DOCSLIB.ORG

Emergency Motion for an Injunction Pending Appeal ______

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Emergency Motion for an Injunction Pending Appeal ______ USCA Case #20-5195 Document #1850902 Filed: 07/09/2020 Page 1 of 159 [ORAL ARGUMENT HAS NOT BEEN SCHEDULED] No. 20-5195 In the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ____________________________ OPEN TECHNOLOGY FUND, AMBASSADOR RYAN CROCKER, AMBASSADOR KAREN KORNBLUH, BEN SCOTT, MICHAEL W. KEMPNER, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. MICHAEL PACK, in his official capacity as Chief Executive Officer and Director of the U.S. Agency for Global Media, Defendant-Appellee. _____________________________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia Case No. 1:20-cv-1710-BAH (The Hon. Beryl A Howell) ____________________________ PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS’ EMERGENCY MOTION FOR AN INJUNCTION PENDING APPEAL ____________________________ JENNIFER BENNETT DEEPAK GUPTA NEIL K. SAWHNEY GREGORY A. BECK GUPTA WESSLER PLLC PETER ROMER-FRIEDMAN 100 Pine Street, Suite 1250 GUPTA WESSLER PLLC San Francisco, CA 94111 1900 L Street, NW, Suite 312 [email protected] Washington, DC 20036 [email protected] (202) 888-1741 (202) 888-7792 (fax) [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] July 9, 2020 Counsel for Plaintiffs-Appellants USCA Case #20-5195 Document #1850902 Filed: 07/09/2020 Page 2 of 159 COMBINED CERTIFICATES Certificate as to Parties, Rulings, and Related Cases As required by Circuit Rules 27(a)(4) and 28(a)(1), counsel for Appellants Open Technology Fund, Ambassador Ryan Crocker, Ambassador Karen Kornbluh, Ben Scott, and Michael Kempner provide the following information: I. Parties and Amici Appearing Below The parties who appeared before the U.S. District Court were Open Tech- nology Fund, Ambassador Ryan Crocker, Ambassador Karen Kornbluh, Ben Scott, and Michael Kempner, Plaintiffs-Appellants, and Michael Pack, Defendant-Appellee. II. Parties and Amici Appearing in this Court The parties appearing in this Court are Open Technology Fund, Ambassador Ryan Crocker, Ambassador Karen Kornbluh, Ben Scott, and Michael Kempner, Plaintiffs-Appellants, and Michael Pack, Defendant-Appellee. III. Rulings under Review The rulings under review in this case are the July 2, 2020 Memorandum Opin- ion and Order of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Howell, C.J.) denying the Plaintiffs-Appellants’ motion for a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order, and the July 6, 2020 Minute Order of U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Howell, C.J.) denying the Plaintiff-Appellants’ motion for re- consideration and, in the alternative, for an injunction pending appeal. IV. Related Cases Counsel are unaware of any related cases in any court. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Deepak Gupta Deepak Gupta Counsel for Plaintiffs-Appellants July 9, 2020 i USCA Case #20-5195 Document #1850902 Filed: 07/09/2020 Page 3 of 159 TABLE OF CONTENTS Combined certificates ................................................................................................ i Table of authorities .................................................................................................. iii Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1 Statement ................................................................................................................... 5 A. Statutory background ........................................................................... 6 B. Factual background .............................................................................. 8 1. OTF establishes itself as a private nonprofit organization, outside of government control. ............................. 8 2. Immediately upon his confirmation as CEO, Pack attempts to terminate and replace OTF’s officers and directors. .................................................................................... 11 3. The district court rejects OTF’s request for temporary and preliminary injunctive relief. ............................................... 13 Standards .................................................................................................................. 14 Argument .................................................................................................................. 15 I. The plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits. ................................ 15 A. The district court correctly concluded that the government lacks statutory authority to remove or replace OTF’s officers or directors. ........................................... 15 B. The bylaws do not confer on the government remove- and-replace authority over OTF that it lacks under the statute. ...................................................................... 20 II. The government’s escalating efforts to take over OTF— including actions taken since this appeal was filed—are causing severe irreparable harm, while an injunction to preserve the status quo pending appeal will cause Pack no harm whatsoever. ......................................................................................... 28 Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 35 ii USCA Case #20-5195 Document #1850902 Filed: 07/09/2020 Page 4 of 159 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases 1230-1250 Twenty-Third Street Condominium Unit Owners Association, Inc. v. Bolandz, 978 A.2d 1188 (D.C. 2009) ........................................................................... 21, 23 Augustine Medical, Inc. v. Progressive Dynamics, Inc., 194 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 1999) ........................................................................... 22 Bernstein v. Goldsmith, 2006 WL 1644849 (D.N.J. June 5, 2006) ......................................................... 33 * Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, 530 U.S. 640 (2000) .............................................................................. 19, 26, 32 C & E Services, Inc. v. Ashland, Inc., 498 F. Supp. 2d 242 (D.D.C. 2007) .................................................................. 21 California Democratic Party v. Jones, 530 U.S. 567 (2000) .......................................................................................... 19 Chaplaincy of Full Gospel Churches v. England, 454 F.3d 290 (D.C. Cir. 2006) ......................................................................... 31 Christian Legal Society v. Martinez, 561 U.S. 661 (2010) ............................................................................................ 19 Cuomo v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 772 F.2d 972 (D.C. Cir. 1985) ............................................................................ 15 Custis v. United States, 511 U.S. 485 (1994) ............................................................................................ 17 D.H. Overmyer Co. v. Frick Co., 405 U.S. 174 (1972) ............................................................................................ 27 Democratic National Committee v. Republican National Committee, 673 F.3d 192 (3d Cir. 2012) ................................................................................ 27 iii USCA Case #20-5195 Document #1850902 Filed: 07/09/2020 Page 5 of 159 Denkler v. United States, 782 F.2d 1003 (Fed. Cir. 1986) .......................................................................... 15 Immigration and Naturalization Services v. St. Cyr, 533 U.S. 289 (2001) .......................................................................................... 20 Knox v. Service Employees International Union, Local 1000, 567 U.S. 298 (2012) ........................................................................................... 18 * League of Women Voters v. Newby, 838 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2016) .......................................................................... 4, 30 Lebron v. National Railroad Passenger Corp., 513 U.S. 374 (1995) ............................................................................................. 2 Leonard v. Clark, 12 F.3d 885 (9th Cir. 1993) ................................................................................ 27 Meshel v. Ohev Sholom Talmud Torah, 869 A.2d 343 (D.C. 2005) ................................................................................ 21 Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418 (2009) ......................................................................................... 32 Peretz v. United States, 501 U.S. 923 (1991) ........................................................................................... 20 Ralis v. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Inc., 770 F.2d 1121 (D.C. Cir. 1985) ........................................................................ 2, 32 * Roberts v. United States Jaycees, 468 U.S. 609 (1984) ...................................................................................... 2, 32 Russello v. United States, 464 U.S. 16 (1983) ............................................................................................. 17 Simon Property Group, Inc. v. Taubman Centers, Inc., 262 F. Supp. 2d. 794 (E.D. Mich. 2003) .......................................................... 33 Talamini v. Allstate Insurance Co., 470 U.S. 1067 (1985) ........................................................................................ 33 iv USCA Case #20-5195 Document #1850902 Filed: 07/09/2020 Page 6 of 159 Walker v. Johnson, 17 App. D.C. 144 (D.C. Nov. 6, 1900) .............................................................. 22 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Commissionn v. Holiday Tours, Inc., 559 F.2d 841 (D.C.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bbg), 2011-2015
    Description of document: FOIA Logs for the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), 2011-2015 Requested date: 02-March-2016 Released date: 06-May-2016 Posted date: 08-August-2016 Source of document: BBG FOIA Office Room 3349 330 Independence Ave. SW Washington, D.C. 20237 Fax: (202) 203-4585 The governmentattic.org web site (“the site”) is noncommercial and free to the public. The site and materials made available on the site, such as this file, are for reference only. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals have made every effort to make this information as complete and as accurate as possible, however, there may be mistakes and omissions, both typographical and in content. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals shall have neither liability nor responsibility to any person or entity with respect to any loss or damage caused, or alleged to have been caused, directly or indirectly, by the information provided on the governmentattic.org web site or in this file. The public records published on the site were obtained from government agencies using proper legal channels. Each document is identified as to the source. Any concerns about the contents of the site should be directed to the agency originating the document in question. GovernmentAttic.org is not responsible for the contents of documents published on the website. Broadcasting 330 Independence Ave.SW T 202.203.4550 Board of Cohen Building, Room 3349 F 202.203.4585 Governors Washington, DC 20237 Office ofthe General Counsel Freedom ofInformation and Privacy Act Office May6, 2016 RE: Request Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act-FOIA #16-035 This letter is in response to your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request dated March 2, 2016 to the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), which the Agency received on March 14, 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • Motion for Temporary Restraining Order
    Case 1:20-cv-01710-BAH Document 4 Filed 06/25/20 Page 1 of 41 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OPEN TECHNOLOGY FUND, AMBASSADOR RYAN CROCKER, AMBASSADOR KAREN KORNBLUH, BEN SCOTT, MICHAEL W. KEMPNER, Plaintiffs, Case No. 1:20-cv-1710 v. The Honorable Beryl A. Howell, Chief Judge MICHAEL PACK, in his official capacity as Chief Executive Officer and Director of the U.S. Agency for Global Media, Defendant. PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION DEEPAK GUPTA GUPTA WESSLER PLLC 1900 L Street, NW, Suite 312 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 888-1741 [email protected] June 25, 2020 Counsel for Plaintiffs Case 1:20-cv-01710-BAH Document 4 Filed 06/25/20 Page 2 of 41 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Statutory and factual background .................................................................................................... 5 Argument ........................................................................................................................................ 16 I. Open Technology Fund is likely to succeed on its claim that Pack lacks any legal authority whatsoever to remove its officers or directors. ......................... 16 II. The plaintiffs are likely to prevail on their claim that Pack’s attempted “governmental takeover” of all four private organizations is unlawful. .................. 21 III. The plaintiffs are likely
    [Show full text]
  • Digital Authoritarianism and the Global Threat to Free Speech Hearing
    DIGITAL AUTHORITARIANISM AND THE GLOBAL THREAT TO FREE SPEECH HEARING BEFORE THE CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION APRIL 26, 2018 Printed for the use of the Congressional-Executive Commission on China ( Available at www.cecc.gov or www.govinfo.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 30–233 PDF WASHINGTON : 2018 VerDate Nov 24 2008 12:25 Dec 16, 2018 Jkt 081003 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 C:\USERS\DSHERMAN1\DESKTOP\VONITA TEST.TXT DAVID CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA LEGISLATIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS Senate House MARCO RUBIO, Florida, Chairman CHRIS SMITH, New Jersey, Cochairman TOM COTTON, Arkansas ROBERT PITTENGER, North Carolina STEVE DAINES, Montana RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio TODD YOUNG, Indiana TIM WALZ, Minnesota DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California TED LIEU, California JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon GARY PETERS, Michigan ANGUS KING, Maine EXECUTIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS Not yet appointed ELYSE B. ANDERSON, Staff Director PAUL B. PROTIC, Deputy Staff Director (ii) VerDate Nov 24 2008 12:25 Dec 16, 2018 Jkt 081003 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 0486 Sfmt 0486 C:\USERS\DSHERMAN1\DESKTOP\VONITA TEST.TXT DAVID C O N T E N T S STATEMENTS Page Opening Statement of Hon. Marco Rubio, a U.S. Senator from Florida; Chair- man, Congressional-Executive Commission on China ...................................... 1 Statement of Hon. Christopher Smith, a U.S. Representative from New Jer- sey; Cochairman, Congressional-Executive Commission on China .................. 4 Cook, Sarah, Senior Research Analyst for East Asia and Editor, China Media Bulletin, Freedom House ..................................................................................... 6 Hamilton, Clive, Professor of Public Ethics, Charles Sturt University (Aus- tralia) and author, ‘‘Silent Invasion: China’s Influence in Australia’’ ............
    [Show full text]
  • Audit of Radio Free Asia Expenditures
    UNCLASSIFIED UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND THE BROADCASTING BOARD OF GOVERNORS OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL AUD-FM-IB-15-24 Office of Audits Jw1e2015 Audit of Radio Free Asia Expenditures IMPORTANT NOTICE: This report is intended solely for the official use of the Department of State or the Broadcasti ng Board of Governors, or any agency or organization receiving a copy d irectly from the Office of Inspector General. No secondary d istribution may be made, in whole or in part, outside the Department of State or the Broadcasting Board of Governors, by them or by other agencies or organizations, without prior authorization by the Inspector General. Public avail ability of the document wi ll be determined by the Inspector General under the U.S. Code, 5 U.S.C. 552. Im proper disclosure of this report may result in crim inal, civil, or administrative penalt ies. UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED Acronyms BBG Broadcasting Board of Governors CFO Chief Financial Officer CFR Code of Federal Regulations IBB International Broadcasting Bureau OIG Office of Inspector General OMB Office of Management and Budget OTF Open Technology Fund RFA Radio Free Asia U.S.C. United States Code UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED Table of Contents Section Page Executive Summary .........................................................................................................................1 Background…. .................................................................................................................................3 Objectives……. ...............................................................................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • ENSURING a FUTURE for DETECTING INTERNET DISRUPTIONS a Field Survey of the Ecosystem Around Internet Censorship, Disruptions, and Shutdowns
    ENSURING A FUTURE FOR DETECTING INTERNET DISRUPTIONS A Field Survey of the Ecosystem Around Internet Censorship, Disruptions, and Shutdowns JUNE 2017 Acknowledgements About New America Thank you to the following for their contributions to this New America is committed to renewing American politics, work: Collin Anderson, Seamus Tuohy, Liz Woolery, Georgia prosperity, and purpose in the Digital Age. We generate big Bullen, and Enrique Piracés. ideas, bridge the gap between technology and policy, and curate broad public conversation. We combine the best of a policy research institute, technology laboratory, public Thank you also to the members of the internet forum, media platform, and a venture capital fund for measurement community who took the time to participate ideas. We are a distinctive community of thinkers, writers, in this research. researchers, technologists, and community activists who believe deeply in the possibility of American renewal. Find out more at newamerica.org/our-story. About OTI The Open Technology Institute (OTI) works at the intersection of technology and policy to ensure that every community has equitable access to digital technology and its benefits. We promote universal access to communications technologies that are both open and secure, using a multidisciplinary approach that brings together advocates, researchers, organizers, and innovators. Find out more at www.newamerica.org/oti. OPEN TECHNOLOGY INSTITUTE Contents Executive Summary 2 Introduction 4 Overview of the State of Shutdown Measurement 10 Introduction to Recommendations 15 Recommendations 18 Conclusion 31 Appendices 32 Notes 43 OPEN TECHNOLOGY INSTITUTE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY When it comes to the internet, we live in a world of of researchers that study internet censorship, contradictions.
    [Show full text]
  • Secure Messaging1
    SoK: Secure Messaging1 Nik Unger∗, Sergej Dechandy Joseph Bonneauzx, Sascha Fahl{, Henning Perl{ Ian Goldberg∗, Matthew Smithy ∗ University of Waterloo, y University of Bonn, z Stanford University, x Electronic Frontier Foundation, { Fraunhofer FKIE Abstract—Motivated by recent revelations of widespread state of this paper, the academic research community is also failing surveillance of personal communication, many solutions now to learn some lessons from tools in the wild. claim to offer secure and private messaging. This includes both a Furthermore, there is a lack of coherent vision for the future large number of new projects and many widely adopted tools that have added security features. The intense pressure in the past two of secure messaging. Most solutions focus on specific issues years to deliver solutions quickly has resulted in varying threat and have different goals and threat models. This is com- models, incomplete objectives, dubious security claims, and a lack pounded by differing security vocabularies and the absence of of broad perspective on the existing cryptographic literature on a unified evaluation of prior work. Outside of academia, many secure communication. products mislead users by advertising with grandiose claims In this paper, we evaluate and systematize current secure messaging solutions and propose an evaluation framework for of “military grade encryption” or by promising impossible their security, usability, and ease-of-adoption properties. We con- features such as self-destructing messages [7]–[10]. The recent sider solutions from academia, but also identify innovative and EFF Secure Messaging Scorecard evaluated tools for basic promising approaches used “in-the-wild” that are not considered indicators of security and project health [11] and found many by the academic literature.
    [Show full text]
  • Fy 2020 Budget Justification
    Congressional FY 2020 BUDGET JUSTIFICATION Table of Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. 1 Summary Charts ...................................................................................................................... 11 Legislative Proposals ..............................................................................................................13 Voice of America (VOA) ......................................................................................................... 17 Office of Cuba Broadcasting (OCB) ................................................................................... 29 International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) ........................................................................33 Office of Internet Freedom (OIF) & Open Technology Fund (OTF) .............................. 36 Technology, Services and Innovation (TSI) .................................................................... 45 Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) ...................................................................57 Radio Free Asia (RFA) .............................................................................................................67 Middle East Broadcasting Networks, Inc. (MBN) ..........................................................77 Broadcasting Capital Improvements (BCI) .................................................................... 85 Performance Budget Information ....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Performance and Accountability Report
    FISCAL YEAR 2015 PERFORMANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT bbg.gov Message from the BBG Chairman and CEO On behalf of the Broadcasting Board of Governors, we are pleased to present the BBG’s Performance and Accountability Report (PAR) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2015. This report includes the results of this year’s audit of the Agency’s financial statements; measures our performance against our FY 2015 objectives; highlights the accomplishments of the past year; and identifies the challenges that lie ahead. The mission of the BBG is to inform, engage, and connect people around the world in support of freedom and democracy. The BBG broadcast services include two federal entities: the Voice of America (VOA) and the Office of Cuba Broadcasting (OCB); and three BBG-sponsored grantees: Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), Radio Free Asia (RFA), and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks (MBN). The BBG upholds freedom of expression and information as universal human rights. By exemplifying free media and free expression, the BBG helps foster and sustain free and democratic societies. The BBG networks pursue this mission through their own media via television, radio, Internet, social and mobile platforms, but also by working closely with media partners on the ground that bring our content into local markets, establishing valuable connections to critical institutions that influence civil society and democratic principles. Through professional journalism, BBG networks help support specific U.S. foreign policy objectives. In 2015, MBN launched its multi-platform Raise Your Voice campaign, providing Iraqis with the opportunity to voice their opinions and engage in discussion on issues relevant to their daily lives and future.
    [Show full text]
  • Online Censorship and Surveillance in Myanmar
    Contents ● Key Findings -------------------- 3 ● Introduction -------------------- 4 ● Background -------------------- 5 ○ Political Turbulence ○ Unprotected Connectivity ○ Online Surveillance ○ Internet Shutdowns and Restrictions ● Methodology -------------------- 8 ○ Step One: Gathering Public Information ○ Step Two: Device Testing and Network Measurements ■ Identifying the targeted group for device testing g ■ Test list review ■ Network measurement ○ Step Three: Interviews ● Limitations -------------------- 13 ● Research and Measurement Findings -------------------- 14 ■ Censorship ○ Surveillance Capacity and Capabilities -------------------- 17 ■ Government documents ■ Police tactics ■ Targeted groups ● Interview Findings -------------------- 24 ○ Safety ■ Online safety ■ Offline safety ○ Surveillance and Censorship -------------------- 26 ■ Surveillance methods ○ Self-Censorship -------------------- 26 ○ Looking to the Future -------------------- 27 ■ Legal protection ■ Psychological well-being ■ Digital safety needs ● Conclusion -------------------- 28 ● Acknowledgements -------------------- 29 ● Annex A​:​ Interview Questionnaire -------------------- 31 ● Annex B​:​ Training, operation, and support for Myanmar police -------------------- 32 ● Annex C​:​ Emergency VPN Analysis -------------------- 35 Key Findings ● Approximately 200 URLs are blocked in Myanmar. ​The majority of these blocked sites are pornographic websites, however, 41 media websites were also found to be blocked between January 1 and July 27, 2020. ○ The blocking
    [Show full text]
  • Case 1:20-Cv-01710-BAH Document 22 Filed 07/02/20 Page 1 of 33
    Case 1:20-cv-01710-BAH Document 22 Filed 07/02/20 Page 1 of 33 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OPEN TECHNOLOGY FUND, et al., Plaintiffs, Civil Action No. 20-1710 (BAH) v. Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell MICHAEL PACK, in his official capacity as Chief Executive Officer and Director of the U.S. Agency for Global Media, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION For nearly 80 years, international broadcasting sponsored by the United States has served as a trusted and authoritative global news source, a forum for the expression of diverse viewpoints on the most pressing topics of the day, a model of journalistic excellence and independence, and a beacon of hope for those trapped within authoritarian regimes. Despite being funded by American taxpayers, U.S. international broadcasting has typically remained free of governmental interference. Indeed, its autonomy and its commitment to providing objective news coverage has often been viewed as key to its ability to advance the interests of the United States abroad. Our country’s commitment to this model of cultural export has largely been viewed as a rousing success, helping to undermine and topple some of history’s most oppressive regimes—including Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union—by spreading freedom and democracy around the globe. The current Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) of the United States Agency for Global Media (“USAGM”)—the defendant, Michael Pack—is accused of putting this legacy at serious risk. Since taking office less than a month ago, Pack has upended U.S.-sponsored
    [Show full text]
  • Measuring Internet Censorship in Disputed Areas: an Examination of Online Media Filtering in Russia and Crimea During the 2018 Russian Presidential Elections
    Measuring Internet Censorship in Disputed Areas: An examination of online media filtering in Russia and Crimea during the 2018 Russian presidential elections by Igor Valentovitch and Ksenia Ermoshina Table of Contents I. Introduction 2 II. Methodology 3 Forging a new methodology 3 Preparing test-lists 4 Virtual feedback loop 4 Engaging testers on the ground 5 Testing period and key numbers 5 III. Data processing and analysis 6 IV. Key findings: Accessibility of liberal and critical platforms in Russia and Crimea 7 Websites of political opponents 7 Human rights organizations and foundations 8 Social media 9 Russian Media 10 Ukrainian Media 11 Tatar Minority Media 13 International Broadcasters 14 VI. Conclusion 15 ​ Recommendations 17 Appendix 20 1 I. Introduction 1 In March 2018, Russian citizens went to the polls to elect a president. For social scientists like us, these elections presented an ideal opportunity to measure Internet censorship in Russia and in the disputed Crimean Peninsula. Accordingly, we set forth to assess whether processes unfolding in the political domain would influence freedom of access to critical content online, and whether strategically important territories such as Crimea would be subject to different information controls than those in mainland Russia. The goal of our study was to provide more profound investigation of the filtering practices in the country by supplementing the research on blocking online resources with investigation how this blocking is executed and whether it is consistent across Russia and
    [Show full text]
  • Secure Messaging1
    SoK: Secure Messaging1 Nik Unger∗, Sergej Dechandy Joseph Bonneauzx, Sascha Fahl{, Henning Perl{ Ian Goldberg∗, Matthew Smithy ∗ University of Waterloo, y University of Bonn, z Stanford University, x Electronic Frontier Foundation, { Fraunhofer FKIE Abstract—Motivated by recent revelations of widespread state insecure ways. However, as will become clear over the course surveillance of personal communication, many solutions now of this paper, the academic research community is also failing claim to offer secure and private messaging. This includes both a to learn some lessons from tools in the wild. large number of new projects and many widely adopted tools that have added security features. The intense pressure in the past two Furthermore, there is a lack of coherent vision for the future years to deliver solutions quickly has resulted in varying threat of secure messaging. Most solutions focus on specific issues models, incomplete objectives, dubious security claims, and a lack and have different goals and threat models. This is com- of broad perspective on the existing cryptographic literature on pounded by differing security vocabularies and the absence of secure communication. a unified evaluation of prior work. Outside of academia, many In this paper, we evaluate and systematize current secure messaging solutions and propose an evaluation framework for products mislead users by advertising with grandiose claims their security, usability, and ease-of-adoption properties. We con- of “military grade encryption” or by promising impossible sider solutions from academia, but also identify innovative and features such as self-destructing messages [7]–[10]. The recent promising approaches used “in-the-wild” that are not considered EFF Secure Messaging Scorecard evaluated tools for basic by the academic literature.
    [Show full text]