Private Investigator Portal

Source: Tim Lohman, Computerworld

Identity theft rings have set their sights on the people who are unemployed and looking for work. Here's how to ensure you don't end up a victim.

As unemployment has increased, so too has the number of job search scams identity theft rings are perpetrating against desperate job seekers.

"We have seen a large proliferation of these scams over the past six to nine months because of the employment situation," says Lyn Chitow Oaks, chief marketing officer of TrustedID, which provides identity-theft protection services to individuals, families and businesses.

She notes that identity thieves are targeting job seekers because they're vulnerable and willing to share personal information as part of the job search process.

Two types of job search scams are most common, according to Oaks. One is a phishing scam, where identity theft perpetrators e-mail would-be victims to tell them about potential jobs and opportunities to make extra money. The e-mails direct recipients to websites that identity thieves have created specifically for gathering personal information, just as if it were a job application, says Oaks.

These fake applications request all the information job seekers would expect to provide, such as their name, address and phone number, as well as for information they may not expect to offer so early in the process, she adds, such as their Social Security number, permission to conduct a background check and bank account information.

"They tell you they need your bank account information so they can make sure your check can be direct deposited," she says, adding that they'll sometimes go so far as to say that they'll place money in your account and then remove it just to make sure it works.

"By allowing them to place money in your account and remove it, you let your bank know that this 'employer' can take money out of your account, and that's how they wipe out people's bank accounts," says Oaks. Never mind the fact that you'll never receive any information about any job from one of these e-mails.

Oaks adds that the identity thieves buy e-mail addresses from legitimate businesses who don't realize they're selling people's information to the Internet black market.

In the second scam, identity thieves pose as employers on legitimate job search sites. They post a generic job that would appeal to a large number of people, Oaks says, and in the course of talking to applicants, they ask for personal information.

"There are identity thieves all over valid and existing job search websites who are posing as employers," she says.

How to Protect Yourself

• Oaks' advice to job seekers is simple: Be wary of the information you're sharing and at which point in the hiring process you're sharing it. Here are six specific tips:
• Never share your bank account information up front. Legitimate employers don't need to access your bank account until you become an employee, says Oaks. If they ask for it as part of the application process, it's a warning sign that this "employer" may be up to no good.
• Never share your Social Security number up front. Legitimate employers will ask for your Social Security number only when they're serious about making a job offer (e.g., after they've interviewed you) and need to conduct a background check, or after you've accepted their offer and they need your Social Security number for tax purposes, says Oaks. Identity thieves will find sneaky ways to ask for your Social Security number up front. Don't fall for their ploys.
• Never agree to a background check up front. "Until you know you're a candidate for a position, it's not necessary for an employer to do a background check," says Oaks, adding that the only exception may be the government. "They need your Social Security number to complete a background check," she says, "and if you give them the opportunity to do that, they'll learn all kinds of personal information."
• Research potential employers. If you're unsure whether a potential employer you've found on a job search site is legitimate, Oaks says to find out whether the business has a physical address and to check with the Better Business Bureau in the state where the business is allegedly located to make sure they're licensed.
• Consider sharing less information on your resume. Many people include their phone numbers and mailing addresses on their resumes, and indeed, employers like to know job applicants' area codes and Zip codes because they sometimes screen candidates based on that information. But if you're wary of identity theft, you may want to include only an e-mail address, at least during initial stages with prospective employers, says Oaks. She also recommends creating a unique e-mail address for your job search. "If employers are interested in you," she says, "they'll contact you."
• Opt out. When you sign up for e-mail newsletters and offers from legitimate businesses, opt out of receiving offers from their third-party business partners. That can cut down on the amount of spam e-mail you receive and decrease the chances of your personal information ending up on the black market.

Copyright Computerworld

 

Our thanks again go to Warren Mallard of Lyonswood Group for his efforts to stop the illegal use of listening devices and tracking devices. We fully support his efforts and we encourage anyone with any information about the cowboys who sell, promote and use these electronic gadgets to contact us with any information.

It is against the law, so don't be fooled by the cheaters' language. These are cunning operators and they will lead you into deep water.

Michael, I write to you regarding the attached letter received from the Minister For Police in response to my representations. What precipitated my approach to the Minister was the obvious and brazen advertising by some Australian investigators and international companies regarding tracking and listening devices despite legislation being in place to prevent the advertising and use of these devices (For example, Surveillance Devices Act NSW and the Federal Telecommunications Interceptions Act).

I am aware of the person referred to in the letter and her predicament that was brought about through her involvement with an industry member. Today I received yet further advice of another tracking device being found on a vehicle and further police involvement. I am unable to comment further on the matter referred to in the ministers letter as this matter is before the court, suffice to say she sought my counsel regarding her predicament.

These are criminal offences. Anyone daring to continue this practice should prepare themselves for serious consequences.

If any industry members know of investigators advertising, selling, promoting or using these devices I would be interested to hear from them. If an investigators contractual employer insists upon the contract investigator using these devices to undertake investigations on behalf of the principal contractor or to purchase these devices from the principal contractor to use or obtain contractual work then they should consider the inherent risks they are taking in breaking existing laws.

VIEW THE LETTER (PDF)»

 

I've come across an article in The New Yorker the other day that had quite a shattering impact on me and which is compelling because it deals with investigators, investigating and an innocent man killed by the American justice system.

The article portrays the fallacies and fallibility of the death penalty, but more significantly it drives home the serious possibility that you and I might at times have been too convinced of our investigative expertise and in the process have caused great harm to one who was innocent.

This is important reading for any investigator, especially arson investigators. Take the time to read it, you'll be the wiser for it.

[ CLICK THIS TO SEE THE ARTICLE ]

Michael Hessenthaler

 

This comprehensive resource is kindly provided by a friend of this website, Wayne Carney of SPECIAL OPERATIONS GROUP AUSTRALIA. Wayne is an old hand at private investigations, security and training and we thank him for assisting established and new private investigators and also investigation students.

Covered in this resource:

• Purpose of notes
• Formation of notes
• When to make notes contemporaneously
  (EVIDENCE ACT 1995 - SECT 72)
• Content of notes
• Accuracy
• Strategy for recording notes
• Digital or electronic recording
• Corrections and alterations
• Preseving notes
• Collaboration in making notes

EACH OF THESE LINKS OPEN IN A NEW WINDOW

 

OK, so you figure this is just the right stuff for you, huh? You simply have to know what your partner's up to, so what's a little risk!

There are several PI agents in Australia trading under well known business names selling special software that enables a mobile phone to become a listening device and a tracking device. They know fully well for what purpose people will use it. That's why they have mile long disclaimers, albeit they don't hold much water. They give you a hand every step of the way on how to use it and provide you the facility to "read" the transmissions.

I say don't let criminal cowboy PI agents lead you into dumb actions.

You won't get caught? You wish!

First of all, some of the handful of PI agents flogging this illegal software and encouraging people to use it by implication, or are directly involved in using it on behalf of clients, are currently under investigation by federal and state police. If you get caught in the same net, you won't feel too comfy. And don't kid yourself that the agent will protect your privacy. These guys are crims without scruples.

Don't believe me? Did you know that what they are selling you for big dollars can be purchased elsewhere on the internet for one tenth of the price? Illegal, nevertheless.

Yes, these cowboy PI crims like to make 1000% + profits.

And as soon as police will lean on them, they will squeal like stuck pigs. Cowards squealing like stuck pigs. They talk tough, but don't be fooled, they are miserly little scum with deep personality problems and complicated personal life issues.

The person who owns the mobile phone which you "infected" might not be quite as dumb as you think. He/she gets their monthly bill which includes internet access. And they will notice that suddenly their bills have excess data charges. This is because the special tracking and listening software uses an internet connection to keep a central server notified continuosly. Mountains of data transfer.

What do you think they will do with a phone bill that's suddenly double the usual amount? Complain to their network provider. And the network provider will show them logs where the excess data has been going. Great way to track you this time!!

If you are ignorant and stupid enough to buy and use this software from the known PI crims, then I will do my utmost to expose you and have the law come right down on you.

Michael Hessenthaler.

 

QUICK CHECK IF YOUR PHONE IS INFECTED

Three simple steps + one additional step:

• Check your phone bill. If your data transfer charges have shot up and you know you haven't been using the phone excessively, you could be infected
• Do you hear that typical electronic buzzing when near a speaker or in the car when the radio is on? You know that sound of feeback when you use the phone. Not the pulsating sound, but that constant even speaker feedback. If you hear the feedback but are not on the phone, it means it is transmitting
• Phone is warm. You know that when you use the mobile it starts to get warm. Hang up and it cools down. If the phone is frequently warm although not being used, it's possibly because it is busy transmitting your location or monitoring your room conversation.
• Internet logs - if you challenge your phone company about excess usage charges for intenet data, ask them for logs to prove it has actually been exceeded. The logs will show the IPs and machine names where the phone has been connecting to upload that mountain of data

 

Surveillance Self-Defense

Given the proliferation of powers by government agencies (police amongst them) to access your computer, your information, your phone and mobile phone calls and movements, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has created the Surveillance Self-Defense site to educate the public about the law and technology of government surveillance in the United States, providing the information and tools necessary to evaluate the threat of surveillance and take appropriate steps to defend against it.

Much if not all of the seriously important information the EFF has provided on their new site applies to people in Australia as, arguably, Australian laws give government agencies even greater capability to access your life and invade your privacy.

Surveillance Self-Defense exists to answer two main questions:

• What can the government legally do to spy on your computer data and communications? (and the Australian agencies have very much similar powers - note article above relating to NSW police powers expansion)
  
  
• And what can you legally do (or, technically do) to protect yourself against such spying?

You might be surprised to learn just how quick and easy it is to break into your computer even if you use passwords and whole disc encryption. And short of detonating a 100kg bomb under it at the crucial moment, there's almost nothing you can do to protect your system.

 

Thank you Warren Mallard - Lyonswood Investigations & Forensic Group for this article.

Tracking Spy Gadgets - Do they have any real benefit?

The short answer is, NOT MUCH BENEFIT AT ALL AND THE USE OF THESE DEVICES WILL MORE THAN LIKELY GET YOU INTO MORE TROUBLE THAN YOU COUNTED UPON.

Today we are surrounded by advancing technology and some who operate and advertise their services in the Private investigation industry believe that these devices are a substitute for a thorough well-planned and well - executed investigation when the evidence available suggests they are not. Further more, in almost all applications of these devices, the actions of  these private investigators are unlawful and exposes them and their clients to the risk of serious criminal charges. In almost all cases the evidence gathered by these devices in not admissible in courts of law and if the target of the investigation discovers one of the illegally used devices then the chances are the investigator and their client will be the subject of criminal charges and claims by the victim for compensation.

The end results can be devastating.

The State Police Forces and Federal Police are currently investigating the illegal advertising and use of these devices with the view to laying criminal charges against some private investigators and changing the legislation when it comes to the existing Acts Of Parliament to strengthen our already much valued rights to privacy.

None of these gimmicks / devices can replace the value of a well-constructed and well-executed investigation. They wont tell you that two people slept together or kissed and cuddled. They wont necessarily tell you the exact location of the people under investigation either. They wont tell you the identity of the other person nor that person's marital status etc. They will just leave many questions unanswered and chances are you will require further traditional and accepted investigation to gather evidence lawfully. Most likely the cost of what you have just expended on these gimmicks will be wasted.

Ask yourself this,  "Is it worth the risk?"  Would I  like someone to place a listening device or text message logger on my  mobile phone? Would I  like someone to place a tracking device on my vehicle?  Would I  like someone to monitor my every key stroke on my  computer? To all of these questions the answer is obviously NO!

G.P.S. TRACKING DEVICES

These devices when used lawfully can be a limited aid to investigation particularly in criminal matters where the court has granted an authority to use them. They can be used to track goods and criminal suspects and are of value in being able to provide a map of the route of the person or goods and approximately where these persons and goods end up. I say approximately because they are still not pin point accurate and if a person attends an underground car park or a large complex of units, the tracking device will still not tell you exactly which unit they are in nor the exact location of the vehicle within that underground car park. To use them lawfully you require an authority from a court of law and these are only issued in extreme cases where illegal activities are strongly suspected and never in infidelity matters.

If a G.P.S. tracking device is used on a vehicle in a matrimonial infidelity matter then there are many complications that will most probably lead to criminal offences being committed by the person who places the tracking device on that vehicle. If another person instructed that investigator to place the device onto a vehicle then that person is also liable.  If the person wanting the person/vehicle tracked does not 100% own that vehicle then the tracking device cannot be lawfully placed as there will clearly be a trespass and an invasion of privacy. You need the permission of all of the owners and drivers of that vehicle before the tracking device can be placed.

TEXT MESSAGE AND TELEPHONE BUGS

No person, not even a Private Investigator can place a listening device or text message logger onto a telephone at all. Only  police and then only when authorised by a court order can they place these devices onto phones. You might own your phone but you do not own the telephone network over which these conversations / text messages take place. The Federal Government owns 51% of this network and thus the Federal Telecommunications Interceptions Act comes into play. This act sets out very clearly that persons found guilty of illegally possessing a device of this type and placing bugs or text message loggers on telephones including mobile phones will be dealt with very harshly indeed and may be sentenced to a gaol term.

COMPUTER KEY STROKE LOGGERS

These cyber devices can be sent to the victim person either remotely via e-mail or via unlawful hacking or placed onto the computer physically. They enable the user to capture every key stroke entered into the computer and with the use of sophisticated forensic software and a well trained technician a complete history of all of that computers data in and out can be copied and retained. Any further communications can be sent to another e-mail address (usually the address of the person who placed the logging device) and thus timely data can be received as and when it happens.

These devices like all the other devices cannot be used without a lawful purpose and without a court order or the permission of the person who owns the computer. Thus in infidelity matters if you represent the wife and the computer in the house is jointly owned by the wife and the husband or perhaps just by the husband then you cannot use these devices lawfully. Even if the computer in this case is totally owned by the wife it is still a very grey area in terms of the obligations of the person having the device placed to notify all of the computer users.

SUMMARY

Can  a client  trust an investigator that breaks the law to gather your evidence? Where would this investigator draw the line? Would this investigator perhaps sell the details of my investigation to a newspaper or even to the person of interest? Once a private investigator crosses this line there is no turning back. A client cannot trust these unscrupulous and stupid private investigators because they will eventually bring the client down and any evidence gathered by them will be useless.  We have recently seen a  Sydney private investigator charged and convicted of criminal offences for his stupid, selfish actions and the investigation industry can ill afford more of these clowns bringing down our hard earned and recovering good reputation.

Warren Mallard - Managing Director
Lyonswood Investigations & Forensic Group
204 Lyons Road, Drummoyne NSW 2047
http://www.investigators.net.au
+61 (0) 2 9819-6833   F +61 (0) 2 9819-6300
DX 21007 Drummoyne

 

Do you want these kinds of special services?

Have you been offered these kinds of services?

We want to hear from you!

Because we are keen to dob in the private investigators who either say they can do it, or do it.

Make no mistake about it, it's a crime.

We get regular emails here at investigateway.com.au from people who were 'clients' of sneaky thieving PIs, who were charged high fees (AKA bribes) to commit these criminal offences.

There are two kinds of PIs offering these services:

1. the crims who do it

2. the cheats that say they can do it, but can't. Yet they will take your money and come back to you with excuses or false information. Who is to know it's the truth? How do you test it? It's easy for them to say "no, no criminal record" and pocket your money.

We want to know about your experiences. We want the names and details of these crooks, fortunately a small minority, who give the honest professional investigators a bad name. Some of these crooks are quite well known, most are smart-assed small time crooks who are not capable of doing any better.

Tell us what you can and we will dob them to the authorities. If the service was offered or dealt with in emails, then we need not only the copy of the email, but also the email header data. If it's hard copy, then send it to us. Or just tell us what you can.

Don't allow yourself to be ripped off. A thief is a thief, no matter how supposedly 'helpful' he is.

MH. ed.

 

Quiz for Organisations:

This quiz will test your knowledge of the National Privacy Principles (NPPs). The NPPs form the law that applies to many private sector organisations. For more information about the NPPs, please go to: http://www.privacy.gov.au/publications/npps01.html

Question 1:

Generally, if an organisation holds personal information about an individual, it must provide the individual with access to the information on request. Which of the following is an exception to that rule?

(a) where providing access would have an unreasonable impact on the privacy of other individuals

(b) where providing access would excessively irritate the administration staff

(c) where providing access would be detrimental to the reputation of the organisation

(d) where the individual has not paid in full for goods or services already rendered, the organisation can deny the requesting individual access to any personal information held by the organisation

Question 2:

Generally, an organisation must not use or disclose personal information about an individual for a purpose other than the primary purpose of collection. Which one of the following is not an exception to that rule:

(a) the individual has consented to the use or disclosure

(b) the use or disclosure is required or authorised by or under law

(c) another organisation asks for the information for a marketing campaign (and this was not the purpose for which the information was collected)

(d) the organisation reasonably believes that the use or disclosure is necessary to lessen or prevent a serious and imminent threat to an individual´s life, health or safety

Question 3:

Generally, an organisation must set out in a document clearly expressed policies on its handling of personal information. Which of the following is not a responsibility regarding the privacy policy of an organisation?

(a) the organisation must make the document available to anyone who asks for it

(b) when someone asks, the organisation should take reasonable steps to let the person know what sort of personal information it holds and for what purpose

(c) when someone asks, the organisation must take reasonable steps to let the person know how it uses and discloses personal information

(d) the organisation must have a designated contact who is responsible for the proper management of privacy within the organisation

Question 4:

Private organisations that have an annual turnover of $3 million or less are generally exempt from the Privacy Act. Which of the following is not an exception to that rule?

(a) organisations that trade in personal information (e.g buying or selling a mailing list)

(b) organisations that are related to a larger business (a related body corporate)

(c) a contractor that provides services under a Commonwealth contract

(d) your local fish and chip shop

Question 5:

The Privacy Commissioner may decline to investigate a complaint if the complainant has not given the respondent an adequate opportunity to deal with the complaint. How long is generally considered ‘an adequate opportunity´ for an organisation to deal with the complaint?

(a) 7 days

(b) 30 days

(c) 60 days

(d) 90 days

Question 6:

Generally, when an organisation collects personal information about an individual, it must make the individual aware of a number of things. Which of the following must an organisation make individuals aware of?

(a) the identity of the organisation and how to contact it

(b) the fact that the individual is able to gain access to the information

(c) the purposes for which the information is collected

(d) all of the above

Question 7:

An organisation in Australia may transfer personal information about an individual to someone who is in a foreign country only under certain conditions. Which of the following is a condition?

(a) the organisation reasonably believes that the recipient of the information is subject to a regime that is substantially similar to the National Privacy Principles

(b) the organisation requires the transfer of the information to enhance business efficacy

(c) the individual to which the information relates to would reasonably expect the information to be passed onto a foreign country

(d) the organisation is required by the law of a foreign jurisdiction to disclose the information
Question 8: In total, how many Privacy Commissioner´s have there been in Australia?

(a) 1
(b) 4
(c) 6
(d) 9

 

Question 9:

True or False, if an employee of an organisation breaches the Privacy Act, it is the employee that must bear personal responsibility for the breach not the organisation as a whole?

Question 10:

Does your organisation have a privacy policy?

(a) yes
(b) no

ANSWERS

1: (a) where providing access would have an unreasonable impact on the privacy of other individuals
All the others are not valid reasons for denying access to personal information.

2: (c) another organisation asks for the information for a marketing campaign (and this was not the purpose for which the information was collected).

All the others are valid reasons for using or disclosing personal information about an individual for a purpose other than the primary purpose of collection.

3: (d) the organisation must have a designated contact who is responsible for the proper management of privacy within the organisation. However, the Office encourages organisations to have an appropriate contact (sometimes called a Privacy Contact Officer or Chief Privacy Officer) who is willing and able to handle privacy enquiries and complaints and who can ensure that the NPPs are properly implemented within the organisation.

4: (d) your local fish and chip shop
As long as the fish and chip ship is a small business earning $3 million or less, is not related to a larger business and does not trade in personal information.

5: (b) 30 days.
If a privacy complaint is lodged against your organisation, we consider 30 days to deal with or start dealing with the matter to be reasonable. In some circumstances, 30 days may be considered too long and it might be more appropriate to deal with the complaint more promptly.

6: (d) all of the above.
Apart from the those listed above, organisations must also take reasonable steps to ensure the individual it has collected information about is aware of: the organisations to which the organisation usually discloses information of that kind, any law that requires the particular information to be collected and the main consequences (if any) for the individual if all or part of the information is not provided.

7: (a) the organisation reasonably believes that the recipient of the information is subject to a regime that is substantially similar to the National Privacy Principles. The others are not valid reasons under the Privacy Act.

8: (b) 4.
The four Commissioners have been:
Judge Kevin O´Connor AM (1989 – 1996)
Moira Scollay (1996 – 1999)
Malcolm Crompton (1999 – 2004)
Karen Curtis (2004 – )

9: False. Under the Privacy Act, individuals cannot be found to interfere with the privacy of another individual because the Privacy Act only provides obligations on organisations and Australian and ACT Government agencies. However, organisations may be able to take action against employees who are responsible for the organisation breaching the Privacy Act.

10: If you answered no, then it would be a good idea to draft one. Many organisations are under an obligation to set out in a document clearly expressed policies on its management of personal information. If you would like to know more about what to include in a privacy policy, see our website www.privacy.gov.au or contact our Enquiries Line on 1300 363 992.

Rating scale

Score:

9-10 Privacy guru
7-8 Very privacy aware
6-7 Moderately privacy aware
4-5 Not so privacy aware
0-3 You may like to contact our Privacy Enquiries line on 1300 363 992 or write to privacy@privacy.gov.au for information about privacy.

Copyright - Privacy Commissioner