JVN: HMS Networks製Ewon Flexy 202における認証情報の不十分な保護の脆弱性
JVN: OpenSSLにおける境界外書き込みの脆弱性(OpenSSL Security Advisory [16th October 2024])
「週刊金曜日」ニュース:総選挙の「ほんとう」の争点
[B] 「号外!ネタニヤフ、ハマス指導者虐殺」【西サハラ最新情報】 平田伊都子
Community-centred connectivity: A new paradigm
Integrating policy, research and technical standards in gender approaches to cybersecurity: Key takeaways from a recent APC-hosted roundtable
California Attorney General Issues New Guidance on Military Equipment to Law Enforcement
California law enforcement should take note: the state’s Attorney General has issued a new bulletin advising them on how to comply with AB 481—a state law that regulates how law enforcement agencies can use, purchase, and disclose information about military equipment at their disposal. This important guidance comes in the wake of an exposé showing that despite awareness of AB 481, the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) flagrantly disregarded the law. EFF applauds the Attorney General’s office for reminding police and sheriff’s departments what the law says and what their obligations are, and urges the state’s top law enforcement officer to monitor agencies’ compliance with the law.
The bulletin emphasizes that law enforcement agencies must seek permission from governing bodies like city councils or boards of supervisors before buying any military equipment, or even applying for grants or soliciting donations to procure that equipment. The bulletin also reminds all California law enforcement agencies and state agencies with law enforcement divisions of their transparency obligations: they must post on their website a military equipment use policy that describes, among other details, the capabilities, purposes and authorized uses, and financial impacts of the equipment, as well as oversight and enforcement mechanisms for violations of the policy. Law enforcement agencies must also publish an annual military equipment report that provides information on how the equipment was used the previous year and the associated costs.
Agencies must cease use of any military equipment, including drones, if they have not sought the proper permission to use them. This is particularly important in San Francisco, where the SFPD has been caught, via public records, purchasing drones without seeking the proper authorization first, over the warnings of the department’s own policy officials.
In a climate where few cities and states have laws governing what technology and equipment police departments can use, Californians are fortunate to have regulations like AB 481 requiring transparency, oversight, and democratic control by elected officials of military equipment. But those regulations are far less effective if there is no accountability mechanism to ensure that police and sheriff’s departments follow them.
The SFPD and all other California law enforcement agencies must re-familiarize themselves with the rules. Police and sheriff’s departments must obtain permission and justify purchases before they buy military equipment, have use policies approved by their local governing body, and provide yearly reports about what they have and how much it costs.