Stolen passports missed at U.S. borders

[R.A. Hettinga]

The Washington Times
 www.washingtontimes.com

Stolen passports missed at U.S. borders
By Jerry Seper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published December 24, 2004
Foreign nationals applying for admission to the United States using stolen
passports have "little reason to fear being caught" and usually are
admitted, even when their fraudulent documents have been posted on the
government's computerized "lookout" lists, a report said.
 The Department of Homeland Security's Office of Inspector General said
in a 40-page report that of the 176 foreign nationals who its investigators
identified as having used a stolen passport in an attempt to enter the
United States from 1998 to 2003, 136 were admitted.
 "While most persons using stolen passports to enter illegally into the
United States may be simply violating immigration laws, some could have
more sinister intentions," said the department's acting inspector general,
Richard L. Skinner.
 The report, completed in November but made public this week, also said
when U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers received new reports
of stolen passports, they did not routinely review existing admission
records to determine whether any already had been used.
 Even if there was such a procedure, the report said, CBP had no way to
give the information on the stolen passports to U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (ICE), Homeland Security's investigative arm.
 "While the 136 successful entries using stolen passports is a
relatively small number, it is significant for several reasons," Mr.
Skinner said. "First, the passports were obtained by criminal acts. Second,
though small, the number could and should be zero, at least for those
admissions that occurred after lookouts were posted. Third, there was no
law-enforcement pursuit once it was recognized an illegal entry had
occurred."
 Mr. Skinner said actionable information was reported and logged in the
lookout system, yet entry was accomplished, "defeating a costly apparatus
established precisely to prevent such an occurrence."
 The inspector general's probe targeted travelers from the 27 foreign
countries for whom a visa is not required, including France, Germany and
Britain.
 Although those travelers were told in October to present either a
machine-readable passport or a U.S. visa, CBP has given officials at ports
of entry the discretionary authority to grant one-time exemptions in an
effort to facilitate travel.
 President Bush also has signed legislation delaying until October 2005
the requirement for visa-waiver countries to include biometrics in their
passports.
 Mr. Skinner said the "vast numbers of stolen passports available"
presented a significant challenge for U.S. immigration authorities, noting
that Interpol estimated last year that more than 10 million lost and stolen
passports are in circulation.
 CBP records show that during 2003, more than 12.7 million travelers to
the United States from visa-waiver countries were inspected at ports of
entry -- nearly 35,000 a day -- and that 4,368 fraudulent passports were
intercepted. The United States had 40.4 million international visitors last
year.
 According to the inspector general's report, of the 98 foreign
nationals who did not have lookouts posted for their stolen passports
before their attempted U.S. entry, 79 were admitted -- a rate of 81
percent. Of those 78 aliens who had posted lookouts on their passports, 57
gained entry -- a rate of 73 percent.
 Of those 57 who gained entry despite "lookouts" on their passports, 33
did so after the September 11 attacks.
 The report also said that 18 aliens whose passports had posted
lookouts were referred by immigration officers to secondary inspections for
more intensive interviews, but got in anyway.
 "We could not determine from the secondary inspections records, the
inspectors' rationale for admitting the aliens with lookouts for the stolen
passports," Mr. Skinner said, describing the records as nonexistent or "so
sketchy that they were not useful."
 Mr. Skinner's report made several recommendations:
 *Primary inspectors should refer foreign nationals to secondary
inspections when their passports are the subject of a lookout.
 *The inspectors should record in detail the results of the secondary
inspections and justifications for any subsequent admission.
 *There should be a supervisory review and approval of a decision to
admit an alien who was the subject of a lookout.
 *Inspectors should enter new names into the lookout database on a
timely basis.
 *CBP should initiate routine reviews of admission records to identify
prior uses of stolen passports.
 *Information on the successful use of stolen passports should be
reported to ICE for investigation.
 Homeland Security Undersecretary Asa Hutchinson, who oversees CBP and
ICE, said the inspector gene

U.S. passport privacy: Over and out?

[R.A. Hettinga]

 



U.S. passport privacy: Over and out?

By Hiawatha Bray The Boston Globe
 Thursday, December 23, 2004


 It's December 2005 and you're all set for Christmas in Vienna. You have
your most fashionable cold-weather gear, right down to Canada's national
red maple leaf embroidered on your jacket and backpack, to conceal your
American citizenship from hostile denizens of Europe.

 But your secret isn't really safe. As you stroll through the terminal, you
pass a nondescript man with a briefcase. The briefcase contains a powerful
radio scanner, and simply by walking past, you've identified yourself as an
American. Without laying a finger on you, the man has electronically
"skimmed" the data in your passport.

 Science fiction? The American Civil Liberties Union doesn't think so.
Neither does Bruce Schneier, software engineer and author of multiple books
on computer security, nor Katherine Albrecht, a privacy activist in
Cambridge, Massachusetts. They are all worried about a State Department
plan to put radio identification tags in all future U.S. passports,
beginning next year.

 That way, American passport data can be read merely by waving it past a
radio detector. But whose radio detector? That's what worries many people.

 "Somebody can identify you as an American citizen from across the street
because of the passport in your back pocket," said Albrecht, founder of a
Web site concerned with the matter, spychips.com. "You're a walking target."

 Nonsense, replies a State Department spokeswoman, Kelly Shannon. "We're
going to prevent the unauthorized skimming of the data," Shannon said.

 The U.S. government thinks the new passports will be harder to forge and
easier to verify than the current model, without causing undue risk of
identity theft.

 It is all part of the continuing debate over radio frequency
identification systems, also known as RFID. Tags that let people zoom
through a highway toll booth contain an RFID chip. Many American pets have
them embedded under their skin and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
has approved doing the same for people, to provide reliable medical
information to emergency room doctors.

 But privacy advocates like Albrecht contend that government agencies and
big corporations want to embed RFID chips into virtually every product,
giving them the ability to track almost every move that people make.

 The RFID chips contain a tiny bit of information that is transmitted via
radio when the chip comes within range of a reading device. The chip could
broadcast a simple code number, or it could contain a lot more information,
like a traveler's name, nationality and digital photograph. This is what
the chips planned for future U.S. passports will do, part of a plan to make
the passport system more secure.

 But according to government documents released by the civil liberties
union, early versions of the system allowed detection of personal data by a
snoop 30 feet, or 9 meters, away. Shannon, of the State Department,
dismissed this research, saying the equipment needed to capture the data
was too complex and heavy to be used undercover.

 That is not much comfort to Schneier, the computer security expert.
"Technology only gets better," he said. "It never gets worse."

 Schneier figures that would-be spies and snoops will find ways to pick up
signals from the passport chips.

 The chips might be made more secure by encrypting the data they contain.
That way, it would be useless even if intercepted. But the State Department
opposes that idea, because immigration officials in many poor countries
cannot afford the necessary decryption gear.

 "Encryption limits the global interoperability of the passport," said Shannon.

 Why use a radio-based identity system at all? Smart chips, like those
found in some credit cards, are plentiful and cheap, and they don't
broadcast. You slide them through a chip reader that instantly scoops up
the data.

 But the International Civil Aviation Organization, which sets global
standards for passports, has decided on the use of a "noncontact"
technology - another way of saying radio-based identification.

 So will Americans be stuck with high-tech passports that beam their
personal data to all comers? Not necessarily. Turns out there's a simple
fix: a passport cover made of aluminum foil. It would form what engineers
call a Faraday cage, after Michael Faraday, the 19th-century British
physicist who discovered the characteristics of electromagnetic waves.

 Wrap an RFID chip inside a Faraday cage, and the electromagnetic waves
from the chip reader can't get in and activate the chip.

 The State Department says it may use the principle to give travelers an
added sense of security. No, there won't be rolls of aluminum foil included
with every passport. Instead, the passport cover may include a network of
wires woven into the fabric. Fold the passport shut, and there's 

A Force Field in Flat Gray to Protect a Wireless Network

[R.A. Hettinga]

The New York Times

December 23, 2004

A Force Field in Flat Gray to Protect a Wireless Network
 Adam Baer


s wireless networks have proliferated, computer security companies have
come up with increasingly complex defenses against hackers: password
protection, encryption, biometrics. Insulating the interior of a house,
apartment or office from radio-wave interference is a simpler concept that
has yet to become a popular consumer strategy, but a new product called
DefendAir from Force Field Wireless could change that.

Available online at forcefieldwireless.com, the product is a latex house
paint that has been laced with copper and aluminum fibers that form an
electromagnetic shield, blocking most radio waves and protecting wireless
networks. Priced at $69 a gallon and available only in flat gray (it can be
used as a primer), one coat shields Wi-Fi, WiMax and Bluetooth networks
operating at frequencies from 100 megahertz to 2.4 gigahertz.

 Two or three coats will achieve the paint's maximum level of protection,
good for networks operating at up to five gigahertz. Force Field Wireless
also sells a paint additive ($34 for a 32-ounce container, enough to treat
a gallon of paint) and $39 window-shield films.

 Harold Wray, a Force Field Wireless spokesman, said the paint must be
carefully applied. "Radio waves find leaks," he said.

 It should be applied selectively, he said, because it might hinder the
performance of radios, televisions and cellphones. "Our main goal is to
shield your wireless radio waves from hackers and outside interference," he
said. "Plus, today, many people watch cable television." Adam Baer

Copyrigh
-- 
-
R. A. Hettinga 
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation 
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

Viic0din and Hydr0c0done Heere vR

[Horace Parks]

I can't believe this incrediible priicess.. 

 Viicodin - $199.95
 Tylenol  - $189.95
 V1a'gra - $199.95 
 Va|ium - $259.95 
 Cia|is - $189.95 
 Xa'nax - $233.95
and many m0r.

We are the bes't available nowadays

http://www.pedlomaniak.com








Noo moree emailsss from us...
sttnquauj1EGdr85dJ215drC5IKX4kgHV5hC7aGMOzi

know what kind

[Paulette Mills]

Client Update:

Our system has returned 3 new matches to your profile for you to choose 
from...they are all located within your area so have fun and play safe 

#0309 'Samantha' 36c Blonde 120lbs - Available Dec 21,23,30,31
#1154 'Kelly' 38d Brunette 141lbs - Available Dec 17,18,22,27 
#1863 'Sarah' 34b Blonde 127lbs - Available Dec 18,20,27,31

http://meetingsmile.com/ora/enter.php


Season's Greetings from the most exclusive private local meeting place 
online.Let us know if this reached you in error by going here:
http://meetingsmile.com/bye/

Re: Finally, the Killer PKI Application

[James A. Donald]

--
> 
>
> (SYS-CON)(Printview)
>
> Finally, the Killer PKI Application Web Services as an 
> application - and a challenge December 22, 2004 Summary 
> Enterprise PKI has a bad name. Complex, costly, difficult to 
> deploy and maintain - all these criticisms have dogged this 
> technology since it first appeared.

Because PKI sucks.

> To the dismay of so many CIOs, few applications have stepped 
> up to make effective use of PKI.

Because PKI sucks.

> A Role for PKI WSS goes to great lengths to remain flexible
> and not to specify a particular encryption/signing
> technology.

Or in other words, due to the fact that PKI sucks, they have 
left the door open for a replacement.

>  now the investment may finally be realized.

I don't think so. 

--digsig
 James A. Donald
 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG
 wBk2DrWHeXk89xcxEqBeSgid7cCLVSNvu1z47YJW
 4VzhTnreELC1p4yrs3eDjP2/svE8kzr6HxxP9ToWm

DOJ: IRS Summons are unenforceable. (fwd)

[J.A. Terranson]

This just gets weirder and weirder!  In their attempt to prevent the
Petition, DOJ is asserting that the IRS is essentially a non-entity.
Except when they take you to prison.  Or something like that...





http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPLawsuit/update04-Dec-22.htm


In Defense of the Petition Clause:

Battles Now Underway on Three Fronts

2nd Circuit Directs DOJ to Explain
Lack of IRS Summons Enforcement Authority


As is now widely known, since July of 1999 the We The People organization
has led a nationwide legal and educational attack on the federal
government, utilizing the force of .popular constitutionalism.. This
assault has come in the form of an intelligent and rational exercise of
the First Amendment Right to Petition for Redress of Grievances, relating
to the government.s imposition of an unconstitutional, direct,
un-apportioned tax on labor.

What is also known is that in November of 2002, three additional Petitions
for Redress were added to the People.s overall Petition process. These
Petitions are related to the Constitution.s war powers clauses versus the
Iraq Resolution, the privacy and due process clauses versus the USA
Patriot Act, and the money and debt limiting clauses versus the Federal
Reserve System.

It is also widely known that the People.s Petitions for Redress have been
legally served on the highest ranking officials of the Executive and
Legislative branches of the federal government, including the President
and leadership of the Congress and every member of Congress, the Attorney
General, Treasury Secretary, and Commissioner of the IRS. Undoubtedly,
these officials know about the We The People Foundation and the Petitions
for Redress of Grievances.

What.s more, with dismay, the People watched their servant government.s
reaction: they have seen the government trespass on the People.s First
Amendment Right to Petition by striking out against the Petitioners --
infringing on that unalienable Right, rather than respond by answering
their questions.

The People decided to fight back . to defend against this invasion of
their Right to Petition. Nearly two thousand joined the fight this year by
becoming named plaintiffs in the lawsuit aimed at getting the federal
courts to declare the meaning of the Right to Petition, including the
Right of the People to retain their money until their grievances are
redressed if the government decides not to properly and honestly respond
as the Constitution commands.

What has not been widely known is that parallel battles in defense against
the government.s invasion of the People.s Right to Petition are now being
fought on a total of three judicial fronts by the We The People
organization. What follows is an update of the primary lawsuit and
breaking news regarding significant developments in a related case that
has reached the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. This second case was brought
by Chairman Bob Schulz, as the sole plaintiff, against the IRS.  We will
discuss the third case in a future article.


Ed. Note: Many of the following linked .PDF documents are large. It is
suggested that you
RIGHT-CLICK  to Save (i.e., download) the files to your computer before
attempting
to open them using the (free) Adobe Reader software.

Update -- The Primary Battle:
We The People v. The United States

On July 19, 2004, this case was initiated in the U.S. District Court in
the District of Columbia. An Amended Complaint was filed in early
September.

On September 30, 2004, as we had previously reported, the government filed
a Motion to Dismiss our complaint.

On November 12, 2004, Mark Lane and Bob Schulz filed a Memorandum in
Opposition to the government.s motion to dismiss.

We asked constitutional scholar and attorney John Wolfgram to review and
comment on our Opposition memorandum. Wolfgram called the Memorandum
.Splendid.Brilliant.. Click here for Wolfgram.s comments.

Wofgram is the author of the article, .How the Judiciary Stole the Right
To Petition,. which was published in 31 U. WEST L.A. L. REV. (Summer
2000).

Wolfgram has a B.A. Degree (University of Wisconsin) and a J.D. Degree
(Southwestern University 1977). Wolfgram founded the Constitutional
Defender Association in 1989 to advance Petition Clause Principles.
Its name derives from the observation that the practical value of a
Constitution depends on the effective enforcement of constitutional rights
and limits against government, by the people. Wolfgram argues that the
Petition Clause is the People's Right to redress government violations of
the Constitution - the Constitution's Defense system against government
usurpation and oppression.

According to the rules of the U.S. District Court for the District of
Columbia, the government had until November 17, 2004 to reply to our
Memorandum in Opposition to the government.s Motion to Dismiss. However,
DOJ filed a Motion for more time, due in part, to .the gravity of the
relief sough

Goods News. Application was accepted

[Yasuhiro Xiangyi]

Dear Applicant,

Your application was processed and approved. You are eligible for $ 400,000 
with a 2.4 % rate.

Please verify your information here: 
http://www.xmastimerates.com/x/loan2.php?id=jrwriter

We look forward to hearing from you.

Yasuhiro Xiangyi, Account Manager
MFD Marketing
3043 Daley Avenue
New Haven, CT 06501

not interested -> http://www.xmastimerates.com/x/st.html

DVD Copying - Get it before it's gone

[DVDCopyONE - Just For You]

Copy your DVD Movies to regular CD-R Discs and watch them on your home DVD Player.






  
 
  
  
   


If you no longer wish to receive these messages,  please send a blank email   hereOR  send a postal mail to: 

 1947 S Wadsworth Blvd #19, Lakewood, CO 80227-2434




   
  
  
  
 

Wine Lovers: 6 Complimentary-Bottles[ID#24502]

[International Wines from OSG]

Wine-Lovers: Six-Bottles for [ID#24502]