Terrorism Blacklist leaked (Update: Source secured)

[Ink]

Terror-suspect database used by banks, governments, has been leaked (Update: Thomson Reuters has secured the source of the leak)

"A database described by some as a "terrorism blacklist" has fallen into the hands of a white-hat hacker who may decide to make it accessible to the public online.

The database, called World-Check, belongs to Thomson Reuters and is used by banks, governments and intelligence agencies to screen people for criminal ties and links to terrorism.

Security researcher Chris Vickery claims to have obtained a 2014 copy of the database. He announced the details on Tuesday in a post on Reddit.

"No hacking was involved in my acquisition of this data," he wrote. "I would call it more of a leak than anything, although not directly from Thomson Reuters."

Vickery declined to share how he obtained the data, but he's already contacted Thomson Reuters about securing the source of the leak."​

reddit: Terrorism Blacklist: I have a copy. Should it be shared? • /r/privacy

Spoiler: reddit snippet

Update #2: Thomson Reuters saw this post, looked up my notification through the World-Check support portal, and gave me a call. They were very nice. I have passed along details of where the leak is and, to the best of my knowledge, they are are working to get it secured.

Theoretically speaking, how would you have felt if the terror-suspect blacklist was made available for the public domain? Would you feel less safe?

 

[hjlbx]

Made Public

The argument from governments is that making information public will drive terrorists under-ground, the terrorists will change their tactics, etc and make their work more difficult. At the same time, innocent people always seem to get targeted -- and there is little, if anything, an innocent person can do.

I think it important to allow NGOs to have access to such information - if it becomes available - to keep government agencies in-line. The digital rights of individuals is slowly, but surely, being slowly eroded by all the "anti-terrorism" mania...

The anti-terrorism climate is the worst I have seen in my life - it is getting too extreme in my opinion. I remember back in the day when there was almost a weekly aircraft hi-jack during the 70s, Beruit, etc.

The argument today is that digital technology is the primary reason why terrorists succeed. LOL... that is complete hogwash. Sure, it is a tool, but to truly counter terrorism - one has to address the fundamental causes of terrorism. The fundamental causes of terrorism have nothing to do with digital technology.

Today, in this digital age, the security agencies want to monitor your under wear...

 

[DJ Panda]

I highly agree with the point @hjlbx makes. However, in the world we live, Media governs it. They just bring panic and chaos. Total bias, they would do anything to get a story (money) even if they are trespassing or not even respecting privacy a majority of the time.

 

[jamescv7]

Securing the information is somehow a big conspiracy at all, especially an institution may manipulate indirectly and denied all allegations.

People should know it, remember that if still persist to make private then expect whistleblowers to come up like bubble in the media.

 

[Logethica]

A database of "suspects" is no more than the name would suggest..
A release of this kind of database is both wholly illogical and wholly unethical,especially as it would probably stop short of fully explaining why each person was considered a "suspect" to begin with.
Imagine the hypothetical release of a database of paedophile "suspects"....what would follow would be the destruction of the lives of those on such a database,many of which "in reality" would be completely innocent.
Let us not lose sight of just how many people could be considered,or labelled as a potential terrorist due to numerous legislative changes over the past 20 years....
Due to the wide-reaching nature of such (poorly conceived,politically motivated) legislation,and the loose legal definition of the term "terrorist" itself,there could potentially be millions of people that would be astonished to find themselves included on such a list.

 

[mal1]

Terrorism is merely a small category on the 2.2-million list. You'll find all kinds of "suspects" from child prostitution to corruption to trivial things (according to articles on Vice News, The Guardian and BBC)

 

[Logethica]

IMO The Psychology of the average person would be such that they would judge those included on a "Suspect List" through "Emotion" rather than "Logic"..Especially regarding "Sensitive" Issues such as Terrorism, Sex-Offences, Domestic Violence, Crimes against Children ..etc.
It is for this very reason that lists of "Suspects" are not released, and also why the fairest Legal-Systems adopt an "Innocent until proven Guilty" Policy..
I am wondering whether those that have voted "Made Public" in this Poll would have that same view should they have found themselves Unjustifiably included on a list of suspects.