Google giving far-right users' data to law
enforcement, documents reveal
Exclusive: in some cases Google did not necessarily
ban users who were often threatening violence or expressing extremist views
Jason
Wilson
@jason_a_w
Mon 17 Aug
2020 11.00 BSTLast modified on Mon 17 Aug 2020 11.01 BST
A
little-known investigative unit inside search giant Google regularly forwarded
detailed personal information on the company’s users to members of a
counter-terrorist fusion center in California’s Bay Area, according to leaked
documents reviewed by the Guardian.
But
checking the documents against Google’s platforms reveals that in some cases
Google did not necessarily ban the users they reported to the authorities, and
some still have accounts on YouTube, Gmail and other services.
The users
were often threatening violence or otherwise expressing extremist views, often
associated with the far right.
The
documents come from the so-called “Blueleaks” trove, which hackers acquired
from the servers of a hosting company in Texas which had been used by several
law enforcement agencies. It contains hundreds of thousands of documents from
more than 200 agencies, dated between 1996 and June 2020.
The leak
has been authenticated by cybersecurity experts. https://krebsonsecurity.com/2020/06/blueleaks-exposes-files-from-hundreds-of-police-departments/
In the
Blueleaks trove, the documents are associated with the Northern California
Regional Intelligence Center, part of a nationwide network of fusion centers,
which were created after 9/11 to facilitate information sharing between state,
federal, local and tribal law enforcement agencies.
Steven
Renderos, executive director of MediaJustice, a nonprofit campaigning for a
more just and participatory media wrote in an email: “In a moment of reckoning
on the failure of police to keep people safe, it is reckless for Google to hand
off private user information to law enforcement.”
Renderos
added: “While the prevalence of hateful activities across Google owned
platforms is a real problem, deflecting responsibility to police is not the
solution.”
The Google
documents retained by NCRIC highlight the activities of individual users,
providing detailed subscriber information, which often includes real names,
street addresses, credit card numbers, Gmail and recovery email addresses,
YouTube channel addresses and the time and IP addresses of recent logins.
Many of the
documents also include copies of comments users have made on Google services
like YouTube.
One user
whose comments Google passed onto police appeared to threaten racist and
terrorist violence.
On a
now-deleted video on the mass shootings in El Paso and Dayton by Canadian white
nationalist, Stefan Molyneux (whose channel YouTube has now banned), the user
wrote: “Hi guys, i need your help, i cant help but look at those shooters and
think, that could be me. I watch Stefan, and black pilled and many others on
the right. I think i should do the same thing they are doing.”
The user
then went on to discuss methods of making explosive devices.
But the
same user also discussed making explosives in other comments which were still
visible on YouTube at the time of reporting, along with the user’s account.
On a video
alleging acts of brutality by local police, the user appended comments urging
others to “kill them, when you go to trial i wouldn’t find you guilty for
shooting these criminals. Kill them all”.
According
to Google’s reports, the same user appended racial slurs to videos reporting
crimes which Google has since removed.
A second
user who still has an account on the site made threats of racist and
anti-police violence on a number of videos.
On a video
of an incident where police appear to run a woman down with their car in Tulsa,
Oklahoma, the second user writes, “Thats vehicular homicide. Need to walk into
his house inhis sleep amd shoot his children” (sic).
On another
video, a report from Russian outlet RT on the coronavirus, the same user
writes: “I want the name of the Asian doctor that let the coronavirus outbreak
happen. Im going to shoot his daughter in the face”.
Google also
reported three videos by a third user – who is identified by name, address,
phone number, email address, IP address and alternate account – all of which
remain on YouTube.
The reports
contain detailed descriptions of the three videos, including “At around 1:10,
the words ‘Muskets would be glowing RED” appear on the screen. Assault weapons
are visible in the background. At 3:28, subject asks: “Where is your line in
the sand? When is enough, enough?’”, and “Video is titled ‘A Toast to the Few
& the BooGaLoo.’”
While many
of the comments appear to threaten other users, law enforcement, or Google
employees, and many of the users appear to share far right extremist
ideologies, many of those users and their comments remain on Google’s services.
Other users
are identified by more sophisticated methods, and while some are banned from
YouTube, they appear to retain access to other Google services.
One user
was identified by matching two separate Gmail addresses to a single Android
device, which yielded the user’s name, age, address and phone number.
That user
had posted YouTube comments making anti-Jewish comments, praising white
supremacist terrorists, including mass killers, and suggesting he may emulate
them.
But the
report indicates that the user still has two Gmail accounts.
While many
of the reports sent by Google feature violent or racist threats, some are more
indicative of thoughts of suicide or self harm, or simply mental distress.
Google did
not immediately respond to detailed questions about its reporting system, user
privacy and the company’s relationship to law enforcement.
Mike Sena,
the Executive Director of NCRIC, said in a telephone conversation that the
Google reports came through a common reporting facility on the site’s front
page that “the public, law enforcement, and any other organization” can use to
pass information to the fusion center.
Asked about
how such reports are used, Sena said that any action from reliable reports “is
usually in the form of a welfare check”, and that “our role is to find the best
resources to help that person”.
Sena said
that reports that meet criteria like reliability “in triage” are stored for 12
months.
But
equality and privacy advocates were concerned about Google’s role in
voluntarily passing on user data to law enforcement.
Saira
Hussein, a staff attorney at the Electronic Frontiers Foundation, said in a
phone conversation that EFF was concerned about the “vast amounts of user data”
Google appeared to be voluntarily passing on to law enforcement, but questioned
Google’s goal in doing so.
“Are they
expecting law enforcement to do something, or is this just a way of covering
themselves? Does Google see its responsibility as simply reporting this to law
enforcement and moving on?” Hussein said.

Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário