https://www.abacusnews.com/digital-life/internet-users-china-are-showing...

Oh, privacy from the government....i thought you were talking about people sharing your full name, company name and job location, videos and moments with people you don't even know who want to stalk you.

This happened to me. At least one member of this forum was involved. Pretty poor form and quite hypocritical but who gives a shit. If it's out there some wanker will use it without your knowledge or permission. Karma sorts out those clowns.

I don't care.  I think it's a lot like the Bermuda Triangle bs, a big hoax.  They are monitoring 88trillion WeChat messages a day? Plus supposedly everything else on the 'net too?  Damn, must have some free-time on their hands!  

How about sortin' out the Day-to-day life problems around here before worrying about whether little Yao is whacking-off to Brooke Shields pics, or whether HK is aiming for 100% independence?

Chinese generally have the attitude of "if I'm not doing anything wrong, there's nothing to worry about" whereas some people have the attitude of "it doesn't matter what I do, everyone should respect my privacy!" 

I'm somewhere in between.

If somebody is reading my posts...   I  must be pretty danged important .

https://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm

WeChat Records Can Now Be Used as Evidence in Court!

GiC Team GuideinChina Yesterday

Conversations onWeChat and QQ, the dominant messaging apps operated by Chinese tech giantTencent, will soon be admissible as evidence for civil disputes without theneed for notarization according to new rules from the Nansha People’s Court ofGuangdong Free Trade Zone.

Image: © Provided by South China Morning Post Publishers Limited

With millions of people communicating via WeChat and QQ every day, allowing these messaging platforms to be part of court records could help determine judgments in somecases, according to legal experts.

On July 18th, theNansha court issued a document titled “Internet Electronic Data Evidence Proof and Certification Procedures” and is the first court in Guangdong province to allow direct presentation of internet chat records without notarization, which isusually a costly, complicated, and lengthy procedure.

Using social media posts and records in court is now a worldwide trend.
Paul Haswell, a partner at the law firm Pinsent Mason, confirmed that WeChat and QQ chat records – as well as WhatsApp messages and emails – are alladmissible as evidence in mainland Chinese courts. “This is important in bothcivil and criminal cases as more and more communication is being conductedthrough these methods,” he said.

In the new guidelines, the Nansha Court gives a detailed explanation ofhow WeChat communication threads can be presented as evidence. WeChat, known as Weixin in China and owned by Tencent, has around 1 billion monthly active users while its sister personal messaging service platform QQ,counts about 800 million active users.

According to the new court rules, parties that decide to use WeChat records as evidence first need to log into their WeChat accounts to prove their authenticity.

However, some legal experts have raised concerns over using WeChat records in court because someusers do not use their real name to register their account.

The President of the Commercial Court of the Nansha Court, Sun Hao, has said that givenexisting circumstances it is not only difficult to identify the subject ofelectronic evidence on the Internet, but the identification ofevidence is also difficult and the content is often difficult to identify.

"Take the most widely-used WeChat as an example, because WeChat isnot all through the real name binding of mobile phone numbers; the identity ofthe sender is difficult to determine and the disputes often occur after theevent. When many parties deal with them, the exchange content is not easy; it’snot easy to form a complete chain of evidence. It is difficult to figure outwhich of the pieces of evidence available is the most effective. In contentidentification, the chat record in WeChat is easy to forge or delete bytechnical means, and it is difficult to identify whether it is authentic."

In the United States, legal experts say that a person’s social media posts could be used against them in a civil court case, especially for workers’ compensation claims where the claimant has shared photos online showing them doing physical activities after an accident, for example.

Last September, the U.K. government began looking into tightening up thecountry’s contempt of court laws to include social media posts that relate tocurrent criminal trials.

China's progress of using electronic data as valid evidence.

In 2015,the Civil Procedure Law of China stated that digital voice messages received orstored on social media platforms could be presented as evidence in court. However, this law was designed as part of China’s censorship controls tomonitor and silence public opinion, not to solve civil disputes.

Voice recordings, including those made via messaging platforms, have been used in some courtcases in China but still require notarization. In the case of Nansha court,cases involving electronic data evidence increased 130% year on year in 2017.

In the first half of 2018, the Nansha court handled 98 commercial disputes that involved electronic data evidence, up 50% from the same period last year. In some cases, WeChat records werethe only evidence the two parties could present to the court.

The type of electronic evidence has expanded greatly from call and video recordings to the use of data as evidence, the latter of which is gradually becoming the main type of evidence type presented.

According to statistics published by the Nansha court, the most important form of electronic evidence have been WeChat records which now account for 65% of all cases, followed by e-mails and text messages which account for 14%, while Alipay and QQ make up just about 7%. In financial disputes involving banks and other financial institutions, electronic contractsare making their way into being accepted as evidence for such cases.

The results from previous cases are different as the evidence provided by both parties’ WeChat records are not always sufficient.

For example, party Acumulatively borrowed RMB 66,000 from party B despite not having completed thereal name verification. Even though party B provided records of their full chathistory and the money transfer made, there is no tangible evidence proving thatthe person party B was in contact with was, in fact, party A. Therefore, partyB failed to meet the necessary requirements to move this case forward. But inother similar financial disputes, the victim may have their way and findjustice after all.

Image: Google

A joint trial practice to solve the problem of Internet electronic data evidence certification.
Deputy director of the Nansha court Li Sheng said that in civil and commercial proceedings, the legal provisions on the collection and authentication of Internet electronic evidence are scattered and not systematic, and have led to a decrease in demands of electronic evidence notarization and authentication institutions of those social services. Inresponse, the Nansha court has issued a joint trial practice to solve theproblem of Internet electronic data evidence certification.

According to various types of evidence, the rules allow both parties toprovide evidence to the court that may include the method of fixed evidence,the form of storage medium used, and the procedure of showing evidence during trial.

The court will also provide a list of proof guidelines when filing a case and delivering the respondent materials. It will guide the parties holding evidenceto submit it in a timely manner in order to reduce the non-standard proof bythe parties and improve the efficiency of the litigation.

Because of the great number of cases that involve electronic evidence, WeChat-relatedelectronic evidence accounts for the vast majority, and the regulations aregiven in detail for the requirements of the proof of WeChat.

As for the chat records pulled out of WeChat, rules and regulationsrequire that both parties provide the evidence based on the following conditions:

Firstly, a process demonstration using the terminal equipment to log in tothe WeChat account of the party, which is used to prove the legitimacy of the WeChat chat records and the authenticity of the identity of the WeChat user.

Secondly, the personal information interface of the two chat parties. Withthe help of the characteristics of the micro signal that cannot be changed, thereal identity of the parties is fixed with the mobile phone number and headimage which is displayed in the personal information interface.

Thirdly, a complete chat record. According to the WeChat chat record in the use terminal,we can only delete the features that can not be added, according to the end ofeach WeChat client of both sides. The whole chat information is compared toverify the integrity and authenticity of the information.

Because WeChat does not enforce real name certification, judges can combine the daily life experience, integrate the relevant information, and apply the principle of high probability, according to the party's micro signal,the binding cell phone number and the related information content provided by the parties.

what you say on twitter, google, facebook, and skype can also be used against you in court, if you live in a western country. western goverments also monitor what goes on these sites, and do frequently make arrests. just to let you know. western goverments are also much more strict and agresive when it comes to nabbing their suspects because the media is controled by the west, and they are unlikely to be critical of themselves, therefore, this gives the green light for cops in the west to do whatever they want

I'm sure the NSA has the ability to access all social media, though they are scared of the rise of encrypted software. If anything NSA has far greater potential for gathering all sorts of information for its own purpose. its budget is in excess of 10.5 billion a year. 

however the racist part of me thinks any commercial secrets would be safer in NSA hands

i don't like the idea of somebody checking my private conversations. but really, it's not  a bog deal. i dont send nudy photos so what are they going to find. encrypted software in social media will aid terrorists, so governments may force there to be a back door in future. have an indentdent judiaciary decide if any access to an individual's social media is warranted

https://www.thedailybeast.com/chinese-police-are-spying-on-uighurson-american-soil

spying, hacking, but blackmail for documents, that puts this shit up to a whole new level.

To make the comparison, here's how privacy in the west works

PEN Registers are an electronic device used on phones that record information concerning outgoing and incoming calls and texts.  Western authorities need not have any physical contact with your cell phone to enact a PEN Register on it.  When a PEN Register is active on your phone it allows Amerikan police to view your text messages, GPS Location, and Calls (both incoming and outgoing) in real time (ie: as they are being sent/received).  Pen Registers also give western authorities access to any past records tied to your phone.  You can view these specific Penal Codes (Article 705, and2703) which are referenced throughout our paperwork (Pages are pulled from multiple Affidavits).

First, how do they get you phone number? This is simple. 1) You were arrested with your phone and they wrote down it’s information. 2) Someone else is arrested with their phone and have you saved as a contact, which depending on your contact with police could interest them. 3) Someone tells them your number, or you have emails exchanging your number with others.  Even if none of the things we just mentioned happened, if you are paying for your phone with a debit or credit card, western authorities have the legal right to subpoena your records.  Western authorities can contact your phone providers, who are legally required to provide them with any information they request.  With this information they catalog phones calls and patterns.  Consequently, they can arguably match your call patterns from a new “safe” account to calls on old registered account.

Above is the first page of an Affidavit, which is submitted to a a western judge by a representative of the state.  It lays out what authorities are asking for in reference to the specific search warrant and why it is critical to their case.  It shows that with PEN Registers, authorities are able to retrieve all caller information (both incoming and outgoing calls).  This means that if there is a PEN Register on your phone, it is going to reveal who is calling you, from where, and at what time.  So in addition to your phone building cases on yourself, it can also be used to build cases on your friends and associates.

The piece of paperwork above shows that at point (15.) changing a number on an existing phone account is not enough to protect your self from a existing PEN Register. To get around this investigative tactic you must use a phone that is not registered to your name, and not paid for (initially or monthly) with credit or debit cards.  In addition to this, you must make sure that your phone is not calling other people’s phones who have these active PEN Registers.  If you are exchanging texts with a friend or family member who identifies you or themselves in a text and PEN registers are present, you should probably consider throwing your phone off of a highway overpass so you can see how pretty it looks as the cars below smash it into itty bitty pieces.  Because really, that’s all it’s good for at that point.

This page above mentions cell sites, which is how western authorities effectively tie you to a specific location at a specific time using Geolocation and Angle of Arrival measurements.  You can click on the links for more information, but basically what it all means is that authorities are able to pinpoint your exact location at the time a phone call/text was made or received based on the speed at which the signals bounce off of cell towers in the area. Calls to 911 are traced the same way.

Above indicates that audio phone taps were not present.  Audio phone taps are considered invasive by the some.  However, in post 9/11 times, there is really no one set legal standard for what a Judge will allow. The coruption, and lack of oversight opens the system up to abuse, as mentioned by Edward J̶u̶d̶e̶n̶ Snowden.
Note: The information included in this post pertains to a vandalism case, indicating that western authorities will exercise their surveilance for trivial matters. If they're willing to go this far for a vandalism case, imagine how hard they will come down on you for other things

https://theintercept.com/2018/09/14/google-china-prototype-links-searches-to-phone-numbers/

Every search linked to your phone number which we control also. Thanks in advance human slave for your attention to this matter to avoid persecution.