Category Archives: Big Brother

New Police “Robocop” Like Smart Helmet To Be Used In U.S. Airports To Track Covid-19 And Use Facial Recognition Software.

by Tyler Durden
Sun, 08/30/2020 – 22:55

Authored by Jack Burns via The Free Thought Project,

It took 33 years but Robocop is now here. Well, not exactly, but the rise of the police state fueled by advancements in technology have given birth to a heads up display equipped helmet sure to please the most anxious of peace officers. It’s called a “Smart Helmet” and it can screen airport passengers for the COVID-19 virus as well as provide the scanning officer with other vital records.

Public officials in Flint, Michigan cannot provide clean drinking water to their residents but travelers to Bishop International Airport can get a glimpse of the new robotic cop helmets where they’re currently deployed.

Under the guise of screening passengers for COVID-19, the Smart Helmet, produced by KeyBiz based in Italy, can scan travelers’ body temperatures from over 20 feet away.

But the Smart Helmet is not limited to temperature body scans which any laser guided thermometer can do, not in the slightest. Facial recognition software is installed which can provide the police officer with information related to outstanding warrants, if an individual is identified on a terror watch list or a no-fly list, and can read license plates for outstanding warrants, stolen vehicle information, criminal histories, etc. Even if you are completely innocent, you will be subject to these scans.

Temperature scans can be done at a distance of 21 feet or less. The helmets have already been deployed in Italy and elsewhere around the world. Michigan’s ABC12 reports if someone’s temperature is in excess of 100.4 degrees, more investigation into the traveler’s health will be conducted to determine if the passenger is too sick to travel.

Anyone who isn’t a passenger who registers a temperature above 100.4 degrees will be asked to leave the terminal building after police conduct some limited coronavirus contact tracing to find out what areas of the building may have been exposed.

We at TFTP have warned our readers for quite some time the COVID-19 pandemic would be used as an onus for a greater invasion of privacy. Some of us here at TFTP are old enough to remember when boarding a plane was a simple as buying a ticket and getting aboard.

Fast forward nearly 20 years and there are quite a few things which happen the minute your ticket is purchased.

First, your name, age, and birth date are checked to see if you’ve been added to a terror watch list, a no-fly list or otherwise. Then, when you’re cleared to travel, you must soon possess a “Real ID”. Without it (come October) you won’t be allowed to fly. Upon arrival to the airport, your identification is scanned and further checked in databases for any flags which may arise.

Afterward, all of your pockets must be emptied, your shoes taken off, your belts, hats, and metal jewelry removed. You’re placed into a sniffing device to check to see if you’re carrying the scent of bomb making materials.

Next, your entire body image is scanned. Later, a total stranger may pat you down and grope your private parts as you wait for the all clear sign to be given at which time you can retrieve your belongings. But that’s only if the x-ray technician doesn’t think your hand sanitizer has too many ounces in its container.

Now, it seems Mr. Robocop will take your temperature against your will, search through your criminal history and examine your facial features. All of these things will likely be cataloged in another alphabet agency’s database.

The entire invasion of privacy will fall under the auspices of fears surrounding a fairly mild pandemic using slogans like “it’s for your health and safety.” And you thought it was about keeping America safe from terrorism. Think again, this makes me long for the good ole days when the only danger in flying was smelling like cigarette smoke from all the puffers aboard.

Unacast Corporation Admits Tracking American Citizens Cell Phone Location During Covid-19. But The Tracking Was Happening Before Covid-19…………..

Like it or not, tech companies can use your phone location data to map social distancing.
Is slowing the spread of coronavirus worth compromising your privacy?

By Sara Morrison Mar 26, 2020, 7:20am EDT
Since the coronavirus pandemic began, businesses from Ford to Facebook have offered up their services, money, and face mask stashes to try to help. Some companies that deal in your data are stepping up, too, offering their data analysis services to try to track or stop the spread of the virus.

On one hand, it’s a welcome change to see this data — data that’s usually supplied by you often without your knowledge or consent, then used to make other companies richer — also being used to help other people. And these days, we can use all the help we can get.

On the other hand, the situation draws attention to just how granular this data collection can be and how little control we have over its collection, who gets it, and what those companies do with it.

Unacast, a data company that collects and provides cellphone location data and analysis to the retail, real estate, marketing, and tourism industries, recently revealed something called the Social Distancing Scoreboard. The scoreboard is an interactive map that assigns letter grades to every state and county in America based on how well Unacast’s data analysis infers that its residents are practicing social distancing. It’s the first product from the company’s new COVID-19 Location Data Toolkit, and over the coming days and weeks, more location data will be added that the company hopes will show trends and patterns.

“This is a pro bono initiative,” Jeanne Meyer, a spokesperson for Unacast, told Recode. “They have 25 data scientists that took five years’ work and spent four days cooking this thing up to help with what’s happening.”

One way the maps could help is by showing health officials that surrounding countries are getting better grades, which would imply that their messaging to local residents about social distancing needs improvement.

“What that’s going to tell a local official is, ‘What are we doing? What is that county doing that we’re not?’” Meyer said. “They’re very large conclusions one might draw, but I think the value with this will come over time.” According to the Washington Post, Unacast’s scores haven’t been vetted by public health officials or epidemiologists, so it’s hard to say how reliable they are or what they’ll be able to tell us.

Unacast isn’t the only tech company to use its data these days for what it says is a public good. Facebook’s “Data for Good” program uses de-identified aggregate data from its users to power its Disease Prevention Maps, which can give insights into where people live and where they move that may help health organizations track the spread of diseases or predict where they’ll hit next. Kinsa Health uses data from its smart thermometers to try to detect unusually high levels of illness for its US Health Weather Map, which the company says has accurately predicted the spread of the flu in the past and might be able to track coronavirus outbreaks now.

But Unacast is a bit different. For Facebook’s program and in Kinsa’s app, you have to opt in to having your location tracked, and then you have a direct relationship with those companies. Unacast, on the other hand, collects data about you from a variety of third-party sources. According to its privacy policy, these sources include Unacast’s partners as well as the software development kit, or SDK, it places in apps. (SDKs are a package of tools that make it easier and faster for developers to build apps. Those tools can also include ways to track user data and report it back to the SDK provider. In this case, that’s Unacast.)

The sticking point is that you may grant permission to one of those apps to access your location data without knowing that this location data is also going to Unacast. There’s no easy way for the typical user to see what SDKs an app may use, and app privacy policies usually say the information is going to third parties without revealing who those parties are. Unacast says on its website that its SDK is its “preferred” data source, but when we asked for specifics, the company would not say which apps or partners it works with. An analysis by mobile app intelligence company Apptopia found Unacast’s SDK in all kinds of iOS and Android apps, including smart TV remotes, period trackers, games, free wifi locators, weather forecasters, and step trackers. You can always turn location tracking off for those apps, but some of them obviously need the location services to be able to work at all.

“[Unacast’s] privacy statement basically screams that it’s up to you to monitor which apps you use and your phone settings, if you don’t like the fact that companies like them are getting access to your location data,” Jennifer King, the director of privacy at the Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School, told Recode. “In that respect, at least, it’s a bit more helpful than most notices and gives us a decent map as to how they’re getting the data.”

But this means that a company you’ve likely never heard of has a lot of data about your phone and, by extension, you. That data includes your device’s unique advertising identifier; location data specific enough to detect which fast food restaurant the device is in and how long it’s been there; and the network name and MAC address of the wifi router the device is connected to. Unacast’s marketing materials show how specific this data can get:

And this very granular data is how Unacast can tell how well people are distancing themselves from each other: In order to deduce how people’s travel patterns have changed, it has to know what those patterns were in the first place, all the way down to the de-identified individual data point.Unacast also discloses some of this information to third parties, though the company says it never shares identifying data like your name or email address. The company also further hashes, or anonymizes, the device identifiers it pulls in, which adds another layer of anonymity, Meyer explained. That said, it is possible to identify a specific person even from such “anonymized” data points, which is why many privacy advocates prefer using the term “de-identified” data rather than “anonymized,” reasoning that nothing is ever truly anonymous.

Importantly, Unacast’s Social Distancing maps don’t show specific individuals. What the public sees is only the analysis of that data, and it only goes down to the county level. (Unacast CEO and co-founder Thomas Walle goes into more detail on the methodology here). Taken at its word, Unacast is adapting technology and data it already uses for its business purposes to prevent the spread of coronavirus.

While the map itself might be a helpful tool, it also makes these data collection practices that go on behind the scenes — and how specific the data collected can get — much more apparent. Unacast is hardly the only company doing this kind of data crunching. Marketing company oneAudience, for example, puts its SDK in apps to collect information about users. As Facebook claimed in a recent lawsuit, the company also secretly harvested social media data, although oneAudience said this collection was unintentional and that it has updated its SDK to stop it. Unacast says it has always been “committed to protecting and respecting data privacy and see[s] privacy as a key driver for the growth of location technologies” and that it follows all applicable privacy laws, including the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation and the California Consumer Privacy Act.

There’s no reason to doubt this. The problem is there’s also no way for an average consumer caught up in Unacast’s net to know exactly what’s going on with their location data, including which companies have access to it and which companies are properly protecting it. Broadly speaking, there aren’t federal laws that prevent this data from being collected, and it’s hard for consumers to take advantage of the privacy rights they do have when most of them don’t even know data collection companies like Unacast even exist.

“There is no way that anyone would know that their location data is being collected from any particular app and then sold on to companies like these,” King said. “At least now you have a right (in California) to request that your data be deleted from their dataset, but fundamentally we should have laws that limit the abilities of third parties to collect your location data without your affirmative consent.”

While Unacast is simply repurposing its existing data sources and presenting only anonymous, aggregated data, companies in other countries have been more willing (or forced) to hand over personally identifiable data. The Chinese and Iranian governments have come out with apps that track their citizens’ movements during the pandemic, while Israel is considering tapping into cellphone location data gathered for antiterrorism purposes to track infected people and their contacts. The South Korean government combined several sources, including phone location data, to track the movements of coronavirus carriers. It then made that information public, prompting private developers to turn that data into maps of coronavirus carriers.

There are concerns among privacy advocates that the serious nature of the pandemic could cause privacy rights in this country to erode, too. In which case, the question then becomes: Do the temporary benefits of this data outweigh the long-term privacy implications?

For King, at least, the answer is no.

“Just because we can make pretty maps with people’s data doesn’t mean that we are gaining useful or actionable insights from that data,” King said. “I would want to hear what tools public health researchers say they need and what would help them, rather than what data scientists who have access to location data can cook up.”

Open Sourced is made possible by Omidyar Network. All Open Sourced content is editorially independent and produced by our journalists.

More Proof Of Plandemic: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Funded Technology That Embeds Immunization Records Into A Child’s Skin Last Year And Could Be Used For Forced Vaccinations For Covid-19.

download (33)

Invisible Ink Could Reveal whether Kids Have Been Vaccinated.


By Karen Weintraub on December 18, 2019

The technology embeds immunization records into a child’s skin.


M.I.T. engineers have developed a way to store medical information under the skin, using a quantum dot dye that is delivered, along with a vaccine, by a microneedle patch. The dye, which is invisible to the naked eye, can be read later using a specially adapted smartphone. Credit: Second Bay Studios

Keeping track of vaccinations remains a major challenge in the developing world, and even in many developed countries, paperwork gets lost, and parents forget whether their child is up to date. Now a group of Massachusetts Institute of Technology researchers has developed a novel way to address this problem: embedding the record directly into the skin.


Along with the vaccine, a child would be injected with a bit of dye that is invisible to the naked eye but easily seen with a special cell-phone filter, combined with an app that shines near-infrared light onto the skin. The dye would be expected to last up to five years, according to tests on pig and rat skin and human skin in a dish.

The system—which has not yet been tested in children—would provide quick and easy access to vaccination history, avoid the risk of clerical errors, and add little to the cost or risk of the procedure, according to the study, published Wednesday in Science Translational Medicine.

“Especially in developing countries where medical records may not be as complete or as accessible, there can be value in having medical information directly associated with a person,” says Mark Prausnitz, a bioengineering professor at the Georgia Institute of Technology, who was not involved in the new study. Such a system of recording medical information must be extremely discreet and acceptable to the person whose health information is being recorded and his or her family, he says. “This, I think, is a pretty interesting way to accomplish those goals.”

The research, conducted by M.I.T. bioengineers Robert Langer and Ana Jaklenec and their colleagues, uses a patch of tiny needles called microneedles to provide an effective vaccination without a teeth-clenching jab. Microneedles are embedded in a Band-Aid-like device that is placed on the skin; a skilled nurse or technician is not required. Vaccines delivered with microneedles also may not need to be refrigerated, reducing both the cost and difficulty of delivery, Langer and Jaklenec say.

Delivering the dye required the researchers to find something that was safe and would last long enough to be useful. “That’s really the biggest challenge that we overcame in the project,” Jaklenec says, adding that the team tested a number of off-the-shelf dyes that could be used in the body but could not find any that endured when exposed to sunlight. The team ended up using a technology called quantum dots, tiny semiconducting crystals that reflect light and were originally developed to label cells during research. The dye has been shown to be safe in humans.


A close-up microscope image of the microneedle array, which could deliver quantum dots into skin. Credit: K.J. McHugh et al. Science Translational Medicine (2019)

The approach raises some privacy concerns, says Prausnitz, who helped invent microneedle technology and directs Georgia Tech’s Center for Drug Design, Development and Delivery. “There may be other concerns that patients have about being ‘tattooed,’ carrying around personal medical information on their bodies or other aspects of this unfamiliar approach to storing medical records,” he says. “Different people and different cultures will probably feel differently about having an invisible medical tattoo.”

When people were still getting vaccinated for smallpox, which has since been eradicated worldwide, they got a visible scar on their arm from the shot that made it easy to identify who had been vaccinated and who had not, Jaklenec says. “But obviously, we didn’t want to give people a scar,” she says, noting that her team was looking for an identifier that would be invisible to the naked eye. The researchers also wanted to avoid technologies that would raise even more privacy concerns, such as iris scans and databases with names and identifiable data, she says.


The quantum dots after being administered in the skin of rodents. Credit: K.J. McHugh et al. Science Translational Medicine (2019)

The work was funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and came about because of a direct request from Microsoft founder and philanthropist Bill Gates himself, who has been supporting efforts to wipe out diseases such as polio and measles across the world, Jaklenec says. “If we don’t have good data, it’s really difficult to eradicate disease,” she says.

The researchers hope to add more detailed information to the dots, such as the date of vaccination. Along with them, the team eventually wants to inject sensors that could also potentially be used to track aspects of health such as insulin levels in diabetics, Jaklenec says.

This approach is likely to be one of many trying to solve the problem of storing individuals’ medical information, says Ruchit Nagar, a fourth-year student at Harvard Medical School, who also was not involved in the new study. He runs a company, called Khushi Baby, that is also trying to create a system for tracking such information, including vaccination history, in the developing world.

Working in the northern Indian state of Rajasthan, Nagar and his team have devised a necklace, resembling one worn locally, which compresses, encrypts and password protects medical information. The necklace uses the same technology as radio-frequency identification (RFID) chips—such as those employed in retail clothing or athletes’ race bibs—and provides health care workers access to a mother’s pregnancy history, her child’s growth chart and vaccination history, and suggestions on what vaccinations and other treatments may be needed, he says. But Nagar acknowledges the possible concerns all such technology poses. “Messaging and cultural appropriateness need to be considered,” he says.

Facial Recognition Technology Expanded By Homeland Security At Major U.S. Airports.

download (23)

CBP Expands Facial Recognition for Global Entry Travelers.

JANUARY 16, 2020
The technology is already being used at 15 airports—including three abroad—to speed pre-approved travelers through the customs process.

Over the last few years, Customs and Border Protection has been rolling out facial recognition programs at ports of entry across the country, including the nation’s international airports. Now, the agency is increasing the use of the technology for its optional Global Entry program.

The Global Entry program allows frequent travelers who are considered “low risk” to bypass CBP officers and go directly to baggage claim after visiting a kiosk. To date, Global Entry at most airports consists of scanning the traveler’s passport and fingerprint at the machine before being cleared to enter the country.

Going forward, CBP will be streamlining that process, instead offering travelers pre-approved through the program the ability to use facial biometrics for clearance, eliminating the need for a passport or fingerprint.

CBP started implementing facial recognition for Global Entry through a pilot program at Orlando International Airport in June 2018. Since that time, the program has expanded to 14 more airports, including two in Ireland and one in the Bahamas (full list below).

On Monday, the agency released a privacy impact statement detailing how the program will roll out at airports across the country, becoming the standard for Global Entry.

The kiosks used for the Global Entry program already have cameras that take photos of travelers, though many will be upgraded or replaced as the program expands. As the facial recognition program rolls out, these kiosks will default to using that technology. CBP also plans to include privacy notices on the upgraded machines informing travelers of the new process.

Once a photo is taken, the image is matched against a gallery compiled from CBP’s Automated Targeting System, or ATS, Unified Passenger Module, or UPAX, system.

“CBP may have captured these images from U.S. passports or visas, previous entry inspections, and/or other DHS encounters, including Global Entry enrollment photos,” according to the privacy statement. “The [Traveler Verification Service] then generates a biometric template for each gallery photograph and stores the template, but not the actual photograph, in the TVS cloud for matching when the traveler arrives at the Global Entry kiosk.”

The images taken at the kiosk are saved to the Homeland Security Department’s massive Automated Biometric Identity System, or IDENT, which the agency is the process of transferring to a new, cloud-based Homeland Advanced Recognition Technology, or HART, system.

“When comparing photos for a facial recognition match, TVS uses travel document photos as well as recently taken photos to improve accuracy because up to date photos may match better than document photos,” the privacy document states.

Per the impact statement, the shift to using facial recognition would lower the privacy risk to travelers, as the program already took photos at the kiosks and no longer needs to collect fingerprints.

An important note in the impact statement clarifies that enrollees are not required to use the facial recognition program and can instead opt to use the passport and fingerprint method, which will remain available. A CBP spokesperson also told Nextgov the kiosks will default to the passport and fingerprint method if there is a technical problem with the facial recognition scan.

Travelers are also still required to provide a copy of their passport and fingerprints at the time of enrollment in Global Entry.

Current list of participating airports:
Aruba–Queen Beatrix International Airport (AUA)
Dallas/Ft. Worth International Airport (DFW)
Detroit Metropolitan Airport (DTW)
Dublin Airport, Ireland (DUB)
Newark Liberty International Airport (EWR)
Fort Lauderdale/Hollywood International Airport (FLL)
Houston–Hobby International Airport (HOU)
George Bush Intercontinental Airport, Houston (IAH)
John F. Kennedy International Airport, New York (JFK)
Orlando International Airport (MCO)
Miami International Airport (MIA)
Nassau–Sir Lynden Pindling International Airport, Bahamas (NAS)
Philadelphia International Airport (PHL)
San Diego International Airport (SAN)
Shannon Airport, Ireland (SNN)

Amazon To Allow Shoppers To Purchase Items With A Biometric Hand Print by Linking Credit Card Details.

download (20)

Amazon To Allow Shoppers To Pay With A WAVE By Linking Credit Card Details To Your Hand Prints.


Tariq Tahir
19 Jan 2020, 12:38
Updated: 20 Jan 2020, 18:46

AMAZON is creating checkout terminals to allow shoppers to link their credit cards to their hands, it was reported.

The tech and retail giant envisages the terminals being in physical stores and they would allow shoppers to simply show their palm, without reaching for their card or phone.

Amazon is aiming the terminals to coffee shops, fast-food restaurants and other retailers that do lots of repeat business with their customers, the Wall Street Journal reports.

The company has been at the forefront of experimenting with new payment methods and already allows customers at Amazon Go stores to walk out without stopping to pay.

The plans are in their early stages but Amazon has begun working with credit card company Visa to test transactions on the terminals and is in discussions with Mastercard.

The company is reportedly also in talks with several banks in the US which have expressed an interest in enabling customers’ cards to be linked to the terminals.

According to Amazon insiders, the company envisions customers would first use the terminals to link their debit or credit card information to their hands.

One example cited is that customers might insert cards into a terminal and then let the terminal scan their hands.

After that they would only need to place a hand over the terminal to pay at a retailer participating in the scheme.

At the end of last year, Amazon filed a patent that allows people to be identified by characteristics associated with the palms of their hands, including wrinkles and veins, Recode reported at the time.

In September it emerged Amazon was testing technology that would allow Whole Foods customers to scan their hand to pay at checkout rather than swiping a card.

Workers at the giant’s New York offices are even testing out the biometric tech to buy snacks and drinks from company vending machines.

The New York Post reported the sensors are different from phone fingerprint scanners as they don’t require users to physically touch their hands to the scanning surface.

Instead, they use vision and depth geometry to process and identify the shape and size of each hand they scan before charging a credit card already on file.

The system – codenamed Orville – will apparently allow customers with Amazon Prime accounts to scan their hands at stores and link them to their credit or debit card.

It’s accurate to within one ten-thousandth of one per cent, but Amazon’s tech experts are working to improve it to a millionth of one per cent ahead of its launch, the source said.

While a regular card transaction typically takes between three and four seconds, Amazon’s new tech can process the charge in less than 300 milliseconds, one insider said.

Insurance Giant Cigna To Use AI Computers To Track Patients Medication Use. Big Brother In The Medical Field.

Prescription on Chart


Jeff Rowe | Dec 13, 2019 11:23 am
The new tool can alert doctors their patients may not be taking their prescribed drugs, but patients who follow their care plans could be spared needless trips to the hospital.

Ensuring that patients are taking their meds correctly has long been a challenge for providers, as it can often be the difference between a prescription’s success or failure when it comes to addressing the targeted condition or disease.

But while a new AI-driven monitoring system from US health plan Cigna aims to take big steps toward resolving that challenge, some experts fear that the new technology could also work against the interest of millions of patients.

According to the Wall Street Journal, “(t)he product, called Health Connect 360, integrates data from a combination of sources and analytical tools and was originally developed for treatment of chronic diseases, including diabetes and heart disease, as well as for pain management. The system aggregates medical, pharmacy, lab and biometric data—such as information from glucometers, which measure blood-sugar levels—into a dashboard that is accessible through an online interface.”

Via that interface, doctors and nurses will be able to constantly keep an eye on patients’ health and step in when they have cause for concern. For example, an alert may be triggered if patients forget to pick up their prescription or miss an appointment.

The tool also combines algorithms “with predictive models to generate recommendations and ways to best engage a patient, whether through an app or in person.”

That’s the positive potential, but in what might be the perfect example of how advances in health IT can cut more than one way at once, patient privacy advocates have expressed reservations about the uses to which an insurance company such as Cigna might put the new tool.

For example, Sam Smith, from the UK medical data campaign group MedConfidential, recently observed to the UK DailyMailOnline an insurer’s interests are not necessarily the same as those of doctors or patients.

“Reducing payouts and increasing premiums is what insurance companies do, and they’ve always tried to use new technologies to do more of both,” Smith argued, adding, “As monitoring from this app is used for one thing, it will be attractive to employers to monitor their staff even more – a digital dystopia masquerading as healthcare.”

Still, in the WSJ article, Matthew Josefowicz, chief executive of research and advisory firm Novarica Inc., noted managing chronic conditions is much less expensive than engaging in some kind of corrective procedure.

“Across the health-care industry, as with every industry, the incredible growth in data availability and ability to communicate enables new kinds of interventions that were just too cost-prohibitive to even consider before,” Mr. Josefowicz said.

President Trump Supports And Pushes Forward 2005 Bush Era Real ID Card Supporting Security Over Liberty. Real ID Exposed: It Is Worse than You Think.

In Video Below President Trump refers to the Real ID card without saying the words Real ID.  Trump Supporters have no idea what he is talking about.

Source of quote below: Written testimony of DHS Secretary John F. Kelly for a House Committee on Homeland Security hearing titled “Department of Homeland Security Reauthorization and the President’s FY 2018 Budget Request”

“Biometrics is another critical DHS identification and verification initiative, and I am committed to the pursuit of robust capabilities in this area. The Budget requests $354 million to support biometric initiatives. We continue to make progress on the Biometric Entry-Exit System, with the goal of making air travel more secure, convenient, and easier.” DHS Secretary John F. Kelly

Click Here: Kelly Calls for Full Implementation of REAL ID

download (12)

Real ID Exposed: It Is Worse than You Think.


By Mark Lerner

The Constitutional Alliance strongly opposes the Real ID Act 2005; our reasons go beyond the reasoning of other organizations. Our primary reasons for opposing the Real ID Act are four-fold. It is my hope and prayer that you will share a link to our web-site with everyone you are in contact with. I do not ask a lot but I am asking now. You will learn while reading this essay why there is not as big a difference as you have been led to believe between states that are in material compliance with the Real ID Act 2005 and those that are not.

The requirement that states collect a digital facial image/photograph of all driver’s license applicants that is facial recognition compatible. Until the signing of the Real ID Act 2005 into law many states and territories were still using a low resolution, analog photograph that was not facial recognition compatible. The analog photograph used was not facial recognition compatible because of the very high error rate associated with low resolution photographs when facial recognition software was or is used. It should be noted that a low resolution analog photograph is just as human recognizable on a driver’s license as the high resolution digital facial image Real ID calls for.

Prior to the passage of the Real ID Act in 2005 a majority of the states were not using facial recognition technology. Today the number is roughly 35 states that are using facial recognition technology.

Facial recognition software/technology maps your face measuring the distances between key facial characteristics such as your lips, ears, nose and eyes. These distances we are told are unique to each person in the same way that we are told that our fingerprints are unique to each of us.

The Real ID Act gives the DHS (Department of Homeland Security) unprecedented power by allowing the Secretary of DHS to solely determine for what “Official Purposes” citizens must present a Real ID materially compliant driver’s license. While there are three such official purposes today (Download DHS (department of homeland security) Real ID Act of 2005 Final Rules Part 1 and 2 Document bottom of page 13 and top of page 14) the fact is this provision of the Real ID Act 2005 would allow for the Secretary of DHS to add to the current official purposes without consulting with or having the approval of Congress (same link as above – page 37).

The Secretary can add the purchase of a weapon and/or the purchase of ammunition to the current list of official purposes. Also the requirement could be added to require a Real ID compliant driver’s license to pick up a prescription. The point is this unfettered discretion given to the Secretary of DHS is in our minds unconstitutional. Nowhere in the Constitution is such broad and sweeping power given to the Executive Branch, let alone a cabinet member.

I think it is important to fully appreciate just how far DHS believes its power extends. In an opinion column written by Secretary Chertoff after the publication of the final rule, he said, “embracing REAL ID” would mean it would be used to “cash a check, hire a baby sitter, board a plane or engage in countless other activities.” page 28.

The Real ID Act calls for state DMV database linking ( ). Federal authorities will have either direct or indirect access to all DMV databases This is especially important since the TSA has indicated that people will be able to board commercial airliners even if they do not have a Real ID compliant license or other alternative acceptable ID document (passport, military ID card, Enhanced Driver’s License). We envision the TSA asking an individual if they have been issued a driver’s license or other valid issued state ID issued by state DMV’s for those that do not drive. TSA would then have either direct access or indirect access to state DMV photo databases. Legally under the provisions of the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act of 1994 the TSA could request and receive a copy of a person’s photo from a state DMV database.

A reality of database linking is it exposes people to a much greater risk of being a victim of identity theft.

The MRZ (Machine Readable Zone) of a Real ID compliant driver’s license is not encrypted. Privacy advocates commented during the RuleMaking process of the Real ID Act that the MRZ should be encrypted. DHS felt that encrypting the MRZ would create technical challenges to the law enforcement officer in the field or in other locations. What we have learned is the “swiping” of the MRZ has become a very real problem that is doing real harm to citizens. Criminals and retailers have used the unencrypted MRZ of a driver’s license for their own purposes.

In order to in as brief of manner as possible articulate the arrogance of DHS about the power it believes it has I will leave you with the following which comes from the Final Rules of the Real ID Act: “Notwithstanding the voluntary nature of the REAL ID Act, DHS assumes that States will willingly comply with the regulation to maintain the conveniences enjoyed by their residents when using their State-issued driver’s licenses and non-driver identity cards for official purposes, particularly as it pertains to domestic air travel.” (Page 124 – Final Rules – Real ID Act Download DHS (department of homeland security) Real ID Act of 2005 Final Rules Part 1 and 2 Document ) Ask yourself when our right to travel and other rights became “conveniences”?

There is a reason that our first objection to the Real ID Act is the digital facial image. It is the position of the Constitutional Alliance that too much focus is being placed on the Real ID compliant licenses itself and not enough on the standard for the digital facial image collection required in the rules of the Real ID Act. The digital facial image/photograph standard is specific for the use of facial recognition software. This fact was addressed in the Privacy Impact Statement for the Real ID Act 2005 released by DHS. Download DHS (department of homeland security) Real ID Act of 2005 Privacy Impact Assessment Document

The standard for the digital facial image can be found on page 68, footnote 17 of the NPRM (Notice of Proposed RuleMaking) issued by DHS in March, 2007. Real ID Act’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

This “standard” is an adopted standard by the international community and is the standard of the ISO (International Organization for Standardization –…

While some contend that Real ID is a national ID, the Constitutional Alliance contends that the operative word is “ID/identification.” Real ID is global or international ID. Both Interpol and Nlets (now called the International Justice and Public Safety Network ) have and are using the standards of the ISO for collection and the sharing of biometrics. The ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) has also adopted the ISO standard(s).

When it comes to identification, it does not matter whether an individual is in Paris, Texas or Paris, France, the individual can be identified by the use of facial recognition software and the use of international telecommunication systems/networks such as Nlets. Nlets itself acknowledges that one of the primary sources of information Nlets provides is state DMV databases. Further, Nlets acknowledges it does share biometric information/data/samples with countries all over the world. (there is no requirement for a warrant).

The driver’s license itself is a red herring in the long run. The goal of TSA and DHS in general is to eliminate the need to focus on the ID document and focus on the use of biometrics. The FBI is spending over $1 billion to create the world’s largest biometric database.

Normally when one thinks about the use of biometrics at a distance they think of facial recognition. While at this time it does appear that facial recognition is the only biometric that allows for the capture of a biometric sample at a distance, it is clear that DHS along with others is working towards and has achieved with limited success being able to capture iris scans and fingerprints at a distance ( ).

Consider with the use of hand held biometric scanners ( , biometric kiosks, the use of smart phones, CCTV, and drones the need to rely on driver’s licenses is negated. Biometric scanners, smart phones and other devices connect wirelessly to state DMV photo databases and other PII contained in DMV databases. If Real ID was repealed tomorrow the goal today of the TSA/DHS would not change; the goal being not to rely on the ID document. Another fact to consider is the regularity of which we learn federal databases have been compromised/hacked ( ). Today I learned the number of people who had their information compromised may reach 30 million plus. My point is knowing we are moving away from relying on the use of the ID document as evidenced by the use of hand held biometric devices, how long will will it before the ID process is moved from the ID document to directly on or in the body?

As far as the linking of databases or the ability to query state DMV photo databases, that is being done apart from the Real ID Act by an Interstate Photo (Sharing) Compact and the FBI’s NGI (Next Generation Identification) program. As a side bar: At an earlier date in time the FBI stated they were not collecting the fingerprints of citizens who had not been convicted of a crime. When the details of the FBI’s “Rap Back” program was came to light it was and is obvious that the FBI is collecting the fingerprints of innocent citizens (—fbi-extends-rap-ba.html ).

During 2013/2014 the United States Senate passed S744 (Comprehensive Immigration Reform). Contained in the legislation is a requirement for all employers to submit a digital facial image/photograph to DHS to be used with a “photo matching tool.”

This is a nice way to say, to be used with facial recognition software. Under current federal directives and policies agencies and departments of the federal government can share biometric information ( ). The point is it should be expected that just as with fingerprints, the digital facial image/photograph of innocent citizens will find their way into the FBI’s NGI database.

Further down I will discuss the religious implications of a global system of identification that links our body to our ability to buy, sell, work and travel. Being that I explained how S744 will ensure that even more citizens are enrolled into this global system of identification and financial control this is an appropriate time to discuss other legislation that ties our bodies to our ability to buy and sell using biometrics as the linchpin.

Currently there is legislation, The Legal Workforce Act before Congress that will require every employer regardless of size to collect the biometrics of each prospective employee. The employer then would be required to provide the biometrics to the Department of Homeland Security.

Previously, on multiple occasions The Photo Identification Security Act was introduced in Congress. We expect this legislation to be introduced again. The Photo Identification Security Act requires all financial institutions to collect the biometrics of all customers. There is no definition within the legislation that defines what a financial institution is. It can be any place where any form of money is exchanged, used, or deposited. Literally our ability to work, travel, buy and sell is being tied to our body or in other words, our body is becoming our ID.

Some argue that there are states that are not and will not comply with the Real ID Act 2005. While this is true that some states are standing by the laws or resolutions passed in those states that prohibit participating in or complying with the Real ID Act, the fact is even in these states DMV’s are continuing to meet the first 18 benchmarks of the Real ID Act to be considered in material compliance. Download The 39 Benchmarks to Full Real ID Act of 2005 Compliance Document

While at first glance it may seem I am contradicting myself by saying some states are not complying yet I also say DMVs in these states are continuing to meet the benchmarks, the fact is this is what is happening. While one may ask how this be true, the answer is simple. The state DMV’s that are continuing to meet the benchmarks even though there is a state law or resolution against participation or compliance with Real ID are doing so under the premise that they are complying with the best practices of AAMVA (American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators), not the provisions of the Real ID Act. This is a distinction without a difference but has been accepted by state legislators.

There is not one state that has not met more benchmarks than they had already met at the time the Real ID Act rules were published. It has also been rightfully said that not one state has met all 39 benchmarks of the Real ID Act. While this is true, it is also true that the reason for this being the case is not because of the lack of will but rather because of logistical limitations that exist today.

It is true that AAMVA said they opposed the Real ID Act but it was not because they thought the Real ID Act went too far but rather most likely because it was not strong enough in some areas. We should ask ourselves if AAMVA opposed the Real ID Act 2005 why didn’t AAMVA object to being named the “hub” and “backbone” of the Real ID Act? The words hub and backbone come directly from the Final Rules of the Real ID Act issued by DHS in 2008 ( Download DHS (department of homeland security) Real ID Act of 2005 Final Rules Part 1 and 2 Document page 10)

When I had the opportunity to question Darrell Williams, The Real ID Act Program Director for DHS at the time, while he was under oath, Director Williams provided false testimony. I asked him “What is the relationship between the federal government and AAMVA? Director Williams responded by saying “There is no relationship between the federal government and AAMVA.”

There has been a relationship between the federal government and AAMVA for decades. One can choose to go back to the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986, which was the first time a federal law called for the collection of a biometric from commercial motor vehicle drivers, or the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform & Immigrant Responsibility Act where within the law itself, not the Rules, Congress mandated the Secretary of Transportation to consult with AAMVA about the issuance of licenses and use of biometrics.

The Supreme Court has ruled that citizens to have a right to anonymity. An officer must be able to articulate reasonable suspicion if the officer requires an individual to produce an identification document. There have been multiple occasions where we know that law enforcement has used facial recognition to determine the identity of an individual absent reasonable suspicion. Currently there is no federal law, or laws in most states that would prohibit the use of facial recognition to determine an individual’s identity.

The following three links (not all inclusive but provided just as examples) are to instances of facial recognition being used absent the knowledge or consent of the individual:–face-recognition-to-spy-on-crowds.html and


Biometrics and our right to anonymity must be raised in federal court or we will as a country be accepting reasonable suspicion being based on “Big Data” rather than observation. Once a law enforcement officer “captures” a person’s facial image when the person is in public and then compares the facial image captured to facial images in a myriad of databases including state DMV databases, the officer will not only be able to determine a person’s identity but also be able to find an infinite amount of other PII (Personal Identifiable Information) about the individual. This PII would include what charities a person gives to, what magazines the person subscribes to, which political party a person has supported or is supporting, what medication a person has been prescribed, and many other tidbits of personal information that federal law enforcement and/or state law enforcement has access to.

Unless the public has a better understanding of how integral biometrics is to the goal of the federal government, specifically DHS and the FBI, the public will be fooled into believing biometrics should not be the focus but rather the repeal of the Real ID Act 2005. The goal of the federal government is to remove any and all anonymity ( ).

It is the position of the Constitutional Alliance that any organization that would support the use and/or mandating of biometrics to achieve immigration reform or for any other purpose outside of correctional institutions and where warrants are required is furthering the erosion of our right to anonymity and thus eroding other rights such as the right to free speech, the right to peacefully assemble, the right to seek redress of our grievances, and our right to religious freedom. There are religious objections to both being photographed (Christians such as the Amish/Mennonite sects ( and ), some Jewish people (Exodus 20:4, Exodus 24:14, Leviticus 26:30, Numbers 33:52, and numerous Chapters and verses of Deuteronomy), and by a growing number of Evangelical Christians (mostly Southern Baptists and some Baptists) to being enrolled into a global system of identification and financial control ( Religious Objections to Biometric ID ).

The question of how expansive has the use of biometrics become on the world stage is one that must be answered for anyone to fully appreciate the threat to all freedom loving people. The following two links answer that question: and

What is undeniable after reading the two links provided above is that in a few short years 3/4 of the countries in the world will have implemented “national/international” ID’s that incorporate biometrics. The 3/4 of the world represents approximately 90% of the world’s population. Interpol has 190 member countries. As a point of information I ask that you realize that there are countries that have national/international ID’s but are not counted as a country with a national/international ID because the governments in these countries refuse to acknowledge they do in fact have such ID’s. The United States in one of these countries.

If a person was to try and ascertain just how many countries there are in the world the answer they would find is somewhat “gray.” This is because some count territories as countries and some people do not. In any case there are only a handful of countries that do not belong to Interpol. As an example I will use Cuba and Venezuela, neither of which belongs to Interpol. Both Cuba and Venezuela have their own biometric ID’s for their citizens.

Often I am asked how could there ever be near total or total global biometric enrollment since so many people live in areas that do not have running water let alone electricity. The answer is what is called mobile biometric enrollment centers. India has a population of about 1/2 billion people. Their national/international ID program, Aadhaar is the most ambitious program to date in the world. About 1/2 the population is already enrolled. Mobile biometric enrollment centers are used allowing the Indian authorities to enroll people even in the most isolated places within India. Within a short time officials expect to reach 1 billion people in enrollment. The rate of enrollment is astounding

An additional point to consider – In the past an individual rarely came into contact with law enforcement. Unless a person created reasonable suspicion that an officer could articulate, was the victim of a crime, a witness to a crime, or committed a traffic violation, the person generally did not come into contact with law enforcement.

Today DHS, the FBI, and others want every person to come into contact with law enforcement every day. The contact does not need to be necessarily physical contact. The “contact” can be achieved through the use of biometrics and surveillance tools such as but not limited to CCTV, smart phones, and drones (expected to be 15,000 or more drones in U.S. by 2020). One should be cognizant of the reality that contact need not be defined within the context of just when a person is “out in public” but also when a person is in their home with the use of smart meters and other technologies.

If there is one lesson all citizens should take from the Snowden revelations it is, if the capability does exist, it will be utilized. In other words if law enforcement and/or our intelligence community have the technology to spy on citizens, that technology will be utilized regardless of the Constitution and/or the law.

A great deal of discussion has taken place recently over the last few months about the militarization of local law enforcement. It is not a secret that the DOD (Department of Defense) develops many technologies that end up in the hands of federal, state, and local law enforcement. When we consider the budget of the DOD it should be obvious that money or funding is not really an issue when it comes to developing invasive technologies. In many ways the same is true of the NSA (National Security Agency). One example of the development of a new technology that will find its way to law enforcement is the development of 3D binoculars the have facial recognition capability built in and connect wirelessly to databases ( ). My point in bringing up new technologies is the law is falling farther and farther behind in terms of dealing with invasive technologies.

My biometrics is just that; they are mine. My biometrics is unique to me. Biometrics is often defined as measurements of the body. “Bio” meaning body and “metrics” meaning measurements. How can I be secure in my person as the 4th Amendment says I shall be if in fact I am required to provide my biometrics to any government entity without a warrant?

It is not the role of state lawmakers to be surrogates of the federal government. State lawmakers must be the buffer between an overreaching federal government and the citizens.

One area I have not addressed is the largest vendor who provides biometric capabilities to local, state and the federal government. Safran’s U.S. subsidiary is Morpho Trust. If you have any type of valid state issued ID including a driver’s license, the reality is that this document was most likely produced by Morpho Trust. Safran, 22% owned by the French government proclaims it has a nearly 40 year partnership with Red China and boasts of offices all over the world including in China and Russia. Safran also has a part in India’s biometric program(s). UPDATE. Safran is now owned 22% by the French government.

Ask yourself why both the Bush and Obama administrations believe our Personal Identifiable information including out biometrics should be in the hands of a foreign company, partly owned by a foreign government, when U.S. companies have the technical capability to do what Morpho Trust does? This makes no sense. Safran has been under investigation in a number of countries for bribery and other serious charges.

I would be remiss if I only discussed the problem and did not offer one possible alternative. The question(s) asked after 9/11 were two-fold, how to we make sure a person is who they say they are and how do we make sure a person does not have more than one driver’s license? The answer(s) is we call the “State to State Identity Verification System.” I and a Board member of the Constitutional Alliance, an organization I co-founded developed this system after speaking with people both inside and outside our government. An overview of The State to State Identity Verification SystemDownload The Solution SSIVS2411 (Power Point)

Breeder documents are documents that are used to establish who a person is. States use birth certificates and social security cards as primary and secondary forms of identification. We provide such documentation when we apply for a driver’s license or valid state issued ID for those that do not drive.

It is much better to number the document, not the person. We had the biometrics of eleven Russian spies in the United States but the biometrics did not tell us who they really were because they used fraudulent breeder documents to establish their identity. France issued hundreds of thousands of E-Passports (biometric and RFID) to people who also used fraudulent breeder documents. Puerto Rico has issued tens of thousands of driver’s licenses to people who used fraudulent breeder documents. These are people that can travel around our country just as you and I can.

If you have not looked at our proposed solution, the State to State Identity Verification System provided earlier via a link, you should now. Our solution among other things provides for the authenticating of breeder documents and making sure a person is not using a breeder document of a deceased person. This is not as difficult as you may believe. It is based on numbering the documents and creating the software to know when the breeder document (e.g.. birth certificate, certificate of birth, Baptism record, etc.) is used to obtain a driver’s license or other valid issued ID. The system would also inform the DMV making the request if the breeder document was used to obtain another state ID from any other state. The bottom line is no two people could use the same breeder document or a fraudulent/counterfeit one. Perhaps best of all, our personal information does not need to go to DHS before we can buy, sell, work or travel.

You cannot reconcile a free society with a surveillance state!!!

Corporations OrbComm And SpaceX: NWO Leaders Taking Away All Of Your Freedoms To Privacy Forever Exposed.

William Cooper Exposed Orbcomm Corporation back in 1994 On The Hour Of The Time radio show. Wow! Hear Show Below. 

download (11)

OrbComm Overview and History:

Source: Wikipedia

ORBCOMM (NASDAQORBC) is an American company that offers industrial Internet of things (IoT) and machine to machine (M2M)[1] communications solutions[buzzword] designed to track, monitor, and control fixed and mobile assets in markets including transportation, heavy equipment, maritime, oil and gas, utilities and government. The company provides hardware devices, modems, web applications and data services delivered over multiple satellite and cellular networks.

As of November 2017, ORBCOMM has more than 2 million billable subscriber communicators,[2] serving Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) such as Caterpillar Inc.Doosan Infracore America, Hitachi Construction Machinery Co., Ltd., John DeereKomatsu Limited, and Volvo Construction Equipment, as well as other customers such as J. B. Hunt,[3] C&S Wholesale GrocersCanadian National RailwaysCR EnglandHub Group, KLLM Transport Services, Marten Transport, Swift TransportationTargetTropicanaTyson FoodsWalmart and Werner Enterprises.[4]

ORBCOMM owns and operates a global network of 31 LEO communications satellites and accompanying ground infrastructure including 16 Gateway Earth Stations (GESs) around the world. ORBCOMM is licensed to provide service in more than 130 countries and territories worldwide.[5]

Founding and development of low Earth orbit satellite system.

The ORBCOMM low Earth orbit (LEO) system was conceived by Orbital Sciences Corporation (Orbital) in the late 1980s. In 1990, Orbital filed the world’s first license application with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for the operation of a network of small LEO spacecraft[6] to provide global satellite services of commercial messaging and data communications services via the company’s ORBCOMM program.

During the initial stages of the program, Orbital pursued a multi-pronged approach: regulatory approvals; ground infrastructure development and procurement of sites; modem development and country licensing. In 1992, the World Administrative Radio Conference (WARC) supported the spectrum allocation for non-voice, non-geostationary mobile satellite service. With WARC approval, Orbital set up a specific ORBCOMM program for the development of satellites and ground infrastructure, and ORBCOMM became a wholly owned subsidiary of Orbital. In 1995, ORBCOMM was granted a full license to operate a network with up to 200,000 mobile Earth stations (MESs).

ORBCOMM began procuring Gateway Earth Station (GES) locations and contracted with a division of Orbital Sciences, located in Mesa, AZ, to develop and build four sets of GESs and associated spares. Land for the four GESs was procured or leased in Arizona, Washington, New York and Georgia.

After the 1992 WARC approval, ORBCOMM signed contracts with three modem developers and manufacturers: Kyushu Matsushita Electric Company, a division of Panasonic; Elisra Electronic Systems, an Israeli company with expertise in electronic warfare systems; and Torrey Science & Technology, a small San Diego-based company with long ties to Orbital Sciences. Panasonic provided the first ORBCOMM-approved MES in March 1995. Elisra followed with the EL2000 in late 1995, and Torrey Science provided the ComCore 200 in April 1996.

During the development of equipment, ORBCOMM also pursued licensing and regulatory approvals in several countries. By 1995, ORBCOMM had obtained regulatory approval in 19 countries, with a number of additional countries well into the regulatory process. ORBCOMM was also in initial negotiations with groups in Indonesia, EMEA and Italy for becoming ORBCOMM licensees, as well as GES operators in their respective regions.

During the conceptual stages of the LEO satellite communications system, Orbital Sciences purchased a small company in Boulder, Colorado specializing in small-satellite design. This company built the first three satellites in the ORBCOMM system: ORBCOMM X, Communications Demonstration Satellite (CDS) 1 and CDS 2. ORBCOMM X was lost after a single orbit. To validate the feasibility of commercially tracking and communicating with a LEO satellite, Orbital built an additional communications payload and flew this payload on an SR-71 in 1992. These tests were successful, and work on CDS 1 and 2 continued. CDS 1 and CDS 2 were launched in February and April 1992 respectively. These satellites were used to further validate the design of the network and were showcased in Orbital’s plans to sign up an equity partner for the completion of the ORBCOMM System.

In June 1992, Orbital created an equal partnership called ORBCOMM Global L.P. with Teleglobe Mobile Partners (Teleglobe Mobile), an affiliate of Teleglobe Inc., for the design and development of the LEO satellite system. Teleglobe Mobile invested million in the project and also provided international service distribution. Orbital agreed to construct and launch satellites for the ORBCOMM system and to construct the satellite control center, the network control center and four U.S. gateway Earth stations.

In April 1995, two satellites (F Plane) were launched, and in the summer the ORBCOMM global mobile data communications network was tested. Teleglobe Mobile invested an additional million in the project that year and joined Orbital as a full joint-venture partner in ORBCOMM. In February 1996, ORBCOMM initiated the world’s first commercial service for global mobile data communications provided by LEO satellites. ORBCOMM also raised an additional million.[7] In October 1996, ORBCOMM licensed Malaysian partner Technology Resources Industries Bhd. (TRI) to sell ORBCOMM’s global two-way messaging service in Singapore, Malaysia and Brunei. TRI became the owner of a 15% stake in ORBCOMM, Teleglobe owning 35% and the rest held by Orbital.[8]

In December 1997, ORBCOMM launched 8 satellites (A Plane). In 1998 ORBCOMM launched 2 satellites (G Plane) in February, 8 satellites (B Plane) in August and 8 satellites (C Plane) in September. After a short hiatus, ORBCOMM launched 7 more satellites (D Plane) in December 1999.

With the launch and operation of the C Plane satellites, ORBCOMM became the first commercial provider of global LEO satellite data and messaging communications services. ORBCOMM inaugurated full commercial service with its satellite-based global data communications network on November 30, 1998. In March 1998, the FCC expanded ORBCOMM’s original license from 36 to 48 satellites.[9]

In January 2000, Orbital halted funding of ORBCOMM, and Teleglobe and Orbital signed a new partnership agreement with 67% ownership to Teleglobe and 33% to Orbital.[10] In May 2000, Teleglobe ceased funding ORBCOMM. Like its voice-centric competitors Iridium and Globalstar, it filed for Chapter 11 protection, in September 2000.

New ownership

In 2001, a group of private investors purchased ORBCOMM and its assets out of an auction process, and ORBCOMM LLC was organized on April 4, 2001. On April 23, 2001, this group of investors acquired substantially all of the non-cash assets of ORBCOMM Global L.P. and its subsidiaries, which included the in-orbit satellites and supporting U.S. ground infrastructure equipment that the company owns today. At the same time, ORBCOMM LLC also acquired the FCC licenses required to own and operate the communications system from a subsidiary of Orbital Sciences Corporation, which was not in bankruptcy, in a related transaction. ORBCOMM issued a public offering of stock in November 2006. The company sold 9.23 million shares of common stock.

In September, 2007, ORBCOMM Inc. was sued for its IPO prospectus containing inaccurate statements of material fact. It failed to disclose that demand for the company’s products was weakening. In 2009, a payment of was agreed.[11]

In September 2009, ORBCOMM signed a contract with SpaceX to launch ORBCOMM’s next-generation OG2 satellite constellation.[12]

ORBCOMM launched its commercial Satellite Automatic Identification System (AIS) service in 2009.[13] AIS technology is used mainly for collision avoidance, but also for maritime domain awareness, search and rescue, and environmental monitoring. AIS launched two additional satellites, VesselSat-1 and VesselSat-2, in January 2011 and October 2012 respectively.

On July 14, 2014 ORBCOMM launched six next-generation OG2 satellites aboard a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida.

In December 2015, the company launched eleven OG2 satellites from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida with the launch of the SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket. This dedicated launch marked ORBCOMM’s second and final OG2 mission to complete its next-generation satellite constellation.[14]

Network services

ORBCOMM provides satellite data services. As of May 2016, ORBCOMM has more than 1.6 million billable subscriber communicators.[37] ORBCOMM has control centers in the United StatesBrazilJapan, and South Korea, as well as U.S. ground stations in New YorkGeorgiaArizonaWashington and international ground stations in Curaçao, Italy, Australia, Kazakhstan, Brazil, Argentina, Morocco, Japan, South Korea, and Malaysia. Plans for additional ground station locations are under way.

The ORBCOMM satellite network is best suited for users who send small amounts of data. To avoid interference, terminals are not permitted to be active more than 1% of the time, and thus they may only execute a 450 ms data burst twice every 15 minutes. The latency inherent in ORBCOMM’s network design prevents it from supporting certain safety-critical applications.

ORBCOMM’s acquisition of SkyWave Mobile Communications in January 2015 gave the company access to higher bandwidth, lower-latency satellite products and services that leverage IsatData Pro (IDP) technology over Inmarsat‘s global L-band satellite network.

ORBCOMM’s direct competition includes Globalstar‘s simplex services (which ORBCOMM also resells) and L-band leased capacity services such as those offered by SkyBitz. ORBCOMM’s most significant competitor is Iridium Communications, which offers the Iridium SBD service, which features data packet, latency and antenna capabilities similar to that of IDP technology, which is now jointly owned by ORBCOMM and Inmarsat.

ORBCOMM satellite services can be easily integrated with business applications. Customer data can be retrieved or auto-forwarded via SMTP or HTTP/XML feed directly over the Internet or through a dedicated link.[38]

ORBCOMM also partners with seven different cellular providers to offer wireless connectivity, cellular airtime data plans and SIM cards for M2M and IoT applications.[39]

ORBCOMM’s other network service business is Automatic Identification System, or AIS, which is a widely deployed system used to track ocean vessels. Six satellites with AIS capability were launched in June 2008, referred to as the Quick Launch satellites. However, all six satellites eventually failed prematurely. When ORBCOMM’s next generation satellites launched on July 14, 2014, each one was equipped with an Automatic Identification System (AIS) payload to receive and report transmissions from AIS-equipped vessels for ship tracking and other maritime applications. ORBCOMM combines its satellite AIS data with a variety of terrestrial feeds to track over 150,000 vessels daily for over 100 customers in a variety of government and commercial organizations.[40]


The Global Leader in Asset Tracking, Monitoring and Control

ORBCOMM (Nasdaq: ORBC) is a global leader and innovator in the industrial Internet of Things (IoT), providing solutions that connect businesses to their assets to deliver increased visibility and operational efficiency. The company offers a broad set of asset monitoring and control solutions, including seamless satellite and cellular connectivity, unique hardware and powerful applications, all backed by end-to-end customer support, from installation to deployment to customer care. ORBCOMM has a diverse customer base including premier OEMs, solutions customers and channel partners spanning transportationsupply chain, warehousing and inventoryheavy equipmentmaritimenatural resources and government.

ORBCOMM at-a-glance:

The largest satellite IoT and M2M player in the world

The industry standard for satellite communications

The most versatile single source for satellite, cellular and dual-mode offerings

The innovative leader in IoT and M2M technologies

The industry’s largest, most diverse technical team

Brochure – ORBCOMM: Connecting the World’s Assets (.pdf)


Over the last 20 years, ORBCOMM has successfully established a strong position of leadership, innovation and expertise in the global IoT and M2M industry.


Acquisitions have played a key role in shaping ORBCOMM’s evolution and what has enabled the company to offer the most comprehensive suite of capabilities in the industrial IoT and M2M industry today. Some key recent milestones in this area include:

Blue Tree Systems (2017)

The acquisition of Blue Tree adds truck in-cab and refrigerated fleet vehicle solutions to ORBCOMM’s expansive transportation portfolio. Customers now have access to the industry’s most comprehensive, integrated offering encompassing nearly all transportation assets—from in-cab to fleet vehicles to refrigerated assets to dry vans—from one source, solidifying ORBCOMM’s global leadership position in transportation and industrial IoT. Blue Tree’s market leadership also adds strength and distribution in key geographies such as Europe, the Middle East and Africa.

inthinc (2017)

With a superior portfolio of telematics solutions, inthinc, Inc. provides a solid entry point for ORBCOMM into the vehicle fleet management market. inthinc’s offering complements and strengthens the company’s existing transportation and heavy equipment product portfolio, allowing customers to access a broader set of asset monitoring solutions. ORBCOMM will expand inthinc’s core telematics services to its existing transportation and heavy equipment markets and broaden inthinc’s global footprint through its widespread distribution channels.

Skygistics (2016)

With the acquisition of Skygistics (PTY) Ltd. and its South African and Australian subsidiaries, ORBCOMM adds distribution for ORBCOMM’s broad range of products in some of the fastest growing IoT markets, including South Africa and 22 other African nations. Based outside of Johannesburg, South Africa, Skygistics provides a broad range of satellite and cellular connectivity options as well as telematics solutions centered around the management of remote and mobile assets to more than 250 telematics and enterprise customers.

WAM Technologies (2015)

ORBCOMM acquired WAM Technologies LLC (WAM), an affiliate of Mark-It Services, Inc. and leading provider of remote management and control solutions for ocean transport refrigerated containers and intermodal equipment. The acquisition of WAM expands and strengthens ORBCOMM’s industry-leading cold chain monitoring solutions, which include trailers, rail cars, gensets and now sea containers. With the addition of WAM’s installed base, ORBCOMM becomes the clear leader in monitoring cargo shipments.

SkyWave Mobile Communications (2015)

The acquisition of SkyWave—the largest M2M service provider on the Inmarsat global L-band satellite network—furthers ORBCOMM’s strategy to provide the most complete set of options and capabilities in the M2M industry. With the addition of SkyWave, ORBCOMM now has one of the largest combined engineering teams in the M2M industry as well as new economies of scale, distribution channels and geographies. The addition of SkyWave’s higher bandwidth, low-latency satellite products and services that leverage the IsatDataPro (IDP) technology further expands the breadth of ORBCOMM’s solutions portfolio.

InSync Software (2015)

The addition of InSync Software—a premier provider of Internet of Things (IoT) enterprise solutions and versatile, turn-key software applications—adds significant application capabilities and allows customers to rapidly deploy M2M and IoT solutions across ORBCOMM’s core markets. By expanding InSync’s uniform software platform beyond RFID, cellular and sensor technologies to include satellite, customers benefit from reduced development costs, time to market and improved ROI.

Euroscan (2014)

With its acquisition of Euroscan—a leading M2M provider of refrigerated transportation temperature compliance recording systems—ORBCOMM adds its integrated, turnkey systems that are used worldwide to ensure the safe and secure transportation of food and pharmaceuticals by monitoring and assuring temperature compliance throughout the supply chain. Euroscan also adds a significant distribution channel in Europe and other key geographies, while Ameriscan adds scale and an expanded portfolio of cold chain monitoring services that complement ORBCOMM’s North American transportation operations.

SENS Asset Tracking (2013)

The acquisition of Comtech’s Sensor Enabled Notification System (SENS) operation—a market leader in one-way satellite products and services—supports ORBCOMM’s multi-network operator strategy and strengthens its position as the leading provider of satellite and cellular communications for the M2M industry. The SENS system, which consists of satellite-based tracking devices, a network hub and an Internet-based back-office platform, enables customers in the government, defense, transportation, logistics, and oil and gas industries to retrieve and view critical data from the field via the Globalstar satellite network.

GlobalTrak (2013)

The GlobalTrak acquisition is a significant step in building the company’s diverse portfolio of end-to-end solutions and enables ORBCOMM to expand its integrated M2M services into new industrial and geographic markets. Combining GlobalTrak’s advanced container and vehicle tracking technology with ORBCOMM’s existing capabilities creates a new suite of product offerings across an expanded global distribution network. GlobalTrak gives ORBCOMM access to military, international, government, and commercial customers as well as expanded geographical reach in growing regions such as the Middle East, Asia and South America.

MobileNet (2013)

By acquiring MobileNet, ORBCOMM can directly address opportunities within the heavy equipment industry through Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs), dealers and fleet owners. Through MobileNet’s flexible, proven telematics platform, ORBCOMM can offer the industry a complete fleet management solution while reducing development costs and time to market. MobileNet’s key customers include Doosan North America, a world-class construction equipment company, and leading rail companies Union Pacific, CSX and BNSF.

PAR LMS (2012)

The acquisition of PAR Logistics Management Systems (PAR LMS)—a leading provider of advanced solutions for monitoring transport assets and cargo—expands ORBCOMM’s satellite, terrestrial and dual-mode offerings, and advances sales growth in attractive business segments. The addition of PAR LMS furthers ORBCOMM’s growth strategy by enhancing value-added services, improving economies of scale in manufacturing and service delivery and providing an expanded customer base with some of the most advanced products in the telematics industry.

StarTrak Systems (2011)

The acquisition of StarTrak and its ReeferTrak® and GenTrakTM brands are an important milestone in the continued evolution of ORBCOMM as an innovative, satellite-based M2M communications services company. A leading provider of tracking, monitoring and control services for the refrigerated transport market, StarTrak provides customers with the ability to proactively monitor, manage and remotely control their refrigerated transport assets. In addition to relationships with leading refrigerated unit manufacturers such as Carrier and Thermo King, StarTrak’s customers include well-known brands such as Tropicana, Maersk Line, Prime Inc, CR England, FFE Transport, Inc. and Exel Transportation.

“Although Verichip has been liquidated and is no longer around. The fact that it was being produced is concerning and shows most likely they have a implantable microchip ready to be used. Satellight infrastructure has to be in place first though.” Old article below from WND.” Michael Difensore. 

Deal forged to equip VeriChip with GPS.


WND StaffPublished December 23, 2004 at 1:00am

Setting the stage for controversial tracking technology, the satellite telecommunications company ORBCOMM has signed an agreement with VeriChip Corp., maker of the world’s first implantable radio frequency identification microchip.

VeriChip, a subsidiary of Applied Digital, will work with ORBCOMM to develop and market new military, security and health-care applications in the U.S. and around the world, the company said.

As WorldNetDaily reported, Applied Digital has created and successfully field-tested a prototype of an implant for humans with GPS, or global positioning satellite, technology.

Once inserted into a human, it can be tracked by GPS technology and the information relayed wirelessly to the Internet, where an individual’s location, movements and vital signs can be stored in a database for future reference.

“ORBCOMM’s relationship with VeriChip provides yet another new and important industry that will use the ORBCOMM satellite system and its ground infrastructure network to transmit messages globally,” ORBCOMM CEO Jerry Eisenberg said.

Initially, after privacy concerns and verbal protests over marketing the technology for government use, Applied backed away from public discussion about such implants and the possibility of using them to usher in a “cashless society.”

In addition, to quell privacy concerns, the company issued numerous denials, stating it had no plans for implants.

When WND reported in April 2002 that the company planned such implant technology, Applied Digital spokesman Matthew Cossolotto accused WND of intentionally printing falsehoods.

Less than three weeks later, however, the company issued a press release announcing that it was accelerating development on a GPS implant.


Implantable-chip company attacks WND

What Is Internet Of Things?


From hairbrushes to scales, consumer and industrial devices are having chips inserted into them to collect and communicate data

Smart toasters, connected rectal thermometers and fitness collars for dogs are just some of the everyday “dumb items” being connected to the web as part of the Internet of Things (IoT).

Connected machines and objects in factories offer the potential for a ‘fourth industrial revolution’, and experts predict more than half of new businesses will run on the IoT by 2020.

Here’s everything you need to know about the increasingly connected world.

What is the Internet of Things?

In the broadest sense, the term IoT encompasses everything connected to the internet, but it is increasingly being used to define objects that “talk” to each other. “Simply, the Internet of Things is made up of devices – from simple sensors to smartphones and wearables – connected together,” Matthew Evans, the IoT programme head at techUK, says.

By combining these connected devices with automated systems, it is possible to “gather information, analyse it and create an action” to help someone with a particular task, or learn from a process. In reality, this ranges from smart mirrors to beacons in shops and beyond.

“It’s about networks, it’s about devices, and it’s about data,” Caroline Gorski, the head of IoT at Digital Catapult explains. IoT allows devices on closed private internet connections to communicate with others and “the Internet of Things brings those networks together. It gives the opportunity for devices to communicate not only within close silos but across different networking types and creates a much more connected world.”

Why do connected devices need to share data?

An argument has been raised that only because something can be connected to the internet doesn’t mean it should be, but each device collects data for a specific purpose that may be useful to a buyer and impact the wider economy.

Within industrial applications, sensors on product lines can increase efficiency and cut down on waste. One study estimates 35 per cent of US manufacturers are using data from smart sensors within their set-ups already. US firm Concrete Sensors has created a device that can be inserted into concrete to provide data on the material’s condition, for instance.

“IoT offers us opportunity to be more efficient in how we do things, saving us time, money and often emissions in the process,” Evans says. It allows companies, governments and public authorities to re-think how they deliver services and produce goods.

“The quality and scope of the data across the Internet of Things generates an opportunity for much more contextualised and responsive interactions with devices to create a potential for change,” continued Gorski. It “doesn’t stop at a screen”.

Where does the IoT go next?

Even those who have purchased one of the myriad smart home products – from lightbulbs, switches, to motion sensors – will attest to the fact IoT is in its infancy. Products don’t always easily connect to each other and there are significant security issues that need to be addressed.

A report from Samsung says the need to secure every connected device by 2020 is “critical”. The firm’s Open Economy document says “there is a very clear danger that technology is running ahead of the game”. The firm said more than 7.3 billion devices will need to be made secure by their manufacturers before 2020.

“We are looking at a future in which companies will indulge in digital Darwinism, using IoT, AI and machine learning to rapidly evolve in a way we’ve never seen before,” Brian Solis, from Altimeter Group, who helped on the research said.

IoT botnets, created using a network of out-of-date devices took large websites and services offline in 2016. A Chinese firm later recalled 4.3 million unsecured connected cameras. The ease of bringing down the internet using IoT devices was revealed when instead of malicious purposes, the botnet was revealed to have been created to game Minecraft.

But aren’t there privacy implications?

Everything that’s connected to the internet can be hacked, IoT products are no exception to this unwritten rule. Insecure IoT systems led to toy manufacturer VTech losing videos and pictures of children using its connected devices.

There’s also the issue of surveillance. If every product becomes connected then there’s the potential for unbridled observation of users. If a connected fridge tracks food usage and consumption, takeaways could be targeted at hungry people who have no food. If a smartwatch can detect when you’re having sex, what is to stop people with that data using it against the watches’ wearer.

“In the future, intelligence services might use the [internet of things] for identification, surveillance, monitoring, location tracking, and targeting for recruitment, or to gain access to networks or user credentials,” James Clapper, the US direction or national intelligence said in 2016. Wikileaks later claimed the CIA has been developing security exploits for a connected Samsung TV.

We need reliable standards

At the centre of creating a vast, reliable IoT network lies one significant issue: compatible standards. Connected objects need to be able to speak to each other to transfer data and share what they are recording. If they all run on different standards, they struggle to communicate and share. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Standards Association lists a huge number of standards being developed and worked on for different applications.

“Additional needs are emerging for standardisation,” the Internet Society says. If standardisation happens it will let more devices and applications be connected.

To try and tackle this issue on an enterprise scale, Microsoft has introduced its own system for IoT devices. Called IoT Central, TechCrunch, reports the system gives businesses a managed central platform for setting up IoT devices. Microsoft claims the system will simply the creation of IoT networks.

Gorski described IoT, even among those with the most experience of the concept, as a “relatively immature market” but said 2016 may have been a turning point. The Hypercat standard is now supported by ARM, Intel, Amey, Bae Systems and Accenture and the firms are currently agreeing on a format for “exposing collections” of URLs, for example.

“In the short term, we know [IoT] will impact on anything where there is a high cost of not intervening,” Evans said. “And it’ll be for simpler day-to-day issues – like finding a car parking space in busy areas, linking up your home entertainment system and using your fridge webcam to check if you need more milk on the way home.

“Ultimately what makes it exciting is that we don’t yet know the exact use cases and just that it has the potential to have a major impact on our lives.”

This article was originally published in January 2017. It has since been updated with further IoT information.

New FBI Document Shows Conspiracy Theorist’s Listed As A New Domestic Terrorism Threat.


download (1)

FBI: Conspiracy Theories Are Domestic Terror Threat.

By Cathy Burke | Thursday, 01 August 2019 04:59 PM


The FBI now considers crackpot fringe conspiracy theories — like the deep-state believer QAnon and the pedophile paranoid Pizzagate — a domestic terrorist threat, Yahoo News reported.

“The FBI assesses these conspiracy theories very likely will emerge, spread, and evolve in the modern information marketplace, occasionally driving both groups and individual extremists to carry out criminal or violent acts,” states an FBI intelligence bulletin from the bureau’s Phoenix field office dated May 30, the news outlet reported Thursday.

The document specifically mentions QAnon, a shadowy network that believes in a deep state conspiracy against President Donald Trump, and Pizzagate, the theory a pedophile ring including Clinton associates was being run out of the basement of a Washington, D.C., pizza restaurant.

“The FBI assesses these conspiracy theories very likely will emerge, spread, and evolve in the modern information marketplace, occasionally driving both groups and individual extremists to carry out criminal or violent acts,” the document states.

It also goes on to say the FBI believes conspiracy theory-driven extremists are likely to increase during the 2020 presidential election cycle.

“The advent of the Internet and social media has enabled promoters of conspiracy theories to produce and share greater volumes of material via online platforms that larger audiences of consumers can quickly and easily access,” the document says, the news outlet reported.

The FBI is already under fire for its approach to domestic extremism, Yahoo News noted — pointing to a hearing last week before the Senate Judiciary Committee in which FBI Director Christopher Wray faced accusations the bureau was not focusing enough on white supremacist violence.

Wray told the lawmakers the FBI had dispensed with separate categories for black identity extremists and white supremacists, saying the bureau was focusing on “racially motivated” violence, the New York Post noted.

Yahoo News reported the bulletin focused on violence based specifically on beliefs that “attempt to explain events or circumstances as the result of a group of actors working in secret to benefit themselves at the expense of others” and are “usually at odds with official or prevailing explanations of events.”

Besides QAnon and Pizzagate, the FBI document also cites a California man who was arrested Dec. 19, 2018, after being found with what appeared to be bomb-making materials in his vehicle.

The unnamed man was planning to “blow up a satanic temple monument” in the Capitol rotunda in Springfield, Illinois, to “make Americans aware of Pizzagate and the New World Order, who were dismantling society,” according to the document.

Volvo To Electronically Restrict Speed Across Its Fleet And Monitor Drivers.


Volvo To Electronically Restrict Speed Across Its Fleet.

By Rahul Jaswal
Updated: Thursday, March 7, 2019, 14:11 [IST

Volvo aims to achieve “no fatalities” as part of its Vision 2020. The Swedish automaker will restrict top speed on all its civilian cars starting next year. As part of its enhanced safety drive, Volvo will electronically limit the top speed to 180kmph on all its vehicles. They aim for no one to be killed or seriously injured in Volvo cars.
Hakan Samuelsson, President and Chief Executive, Volvo Cars, stated, “Volvo is a leader in safety: we always have been and we always will be. Because of our research we know where the problem areas are when it comes to ending serious injuries and fatalities in our cars. And while a speed limitation is not a cure-all, it’s worth doing if we can even save one life. We want to start a conversation about whether car makers have the right or maybe even an obligation to install technology in cars that change their driver’s behaviour, to tackle things like speeding, intoxication or distraction. We don’t have a firm answer to this question, but believe we should take leadership in the discussion and be a pioneer.”
Volvo says the speed limit is necessary because existing active and passive safety features in most cars are unable to prevent fatalities and severe injuries above a certain seed limit. This is also reason why countries set speed limits and restrictions. However, speeding is common practice and the leading cause of road fatalities.

Volvo cars also plans to address two more problems that result in accidents. One is drivers under thee influence of alcohol and or drugs, and the other is distracted drivers. They plan to present some ideas at a safety event at Sweden on March 20, 2019.
Volvo’s cars will include new technology that will monitor the vehicle and also driver behaviour. They’re working on a separate system that will use smart speed control and geofencing technologies to automatically restrict speeds around schools and hospitals.

Volvo also said that none of their police cars will have the 180kmph speed restrictions.

Thoughts About Electronic Speed Restrictions On Volvo Cars.

We think this is a fantastic idea. However, for India, 180kmph is still over the top. Again, watching these technologies work in real time will be interesting.

« Older Entries