force decisions. More force is often used in crowded areas due to perceived risks and accountability concerns.
Organizational Variables
- Culture and Policies: A supportive organizational culture and clear use-of-force policies can reduce coercive tactics and excessive force. Procedurally fair organizational climates foster trust and adherence to policies.
- Structure and Accountability: Departmental structures, such as excessive work hours, can lead to fatigue and poor decision-making. Organizational accountability mechanisms are crucial in preventing misconduct.
Community-Level Factors:
- Neighborhood Characteristics: Neighborhood crime rates and socioeconomic status influence police behavior, with more force used in high-crime areas.
- Accountability and Governance: Higher levels of accountability and democratic governance reduce police misconduct by limiting discretion and promoting transparency.
Implications and Future Directions
The scoping review underscores the complexity of police discretion in use-of-force decisions, highlighting the need for further research in this area. Future research might focus on developing improved training, policies and procedures along with exploring organizational and community-level factors. Consistent methodologies are also necessary to operationalize and measure the use of force across studies.
Conclusion
The work by De Buck et. al. emphasizes the multifaceted nature of police discretion and the importance of addressing both individual and systemic factors to improve use-of-force decision-making. By better understanding these factors, law enforcement agencies can potentially develop targeted training and policies to enhance officer judgment and reduce unnecessary force.
Reference
De Buck, A., Raes, J.L. & Verhage, A. Discretion in Police Use of Force Decision-Making: A Scoping Review. J Police Crim Psych 39, 454–468 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-024-09683-w
=-=-=-=-=-=
https://kardasz.blogspot.com/2025/03/examination-of-discretion-in-police-use.html
Monday, February 03, 2025
Drones as First Responder (DFR) Technology
Background and Development
Flock Safety, acquired Aerodome in October 2024 to expand its capabilities into drone-based solutions for law enforcement[1][9]. Aerodome helped to develop advanced Drone as First Responder (DFR) technology. The acquisition brought together Flock Safety's existing suite of public safety tools with Aerodome's drone expertise to create an integrated DFR system.
Key Features of Flock Aerodome™ DFR
Automated Deployment
- DFR systems use automated, battery-swapping docks positioned across a coverage area, allowing drones to be rapidly deployed to emergency situations[5][7]. This automation enables 24/7 readiness with minimal human intervention.
Integration with Existing Systems
- DFR systems can include license plate recognition (LPR) cameras, video surveillance, and gunshot detection sensors[1][4]. This integration allows for automated drone deployment in response to alerts from these systems.
Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) Operations
- Advanced software and hardware enable the drones to operate safely beyond the visual line of sight of operators, expanding the coverage area and reducing the need for on-site personnel[3][7].
Real-Time Video Streaming
- The system provides live high-definition video streaming and telemetry data to emergency responders and command centers, enhancing situational awareness[4][16].
Rapid Response Capabilities
- Flock Aerodome™ reports an average response time of 86 seconds, significantly faster than traditional response methods[4][5]. This rapid response can be crucial in emergency situations.
Impact on Public Safety Operations
Improved Response Times
- The system's ability to quickly deploy drones to incident locations provides law enforcement with immediate eyes on the scene, potentially reducing overall response times by up to 71%[7].
Enhanced Situational Awareness
- Real-time aerial footage allows first responders to assess situations more accurately before arriving on scene, improving officer safety and tactical decision-making[1][9].
Resource Optimization
- Approximately 20% of calls can be resolved without deploying patrol units, leading to more efficient use of law enforcement resources[4][16].
Increased Subject Location
- The aerial perspective provided by drones has led to an 89% increase in locating subjects of interest[4][7].
Implementation and Adoption
- Scottsdale, Arizona was among the first cities to implement the Flock Aerodome™ DFR system, integrating it with their Real-Time Crime Center[3][6]. As of January 2025, other cities like Hempstead, New York have also announced plans to deploy the system[5].
Considerations and Challenges
While the Flock Aerodome™ DFR system offers benefits, agencies must consider factors such as community engagement, privacy concerns, and regulatory compliance. The system includes features for transparency and accountability to address these issues[13][17].
Conclusion
DFR systems represent an advancement in public safety technology. By combining automated drone deployment with existing surveillance and alert systems, it has the potential to revolutionize emergency response capabilities for law enforcement agencies. As the technology continues to evolve and more agencies adopt DFR systems, its impact on public safety operations is likely to grow.
Citations:
[1] https://www.aerodome.com/blog/flock-safety-expands-into-drones-for-law-enforcement-with-acquisition-of-aerodome/
[2] https://dronelife.com/2024/07/24/aerodome-and-flock-safety-partner-to-expand-drone-as-first-responder-technology/
[3] https://www.aerodome.com/blog/flock-safety-partnership/
[4] https://www.flocksafety.com/devices/drone-as-first-responder-dfr
[5] https://metroairportnews.com/hempstead-police-department-announces-new-drone-as-first-responder-dfr-system/
[6] https://www.police1.com/tech-pulse/aerodome-flock-safety-partner-to-expand-drone-as-first-responder-technology-for-public-safety
[7] https://www.flocksafety.com/devices/flock-aerodome
[8] https://www.aerodome.com
[9] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOdb4_Swe7c
[10] https://dronelife.com/2024/10/16/flock-safety-expands-capabilities-with-acquisition-of-aerodome/
[11] https://www.2048.vc/blog/flock-aerodome
[12] https://www.flocksafety.com/articles/flock-safety-expands-into-drones-for-law-enforcement-with-acquisition-of-aerodome
[13] https://www.aerodome.com/blog/the-evolution-of-dfr/
[14] https://www.unmannedsystemstechnology.com/2024/10/flock-safety-acquires-aerodome-drone-as-first-responder-technology/
[15] https://www.flocksafety.com/articles/aerodome-and-flock-safety-forge-strategic-partnership-to-expand-drone-as-first-responder-technology-for-public-safety-agencies
[16] https://www.flocksafety.com/drone-as-first-responder-flock-safety-aerodome
Friday, January 17, 2025
Diamonds in IoT: A Sparkling Future for Technology?
The Unique Properties of Diamonds for IoT Applications
The exceptional physical and electronic properties of diamonds make them good candidates for use in Internet of Things (IoT) devices. Here's why diamonds are emerging as a superior material for IoT applications:
Unmatched Thermal Conductivity
- Diamonds possess the highest thermal conductivity of any known material, with a value of over 20 W/cmK[3]. This property allows for efficient heat dissipation in electronic devices, crucial for maintaining optimal performance and longevity in IoT sensors and components.
Wide Bandgap and High Breakdown Field
- With an ultra-wide bandgap of 5.46 eV and an impressive breakdown field of 10 MV/cm, diamond outperforms other semiconductors[3]. These characteristics enable the creation of high-power, high-frequency devices that can operate in extreme conditions.
Superior Carrier Mobility
- Diamond boasts exceptionally high electron and hole mobilities, facilitating the development of compact THz and sub-THz plasmonic sources and detectors[3]. This property is particularly valuable for IoT devices requiring high-frequency operation.
Radiation Hardness
- Diamond's resistance to radiation damage makes it an excellent choice for IoT devices deployed in harsh environments or space applications[3].
Synthetic Diamonds: Improving IoT
- The advent of synthetic diamond production revolutionized the potential for diamond-based IoT devices. Synthetic diamonds offer several advantages over their natural counterparts:
Consistent Quality
- Synthetic diamonds can be produced with precise control over their properties, ensuring consistent performance across IoT devices[6].
Customization
- Manufacturers can tailor the properties of synthetic diamonds to meet specific IoT application requirements, such as optimizing for thermal conductivity or electrical insulation[4].
Cost-Effectiveness
- As synthetic diamond production techniques improve, the cost of diamond-based IoT components is becoming more competitive, making them a viable option for large-scale deployment[6].
Ethical Sourcing
- Synthetic diamonds eliminate concerns about conflict diamonds, ensuring that IoT devices using this material are ethically produced[6].
Applications of Diamond-Based IoT Devices
- The unique properties of diamonds enable a wide range of IoT applications:
High-Power Electronics
- Diamond-based transistors and power devices can handle higher voltages and frequencies, making them ideal for IoT devices in industrial and energy sectors[3].
Quantum Sensing and Computing
- The long-lived quantum states in diamond make it an excellent material for quantum sensors and potential quantum computing applications in IoT networks[4].
Thermal Management
- Diamond heat spreaders can significantly improve the performance and reliability of high-power IoT devices operating in challenging environments[4].
THz Communications
- Diamond-based TeraFETs (Terahertz Field-Effect Transistors) show promise for future 6G communication systems, potentially revolutionizing IoT connectivity[3].
Implications for Law Enforcement
- As diamond-based IoT devices become more prevalent, law enforcement agencies need to be aware of several key points:
Enhanced Surveillance Capabilities
- IoT devices incorporating diamond components may offer superior performance in surveillance and monitoring applications, potentially aiding in crime prevention and detection[7].
Cybersecurity Concerns
- The increased adoption of advanced IoT devices necessitates robust cybersecurity measures to protect against potential vulnerabilities and data breaches[7].
Forensic Opportunities
- Diamond-based IoT devices may provide new avenues for digital forensics, offering more reliable and durable data storage in extreme conditions[7].
Potential for Misuse
- Law enforcement should be vigilant about the potential misuse of high-performance diamond-based IoT devices in criminal activities, such as advanced hacking tools or covert surveillance equipment[8].
Conclusion
The integration of diamonds, particularly synthetic diamonds, into IoT devices represents a significant leap forward in technology. Their unique properties offer solutions to many challenges faced by current IoT applications, from thermal management to high-frequency communications. As this technology advances, it will be important for both industry and law enforcement to stay informed about its capabilities and potential impacts on society.
Citations:
[1] https://hbantwerp.com/hb-capsule-iot-device/
[2] https://www.diamondt.com/products/m2m-embedded-gateways/
[3] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10935413/
[4] https://www.ingenia.org.uk/articles/diamond-technology-beyond-hardness/
[5] https://physicsworld.com/a/synthetic-diamond-how-materials-innovation-is-rewriting-the-rules-of-quantum-networking/
[6] https://www.withclarity.com/blogs/diamond/natural-vs-synthetic-diamonds
[7] https://www.tomorrow.bio/post/transforming-law-enforcement-iot-s-integration-in-policing-2023-07-4883983868-iot
[8] https://www.sanctions.io/blog/money-laundering-through-trade-in-diamonds
[9] https://www.laxmidiamond.com/Home/BlogIOTInTheDiamondIndustry
[10] https://www.evolvediamonds.com/electronic-properties-of-diamond/
[11] https://www.analyticssteps.com/blogs/how-does-iot-benefit-law-enforcement
[12] https://www.networkworld.com/article/932286/how-the-internet-of-things-is-transforming-law-enforcement.html
=-=-=-=-=-=
https://kardasz.blogspot.com/2024/12/diamonds-in-iot-sparkling-future-for.html
=-=-=-=-=-=
Monday, January 13, 2025
E-Tattoos: The Future of Wearable Technology and the Implications
Electronic tattoos, or e-tattoos, represent an advancement in wearable technology that may change healthcare, law enforcement, and personal computing. These ultra-thin, flexible devices adhere to the skin and contain integrated sensors capable of monitoring various bodily functions and transmitting data wirelessly. As this technology continues to evolve, it is important to understand its potential applications, advantages, drawbacks, and the privacy concerns it raises.
What Are E-Tattoos?
E-tattoos are soft, sensor-equipped wearable devices that attach directly to a person's skin. Typically made from conductive materials such as graphene, carbon, or conductive polymers, these devices can measure a wide range of biometric data, including:
- Electrical signals from the body (e.g., muscle impulses, heart rate, brain activity)
- Motion and temperature
- Chemical composition of sweat
Unlike traditional wearables such as smartwatches, e-tattoos can be placed on various parts of the body and provide closer contact with the skin, allowing for more accurate measurements.
Advantages of E-Tattoos
- Portability: E-tattoos are easily portable and don't require charging or battery replacement.
- Durability: They are waterproof, flexible, and can withstand stretching.
- Accuracy: By integrating directly with the skin, e-tattoos provide more precise and instantaneous data compared to other wearable devices.
- Medical applications: E-tattoos can monitor vital signs, help prevent and control diseases, and assist in diagnosing serious health conditions.
- Potential to replace smartphones: Some experts believe e-tattoos could eventually take over many functions currently performed by smartphones.
Disadvantages and Concerns
- Impermanence: Current e-tattoo technology is designed for short-term use, typically lasting only 1-2 weeks.
- Privacy risks: The data collected by e-tattoos could be vulnerable to hacking or unauthorized access.
- Ethical concerns: The use of e-tattoos in law enforcement and surveillance raises questions about individual privacy and civil liberties.
- Data management: The collection and storage of large amounts of personal biometric data present challenges in terms of security and consent.
Privacy Concerns and Law Enforcement Use
The development of e-tattoo technology has sparked significant privacy concerns, particularly in relation to law enforcement use. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the FBI have been working on tattoo recognition technology, which raises several issues:
- Biometric identification: E-tattoos could be used to identify individuals based on unique characteristics of their tattoos, raising concerns about surveillance and tracking.
- Profiling: Law enforcement agencies might use e-tattoo recognition to make inferences about a person's affiliations, beliefs, or background.
- Data sharing: There are worries about how tattoo image databases might be shared among agencies or with third parties without proper oversight.
- First Amendment issues: The analysis of tattoo imagery could potentially infringe on freedom of expression and association.
- Ethical research concerns: Some research initiatives have been criticized for using tattoo images from prisoners without proper consent or oversight.
What Law Enforcement Needs to Know
Law enforcement agencies considering the use of e-tattoo technology should be aware of several key points:
- Legal and ethical implications: The use of e-tattoo recognition technology may raise constitutional concerns and should be carefully evaluated.
- Limitations of technology: While tattoo recognition algorithms are improving, they are not infallible and may produce false positives or misidentifications.
- Data protection: Strict protocols should be in place to protect the privacy and security of collected tattoo data.
- Transparency: Agencies should be transparent about their use of e-tattoo technology and establish clear guidelines for its application.
- Consent and oversight: The collection and use of tattoo data, especially from vulnerable populations like inmates, requires proper consent and ethical oversight.
Investigative Considerations for Law Enforcement
When a law enforcement investigator encounters a suspect, victim, or deceased individual with evidence of an e-tattoo, they should consider the following:
Physical Characteristics
- Location and Design: Note the precise placement and visual appearance of the e-tattoo, as these details can be crucial for identification purposes.
- Sensor Components: Look for any visible electronic components or unusual materials that distinguish the e-tattoo from a traditional tattoo.
- Durability: Be aware that current e-tattoo technology is typically designed for short-term use, lasting only 1-2 weeks.
Functionality and Data
- Active Monitoring: Check if the e-tattoo appears to be actively collecting or transmitting data, which could indicate recent use.
- Biometric Information: Consider that the e-tattoo may be capable of measuring various bodily functions, such as heart rate, muscle activity, or chemical composition of sweat.
Evidence Collection
- Photographic Evidence: Capture high-quality images of the e-tattoo, following NIST guidelines for photographic evidence.
- Database Comparison: Consider using tattoo recognition technology to compare the e-tattoo against existing databases for potential matches or connections to other cases.
- Soft Biometric Markers: Look for any associated scars or marks near the e-tattoo, as these can also be valuable for identification.
Legal and Privacy Considerations
- Data Extraction: Be cautious about attempting to extract data from the e-tattoo without proper authorization, as this may raise privacy concerns.
- Constitutional Considerations: Remember that the analysis of tattoo imagery, including e-tattoos, may have First Amendment implications.
Documentation and Chain of Custody
- Detailed Recording: Document all observations meticulously, including any changes in the e-tattoo's appearance or functionality over time.
- Preservation: Take appropriate measures to preserve the e-tattoo and any associated electronic components as evidence.
As e-tattoo technology continues to advance, it is important to balance its potential benefits with the need to protect individual privacy and civil liberties. Ongoing dialogue between technologists, policymakers, and the public will be essential in shaping the responsible development and use of this innovative technology. Law enforcement agencies should stay informed about the latest developments in e-tattoo technology and adapt investigative practices accordingly, always keeping in mind the balance between effective law enforcement and the protection of individual rights.
References
Electronic Frontier Foundation. (2016, June 25). Tattoo recognition research threatens free speech and privacy. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/06/la-investigacion-sobre-el-reconocimiento-de-tatuajes-atenta-contra-la-libertad-de
Electronic Frontier Foundation. (2016, June 5). 5 ways law enforcement will use tattoo recognition technology. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/06/5-maneras-en-que-las-fuerzas-del-orden-utilizaran-la-tecnologia-de-reconocimiento
Hodge, S. D., & Meehan, J. (2021). Tattoo recognition technology is gaining acceptance as a crime-solving technique. Northern Illinois University Law Review, 42(1), 125-145.
Saey, T. H. (2024, December 2). Electronic 'tattoos' offer an alternative to electrodes for brain monitoring. Science News. https://www.sciencenews.org/article/electronic-tattoos-brain-monitoring
Williams, N. X., & Franklin, A. D. (2020). Electronic tattoos: A promising approach to real-time theragnostics. Journal of Dermatological Science and Therapy, 1-15.
=-=-=-=-=-=
https://kardasz.blogspot.com/2024/12/e-tattoos-future-of-wearable-technology.html
Friday, January 10, 2025
Signal and Session: Comparing Two Privacy-Focused Messaging Apps
For secure messaging, Signal and Session are two prominent options. This post compares the two apps, focusing on features, privacy measures, and how they handle metadata.
Signal Messaging App
Signal is an end-to-end encrypted messaging app that prioritizes user privacy. It offers a range of features while minimizing data collection[3].
Key features of Signal:
- End-to-end encryption for messages, voice calls, and video calls
- Group chats and voice calls (up to 40 participants)
- Disappearing messages
- Screen lock
- Message scheduling (on Android)
- Customizable chat colors and themes
Signal's approach to metadata:
Signal collects minimal metadata. The only information retained is the phone number used for registration, the date of initial registration, and the date of last use[5]. With the "sealed sender" feature, Signal further reduces metadata by concealing the sender's identifier[32].
Download Signal:
- iOS: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/signal-private-messenger/id874139669
- Android: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.thoughtcrime.securesms
Session Messaging App
Session is a decentralized messaging app that focuses on anonymity and metadata protection[4].
Key features of Session:
- End-to-end encryption
- No phone number or email required for registration
- Onion routing for enhanced privacy
- Group chats (up to 100 participants)
- Voice messages
- File attachments
Session's approach to metadata:
Session uses onion routing to minimize metadata collection. It doesn't require personal information for account creation and doesn't store user data on centralized servers[6][15].
Download Session:
- iOS: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/session-private-messenger/id1470168868
- Android: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=network.loki.messenger
Feature Comparison
Decentralization and Privacy
Session's decentralized network improves privacy in several ways:
- No central point of failure: Decentralization eliminates the risk of a single point of compromise, making it harder for attackers to access user data[33].
- Reduced data collection: Without a central authority, there's less opportunity for large-scale data collection and analysis[33].
- User control: Decentralization gives users more control over their data, allowing them to choose what information to share and with whom[33].
- Improved anonymity: By using onion routing, Session makes it difficult to trace messages back to their origin, enhancing user anonymity[4].
- Resilience: A decentralized network is more resistant to censorship and service disruptions[27].
Conclusion
Both Signal and Session offer strong privacy protections, but they take different approaches. Signal focuses on minimizing data collection within a centralized system, while Session leverages decentralization to enhance anonymity. The choice between the two depends on individual privacy needs and preferences.
References:
[1] https://signal.org
[2] https://getsession.org
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_(software)
[4] https://cyberinsider.com/secure-encrypted-messaging-apps/session/
[5] https://www.reddit.com/r/signal/comments/exd92f/what_kind_of_usermessage_metadata_is_observed_and/
[6] https://www.privacyaffairs.com/session-app/
[7] https://blog.unmarshal.io/unlocking-the-future-why-decentralized-data-networks-are-essential-for-privacy-security-and-user-7b3630b8aa21?gi=70cee46d0b6a
[8] https://beebom.com/best-useful-features-signal-app/
[9] https://thehackernews.com/2018/10/signal-secure-messaging-metadata.html
[10] https://blockapps.net/blog/enhancing-digital-security-and-user-privacy-with-web3/
[11] https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/session
[12] https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/sections/360001602792-Signal-Messenger-Features
[13] https://apps.apple.com/us/app/session-private-messenger/id1470168868
[14] https://signal.org/blog/new-features-fall-2023/
[15] https://www.privacyaffairs.com/session-app/
[16] https://x.com/signalapp?lang=en
[17] https://getsession.org/faq
[18] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.thoughtcrime.securesms&hl=en_US
[19] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Session_(software)
[20] https://mashable.com/article/what-is-signal-app
[21] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=network.loki.messenger&hl=en_US
[22] https://signal.org/blog/sealed-sender/
[23] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oa_7lgeKV_E
[24] https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/metadata-in-signal-pictures/13809
[25] https://cyberinsider.com/secure-encrypted-messaging-apps/session/
[26] https://discuss.techlore.tech/t/questions-about-metadata-in-messengers/2545
[27] https://getsession.org
[28] https://freedom.press/digisec/blog/metadata-102/
[29] https://www.zdnet.com/article/this-new-fully-encrypted-messenger-app-is-serious-about-privacy/
[30] https://crypto.stackexchange.com/questions/110903/can-we-be-certain-that-signal-doesnt-log-metadata-e-g-message-graphs
[31] https://sessionapp.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/4439032171033-Does-Session-strip-metadata-from-my-attachments
[32] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_Protocol
[33] https://www.datasciencecentral.com/how-decentralized-apps-can-help-businesses-improve-data-security-and-privacy/
[34] https://starkware.co/blog/how-could-blockchain-enhance-data-privacy/
Friday, January 03, 2025
US Department of Treasury Data Breached
Security Incident Overview
The US Department of Treasury experienced a major cybersecurity incident involving unauthorized access through a third-party service provider, BeyondTrust, on December 8, 2024[1]. A China state-sponsored Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) actor gained access to a security key used for cloud-based technical support services[1].
Incident Impact and Response
Breach Details
The threat actor successfully:
- Obtained access to a security key for BeyondTrust's cloud service
- Overrode service security measures
- Accessed Treasury Departmental Offices (DO) user workstations
- Retrieved certain unclassified documents[1]
Response Measures
The Treasury engaged multiple agencies and resources in response:
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA)
- Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
- Intelligence Community
- Third-party forensic investigators[1]
BeyondTrust Service
BeyondTrust operated as a third-party software service provider offering cloud-based technical support for Treasury DO end users. Following the incident, the compromised service was taken offline[1]. The Treasury confirmed no evidence of continued unauthorized access to Treasury information[1].
APT Incidents and Treasury Policy
Classification
The Treasury classifies any intrusion attributable to an APT as a major cybersecurity incident, requiring specific reporting and response protocols[1].
Preventive Measures
The Treasury has implemented several protective measures:
- Investments through the Cybersecurity Enhancement Account (CEA)
- Enhanced incident response processes
- Comprehensive logging systems
- Immediate engagement with security agencies[1]
Regulatory Compliance
The incident triggered reporting requirements under:
- Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014 (FISMA).
- The Treasury Department was required to notify the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs of the situation.
- OMB Memorandum 24-04
- Treasury policy guidelines[1]
A future supplemental 30-day report will provide additional details about the incident as required by FISMA and OMB guidance[1].
Citations:
[1] https://pplx-res.cloudinary.com/image/upload/v1735767931/user_uploads/urLJfwaVDptrnxW/Screenshot-2025-01-01-at-11.31.11.jpg
Approved Human Sacrifices: The Deadly Fireworks Tradition
The recent tragic New Year's fireworks-related deaths and injuries in Hawaii and beyond are heartbreaking reminders of an obtuse subcultural tacit approval of human sacrifice via fireworks.
Human sacrifice resulting in death was purposefully practiced by ancient cultures including the Aztecs, Mayans, Chinese, and others; often as part of religious rituals or to appease deities.
In modern US subculture, the sacrifices come in the form of holiday fireworks accompanied by predictable but accidental mayhem and death.
The contemporary Russian-Roulette version of human sacrifice by fireworks often involves alcohol-infused handlers launching illegal aerial incendiaries that can explode in horrific ways.
It would, of course, be preferable to leave the missile-launching to the professionals but alas; every holiday-drunken rocket-man is another "hold-my-beer" expert in the field of bomb-handling. Then, and all too frequently, Darwinism prevails as they thin the herd of those unfit for continued survival with complete appendages.
The tragic and unacceptable collateral damages are those innocent and unwitting victims who were simply on the periphery of the disasters.
In 2023
According to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission's (CPSC) 2023 Report, fireworks-related deaths and injuries were reported as follows:
Deaths
- In 2023, there were 8 reported non-occupational fireworks-related deaths. The circumstances of these deaths included the following:
- 5 deaths associated with fireworks misuse
- 2 deaths associated with device malfunction
- 1 death involved unknown circumstances
Note: Those 2023 numbers are considered minimums, as reporting may be incomplete.
Injuries
The CPSC estimated approximately 9,700 fireworks-related injuries treated in U.S. hospital emergency departments in 2023. This translates to an estimated rate of 2.9 emergency department-treated injuries per 100,000 individuals in the United States, which is a slight decrease from 3.1 estimated injuries per 100,000 individuals in 2022.
Injury Trends
Despite recent declines since 2020, there has been an overall increasing trend in fireworks-related injuries from 2008 to 2023, with an average increase of 561 injuries per year.
Types of Injuries
- Hands and fingers were the most commonly injured body parts (35% of injuries)
- Head, face, and ears accounted for 22% of injuries
- Eyes accounted for 19% of injuries
- Burns made up about 42% of the emergency department-treated fireworks-related injuries
In 2024 (accounting incomplete)
Based on the available information, there were several deaths reported from 2024, with the most significant incident occurring in Hawaii on New Year's Eve.
The tragic explosion in a Honolulu neighborhood on New Year's Eve 2024 resulted in at least five fatalities and critically injured 20 others. One three year old child victim died a few days later from burns. It was one of the most severe fireworks-related accidents reported in 2024. Another fireworks death also occurred elsewhere on the island bringing the Honolulu County death toll thus far to five.
Hundreds of thousands of permits are issued for authorized and legal non-aerial fireworks in Honolulu County every year. But offenders can also obtain unlawful smuggled fireworks, or disassemble and remove the powder from smaller firecrackers and reassemble the contents into much larger explosives.
Other Reported Fatalities
While full data for the entire year of 2024 is not available, there were other fireworks-related deaths reported across the United States during Fourth-of-July celebrations included the following:
- A 34-year-old man died after handling fireworks on Chicago's Northwest Side
- A 25-year-old man died in a fireworks mishap in LaSalle, Illinois
- In South Carolina, a 41-year-old man died after igniting a large firework device and placing it on his head
- In Alabama, a 20-year-old man from Harvest suffered fatal injuries in a fireworks accident in Madison County
Government Response
In the wake of the latest tragedies, authorities are predictably calling for increased penalties for offenders along with more enforcement activity and improved public awareness.
Drone Entertainment Alternatives?
The trend towards flying lighted drone displays for celebrations and holidays is rapidly gaining popularity as a captivating alternative to traditional fireworks. This emerging form of entertainment combines cutting-edge technology with creative artistry to produce mesmerizing aerial spectacles.
Conclusion
In some ways, our culture has evolved from human sacrifice, in other ways....not so much.
It is unlikely that increases in penalties, more law enforcement and improved prevention activities will have much effect on the explosive-obsessed sub-culture. We can anticipate the next wave of sad human sacrifices at the next bomb-fest holiday.
Perhaps someday our species will evolve and replace destructive fireworks with something less lethal; until then, take cover.
=-=-=-=-=-=
https://kardasz.blogspot.com/2025/01/approved-human-sacrifices-fireworks.html
Wednesday, January 01, 2025
Sunday, December 22, 2024
IoT: Wearable Technologies & Federal Employment Discrimination Laws
Legal Compliance
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
- Collecting health-related information through wearables may qualify as "medical examinations" under the ADA.
- Employers directing employees to provide health information related to wearables could be making "disability-related inquiries," which are limited to situations that are "job-related and consistent with business necessity" or otherwise permitted under the ADA.
Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Laws
- Employers must adhere to EEO laws when using data collected from wearables, prohibiting discrimination based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex (including pregnancy and gender identity), disability, age (40 or older), and genetic information.
Data Collection and Usage
Types of Data
- Wearables can gather various information types, including biometric data and location tracking.
- Employers should assess the necessity and relevance of the data collected.
Data Accuracy and Validity
- Ensure wearable technology provides accurate results across different demographics.
- Inaccurate data may lead to discriminatory practices.
Data Storage and Confidentiality
- Medical data collected from wearables must be maintained separately and treated as confidential with limited exceptions.
- Implement strong data security measures to protect sensitive employee information.
Fair Practices
Avoid Selective Monitoring
- Do not monitor employees selectively based on protected characteristics or in retaliation for exercising their rights.
Prevent Adverse Impact
- Ensure that decisions based on wearable-generated information do not disproportionately affect employees of protected classes.
Reasonable Accommodations
- Be prepared to make exceptions to wearable policies as reasonable accommodations for religious beliefs, disabilities, or pregnancy-related conditions.
Voluntary Participation
- Consider implementing wearable technology programs on a voluntary basis as part of employee health initiatives.
Transparency and Communication
- Clearly communicate the purpose, scope, and use of wearable technology within the workplace.
By considering these factors, employers can effectively utilize wearable technologies while minimizing legal risks and safeguarding employee rights.
Reference
US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2024). Wearables in the Workplace: Using Wearable Technologies Under Federal Employment Discrimination Laws. https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/2024-12/Wearables_Fact_Sheet_V10_%28002%29_508FINAL.pdf
=-=-=-=-=-=
https://kardasz.blogspot.com/2024/12/wearable-technologies-federal.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)