Aggregator

台風第10号に関する被害状況等について（第12報）

台風第10号に関する被害状況等について（第11報）

令和6年9月1日付　総務省人事

令和6年9月1日付　公害等調整委員会事務局人事

　前号で触れた安和桟橋（辺野古への埋立土砂の搬出港）でのダンプによる死傷事故(6月28日)からひと月半。重傷を負った市民女性が奇跡的な回復を見せつつあるのが救いだが、時を経るにつれ、この事故を巡る状況の異様さが露わになってきた。　まずは警察の動きが見えないこと。死傷事故を起こしたダンプの運転手は逮捕されず、事故現場にいた人の誰も（怪我をした本人も含め）事情聴取を受けていない。現場検証についても、市民団体が辺野古弁護団の弁護士とともに現場検証したという報道の翌日、ようやく警察が..

EFF is closely monitoring the situation in France in which Telegram’s CEO Pavel Durov was charged with having committed criminal offenses, most of them seemingly related to the operation of Telegram. This situation has the potential to pose a serious danger to security, privacy, and freedom of expression for Telegram’s 950 million users.  

On August 24th, French authorities detained Durov when his private plane landed in France. Since then, the French prosecutor has revealed that Durov’s detention was related to an ongoing investigation, begun in July, of an “unnamed person.” The investigation involves complicity in crimes presumably taking place on the Telegram platform, failure to cooperate with law enforcement requests for the interception of communications on the platform, and a variety of charges having to do with failure to comply with  French cryptography import regulations. On August 28, Durov was charged with each of those offenses, among others not related to Telegram, and then released on the condition that he check in regularly with French authorities and not leave France.  

We know very little about the Telegram-related charges, making it difficult to draw conclusions about how serious a threat this investigation poses to privacy, security, or freedom of expression on Telegram, or on online services more broadly. But it has the potential to be quite serious. EFF is monitoring the situation closely.  

There appear to be three categories of Telegram-related charges:  

• First is the charge based on “the refusal to communicate upon request from authorized authorities, the information or documents necessary for the implementation and operation of legally authorized interceptions.” This seems to indicate that the French authorities sought Telegram’s assistance to intercept communications on Telegram.  

• The second set of charges relate to “complicité” with crimes that were committed in some respect on or through Telegram. These charges specify “organized distribution of images of minors with a pedopornographic nature, drug trafficking, organized fraud, and conspiracy to commit crimes or offenses,” and “money laundering of crimes or offenses in an organized group.”  

• The third set of charges all relate to Telegram’s failure to file a declaration required of those who import a cryptographic system into France.  

Now we are left to speculate. 

It is possible that all of the charges derive from “the failure to communicate.” French authorities may be claiming that Durov is complicit with criminals because Telegram refused to facilitate the “legally authorized interceptions.” Similarly, the charges connected to the failure to file the encryption declaration likely also derive from the “legally authorized interceptions” being encrypted. France very likely knew for many years that Telegram had not filed the required declarations regarding their encryption, yet they were not previously charged for that omission. 

Refusal to cooperate with a valid legal order for assistance with an interception could be similarly prosecuted in most international legal systems, including the United States. EFF has frequently contested the validity of such orders and gag orders associated with them, and have urged services to contest them in courts and pursue all appeals. But once such orders have been finally validated by courts, they must be complied with. It is a more difficult situation in other situations such as where the nation lacks a properly functioning judiciary or there is an absence of due process, such as China or Saudi Arabia. 

In addition to the refusal to cooperate with the interception, it seems likely that the complicité charges also, or instead, relate to Telegram’s failure to remove posts advancing crimes upon request or knowledge. Specifically, the charges of complicity in “the administration of an online platform to facilitate an illegal transaction” and “organized distribution of images of minors with a pedopornographic nature, drug trafficking,[and] organized fraud,” could likely be based on not depublishing posts. An initial statement by Ofmin, the French agency established to investigate threats to child safety online, referred to “lack of moderation” as being at the heart of their investigation. Under French law, Article 323-3-2, it is a crime to knowingly allow the distribution of illegal content or provision of illegal services, or to facilitate payments for either. 

It is not yet clear whether Telegram users themselves, or those offering similar services to Telegram, should be concerned.

In particular, this potential “lack of moderation” liability bears watching. If Durov is prosecuted because Telegram simply inadequately removed offending content from the site that it is generally aware of, that could expose most every other online platform to similar liability. It would also be concerning, though more in line with existing law, if the charges relate to an affirmative refusal to address specific posts or accounts, rather than a generalized awareness. And both of these situations are much different from one in which France has evidence that Durov was more directly involved with those using Telegram for criminal purposes. Moreover, France will likely have to prove that Durov himself committed each of these offenses, and not Telegram itself or others at the company. 

EFF has raised serious concerns about Telegram’s behavior both as a social media platform and as a messaging app. In spite of its reputation as a “secure messenger,” only a very small subset of messages  on Telegram are encrypted in such a way that prevents the company from reading the contents of communications—end-to-end encryption. (Only one-to-one messages with the “secret messages” option enabled are end-to-end encrypted) And even so, cryptographers have questioned the effectiveness of Telegram’s homebrewed cryptography. If the French government’s charges have to do with Telegram’s refusal to moderate or intercept these messages, EFF will oppose this case in the strongest terms possible, just as we have opposed all government threats to end-to-end encryption all over the world. 

This arrest marks an alarming escalation by a state’s authorities. 

It is not yet clear whether Telegram users themselves, or those offering similar services to Telegram, should be concerned. French authorities may ask for technical measures that endanger the security and privacy of those users. Durov and Telegram may or may not comply. Those running similar services may not have anything to fear, or these charges may be the canary in the coalmine warning us all that French authorities intend to expand their inspection of messaging and social media platforms. It is simply too soon, and there is too little information for us to know for sure.  

It is not the first time Telegram’s laissez faire attitude towards content moderation has led to government reprisals. In 2022, the company was forced to pay a fine in Germany for not establishing a lawful way for reporting illegal content or naming an entity in Germany to receive official communication. Brazil fined the company in 2023 for failing to suspend accounts of supporters of former President Jair Bolsonaro. Nevertheless this arrest marks an alarming escalation by a state’s authorities.  We are monitoring the situation closely and will continue to do so.  

台風第10号に関する被害状況等について（第10報）

台風第10号に関する被害状況等について（第9報）

「モロッコは日本を馬鹿にしている」と、マライニン西サハラAUアフリカ連合代理大使が、8月23日のモロッコ外交官暴行事件を撮った画像を付けて、メールを送ってきました。　動画を見ましたか？　＜法の秩序＞を最優先する日本で、第9回TICAD東京アフリカ開発国際会議の最中に、モロッコ外交官があるまじき暴行事件を起こしたのです！

When you talk to your friends and family on Snapchat or Facebook, you should be assured that those services will not freely disclose your communications to the government or other private parties.

That is why the California Supreme Court must take up and reverse the appellate opinion in the case of Snap v. The Superior Court of San Diego County. This opinion dangerously weakens the Stored Communications Act (SCA), which is one of the few federal privacy laws on the books. The SCA prevents certain communications providers from disclosing the content of your communications to private parties or the government without a warrant (or other narrow exceptions).

EFF submitted an amicus letter to the court, along with the Center for Democracy & Technology.

The lower court incorrectly ruled that modern services like Snapchat and Facebook largely do not have to comply with the 1986 law. Since those companies already access the content of your communications for their own business purposes—including to target their behavioral advertising—the lower court held that they can also freely disclose the content of your communications to anyone.

The ruling came in the context of a criminal defendant who sought access to the communications of a deceased victim with a subpoena. In compliance with the law, both Meta and Snap resisted disclosing the information.

The lower court’s opinion conflicts with nearly 40 years of interpretation by Congress and other courts. It ignores the SCA’s primary purpose of protecting your communications from disclosure. And the opinion gives too much weight to companies’ terms of service. Those terms, which almost no one reads, is where most companies bury their own right to access to your communications.

There is no doubt that companies should also be restricted in how they access and use your data, and we need stronger laws to make that happen. For years, EFF has advocated for comprehensive data privacy legislation, including data minimization and a ban on online behavioral advertising. But that does not affect the current analysis of the SCA, which protects against disclosure now.

If the California Supreme Court does not take this up, Meta, Snap, and other providers would be allowed to voluntarily disclose the content of their users’ communications to any other corporations for any reason, to parties in civil litigation, and to the government without a warrant. Private parties could also compel disclosure with a mere subpoena.

　メディアの世界をめざす学生向けに、今年もジャーナリスト講座を７回シリーズで開く。沖縄からの報告を除く６回は東京の会場で開催する。予定は次の通り。▽９月１４日午後２時「記者の仕事と昨今のメディア就活事情」、講師は共同通信記者・新崎盛吾さん。築地社会教育会館▽９月２９日午後２時「横浜市教育委員会の裁判傍聴妨げ問題にどう迫ったか」、講師は東京新聞横浜支局記者・森田真奈子さんと共同通信文化部記者・團奏帆さん。男女平等センター・ブーケ２１▽１０月６日午後２時「完璧なエントリーシートが..

在日クルド人に対するヘイトスピーチの蔓延に警鐘を鳴らすべく、日本弁護士連合会が８月２６日に東京都内で緊急集会を開催した。ここ１年ほどの間、埼玉県川口市周辺に居住するクルド人に対し、ＳＮＳ上での激しい誹謗中傷が繰り返されており、このような状況に在日クルド人で、「日本クルド文化協会」代表理事のチカン・ワッカス氏は、「ＳＮＳ上の投稿はほぼデマ」と実態を語った。（岩本裕之）

エフサステクノロジーズ株式会社が提供するIPCOMのSSLアクセラレータ機能およびSSL-VPN機能には、処理時間の相違に起因する情報漏えいの脆弱性が存在します。

Sayful Islamが提供するWordPress用プラグインCarousel Sliderには、複数の脆弱性が存在します。

先日ある日本人が「タイで性適合手術を受けたい」とバンコクにやってきてそのお手伝いをすることになった。本人は友人（女性）と同棲しているが、どうしても「男性になって結婚したい」とのことだった。いわゆる「FTM」Female to Maleの手術を受けたいということだ。「日本でも可能だがタイの方がそのための環境、条件が整っている。経済的に精神的に受け容れやすいのです」とも言った。日本はもとより周辺国、遠くは欧米からも性適合手術を受けにタイを訪れるひとは増加している。