Slashdot Mirror
Europe is Using Smartphone Data as a Weapon To Deport Refugees (wired.co.uk)
Governments are using migrants' smartphones to deport them. From a report: Across the continent, migrants are being confronted by a booming mobile forensics industry that specialises in extracting a smartphone's messages, location history, and even WhatsApp data. That information can potentially be turned against the phone owners themselves. In 2017 both Germany and Denmark expanded laws that enabled immigration officials to extract data from asylum seekers' phones. Similar legislation has been proposed in Belgium and Austria, while the UK and Norway have been searching asylum seekers' devices for years.
Following right-wing gains across the EU, beleaguered governments are scrambling to bring immigration numbers down. Tackling fraudulent asylum applications seems like an easy way to do that. As European leaders met in Brussels last week to thrash out a new, tougher framework to manage migration -- which nevertheless seems insufficient to placate Angela Merkel's critics in Germany -- immigration agencies across Europe are showing new enthusiasm for laws and software that enable phone data to be used in deportation cases. Admittedly, some refugees do lie on their asylum applications.
Following right-wing gains across the EU, beleaguered governments are scrambling to bring immigration numbers down. Tackling fraudulent asylum applications seems like an easy way to do that. As European leaders met in Brussels last week to thrash out a new, tougher framework to manage migration -- which nevertheless seems insufficient to placate Angela Merkel's critics in Germany -- immigration agencies across Europe are showing new enthusiasm for laws and software that enable phone data to be used in deportation cases. Admittedly, some refugees do lie on their asylum applications.
Europe is using smartphone data as a tool to help repatriate lost runaways.
" Admittedly, some refugees do lie on their asylum applications."
Who writes this stuff? There is a difference between an asylum seeker and an immigrant and a migrant and an illegal immigrant. To conflate it all is disingenuous.
Refugees aren't being deported (unless they have been extraordinarily naughty). You get deported (maybe, sometimes, if officials can be bothered or if you drag out your appeal for so long that they give up, and if you do not make too much of a scene) when your asylum claim is rejected. And plenty of rejected applicants are not deported, they just hang around. Hoping for another mass pardon of illegal immigrants, perhaps.
Separating actual refugees from immigrants with other motivations is vitally important, to make sure we can financially, politically and socially afford to take in as many actual refugees as needed. It's not unreasonable to ask applicants to provide proof to support their claim, and that includes submitting mobile phone data. As long as it is treated as the highly sensitive data that it is, with only relevant portions being retained and only for as long as necessary.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Rather than use it on law abiding citizens,let's use it to more readily track the illegal immigrants in the US (border hoppers and VISA overstays) and use this to more readily track them down.
This would go a long way of circumventing the sanctuary cities that don't obey the laws and cooperate.
I don't have a problem with people coming and migrating to the US to integrate and become US citizens, but if you are coming to the country, at least sign the fucking GUEST BOOK on the way in, and do things legally.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
No, big difference between finding and removing immigration criminals and citizens.
Countries have borders and immigration laws. There is no problem using whatever means to locate immigration criminals.
Useful idiots like Merkel just brought on the much needed police state. Once those pesky rapefugees are gone, they'll be using those tools on the native population.
All apart of the plan.
Useful idiots like Merkel just brought on the much needed police state. Once those pesky rapefugees are gone, they'll be using those tools on the native population.
All apart of the plan.
Yeah, right. About that...
It would appear that unrestricted immigration and taking refugees is something the people don't want, both in the EU and here in the US.
In the US we allow about 1.1 million legal immigrants per year, which is generous in comparison to any other country. That's enough to skew the economy, make jobs hard to get, and puts a burden on the infrastructure. Letting unrestricted migrants in could cripple the country, possibly bring it down.
Non-citizens can apparently vote, and there's a big push in CA to force the census bureau to remove the citizenship question in the next census.
After the census is tallied, it means that CA gets 3 [US House] more representatives due to non-citizens, and for all states non-citizens total about 7 house representatives.
(Question: Is giving non-citizens legislative power like that insane? Asking for a friend...)
I have no Earthly idea why Merkel and the rest of the EU is so hell-bent on getting more refugees. Refugees are causing a lot of problems, it's clearly something the member states don't want, and there's apparently no end in sight. The whole refugee thing started because of Arab Spring (remember that?), which was 8 years ago!
My best guess is that being called "nazi" is still a big thing in Europe, and they'll do anything to save face and avoid being called that name. Trash their own country by virtue signalling.
Anyway...
The basic problem is that the people really don't want unrestricted immigration. It's something that people can readily see, and that affects them directly. Trump's approval rating actually went *up* during the recent protests.
When the government does something the people *really* don't like, it's the government that has to change.
Merkel is the one who oversaw in introduction of really strong privacy laws and tried to find a workable, humane solution to the migrant crisis.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Yes there are rights for when they are hunted, captured, detained and deported. All that is legal under the law. That has never changed.
There are laws for refugees. There are laws for immigration.
You do not advocate the rule of law. That is wrong.
He related that manyl of the refugees he'd come across seemed to have managed to lose all of their identity papers and documents, but all of them seemed to have been able to hold on to their smartphones and selfie sticks.
There is no God, and Dirac is his prophet.
The federal government is the one who decides who can and cannot enter the country, and the Executive branch is tasked with securing the border and enforcing immigration laws.
States may not have to specifically aid the feds for certain things, but they cannot actively interfere with their operations. Doing so makes them active participants in crime. And yes, entering the country illegally is a crime. As is aiding and abetting such criminals.