6月3日、韓国は大統領選挙が行われるけど、尹錫悦の戒厳令を支持した保守与党の国民の力が4人の予備選候補を選出。主流派の金文洙、洪準杓は予想通りだけど、意外だったのは、弾劾に賛成した造反派の安哲秀と韓東勲が候補に選出されたこと。つまり保守層にはそれなりに尹錫悦の戒厳令・弾劾に批判的な勢力があるということで、正式な候補に選出される可能性は低いとはいえ、保守層の投票行動が面白くなる。（安田幸弘）

i-PRO株式会社が提供する複数のi-PRO設定ツールには、ハードコードされた暗号鍵の使用の脆弱性が存在します。

入管法改悪反対を掲げる市民有志は今週末26日午後7時から、東京・新宿でスタンディングアクション「＃入管法改悪反対アクション＠新宿南口」を実施する予定だ。（藤ヶ谷魁）

2019年12月に、中国武漢で発生した重症肺炎が起源とされる「新型コロナウイルス」による感染症（Covid-19と称される）パンデミック騒動は、世界中に混乱を引き起こした。その影響は、人類始まって以来の大騒動と言って良いであろう。そのウイルスはどこから発生したのか。諸説あるなかで、最近有力視されるようになってきているものがある。

電気通信紛争処理委員会（第250回）

電気通信紛争処理委員会の令和6年度年次報告

電波監理審議会　有効利用評価部会(第45回)会議資料

利用者情報に関するワーキンググループ（第23回）

オンラインカジノに係るアクセス抑止の在り方に関する検討会（第1回）

情報通信審議会　情報通信技術分科会　電波有効利用委員会　電波環境分野の在り方検討作業班（第2回）

APC welcomes this landmark resolution adopted by consensus at the 58th session of the Human Rights Council. The resolution addresses many of the concerns that APC and our partners have been…

Ola Bini was first detained in Quito’s airport six years ago, called a “Russian hacker,” and accused of “alleged participation in the crime of assault on the integrity of computer systems.” It wouldn't take long for Ecuadorean authorities to find out that he was Swedish and an internationally respected free software developer and computer expert. 

Lacking evidence, authorities rapidly changed the criminal offense underpinning the accusation against Bini and struggled to build a case based on a mere image that shows no wrongdoing. Yet, Bini remained arbitrarily detained for 70 days in 2019 and outrageously remains under criminal prosecution.

This week, the Observation Mission monitoring Ola Bini’s case is again calling out the prosecution’s inaccuracies and abuses that weaponize misunderstandings about computer security, undermining both Bini’s rights and digital security more broadly. The Observation Mission is comprised of digital and human rights organizations, including EFF. Specifically, we highlight how Ecuadorean law enforcement authorities have tried to associate the use of Tor, a crucial privacy protection tool, with inherently suspicious activity. 

Following a RightsCon 2025 session about the flaws and risks of such an interpretation, we are releasing this week a technical statement (see below) pointing out why Ecuadorean courts must reaffirm Bini’s innocence and repudiate misconceptions about technology and technical knowledge that only disguise the prosecutor’s lack of evidence supporting the accusations against Bini. 

Let’s not forget that Bini was unanimously acquitted in early 2023. Nonetheless, the Prosecutor’s Office appealed and the majority of the appeals court considered him guilty of attempted unauthorized access of a telecommunications system. The reasoning leading to this conclusion has many problems, including mixing the concepts of private and public IP addresses and disregarding key elements of the acquittal sentence.  

The ruling also refers to the use of Tor. Among other issues, the prosecution argued that Tor is not a tool known by any person except for technical experts since its purpose is to hide your identity on the internet while leaving no trace you're using it. As we stressed at RightsCon, this argument turns the use of a privacy-protective, security-enhancing technology into an indication of suspicious criminal activity, which is a dangerous extrapolation of the “nothing-to-hide argument.” 

The prosecutor’s logic, which the majority appeal ruling endorses, is if you’re keeping your online activities private it’s because you’re most likely doing something wrong, instead of we all have privacy rights, so we are entitled to use technologies that ensure privacy and security by default. 

Backing such an understanding in a court ruling sets an extremely worrying precedent for privacy and security online. The use of Tor must not be up for grabs when a prosecutor lacks actual evidence to sustain a criminal case.

Bini’s defense has appealed the unfounded conviction. We remain vigilant, hoping that the Ecuadorean judicial system will correct the course as per basic tenets of the right to a fair trial, recognizing the weakness of the case rather than surrendering to pressure and prejudice. It's past time for justice to prevail in this case. Six years of a lingering flimsy prosecution coupled with the undue restriction of Bini’s fundamental rights is already far too long.

Read the English translation of the statement below (see here the original one in Spanish):

TECHNICAL STATEMENT
Ola Bini’s innocence must be reaffirmed 

In the context of RightsCon Taipei 2025, the Observation Mission of the Ola Bini case and the Tor Project organized a virtual session to analyze the legal proceedings against the digital security expert in Ecuador and to discuss to what extent and with what implications the use of the Tor digital tool is criminalized1. In that session, which included organizations and speakers from civil society from different countries, we reached the following conclusions and technical consensuses: 

1. The criminal case against Bini was initiated by political motivations and actors and has been marked by dozens of irregularities and illegalities that undermine its legal legitimacy and technical viability. Rather than a criminal case, this is a persecution. 
2. The way the elements of conviction of the case were established sets a dangerous precedent for the protection of digital rights and expert knowledge in the digital realm in Ecuador and the region. 
3. The construction of the case and the elements presented as evidence by the Ecuadorian Attorney General’s Office (EAG) are riddled with serious procedural distortions and/or significant technical errors2. 
4. Furthermore, to substantiate the crime supposedly under investigation, the EAG has not even required a digital forensic examination that demonstrate whether any kind of system (be it computer, telematic, or telecommunications) was accessed without authorization. 
5. The reasoning used by the Appeals Court to justify its guilty verdict lacks sufficient elements to prove that Ola Bini committed the alleged crime. This not only violates the rights of the digital expert but also creates precedents of arbitrariness that are dangerous for the rule of law3. 
6. More specifically, because of the conviction, part of the Ecuadorian judiciary is creating a concerning precedent for the exercise of the rights to online security and privacy, by holding that the mere use of the Tor tool is sufficient indication of the commission of a criminal act. 
7. Furthermore, contrary to the global trend that should prevail, this ruling could even inspire courts to criminalize the use of other digital tools used for the defense of human rights online, such as VPNs, which are particularly useful for key actors—like journalists, human rights defenders, academics, and others—in authoritarian political contexts. 
8. Around the world, millions of people, including state security agencies, use Tor to carry out their activities. In this context, although the use of Tor is not the central focus of analysis in the present case, the current conviction—part of a politically motivated process lacking technical grounding—constitutes a judicial interpretation that could negatively impact the exercise of the aforementioned rights. 

For these reasons, and six years after the beginning of Ola Bini’s criminal case, the undersigned civil society organizations call on the relevant Ecuadorian judicial authorities to reaffirm Bini’s presumption of innocence at the appropriate procedural stage, as was the first instance ruling demonstrated.

The Observation Mission will continue monitoring the development of the case until its conclusion, to ensure compliance with due process guarantees and to raise awareness of the case’s implications for the protection of digital rights.

1. RightsCon is the leading global summit on human rights in the digital age, organized by Access Now. ↩

2. See https://www.accessnow.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Informe-final-Caso-Ola-Bini.pdf ↩

3. The Tribunal is composed of Maritza Romero, Fabián Fabara and Narcisa Pacheco. The majority decision is from Fabara and Pacheco. ↩

　社会学者の開沼博氏が23年OurPlanet-TVの報道に対し500万円の損害賠償を求める裁判を起こした。２年間の審理を経て、6月6日(金)１４時から東京地裁４１５号法廷で判決が言い渡される。論点は２つ。１つは、提訴会見の際に、原告側弁護士が口にした言葉を動画で配信したり、記事にしたりしたメディアもまた名誉毀損となるのかという点。もう１つは、裁判で原告が敗訴すると、提訴報道もまた違法となるのかという点だ。　こうしたことが認められれば、大きな萎縮効果を生み、自由で独立した報道..

In this interview, Marcela Guerra - a member of the Portal Sem Porteiras community network in Brazil - tells us more about the challenge of tackling issues such as cybersecurity within the school…

　昨年３月８日号のこのコラムで「テレビに声を上げよう」を書いた。「テレビ輝け！市民ネットワーク」の株主提案の知らせであった。この株主提案は今年も実施する。まだ文案は確定していないが、およそ５項目の定款追加を提案する予定だ […]

　国連が３月８日を国際女性デーと決定して50年に当たる今年、ジェンダー平等に関するさまざまなイベントが各地で行なわれた。 　特に課題とされているのは政治分野の女性が少ないことだが、「クオータ制を推進する会（Ｑの会）」は同 […]