With this short video clip, the Brussels-based NGO Protection International announces that one can now register for the online course “Security and protection management for human rights defenders and social organisations”mainly addressed to NGOs, social organizations and persons interested in the security work for HRD, their organizations and/or communities. The main aim is for human rights defenders to develop various skills, capacities and strategies to allow them to improve the level of security and protection, both for themselves and also for the people they work with. Read the rest of this entry »
Posts Tagged ‘digital security’
On-line training course for better protection of human rights defenders
April 9, 2016HURIDOCS not too worried about the theft of its computers – read why
December 11, 2015
Last weekend, HURIDOCS office in Geneva and the office of an ally organization were burglarized; two of its desktop computers were stolen. Computers were the only stolen items at both offices, but it’s not possible to say whether the theft was specifically for information stored on the hard drives or just for the computers themselves. Either way, it states confidently in a message that they have not experienced a data breach, because both computers were encrypted and locked with strong passwords. They also didn’t lose any data, because it’s safely stored in Casebox. Here’s how to protect your information and yourself, critical for human rights defenders, in case of physical computer theft:
- Lock your computer with a strong and unique password. All passwords should be strong and unique, but perhaps even most importantly for your computer itself. Simple passwords are more easily hacked by ‘brute force’ (guessing until success), seen by someone glancing as you type, or determined from camera footage (that’s why Snowden typed his passwords under a blanket in Citzenfour). There are some good tips for better passwords.
- Safeguard all passwords. Do not keep your passwords written on paper near your computer. A multitude of secure passwords will be impossible to keep in mind, so we recommend using a password manager like KeePassX instead; KeePassX also rates the strength of your passwords.
- Consistently lock your screen when you step away. Theft can happen very quickly and obviously, unexpectedly. Encrypt your hard drive. If it’s encrypted, no one else can read it. Check your settings in Filevault on Mac and Bitlocker or Veracrypt on Windows.
- Regularly back up your encrypted hard drive to another location. If your computer is stolen, you’ll still have all of your information. If you use a password manager like KeePassX, your backup will include a locked file containing all of your passwords. To further protect yourself against privacy breaches and malicious threats, we also recommend to: Scan your hard drive for viruses at least once a week with updated antivirus software like Sophos or Avast.
- Update your computer’s operating system and all critical software as soon as updates become available. These updates are often to better protect you from breaches. Set up two-factor authentication and two-step verification on all critical accounts like email, social networks, Apple ID, and shared workspaces. Change your passwords often.
HURIDOCS conclusion: If you’ve taken the above steps and your computer is stolen, you won’t need to worry about your data being stolen along with it. We strongly recommend all human rights defenders take these precautions.
https://www.huridocs.org/2015/12/steps-to-protect-your-data-computer-theft/
2nd The Hague Training Course for Human Rights Defenders & Security now open for application
March 30, 2015After the successes of the first course in December 2014, Justice and Peace Netherlands will host the second edition of the The Hague Training Course for Human Rights Defenders on Security from 16-25 June 2015.
20 Human Rights Defenders (HRDs) from around the world will be invited to The Hague where Justice and Peace will facilitate the strengthening of their knowledge and skills on security issues and the building of their international networks. This training aims to reduce the vulnerabilities of the participants, thereby improving their security as well as the security of their families and the organisations they work for in their home countries.
The themes of the course include:
- physical and digital security,
- international guidelines and protection mechanisms,
- functioning of the International Criminal Court (including a visit),
- social media activism,
- advocacy and policy influencing, and
- working within repressive regimes.
Justice and Peace will also conduct a ‘Training of Trainers’ and a network event which will enable the HRDs to develop 1-to-1 relationships with parliamentarians, lawyers, journalists and scientists who might be able to advocate and support their cause in the future.
Entry requirements:
- The participants should work as a Human Rights Defender (HRD) and work for a human rights organisation or an organisation promoting peace or social justice.
- The HRD should implement a non-violent approach in his or her work.
- The HRD should have adequate skills to communicate in English.
- The HRD will organise a training for at least 5 colleagues and/or partners to share the knowledge that was gained during the training within three months of the ‘The Hague Training Course.’
Online application form here or go to justiceandpeace.nl and follow the links to the THTC page. Deadline: 13 April 2015.
via Call for Applications The Hague Training Course for Human Rights Defenders on Security now OPEN!.
Reporters Without Borders published its 2014 World Press Freedom Index
February 14, 2015
Reporters Without Borders recently published its 2014 World Press Freedom Index. It has a nice easy-to-use and colorful map. The accompanying text spotlights the negative correlation between freedom of information and conflicts, both open conflicts and undeclared ones. In an unstable environment, the media become strategic goals and targets for groups or individuals whose attempts to control news and information.
The ranking of some countries has also been affected by a tendency to interpret national security needs in an overly broad and abusive manner to the detriment of the right to inform and be informed. This trend constitutes a growing threat worldwide and is even endangering freedom of information in countries regarded as democracies. Finland tops the index for the fourth year running, closely followed by Netherlands and Norway, like last year. At the other end of the index, the last three positions are again held by Turkmenistan, North Korea and Eritrea, three countries where freedom of information is non-existent. Despite occasional turbulence in the past year, these countries continue to be news and information black holes and living hells for the journalists who inhabit them. This year’s index covers 180 countries.
Bahaa Nasr teaches cyber security to Syrian opposition against their digital enemies
February 10, 2015Forbes of 2 February 2015 carries an interesting piece by Thomas Fox-Brewster about Bahaa Nasr, a man who “Is Teaching Syrians To Defend Themselves Against Their Many Digital Enemies“.
After a description of recent attacks on opposition forces of the Syrian regime, the article – which does not distinguish a lot between human rights defenders and armed opposition – states that those under attack are in need of better cyber awareness. “That’s where Bahaa Nasr comes in. He runs Cyber Arabs, which provides digital security training not only for Syrians but for activists, human rights defenders and journalists across the Arab world.
“Syria, of course, has been a strong focus of our work in the past years due to the multitude of risks CSO [civil society organization) activists are facing there. While originally the main threat came from the regime and from groups like the SEA, now there is more and more concern about extremist groups like ISIS also resorting to cyber attacks,” he tells me over encrypted email.
He notes one of the most common techniques is social engineering, as the opposition has come to realise. But there are also targeted malware attacks, such as those allegedly launched by ISIS.
Then there are cruder methods at play in Syria’s information war. “Checkpoints are also a problem in many places where they often confiscate computers and mobile phones and thus gain access to data and accounts and new entry points for social engineering attacks,” Nasr adds.
He claims Cyber Arabs has helped around 500 activists, journalists, human rights defenders and citizen journalists from 17 Arab countries. At least 200 were from Syria. Training takes place in person and online, covering general digital hygiene: recognising and avoiding phishing attacks or social engineering attempts, good password practices, learning about different kinds of malware and how to improve the security of social media accounts. Cyber Arabs also teaches use of tools tailored for people’s needs, including secure email and instant messaging, and encryption. There’s an Android app to help stay up to date on the latest threats in the region too.
Nasr has been working closely with a range of influential groups, including Citizen Lab, a research collective based in Toronto, which focuses on digital attacks on activists. John Scott Railton, a member of Citizen Lab, described Cyber Arabs’ work as simply “amazing”. With such help available to Syrians, it’s hoped they won’t suffer from smart online offensives on their systems as they try to bring an end to a horrific, protracted war.”
This Man Is Teaching Syrians To Defend Themselves Against Their Many Digital Enemies.
Persecution of Lawyers and Journalists in Turkey: side event in Geneva on 27 January
January 23, 2015
Lawyers for Lawyers, the Law Society of England and Wales, Lawyers Rights Watch Canada, Privacy International, Fair Trial Watch and Media Legal Defence Initiative organise a panel discussion on the “Persecution of Lawyers and Journalists in Turkey” on Tuesday, 27 January, in Geneva, Immediately after the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) on Turkey,
At this event fundamental rights of lawyers and journalists that are regularly being violated will be discussed, including freedom of expression, privacy, confidentiality between lawyers and their clients and the protection of sources by journalists. This event comes at a time when the rule of law in Turkey is under serious threat.
[Turkey has adopted new laws and judicial reform packages, allowing for even more internet censorship, data collection, surveillance and the censoring of critical views on the pretence of protecting national security, which are directly undermining the freedom of expression, but also other fundamental rights such as privacy. In particular, journalists and lawyers are negatively impacted. They are subject to surveillance and legal harassment. The last couple of years large groups of lawyers and journalists have been arrested on the suspicion of terrorism related offences. Lawyers face stigmatisation by being continuously identified with their clients’ causes. Journalists are accused of not being independent. For both groups it is hard, if not impossible, to work freely, independently and securely.]
Speakers:
Ayse Bingol – Lawyer from Turkey
Tayfun Ertan – Journalist from Turkey
Marietje Schaake (by Skype) – Member European Parliament
Alexandrine Pirlot de Corbion – Privacy International
Tony Fisher – The Law Society of England and Whales
Moderator: Irma van den Berg – Turkey expert of Lawyers for Lawyers
The event takes place from 12h45 – 14h30 in Room XXIII, Palais des Nations. Those wishing to attend, send email – before 23 January – to : bp[at]lawyersforlawyers.nl
Front Line Annual Report: over 130 human rights defenders killed in 2014
January 15, 2015 
On Wednesday 14 January, Front Line Defenders launched its 2015 Annual Report, “Human Rights Defenders, Lives in the Balance” which examines in detail the deteriorating situation for human rights defenders (HRDs) around the world in the period January – December 2014.
The report was launched at a press conference in Dublin with as keynote speaker Mary Akrami, Co-founder and Director of the Afghan Women Skills Development Centre which was the first safe house for women and children in Afghanistan.
Mary Akrami, Andrea Rocca, and Mary Lawlor from Front Line Defenders launch the report.
Over the last two years Front Line Defenders has documented a growing global backlash against human rights defenders (HRDs) which has now reached crisis point. Against this backdrop, international human rights institutions as well as governments traditionally supportive of human rights defenders appear to be incapable of forcefully and effectively opposing the shutting down of civil society space.
“This is a crucial political moment. If we are to challenge the systematic erosion of human rights standards there needs to be a more consistent and credible political response, which must give the same priority and resources to creating a safe space for HRDs as authoritarian governments give to closing it down” said Front Line Defenders Executive Director, Mary Lawlor. “There can be no human rights progress if those at the forefront of human rights work are not allowed to work”.
The report highlights:
• that over 130 HRDs were killed or died in detention in the first ten months of 2014 as reported to Front Line Defenders
• Colombia accounted for 46 of those 130 HRDs killed in 2014
• The Americas overall claimed 101 of the 130 HRDs killed in 2014
• Globally, deprivation of liberty and court proceedings were the most widely used strategies to silence and intimidate HRDs
• Repressive laws continued their viral spread across the world with the growth of cut and paste repression as governments replicate legislation
• HRDs are exposed to digital attacks.
For more see: http://www.frontlinedefenders.org/node/27916
Edward Snowden gets another human rights award in Berlin
December 15, 2014Former NSA contractor turned whistleblower Edward Snowden was given the Carl von Ossietzky Medal in Berlin on Sunday, a medal which honors those who exhibit extraordinary civic courage or commitment to the spread and defense of human rights. According to website of the International League for Human Rights in Berlin, which has awarded the prize since 1962, Snowden was chosen because of his “momentous decision of conscience … to put [his] personal freedom on the line” to expose the “abuse of power” exercised by the US and Germany.
Snowden shares the medal with Glenn Greenwald, the Guardian journalist who broke his story, along with Laura Poitras, the documentary filmmaker who was in Berlin to accept it on the whole trio’s behalf [Snowden appeared on skype]. Several speeches were given, including one from former federal Interior Minister Gerhart Baum and human rights lawyer Wolfgang Kaleck, who represents Snowden. Baum spoke of how the Snowden had “opened our eyes to the largest intelligence surveillance scandal I know.” See more: https://thoolen.wordpress.com/tag/snowden/
The von Ossietzky medal is named after the German Nobel Peace Prize winner who spoke out actively against the Nazi regime. Not to be confused with two other awards in the name of Ossietzky.
Edward Snowden gets human rights award in Berlin | News | DW.DE | 14.12.2014.
NGOs concerned about alarming proliferation of surveillance technologies to repressive countries – the Wassenaar Arrangement
December 2, 2014On 1 December 2014 a group of 7 NGOs (Amnesty International, Digitale Gesellschaft, International Federation for Human Rights, Human Rights Watch, Open Technology Institute (at New America), Privacy International, Reporters sans frontieres) sent an Open Letter to the “Wassenaar Arrangement” (for what this is see link at the end). The key issue is that the alarming proliferation of surveillance technologies available to repressive countries adversely affects political activists, human rights defenders, refugees, dissidents and journalists.
Here is the text of the letter:
“We, the undersigned organisations, call upon the 41 Governments that compose the Wassenaar Arrangement on Export Controls for Conventional Arms and Dual-Use Goods and Technologies, to take action and address the alarming proliferation of surveillance technologies available to repressive countries involved in committing systematic human rights violations. This trade results in unlawful surveillance, which often leads to further human rights violations including invasions of privacy, arbitrary arrest and detention, torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the silencing of free expression, preventing political participation, and crushing offline and online dissent.
Surveillance technologies are not simply harmless tools. In the wrong hands they are often used as a tool of repression. Evidence is continuing to reveal the extent of this secretive trade that puts countless individuals at direct risk from human rights abusing governments. More and more stories emerge showing these damaging and often unlawful technologies affecting political activists, human rights defenders, refugees, dissidents and journalists, with some technologies placing entire populations under surveillance. Governments with internationally condemned human rights records such as Bahrain, Ethiopia, Egypt, Turkmenistan, Libya, Syria and Iran have all purchased surveillance technologies from private companies, and have used them to facilitate a variety of human rights violations. Some revelations in France, Germany, the UK, and the US have led to police and judicial investigations following calls from NGOs and members of the Coalition Against Unlawful Surveillance Exports. Remarkably and despite mounting evidence of associated abuses, surveillance technology companies still openly market their products at ‘trade fairs’ across the UK, France, US, Brazil and the UAE among other countries.
Although steps were taken in 2013 to address this largely unregulated global market, governments cannot let the momentum halt. Governments have now included additional technologies associated with intrusion software and IP monitoring to the Lists of Dual Use Goods and Technologies and Munitions, and are aware of the impact surveillance technologies can have on human rights. There is now a pressing need to modernise out of date export controls. In addition, technologies such as undersea fibre-optic cable taps, monitoring centres, and mass voice / speaker recognition technologies urgently need to be examined for their impact on human rights and internal repression, particularly when the end user is a government known for committing human rights violations. Technologies evolve at a rapid pace and governments that abuse human rights take advantage of weak regulation, the product of poor understanding of the technologies and their capabilities.
In the current system, human rights and digital rights groups, as well as external independent experts, are excluded from contributing their expertise and knowledge to the Wassenaar Arrangement forum. The additional expertise and knowledge that civil society can bring to the debate is invaluable to this end. Discussions should not continue in a closed-forum manner and we urge governments to engage with civil society organisations to help ensure that accurate and effective controls are developed which reflect modern technological developments and do not impede legitimate scientific and security research.
Any export policy relating to surveillance technologies should place human rights at its heart. Governments must exercise a strict policy of restraint and should refuse to grant export licenses for surveillance technology destined for end-users in countries where they are likely to be used in an unlawful manner i.e. not compliant with human rights legal standards. Governments should consider the weakness or absence of an appropriate legal framework in the recipient country to ensure the transfer would not pose a substantial risk of the items being used to violate or abuse human rights. Governments should also be transparent in what they export, and to whom and support the development of an international legal framework to address the sale and trade of surveillance technologies.”
An Open Letter to the Members of the Wassenaar Arrangement | Human Rights Watch.
The Wassenaar Arrangement (41 participating States) has been established in order to contribute to regional and international security and stability, by promoting transparency and greater responsibility in transfers of conventional arms and dual-use goods and technologies, thus preventing destabilising accumulations. Participating States seek, through their national policies, to ensure that transfers of these items do not contribute to the development or enhancement of military capabilities which undermine these goals, and are not diverted to support such capabilities.
United Nations declares again that mass surveillance threatens the right to privacy.
November 27, 2014Several newspapers have reported on this matter but perhaps not many in the US (see at the end). In an excellent blog post on 26 November 2014 Peter Micek and Javier Pallero give the background to this UN Declaration, for the second straight year, which states that government communications surveillance poses a threat to the right to privacy. I quote liberally from it:
Passed unanimously on Tuesday by the Third Committee, the resolution on “The right to privacy in the digital age” this time also calls for a permanent ‘office’ on the right to privacy. For that to happen, the Human Rights Council in Geneva will have to take action in March 2015 by creating a new “special rapporteur” on the right to privacy.
Background
In response to mass surveillance revelations in 2013, including news that their political leaders had been spied on, Brazil and Germany co-authored a unanimous resolution in the General Assembly. The resolution called for a report by the then High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, who came with a scathing critique in July 2014 that cited the need for immediate reform of surveillance laws and practices in line with international human rights norms. The report’s finding that mass surveillance inherently violates human rights spoke directly to the “five eyes” countries – the US, Canada, the UK, New Zealand, and Australia – who are responsible for weakening technical standards, collecting untold reams of data, and thwarting public debate over their practices.
Brazil and Germany again teamed up to lead this year’s effort, gathering more than 60 cosponsors. The resolution finds that surveillance must be “consistent with international human rights obligations and must be conducted on the basis of a legal framework, which must be publicly accessible, clear, precise, comprehensive and non-discriminatory.” It smartly calls for greater access to remedy for victims — a too-often ignored pillar of rights frameworks — and for increased attention to the role of private companies in government surveillance. In oral statements, the US and its allies in the “Five Eyes” drew attention to the resolution’s acknowledgment of “threats and harassment” that human rights defenders face along with privacy violations. And the resolution invites the Human Rights Council to “consider the possibility of establishing a special procedure” regarding the promotion and protection of the right to privacy.
Shortcomings
- The resolution does not specifically call for governments to extend protections to users abroad. Although expressing concern is important, governments must do much more to provide an effective solution to cross-border violations.
- The resolutions language on restrictions is unnecessarily general (“non-arbitrary and lawful”) but it could have used findings by multiple courts and international experts more precisely defining how privacy rights should be handled – that surveillance and other privacy restrictions should only be prescribed by law, necessary to achieve a legitimate aim, and proportionate to the aim pursued. These concepts are further articulated in the International Principles on the Application of Human Rights to Communications Surveillance, which High Commissioner Pillay said in her report can be considered interpretive guidance of Article 17 of the ICCPR that establishes the right to privacy.
- While the resolution notes that metadata can, when aggregated, “reveal personal information and can give an insight into an individual’s behaviour, social relationships, private preferences and identity,” it stops short of calling for an end to bulk metadata collection by governments, which the Human Rights Council has an opportunity to push for in March.
Summarizing, the authors of the post think that this resolution is a step in the right direction and “Access” will continue working to ensure the Council follows through on the General Assembly’s suggestion, and creates the Special Rapporteur.
In a related piece in ‘The Local’ one can read how Germany – at the heart of moves to limit the power of US web companies and their involvement in surveillance – is pressured by American companies and politicians.
http://www.thelocal.de/20141126/germany-denies-accusations-of-google-bashing
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 