Search

1000 results for “commons_protocol”

Bill Statler @[email protected] · 2024-03-04 · 02:30 UTC
In brief:

...this wasn’t a malicious scraper trying to crawl the network and make money off of people’s posts. It was some guy’s hobby project to build a service similar to micro.blog. ...

Sascha was building a free ActivityPub library for his project. While he managed to get the basic concepts down, there were still a lot of missing pieces that are essential for participating in the modern Fediverse. Unfortunately, a lot of those resources are not readily available to anyone. ...

...community members decided to have a little bit of extra fun, attempting to “make the crawler crash“, send angry emails to the service operator, and more. After some study of how the site worked, one person had the malicious idea to send a remote post containing child pornography to the site, before getting someone else to report Content Nation for Child Sexual Abuse Material. ...

Sascha’s life could have been turned upside down for absolutely nothing. Say what you will about how his website looked, or how his platform functioned: none of these things warranted such a disgusting level of abuse. Somebody basically tried to send a fledgling platform developer to prison, because they didn’t like what he was doing. ...

Look. I know this is not a majority of Mastodon users. But this is evil stuff. This isn't what the Fediverse is for.

In politics, a lot has been said about the results of tolerating intolerance. Well, the same principles apply to social networking.

And I'm going to point out again, just in case any Mastodon users are actually listening to me, that you have MANY Fediverse options besides Mastodon. If that tool is not serving your needs, and if the culture is becoming polluted, please look at the alternatives.

[email protected] wrote the following post Sat, 02 Mar 2024 16:19:00 -0800 Yesterday, Mastodon was abuzz regarding a strange new scraper that seemed to be pulling people’s profiles and content streams into a platform designed around monetization. Dubbed Content Nation, the site’s combination of strange design, stock images, and focus on getting paid for posts raised more than a few eyebrows. Indeed, the site visually resembles something akin to a domain parking page, with an eye-watering visual layout and strange mix of posts that don’t seem to fit anywhere.
- Holy stock art, Batman!
- I can’t make heads or tails of this.
Some long-standing admins poked and prodded at it, before declaring that Content Nation was, indeed, an effort to scrape Fediverse content for profit. It shared Unlisted posts in search results, seemingly rejected blocks, and deleted materials seemed to reappear on the website nearly instantly. All a person needed to do to verify it was put in their own user handle, and see their posts and profile get scraped out of nowhere.

A lot of people were angry, and readily pulled out the torches and pitchforks. The sad truth, though, was that this wasn’t a malicious scraper trying to crawl the network and make money off of people’s posts. It was some guy’s hobby project to build a service similar to micro.blog.

What is Content Nation?

Content Nation is, essentially, a feed reader for a small publishing community that just happened to be experimenting with ActivityPub. It’s a project developed by Sascha Nitsch, a backend developer and management consultant from Germany. Sascha is a relative outsider to the Fediverse that heard about the network, loved the idea behind it, and tried to integrate his site into the network.

The site is, understandably, somewhat jarring in its appearance, because Sascha is primarily a backend developer, not a frontend designer. He was more interested in building out a robust list of features prior to doing any visual design work, because the platform was still taking shape. As a one-man operation, this kind of approach made the most sense to him.

“The site was and is free,” Sascha wrote, “no ads, no cookies nor tracking. I did not make any money with the federation; it’s a service for users on the platform. And it was never intended to be to make money with those content.”

How did the Fediverse React?

Several people came forward to point out to Sascha that his platform interoperates very, very poorly with Mastodon, and that Sascha did not do sufficient research prior to launching his service. Until recently, Content Nation didn’t properly make use of a User Agent in its request, so it was easy to mistake for a scraper.

Compounding things further, people didn’t realize that the site implemented Webfinger in its search function, allowing people to load remote content by putting in an address into a search field. People would go to Content Nation, search for themselves, and inadvertently kick off a fetch request, leading them to believe they had just been scraped. In reality, this is how 99% of Fediverse servers operate by default.

When users sent GDPR takedowns, Sascha would comply, but the system had nothing in place to block anything. Those same users were distraught to once again search for themselves, only to find their own data all over again.

The High Barrier of Entry for Fediverse Development

The shortcomings described above paint a picture: Sascha was building a free ActivityPub library for his project While he managed to get the basic concepts down, there were still a lot of missing pieces that are essential for participating in the modern Fediverse. Unfortunately, a lot of those resources are not readily available to anyone.

Here’s the thing: if you were to take the ActivityPub specification from the W3C, and implement it as specified, you’d end up with something that wouldn’t correctly talk to any service in use today. Mastodon, and platforms designed to talk to it, have a dozen or so behaviors that are not actually in the spec at all: Webfinger, SharedInbox, Privacy Scopes, and Opt-Out for Search are just a few of them.

Many of these things are almost completely undocumented, and can only be developed by lengthy conversations with people who already built those things. Even Mastodon’s own specs say very little. The majority of people dismissed Content Nation as simply being a malicious attempt to slurp up their public and private content for profit. Even when Sascha tried to defend himself, he was ridiculed and mocked.

From Bad to Worse

Aside from simply blocking the domain and moving on, community members decided to have a little bit of extra fun, attempting to “make the crawler crash“, send angry emails to the service operator, and more. After some study of how the site worked, one person had the malicious idea to send a remote post containing child pornography to the site, before getting someone else to report Content Nation for Child Sexual Abuse Material.

To be clear: someone searched a list of known illegal material, loaded that remote content onto Content Nation locally, and then put up a red flag for someone to file a report. Given the server’s jurisdiction being in Germany, this could have been catastrophic: Germany’s laws regarding CSAM stipulate a one-year prison term minimum for possession of this kind of material. Just look at the recent case of a teacher who found out that a pornographic video was circulating about one of her students. When she tried to turn in evidence to the police, she was arrested.
It’s a case that causes people to shake their heads: A teacher wanted to help a student whose intimate video was circulating at school and now has to answer in court for, among other things, distributing child pornography.

Following a complaint from the public prosecutor’s office, the Koblenz regional court overturned the decision of the Montabaur district court not to open main proceedings in this case. “The regional court, like the public prosecutor, considers the behavior of the accused to be criminal in principle,” said senior public prosecutor Thomas Büttinghaus. The educator is currently facing at least a year in prison – and with it the loss of her civil servant status.

Sascha’s life could have been turned upside down for absolutely nothing. Say what you will about how his website looked, or how his platform functioned: none of these things warranted such a disgusting level of abuse. Somebody basically tried to send a fledgling platform developer to prison, because they didn’t like what he was doing. A series of assumptions and misunderstandings escalated to this point.

Why is this Important?

Over the years, Mastodon’s user culture has become incredibly insular and hostile towards outsiders. Despite repeated claims of “People are just nicer here!” and “Everyone is just so welcoming!”, often those preaching about privacy and consent are the first to harass anyone doing something they don’t like. Reactions have extended to doxxing, death threats, DDoS attacks, and apparently, distribution of CSAM. Just the other week, Mastodon users were harassing a guy who built a protocol bridge that hadn’t even been enabled yet.

Neither of these things are first occurrences, either. People in the past have tried to build tooling for the Fediverse, from search engines to disposable account services for testing to indexes of verified accounts. People like Wil Wheaton were harassed off the network for their ignorance of nuances about who was on a given blocklist that they shared. Some Lemmy instsances have been flooded with CSAM as part of a community retaliation effort from other instances.

Mastodon’s user community have also long looked down their noses at other platforms such as Pleroma, due to a combination of platform rivalry, cultural clashes, personal squabbles, and an “us vs them” mentality. It wasn’t so long ago that simply using Pleroma was considered a valid reason for blocking someone on sight, because good people only used Mastodon.

Source: FediDB.org

Mastodon still makes up the majority of the Fediverse at this point, and acts as a defacto standard for ActivityPub. Many parts of the Mastodon community still threaten to block, doxx, or harass people simply because they expressed a thought or opinion that stands in contrast to what the hive mind demands.

Even Damon, at one point, has received death threats from total strangers for his perspective on FediPact and Threads that other people didn’t agree with. He’s told me on several occasions that the Fediverse doesn’t feel like it was made for people like him, and a good portion of it is due to Mastodon’s user culture.

Whatever this thing is, it’s not sustainable. A big aspect of Mastodon’s norms center around a type of Puritanical culture that half the time, isn’t even consistent with itself. We can’t advocate for a space and say that it’s so much better than everywhere else, when so many people are subjected to this.

The Aftermath

A report was filed with Content Nation’s host, Hetzner, due to the presence of CSAM being detected. However, Sascha’s platform was only set up to cache remote content for an hour prior to purging it. The best conclusion we can draw from this, at the moment, is that someone willingly set Content Nation up.

“I’m not sure it even was CSAM,” Sascha writes in a private chat, “I never saw the pictures, as they had already been deleted. The data was already removed from the cache, and the original server was down, so it wasn’t refreshed [on Content Nation].”

“My flat could have been raided, and I would not have an electronic device left to write this,” he added.

As of this writing, Content Nation has turned off all Fediverse integrations, and Sascha has been turned off of having anything to do with the network after having this experience. He has been effectively bullied off the network.

How can we avoid this happening again?

Throughout researching this article and situation, I think there are several things that really, really need to change for the better. The modern Fediverse operates involves a long list of internal knowledge that’s not really written down anywhere. No part of the ActivityPub spec or Mastodon talks about how to implement their special pieces, so that people writing new servers can be good actors.

As it stands today, no singular piece of Fediverse software includes instructions to load a “worst of the worst” blocklist when setting up an instance, or to put a Webfinger search form behind a login page. What seems like common sense to some people is literally a new concept to others.

Culturally, we need to accept that most people coming into the community for the first time are operating with a lack of prior knowledge. We can’t simply cross our arms and say “You should have known better”, and socially punish people, when in fact there was no way for them to learn about it.

https://wedistribute.org/2024/03/contentnation-mastodons-toxicity/

#CSAM #Harassment #TrustSafety
#csam #harassment #trustsafety
Bill Statler @[email protected] · 2024-03-04 · 02:30 UTC
In brief:

...this wasn’t a malicious scraper trying to crawl the network and make money off of people’s posts. It was some guy’s hobby project to build a service similar to micro.blog. ...

Sascha was building a free ActivityPub library for his project. While he managed to get the basic concepts down, there were still a lot of missing pieces that are essential for participating in the modern Fediverse. Unfortunately, a lot of those resources are not readily available to anyone. ...

...community members decided to have a little bit of extra fun, attempting to “make the crawler crash“, send angry emails to the service operator, and more. After some study of how the site worked, one person had the malicious idea to send a remote post containing child pornography to the site, before getting someone else to report Content Nation for Child Sexual Abuse Material. ...

Sascha’s life could have been turned upside down for absolutely nothing. Say what you will about how his website looked, or how his platform functioned: none of these things warranted such a disgusting level of abuse. Somebody basically tried to send a fledgling platform developer to prison, because they didn’t like what he was doing. ...

Look. I know this is not a majority of Mastodon users. But this is evil stuff. This isn't what the Fediverse is for.

In politics, a lot has been said about the results of tolerating intolerance. Well, the same principles apply to social networking.

And I'm going to point out again, just in case any Mastodon users are actually listening to me, that you have MANY Fediverse options besides Mastodon. If that tool is not serving your needs, and if the culture is becoming polluted, please look at the alternatives.

We Distribute wrote the following post Sat, 02 Mar 2024 16:19:00 -0800 Yesterday, Mastodon was abuzz regarding a strange new scraper that seemed to be pulling people’s profiles and content streams into a platform designed around monetization. Dubbed Content Nation, the site’s combination of strange design, stock images, and focus on getting paid for posts raised more than a few eyebrows. Indeed, the site visually resembles something akin to a domain parking page, with an eye-watering visual layout and strange mix of posts that don’t seem to fit anywhere.
- Holy stock art, Batman!
- I can’t make heads or tails of this.
Some long-standing admins poked and prodded at it, before declaring that Content Nation was, indeed, an effort to scrape Fediverse content for profit. It shared Unlisted posts in search results, seemingly rejected blocks, and deleted materials seemed to reappear on the website nearly instantly. All a person needed to do to verify it was put in their own user handle, and see their posts and profile get scraped out of nowhere.

A lot of people were angry, and readily pulled out the torches and pitchforks. The sad truth, though, was that this wasn’t a malicious scraper trying to crawl the network and make money off of people’s posts. It was some guy’s hobby project to build a service similar to micro.blog.

What is Content Nation?

Content Nation is, essentially, a feed reader for a small publishing community that just happened to be experimenting with ActivityPub. It’s a project developed by Sascha Nitsch, a backend developer and management consultant from Germany. Sascha is a relative outsider to the Fediverse that heard about the network, loved the idea behind it, and tried to integrate his site into the network.

The site is, understandably, somewhat jarring in its appearance, because Sascha is primarily a backend developer, not a frontend designer. He was more interested in building out a robust list of features prior to doing any visual design work, because the platform was still taking shape. As a one-man operation, this kind of approach made the most sense to him.

“The site was and is free,” Sascha wrote, “no ads, no cookies nor tracking. I did not make any money with the federation; it’s a service for users on the platform. And it was never intended to be to make money with those content.”

How did the Fediverse React?

Several people came forward to point out to Sascha that his platform interoperates very, very poorly with Mastodon, and that Sascha did not do sufficient research prior to launching his service. Until recently, Content Nation didn’t properly make use of a User Agent in its request, so it was easy to mistake for a scraper.

Compounding things further, people didn’t realize that the site implemented Webfinger in its search function, allowing people to load remote content by putting in an address into a search field. People would go to Content Nation, search for themselves, and inadvertently kick off a fetch request, leading them to believe they had just been scraped. In reality, this is how 99% of Fediverse servers operate by default.

When users sent GDPR takedowns, Sascha would comply, but the system had nothing in place to block anything. Those same users were distraught to once again search for themselves, only to find their own data all over again.

The High Barrier of Entry for Fediverse Development

The shortcomings described above paint a picture: Sascha was building a free ActivityPub library for his project While he managed to get the basic concepts down, there were still a lot of missing pieces that are essential for participating in the modern Fediverse. Unfortunately, a lot of those resources are not readily available to anyone.

Here’s the thing: if you were to take the ActivityPub specification from the W3C, and implement it as specified, you’d end up with something that wouldn’t correctly talk to any service in use today. Mastodon, and platforms designed to talk to it, have a dozen or so behaviors that are not actually in the spec at all: Webfinger, SharedInbox, Privacy Scopes, and Opt-Out for Search are just a few of them.

Many of these things are almost completely undocumented, and can only be developed by lengthy conversations with people who already built those things. Even Mastodon’s own specs say very little. The majority of people dismissed Content Nation as simply being a malicious attempt to slurp up their public and private content for profit. Even when Sascha tried to defend himself, he was ridiculed and mocked.

From Bad to Worse

Aside from simply blocking the domain and moving on, community members decided to have a little bit of extra fun, attempting to “make the crawler crash“, send angry emails to the service operator, and more. After some study of how the site worked, one person had the malicious idea to send a remote post containing child pornography to the site, before getting someone else to report Content Nation for Child Sexual Abuse Material.

To be clear: someone searched a list of known illegal material, loaded that remote content onto Content Nation locally, and then put up a red flag for someone to file a report. Given the server’s jurisdiction being in Germany, this could have been catastrophic: Germany’s laws regarding CSAM stipulate a one-year prison term minimum for possession of this kind of material. Just look at the recent case of a teacher who found out that a pornographic video was circulating about one of her students. When she tried to turn in evidence to the police, she was arrested.
It’s a case that causes people to shake their heads: A teacher wanted to help a student whose intimate video was circulating at school and now has to answer in court for, among other things, distributing child pornography.

Following a complaint from the public prosecutor’s office, the Koblenz regional court overturned the decision of the Montabaur district court not to open main proceedings in this case. “The regional court, like the public prosecutor, considers the behavior of the accused to be criminal in principle,” said senior public prosecutor Thomas Büttinghaus. The educator is currently facing at least a year in prison – and with it the loss of her civil servant status.

Sascha’s life could have been turned upside down for absolutely nothing. Say what you will about how his website looked, or how his platform functioned: none of these things warranted such a disgusting level of abuse. Somebody basically tried to send a fledgling platform developer to prison, because they didn’t like what he was doing. A series of assumptions and misunderstandings escalated to this point.

Why is this Important?

Over the years, Mastodon’s user culture has become incredibly insular and hostile towards outsiders. Despite repeated claims of “People are just nicer here!” and “Everyone is just so welcoming!”, often those preaching about privacy and consent are the first to harass anyone doing something they don’t like. Reactions have extended to doxxing, death threats, DDoS attacks, and apparently, distribution of CSAM. Just the other week, Mastodon users were harassing a guy who built a protocol bridge that hadn’t even been enabled yet.

Neither of these things are first occurrences, either. People in the past have tried to build tooling for the Fediverse, from search engines to disposable account services for testing to indexes of verified accounts. People like Wil Wheaton were harassed off the network for their ignorance of nuances about who was on a given blocklist that they shared. Some Lemmy instsances have been flooded with CSAM as part of a community retaliation effort from other instances.

Mastodon’s user community have also long looked down their noses at other platforms such as Pleroma, due to a combination of platform rivalry, cultural clashes, personal squabbles, and an “us vs them” mentality. It wasn’t so long ago that simply using Pleroma was considered a valid reason for blocking someone on sight, because good people only used Mastodon.

Source: FediDB.org

Mastodon still makes up the majority of the Fediverse at this point, and acts as a defacto standard for ActivityPub. Many parts of the Mastodon community still threaten to block, doxx, or harass people simply because they expressed a thought or opinion that stands in contrast to what the hive mind demands.

Even Damon, at one point, has received death threats from total strangers for his perspective on FediPact and Threads that other people didn’t agree with. He’s told me on several occasions that the Fediverse doesn’t feel like it was made for people like him, and a good portion of it is due to Mastodon’s user culture.

Whatever this thing is, it’s not sustainable. A big aspect of Mastodon’s norms center around a type of Puritanical culture that half the time, isn’t even consistent with itself. We can’t advocate for a space and say that it’s so much better than everywhere else, when so many people are subjected to this.

The Aftermath

A report was filed with Content Nation’s host, Hetzner, due to the presence of CSAM being detected. However, Sascha’s platform was only set up to cache remote content for an hour prior to purging it. The best conclusion we can draw from this, at the moment, is that someone willingly set Content Nation up.

“I’m not sure it even was CSAM,” Sascha writes in a private chat, “I never saw the pictures, as they had already been deleted. The data was already removed from the cache, and the original server was down, so it wasn’t refreshed [on Content Nation].”

“My flat could have been raided, and I would not have an electronic device left to write this,” he added.

As of this writing, Content Nation has turned off all Fediverse integrations, and Sascha has been turned off of having anything to do with the network after having this experience. He has been effectively bullied off the network.

How can we avoid this happening again?

Throughout researching this article and situation, I think there are several things that really, really need to change for the better. The modern Fediverse operates involves a long list of internal knowledge that’s not really written down anywhere. No part of the ActivityPub spec or Mastodon talks about how to implement their special pieces, so that people writing new servers can be good actors.

As it stands today, no singular piece of Fediverse software includes instructions to load a “worst of the worst” blocklist when setting up an instance, or to put a Webfinger search form behind a login page. What seems like common sense to some people is literally a new concept to others.

Culturally, we need to accept that most people coming into the community for the first time are operating with a lack of prior knowledge. We can’t simply cross our arms and say “You should have known better”, and socially punish people, when in fact there was no way for them to learn about it.

https://wedistribute.org/2024/03/contentnation-mastodons-toxicity/

#CSAM #Harassment #TrustSafety
#trustsafety #harassment #csam
Rhonabwy @[email protected] · 2024-04-29 · 15:21 UTC
I cut an initial release (0.1.0-alpha) of the library automerge-repo-swift. A supplemental library to Automerge swift, it adds background networking for sync and storage capabilities. The library extends code I initially created in the Automerge demo app (MeetingNotes), and was common enough to warrant its own library. While I was extracting those pieces, I leaned into the same general pattern that was used in the Javascript library automerge-repo. That library provides largely the same functionality for Automerge in javascript. I borrowed the public API structure, as well as compatibility and implementation details for the Automerge sync protocol. One of my goals while assembling this new library was to build it fully compliant with Swift’s data-race safety. Meaning that it compiles without warnings when I use the Swift compiler’s strict-concurrency mode.
There were some notable challenges in coming up to speed with the concepts of isolation and sendability. In addition to learning the concepts, how to apply them is an open question. Not many Swift developers have embraced strict concurrency and talked about the trade-offs or implications for choices. Because of that, I feel that there’s relatively little available knowledge to understand the trade-offs to make when you protect mutable state. This post shares some of the stumbling blocks I hit, choices I made, and lessons I’ve learned. My hope is that it helps other developers facing a similar challenge.
Framing the problem
The way I try to learn and apply new knowledge to solve these kinds of “new fangled” problems is first working out how to think about the problem. I’ve not come up with a good way to ask other people how to do that. I think when I frame the problem with good first-principles in mind, trade-offs in solutions become easier to understand. Sometimes the answers are even self-obvious.
The foremost principle in strict-concurrency is “protect your mutable state”. The compiler warnings give you feedback about potential hazards and data-races. In Swift, protecting the state uses a concept of an “isolation domain”. My layman’s take on isolation is “How can the compiler verify that only one thread is accessing this bit of data at a time”. There are some places where the compiler infers the state of isolation, and some of them still changing as we progress towards Swift 6. When you’re writing code, the compiler knows what is isolated (and non-isolated) – either by itself or based on what you annotated. When the compiler infers an isolation domain, that detail is not (yet?) easily exposed to developers. It really only shows up when there’s a mismatch in your assumptions vs. what the compiler thinks and it issues a strict-concurrency warning.
Sendability is the second key concept. In my layman’s terms again, something that is sendable is safe to cross over thread boundaries. With Swift 5.10, the compiler has enough knowledge of types to be able to make guarantees about what is safe, and what isn’t.
The first thing I did was lean heavily into making anything and everything Sendable. In hindsight, that was a bit of a mistake. Not disastrous, but I made a lot more work for myself. Not everything needs to be sendable. Taking advantage of isolation, it is fine – sometimes notably more efficient and easier to reason about – to have and use non-sendable types within an isolation domain. More on that in a bit.
My key to framing up the problem was to think in terms of making explicit choices about what data should be in an isolation region along with how I want to pass information from one isolation domain to another. Any types I pass (generally) need to be Sendable, and anything that stays within an isolation domain doesn’t. For this library, I have a lot of mutable state: networking connections, updates from users, and a state machines coordinating it all. All of it needed so a repository can store and synchronize Automerge documents. Automerge documents themselves are Sendable (I had that in place well before starting this work). I made the Automerge documents sendable by wrapping access and updates to anything mutable within a serial dispatch queue. (This was also needed because the core Automerge library – a Rust library accessed through FFI – was not safe for multi-threaded use).
Choosing Isolation
I knew I wanted to make at least one explicit isolation domain, so the first question was “Actor or isolated class?” Honestly, I’m still not sure I understand all the tradeoffs. Without knowing what the effect would be to start off with, I decided to pick “let’s use actors everywhere” and see how it goes. Some of the method calls in the design of the Automerge repository were easily and obviously async, so that seemed like a good first cut. I made the top-level repo an actor, and then I kept making any internal type that had mutable state also be it’s own actor. That included a storage subsystem and a network subsystem, both of which I built to let someone else provide the network or storage provider external to this project. To support external plugins that work with this library, I created protocols for the storage and network provider, as well as one that the network providers use to talk back to the repository.
The downside of that choice was two-fold – first setting things up, then interacting with it from within a SwiftUI app. Because I made every-darn-thing an actor, I hade to await a response, which meant a lot of potential suspension points in my code. That also propagated to imply even setup needed to be done within an async context. Sometimes that’s easy to arrange, but other times it ends up being a complete pain in the butt. More specifically, quite a few of the current Apple-provided frameworks don’t have or provide a clear path to integrate async setup hooks. The server-side Swift world has a lovely “set up and run” mechanism (swift-service-lifecycle) it is adopting, but Apple hasn’t provided a similar concept the frameworks it provides. The one that bites me most frequently is the SwiftUI app and document-based app lifecycle, which are all synchronous.
Initialization Challenges
Making the individual actors – Repo and the two network providers I created – initializable with synchronous calls wasn’t too bad. The stumbling block I hit (that I still don’t have a great solution to) was when I wanted to add and activate the network providers to a repository. To arrange that, I’m currently using a detached Task that I kick off in the SwiftUI App’s initializer:
```
public let repo = Repo(sharePolicy: .agreeable)public let websocket = WebSocketProvider()public let peerToPeer = PeerToPeerProvider(    PeerToPeerProviderConfiguration(        passcode: "AutomergeMeetingNotes",        reconnectOnError: true,        autoconnect: false    ))@mainstruct MeetingNotesApp: App {    var body: some Scene {        DocumentGroup {            MeetingNotesDocument()        } editor: { file in            MeetingNotesDocumentView(document: file.document)        }        .commands {            CommandGroup(replacing: CommandGroupPlacement.toolbar) {            }        }    }    init() {        Task {            await repo.addNetworkAdapter(adapter: websocket)            await repo.addNetworkAdapter(adapter: peerToPeer)        }    }}
```
Swift Async Algorithms
One of the lessons I’ve learned is that if you find yourself stashing a number of actors into an array, and you’re used to interacting with them using functional methods (filter, compactMap, etc), you need to deal with the asynchronous access. The standard library built-in functional methods are all synchronous. Because of that, you can only access non-isolated properties on the actors. For me, that meant working with non-mutable state that I set up during actor initialization.
The second path (and I went there) was to take on a dependency to swift-async-algorithms, and use its async variations of the functional methods. They let you “await” results for anything that needs to cross isolation boundaries. And because it took me an embarrasingly long time to figure it out: If you have an array of actors, the way to get to an AsyncSequence of them is to use the async property on the array after you’ve imported swift-async-algorithms. For example, something like the following snippet:
```
let arrayOfActors: [YourActorType] = []let filteredResults = arrayOfActors.async.filter(...)
```
Rethinking the isolation choice
That is my first version of this library. I got it functional, then turned around and tore it apart again. In making everything an actor, I was making LOTS of little isolation regions that the code had to hop between. With all the suspension points, that meant a lot of possible re-ordering of what was running. I had to be extrodinarily careful not to assume a copy of some state I’d nabbed earlier was still the same after the await. (I still have to be, but it was a more prominent issue with lots of actors.) All of this boils down to being aware of actor re-entrancy, and when it might invalidate something.
I knew that I wanted at least one isolation region (the repository). I also want to keep mutable state in separate types to preserve an isolation of duties. One particular class highlighted my problems – a wrapper around NWConnection that tracks additional state with it and handles the Automerge sync protocol. It was getting really darned inconvenient with the large number of await suspension points.
I slowly clued in that it would be a lot easier if that were all synchronous – and there was no reason it couldn’t be. In my ideal world, I’d have the type Repo (my top-level repository) as an non-global actor, and isolate any classes it used to the same isolation zone as that one, non-global, actor. I think that’s a capability that’s coming, or at least I wasn’t sure how to arrange that today with Swift 5.10. Instead I opted to make a single global actor for the library and switch what I previously set up as actors to classes isolated to that global actor.
That let me simplify quite a bit, notably when dealing with the state of connections within a network adapter. What surprised me was that when I switched from Actor to isolated class, there were few warnings from the change. The changes were mostly warnings that calls dropped back to synchronous, and no longer needed await. That was quick to fix up; the change to isolated classes was much faster and easier than I anticipated. After I made the initial changes, I went through the various initializers and associated configuration calls to make more of it explicitly synchronous. The end result was more code that could be set up (initialized) without an async context. And finally, I updated how I handled the networking so that as I needed to track state, I didn’t absolutely have to use the async algorithsm library.
A single global actor?
A bit of a side note: I thought about making Repo a global actor, but I prefer to not demand a singleton style library for it’s usage. That choice made it much easier to host multiple repositories when it came time to run functional tests with a mock In-Memory network, or integration tests with the actual providers. I’m still a slight bit concerned that I might be adding to a long-term potential proliferation of global actors from libraries – but it seems like the best solution at the moment. I’d love it if I could do something that indicated “All these things need a single isolation domain, and you – developer – are responsible for providing one that fits your needs”. I’m not sure that kind of concept is even on the table for future work.
Recipes for solving these problems
If you weren’t already aware of it, Matt Massicotte created a GitHub repository called ConcurrencyRecipes. This is a gemstone of knowledge, hints, and possible solutions. I leaned into it again and again while building (and rebuilding) this library. One of the “convert it to async” challenges I encountered was providing an async interface to my own peer-to-peer network protocol. I built the protocol using the Network framework based (partially on Apple’s sample code), which is all synchronous code and callbacks. A high level, I wanted it to act similarly URLSessionWebSocketTask. This gist being a connection has an async send() and an async receive() for sending and receiving messages on the connection. With an async send and receive, you can readily assemble several different patterns of access.
To get there, I used a combination of CheckedContinuation (both the throwing and non-throwing variations) to work with what NWConnection provided. I wish that was better documented. How to properly use those APIs is opaque, but that is a digression for another time. I’m particular happy with how my code worked out, including adding a method on the PeerConnection class that used structured concurrency to handle a timeout mechanism.
Racing tasks with structured concurrency
One of the harder warnings for me to understand was related to racing concurrent tasks in order to create an async method with a “timeout”. I stashed a pattern for how to do this in my notebook with references to Beyond the basics of structured concurrency from WWDC23.
If the async task returns a value, you can set it up something like this (this is from PeerToPeerConnection.swift):
```
let msg = try await withThrowingTaskGroup(of: SyncV1Msg.self) { group in    group.addTask {        // retrieve the next message        try await self.receiveSingleMessage()    }    group.addTask {        // Race against the receive call with a continuous timer        try await Task.sleep(for: explicitTimeout)        throw SyncV1Msg.Errors.Timeout()    }    guard let msg = try await group.next() else {        throw CancellationError()    }    // cancel all ongoing tasks (the websocket receive request, in this case)    group.cancelAll()    return msg}
```
There’s a niftier version available in Swift 5.9 (which I didn’t use) for when you don’t care about the return value:
```
func run() async throws {    try await withThrowingDiscardingTaskGroup { group in        for cook in staff.keys {            group.addTask { try await cook.handleShift() }        }        group.addTask { // keep the restaurant going until closing time            try await Task.sleep(for: shiftDuration)            throw TimeToCloseError()        }    }}
```
With Swift 5.10 compiler, my direct use of this displayed a warning:
```
warning: passing argument of non-sendable type 'inout ThrowingTaskGroup<SyncV1Msg, any Error>' outside of global actor 'AutomergeRepo'-isolated context may introduce data racesguard let msg = try await group.next() else {                          ^
```
I didn’t really understand the core of this warning, so I asked on the Swift forums. VNS (on the forums) had run into the same issue and helped explain it:
It’s because withTaskGroup accepts a non-Sendable closure, which means the closure has to be isolated to whatever context it was formed in. If your test() function is nonisolated, it means the closure is nonisolated, so calling group.waitForAll() doesn’t cross an isolation boundary.
The workaround to handle the combination of non-sendable closures and TaskGroup is to make the async method that runs this code nonisolated. In the context I was using it, the class that contains this method is isolated to a global actor, so it’s inheriting that context. By switching the method to be explicitly non-isolated, the compiler doesn’t complain about group being isolated to that global actor.
Sharing information back to SwiftUI
These components have all sorts of interesting internal state, some of which I wanted to export. For example, to provide information from the network providers to make a user interface (in SwiftUI). I want to be able to choose to connect to endpoints, to share what endpoints might be available (from the NWBrowser embedded in the peer to peer network provider), and so forth.
I first tried to lean into AsyncStreams. While they make a great local queue for a single point to point connection, I found they were far less useful to generally make a firehouse of data that SwiftUI knows how to read and react to. While I tried to use all the latest techniques, to handle this part I went to my old friend Combine. Some people are effusing that Combine is dead and dying – but boy it works. And most delightfully, you can have any number of endpoints pick up and subscribe to a shared publisher, which was perfect for my use case. Top that off with SwiftUI having great support to receive streams of data from Combine, and it was an easy choice.
I ended up using Combine publishers to make a a few feeds of data from the PeerToPeerProvider. They share information about what other peers were available, the current state of the listener (that accepts connections) and the browser (that looks for peers), and last a publisher that provides information about active peer to peer connctions. I feel that worked out extremely well. It worked so well that I made an internal publisher (not exposed via the public API) for tests to get events and state updates from within a repository.
Integration Testing
It’s remarkably hard to usefully unit test network providers. Instead of unit testing, I made a separate Swift project for the purposes of running integration tests. It sits in it’s own directory in the git repository and references automerge-repo-swift as a local dependency. A side effect is that it let me add in all sorts of wacky dependencies that were handy for the integration testing, but that I really didn’t want exposed and transitive for the main package. I wish that Swift Packages had a means to identify test-only dependencies that didn’t propagate to other packages for situations like this. Ah well, my solution was a separate sub-project.
Testing using the Combine publisher worked well. Although it took a little digging to figure out the correct way to set up and use expectations with async XCTests. It feels a bit exhausting to assemble the expectations and fulfillment calls, but its quite possible to get working. If you want to see this in operation, take a look at P2P+explicitConnect.swift. I started to look at potentially using the upcoming swift-testing, but with limited Swift 5.10 support, I decided to hold off for now. If it makes asynchronous testing easier down the road, I may well adopt it quickly after it’s initial release.
The one quirky place that I ran into with that API setup was that expectation.fulfill() gets cranky with you if you call it more than once. My publisher wasn’t quite so constrained with state updates, so I ended up cobbling a boolean latch variable in a sink when I didn’t have a sufficiently constrained closure.
The other quirk in integration testing is that while it works beautifully on a local machine, I had a trouble getting it to work in CI (using GitHub Actions). Part of the issue is that the current swift test defaults to running all possible tests at once, in parallel. Especially for integration testing of peer to peer networking, that meant a lot of network listeners, and browsers, getting shoved together at once on the local network. I wrote a script to list out the tests and run them one at a time. Even breaking it down like that didn’t consistently get through CI. I also tried higher wait times (120 seconds) on the expectations. When I run them locally, most of those tests take about 5 seconds each.
The test that was a real challenge was the cross-platform one. Automerge-repo has a sample sync server (NodeJS, using Automerge through WASM). I created a docker container for it, and my cross-platform integration test pushes and pulls documents to an instance that I can run in Docker. Well… Docker isn’t available for macOS runners, so that’s out for GitHub Actions. I have a script that spins up a local docker instance, and I added a check into the WebSocket network provider test – if it couldn’t find a local instance to work against, it skips the test.
Final Takeaways
Starting with a plan for isolating state made the choices of how and what I used a bit easier, and reaching for global-actor constrained classes made synchronous use of those classes much easier. For me, this mostly played out in better (synchronous) intializers and dealing with collections using functional programming patterns.
I hope there’s some planning/thinking in SwiftUI to update or extend the app structure to accomodate async hooks for things like setup and initialization (FB9221398). That should make it easier for a developer to run an async initializer and verify that it didn’t fail, before continuing into the normal app lifecycle. Likewise, I hope that the Document-based APIs gain an async-context to work with documents to likewise handle asynchronous tasks (FB12243722). Both of these spots are very awkward places for me.
Once you shift to using asynchronous calls, it can have a ripple effect in your code. If you’re looking at converting existing code, start at the “top” and work down. That helped me to make sure there weren’t secondary complications with that choice (such as a a need for an async initializer).
Better yet, step back and take the time to identify where mutable state exists. Group it together as best you can, and review how you’re interacting it, and in what isolation region. In the case of things that need to be available to SwiftUI, you can likely isolate methods appropriately (*cough* MainActor *cough*). Then make the parts you need to pass between isolation domains Sendable. Recognize that in some cases, it may be fine to do the equivalent of “Here was the state at some recent moment, if you might want to react to that”. There are several places where I pass back a summary snapshot of mutable state to SwiftUI to use in UI elements.
And do yourself a favor and keep Matt’s Concurrency Recipes on speed-dial.
Before I finished this post, I listened to episode 43 of the Swift Package Index podcast. It’s a great episode, with Holly Bora, compiler geek and manager of the Swift language team, on as a guest to talk about the Swift 6. A tidbit she shared was that they are creating a Swift 6 migration guide, to be published on the swift.org website. Something to look forward to, in addition to Matt’s collection of recipes!
https://rhonabwy.com/2024/04/29/designing-a-swift-library-with-data-race-safety/
#automerge #concurrency #swift
#automerge #concurrency #swift
Seth Grover @[email protected] · 2024-03-06 · 17:35 UTC
CW: Malcolm v24.03.0 release notes
It is with great relish that we announce the v24.03.0 release of Malcolm, a powerful, easily deployable network traffic analysis tool suite.
Although the previous Malcolm release came out just a few weeks ago, the Malcolm development team felt there was enough new goodness to cut an early March release. This release contains new features, bug fixes and component version updates, including:
Support for JSON-delimited Zeek log ingestion (issue #65)
JSON format logs generated by Zeek instances external to Malcolm can now be ingested by Malcolm, either by forwarding them with a tool like filebeat or Fluent Bit or by uploading an archive file containing the log files. While Malcolm still generates TSV-formatted Zeek logs internally by default, it can be configured to create JSON format Zeek logs as well.
Created new dashboards for other non-network and third-party log data (issue #414)
While Malcolm's main focus is analyzing network traffic log metadata (generated by Zeek, Arkime, and Suricata), it can also receive and index logs from other sources, such as:
System resource utilization metrics (CPU, memory, disk, network, etc.)
System temperatures
Linux system logs
Windows event logs
Process or service health status
Logs appended to textual log files (e.g., tail-ing a log file)
The output of an external script or program
Messages in the form of MQTT control packets
many more…
This release revamped some existing dashboards and added several new ones to visualize some of these common third-party and host logs.
Container security review (issue #236)
Malcolm's container images are automatically scanned by Trivy as they are build as part of our CI workflows. This release entailed an in-depth review of the results from the latest scans which resulted in resolving most of the outstanding issues found.
Support /attributes and /events enpoints from MISP feed for Zeek intel generation (issue #336)
This release expands Malcolm's ability to pull from MISP feeds to generate Zeek intel files. When Malcolm connects to user-provided URLs for the MISP feeds, it will attempt to determine the format of the data served and process it accordingly. This could be presented as:
a manifest JSON file
a directory listing containing a file named manifest.json
a directory listing of JSON files without a manifest.json file
a list of Events returned for a request via the MISP Automation API made to a MISP platform's /events endpoint
a list of Attributes returned for a request via the MISP Automation API made to a MISP platform's /attributes endpoint
In addition to MISP, STIX™ v2.0/v2.1 indicators and TAXII™ 2.0/2.1 feeds are supported as well.
Added Suricata rules to detect Unitronics VisiLogic CVE-2023-6448 (issue #394) from the DHS CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog
Minor tweaks to the new Malcolm landing page (issue #427)
Incorporated a new ICSNPP Profinet IO CM network protocol analyzer (issue #429)
Version updates to some major Malcolm components:
Arkime to v5.0.1
OpenSearch and OpenSearch Dashboards to v2.12.0
A handful of bug fixes:
fixed the way we handle false values in environment variables in local.zeek (issue #413)
addressed a few issues with the install.py script when installing from downloaeded GitHub release artifacts (issue #416)
fixed a condition in which the htadmin was creating htpasswd file entries without a newline between them (issue #426)
removed a hard-coded date value in Arkime-to-Kibana pivot links (issue #428)
corrected unencrypted, unzipped extracted file download not working in the extracted files interface (issue #431)
a few fixes to the Raspberry Pi 4 build of Hedgehog Linux
Keep your eyes open, because there's lots more on the way in the coming months, including a bunch of end-user training topics for which we hope to develop training/documentation/videos. If you've got suggestions, we want to hear them.
Malcolm and Hedgehog Linux may be obtained by pulling or building the Docker images and/or building the ISO installer images as described in the documentation. Unofficial ISO installer images for Malcolm and Hedgehog Linux are not hosted on GitHub, but may be downloaded from https://malcolm.fyi/.
#Malcolm #HedgehogLinux #Zeek #Arkime #NetBox #OpenSearch #Elasticsearch #Suricata #PCAP #NetworkTrafficAnalysis #networksecuritymonitoring #OT #ICS #icssecurity #CyberSecurity #Cyber #Infosec #GitHub #INL #DHS #CISA #CISAgov #Kubernetes #Docker #raspberrypi
#malcolm #hedgehoglinux #zeek #arkime #netbox #opensearch
Karsten Schmidt @[email protected] · 2026-04-16 · 09:42 UTC

RE: https://infosec.exchange/@Sempf/116412330882479256
‘By Design’ Flaw in MCP Could Enable Widespread AI Supply Chain Attacks
"Researchers warn that a flaw in Anthropic’s Model Context Protocol allows unsanitized commands to execute silently, enabling full system compromise across widely used AI environments."
"OX extensively tested whether this ‘flaw’ was exploitable, extensively succeeded, and extensively disclosed its findings to the MCP providers; from Anthropic downward. Initially it had little response. Eventually, the common response was inaction coupled with the suggestion that this behavior was ‘by design’.
But OX discovered, and demonstrated, that this ‘by design’ behavior could be easily exploited, leaving potentially millions of downstream users exposed to sensitive data, API key and internal corporate data theft, the exposure of chat histories, and more. If the process that MCP failed included malware, that malware could be silently installed, potentially leading to complete system takeover."
#AI #MCP #InfoSec #Anthropic #HouseOfCards

#ai #mcp #infosec #anthropic #houseofcards
DoomsdaysCW @[email protected] · 2024-09-21 · 22:56 UTC

'We cannot exist if we lose the water': In #Honduras, a community resists a #mine polluting the #RíoGuapinol
"#JuanLópez, representative of the Committee for the Defense of Common and Public Goods, told #RadioProgreso that the activists' next step is advocate for the revoking of Inversiones Los Pinares' mining contracts, the environmental license and the exploitation and exploration permit."
by Soli Salgado
October 18, 2022
TOCOA, HONDURAS - "The Río Guapinol that streams through the Bajo Aguán valley in northern Honduras has long been a source of drinking, bathing, cleaning, irrigation and cooking water for the surrounding community in Tocoa.
"In the last few years, the river has also provided an education: how to resist an international mining operation that they say contaminates the river in the name of development; how to confront a seemingly compromised justice system when that #resistance goes awry; and — for the women in particular — how to become leaders of a movement upon the indefinite imprisonment of their husbands and sons.
"Vilma Cruz raised her five children using the river, including a son who wound up spending almost two and a half years in jail for protesting the mining as part of the #Guapinol8, a group whose 2019 arrests and long detentions drew international outrage.
"'We don't feel at peace because our water has been endangered,' she said. 'Now, when I go to the river, I feel my chest swell, like I'm not free.'
A mine emerges, a community responds
"About a decade ago, #InversionesLosPinares, formerly the Honduran #EMCO Mining Company and based in #Tocoa, applied for a concession to build an iron oxide mine in the protected #CarlosEscaleras #NationalPark. Then-President Juan Orlando Hernández authorized the request in 2013, a decision locals said was made without following protocol of consulting residents of the area.
"The #OpenPit #mining project was upstream of the #RíoGuapinol, a channel that stems from the larger #RíoAguan, a river that flows through tropical mountains from the Atlantic on the northern side of the #CentralAmerican country.
"When the Río Guapinol in 2018 started to turn a chocolate brown, locals took that as a cue to act against Inversiones Los Pinares.
"#GuapinolResiste, the local community's movement in response to the mining, said in a 2020 report that even before mining began, the construction of the facilities and roads had polluted both the Guapinol and #SanPedro rivers, affecting 14,000 residents who rely on the water for consumption and domestic purposes.
"'Losing the river would mean buying water, and you can't buy water for everything,' said Leonel George, who serves on the Municipal Committee for the Defense of Common and Public Goods, founded in 2018 in response to the mining project.
"The river, he added, is 'closely linked to life and the existence of everything that surrounds us,' noting that the committee's concern goes beyond the effects that contaminated water would have on human beings to the river's surrounding #forests and #biodiversity."
Read more:
https://www.ncronline.org/earthbeat/justice/we-cannot-exist-if-we-lose-water-honduras-community-resists-mine-polluting-r-o
#JusticeForJuan #GuapinolRiver #WaterDefender #SaveTheForests #DefendTheSacred
#NoMiningWithoutConsent #WaterIsLife #SaveTheRivers #EMCO #InversionesLosPinares
#MunicipalCommitteeForTheDefenseOfCommonAndPublicGoods

#municipalcommitteeforthedefenseofcommonandpublicgoods #savetherivers #waterislife #nominingwithoutconsent #defendthesacred #savetheforests
DoomsdaysCW @[email protected] · 2024-09-21 · 22:56 UTC

'We cannot exist if we lose the water': In #Honduras, a community resists a #mine polluting the #RíoGuapinol
"#JuanLópez, representative of the Committee for the Defense of Common and Public Goods, told #RadioProgreso that the activists' next step is advocate for the revoking of Inversiones Los Pinares' mining contracts, the environmental license and the exploitation and exploration permit."
by Soli Salgado
October 18, 2022
TOCOA, HONDURAS - "The Río Guapinol that streams through the Bajo Aguán valley in northern Honduras has long been a source of drinking, bathing, cleaning, irrigation and cooking water for the surrounding community in Tocoa.
"In the last few years, the river has also provided an education: how to resist an international mining operation that they say contaminates the river in the name of development; how to confront a seemingly compromised justice system when that #resistance goes awry; and — for the women in particular — how to become leaders of a movement upon the indefinite imprisonment of their husbands and sons.
"Vilma Cruz raised her five children using the river, including a son who wound up spending almost two and a half years in jail for protesting the mining as part of the #Guapinol8, a group whose 2019 arrests and long detentions drew international outrage.
"'We don't feel at peace because our water has been endangered,' she said. 'Now, when I go to the river, I feel my chest swell, like I'm not free.'
A mine emerges, a community responds
"About a decade ago, #InversionesLosPinares, formerly the Honduran #EMCO Mining Company and based in #Tocoa, applied for a concession to build an iron oxide mine in the protected #CarlosEscaleras #NationalPark. Then-President Juan Orlando Hernández authorized the request in 2013, a decision locals said was made without following protocol of consulting residents of the area.
"The #OpenPit #mining project was upstream of the #RíoGuapinol, a channel that stems from the larger #RíoAguan, a river that flows through tropical mountains from the Atlantic on the northern side of the #CentralAmerican country.
"When the Río Guapinol in 2018 started to turn a chocolate brown, locals took that as a cue to act against Inversiones Los Pinares.
"#GuapinolResiste, the local community's movement in response to the mining, said in a 2020 report that even before mining began, the construction of the facilities and roads had polluted both the Guapinol and #SanPedro rivers, affecting 14,000 residents who rely on the water for consumption and domestic purposes.
"'Losing the river would mean buying water, and you can't buy water for everything,' said Leonel George, who serves on the Municipal Committee for the Defense of Common and Public Goods, founded in 2018 in response to the mining project.
"The river, he added, is 'closely linked to life and the existence of everything that surrounds us,' noting that the committee's concern goes beyond the effects that contaminated water would have on human beings to the river's surrounding #forests and #biodiversity."
Read more:
https://www.ncronline.org/earthbeat/justice/we-cannot-exist-if-we-lose-water-honduras-community-resists-mine-polluting-r-o
#JusticeForJuan #GuapinolRiver #WaterDefender #SaveTheForests #DefendTheSacred
#NoMiningWithoutConsent #WaterIsLife #SaveTheRivers #EMCO #InversionesLosPinares
#MunicipalCommitteeForTheDefenseOfCommonAndPublicGoods

#honduras #mine #rioguapinol #juanlopez #radioprogreso #resistance
OptimusPrimeBot @[email protected] · 2026-01-20 · 13:04 UTC

A Pathway to Protocells on Titan – Animations
#Acrylonitrile #Amphiphile #Animation #Astrobiology #Atmosphere #Biology #Carbon #Cell
⏩ 1 new picture and 1 new video from NASA (SVS) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles?limit=18&user=OptimusPrimeBot&ilshowall=1&offset=20260118130156

#acrylonitrile #amphiphile #animation #astrobiology #atmosphere #biology
OptimusPrimeBot @[email protected] · 2026-01-19 · 13:02 UTC

A Pathway to Protocells on Titan – Animations
#Acrylonitrile #Amphiphile #Animation #Astrobiology #Atmosphere #Biology #Carbon #Cell
⏩ 1 new picture and 1 new video from NASA (SVS) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles?limit=18&user=OptimusPrimeBot&ilshowall=1&offset=20260118130156

#acrylonitrile #amphiphile #animation #astrobiology #atmosphere #biology
OptimusPrimeBot @[email protected] · 2026-01-18 · 15:54 UTC

A Pathway to Protocells on Titan – Animations
#Acrylonitrile #Amphiphile #Animation #Astrobiology #Atmosphere #Biology #Carbon #Cell
⏩ 1 new picture and 1 new video from NASA (SVS) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles?limit=18&user=OptimusPrimeBot&ilshowall=1&offset=20260118130156

#acrylonitrile #amphiphile #animation #astrobiology #atmosphere #biology
OptimusPrimeBot @[email protected] · 2026-01-18 · 13:04 UTC

A Pathway to Protocells on Titan – Animations
#Acrylonitrile #Amphiphile #Animation #Astrobiology #Atmosphere #Biology #Carbon #Cell
⏩ 1 new picture and 1 new video from NASA (SVS) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles?limit=18&user=OptimusPrimeBot&ilshowall=1&offset=20260118130156

#acrylonitrile #amphiphile #animation #astrobiology #atmosphere #biology
Fynn @utf8equalsX · 2019-04-24 · 18:42 UTC

@a_breakin_glass It's email with PGP. Which is great, because it's compatible, a common standard and decentralized, but it also means that it's not as secure as a chat encryption protocol with #perfectForwardSecrecy.

#perfectforwardsecrecy
Sterna Paradisaea @[email protected] · 2025-05-20 · 16:47 UTC

Falling Apart…
I’m writing this from a hotel room in Ilulissat, rather than Qaanaaq where I had intended to be arriving shortly, because our plane has been cancelled due to bad weather (at time of writing the airport was measuring gusts of 14 m/s, so I’m actually quite glad it was cancelled).
Weather and flight cancellations are an eternal hazard when doing fieldwork in Greenland, but in this case it also means an impact on our planned fieldwork, because the sea ice is falling apart. And rather earlier than usual (though we have not yet done a systematic review to prove this). In fact, part of the reason for coming here in May (instead of my usual March trip) was to investigate an interesting event that happened earlier this spring. In the animation of satellite pictures below you can see the sea ice rather dramatically falling apart in mid-April and then again at the end of April.
The March to May sea ice season from Sentinel 2 in NW Greenland
To understand what is happening and why it’s unusual, first a bit of background. As I have written before, my DMI colleagues have been working up in NW Greenland for about 15 years on a programme of ocean measurements in the fjord (see map below). I joined about 5 years ago, working in the melange zone of the glaciers at the head of Inglefield Bredning (PSA: a paper we recently submitted about this programme will hopefully be online soon). We use the sea ice as highway and stable platform for observations, so it’s pretty important for us and came to the conclusion it wa squite important for some parts of the glaciers too. The local community, with whom we work closely use it also for travelling, hunting and fishing from. It’s extremely important for them.
The region of North West Greenland we’re talking about
Normally there’s pretty thick (~1m) sea ice covering the whole of Inglefield Bredning (Gulf of Inglefield, also known as Kangerlussuaq, but not that one) out to the islands of Qeqertarsuaq and Kiatak. You can seen an example of what this looks like normally in the satellite animation from 2020, which happens to be when my first trip out on to the sea ice in Qaanaaq took place at the end of May and beginning of June. We were actually very lucky, we had great weather, got very close to the ice edge and watched narwhals swimming out in the North Water polynya. (Yes, sometimes I wonder how I managed to get this job too). The animation below is Sentinel-2 images as cloud free as I could find them from that first field season. As you can see, the sea ice already in March was much much more extensive than this year at the same time. And perhaps that is part of the answer.
It’s probably worth pointing out at this stage that although there were some pretty warm (unusually so) spikes in March and April, the sea ice breakup in April was probably largely driven by ocean swell, and perhaps some winds which were strong, though not excessively so as far as we can see in the observations. The latest break-up seems to be driven also by high winds.
Back to our current field season. We had in fact planned a brief trip up here already – I am currently setting up a project looking at snow processes with the team and we had planned to install and test some new instruments and protocol that we hope to use in Antarctica later this year (more on all of that later hopefully). However, as the soon to be published preprint shows, I and the team have developed pretty extensive sea ice interests recently, so this unusual behaviour rather piqued our curiosity.
We have a lot of questions:
Why did it happen this year? Is it really the earliest in the satellite record? What makes the ice vulnerable? Composition, thickness, temperature? Is the ocean driving it or the atmosphere or both (it’s usually both), and what makes this year so unusual? Further down the line, can we model it and use those simulations to understand if this is a single aberration or likely to be more common in the future? And what impact will the earlier breakups have on the ecosystem, the adjacent glaciers and the local community?
Or fieldtrip thus appeared an excellent opportunity to grab some real data on all of these points. Our colleague Henriette Skourup at DTU-Space was kind enough to lend us one of her instruments, which we shipped up last minute to allow us to do an add-on. It is all currently sitting there waiting for us.
Unfortunately the sea ice is not waiting for us, if the photos from my colleague in Qaanaaq, Aksel are anything to go by.
A large and widening crack in the sea ice in front of Qaanaaq. The small objects on the sea ice (fishing gear?) suggest we were not the only ones surprised). Credit: Aksel Ascanius, DMI
The high winds which grounded our plane have also been busy on the sea ice, which is falling apart in the bay with surprising speed as far as I can see. We are still waiting for today’s optical imagery but the quick look from radar based Sentinel-1 suggests cracks widening rapidly as the photo above confirms.
Temperature observations from Qaanaaq airport
With a bit of luck we will get to Qaanaaq on Thursday (immaqa) to see if our sea ice research plan can go ahead. At this stage I rather doubt it. But it will very much depend on the next few hours. The wind speeds are quite high still but the temperature which was well above freezing has now dropped down to just below.
Wind observations from Qaanaaq airport
We are fortunate that we work with local hunters on the sea ice who are immensely experienced. The first rule is always safety first. We do have *a lot* of other work to do and rather fewer days to do it all in, so either way we’ll be busy. Ffor now, it’s keep checking in with the weather, the satellite images and our friends in Qaanaaq and use the time in Ilulissat wisely – in our case, it’s time to write some papers. And one of them is all about sea ice.
To be continued…
All satellite imagery on this page is from the European Space Agency Sentinel-2 mission, processed on the Copernicus EO Browser – a FREE!! and easy to use entry point to use ESA data. Weather observations are from Qaanaaq airport, operated by Mittarfeqarfiit A/S – Grønlands Lufthavne (Greenland Airports) and processed by DMI. It’s actually pretty nice how much high quality data we have access to these days…
This fieldwork is undertaken as part of the PRECISE (Predicting Ice Sheets on Earth) project funded by the Novo Nordisk Foundation and by the ESA Climate Change Initiative for Sea Ice and the Climate Modelling Research Group
#Arctic #fieldwork #Greenland #Qaanaaq #satelliteData #Science #SeaIce

#arctic #fieldwork #greenland #qaanaaq #satellitedata #science
Sterna Paradisaea @[email protected] · 2025-05-20 · 16:47 UTC

Falling Apart…
I’m writing this from a hotel room in Ilulissat, rather than Qaanaaq where I had intended to be arriving shortly, because our plane has been cancelled due to bad weather (at time of writing the airport was measuring gusts of 14 m/s, so I’m actually quite glad it was cancelled).
Weather and flight cancellations are an eternal hazard when doing fieldwork in Greenland, but in this case it also means an impact on our planned fieldwork, because the sea ice is falling apart. And rather earlier than usual (though we have not yet done a systematic review to prove this). In fact, part of the reason for coming here in May (instead of my usual March trip) was to investigate an interesting event that happened earlier this spring. In the animation of satellite pictures below you can see the sea ice rather dramatically falling apart in mid-April and then again at the end of April.
The March to May sea ice season from Sentinel 2 in NW Greenland
To understand what is happening and why it’s unusual, first a bit of background. As I have written before, my DMI colleagues have been working up in NW Greenland for about 15 years on a programme of ocean measurements in the fjord (see map below). I joined about 5 years ago, working in the melange zone of the glaciers at the head of Inglefield Bredning (PSA: a paper we recently submitted about this programme will hopefully be online soon). We use the sea ice as highway and stable platform for observations, so it’s pretty important for us and came to the conclusion it wa squite important for some parts of the glaciers too. The local community, with whom we work closely use it also for travelling, hunting and fishing from. It’s extremely important for them.
The region of North West Greenland we’re talking about
Normally there’s pretty thick (~1m) sea ice covering the whole of Inglefield Bredning (Gulf of Inglefield, also known as Kangerlussuaq, but not that one) out to the islands of Qeqertarsuaq and Kiatak. You can seen an example of what this looks like normally in the satellite animation from 2020, which happens to be when my first trip out on to the sea ice in Qaanaaq took place at the end of May and beginning of June. We were actually very lucky, we had great weather, got very close to the ice edge and watched narwhals swimming out in the North Water polynya. (Yes, sometimes I wonder how I managed to get this job too). The animation below is Sentinel-2 images as cloud free as I could find them from that first field season. As you can see, the sea ice already in March was much much more extensive than this year at the same time. And perhaps that is part of the answer.
It’s probably worth pointing out at this stage that although there were some pretty warm (unusually so) spikes in March and April, the sea ice breakup in April was probably largely driven by ocean swell, and perhaps some winds which were strong, though not excessively so as far as we can see in the observations. The latest break-up seems to be driven also by high winds.
Back to our current field season. We had in fact planned a brief trip up here already – I am currently setting up a project looking at snow processes with the team and we had planned to install and test some new instruments and protocol that we hope to use in Antarctica later this year (more on all of that later hopefully). However, as the soon to be published preprint shows, I and the team have developed pretty extensive sea ice interests recently, so this unusual behaviour rather piqued our curiosity.
We have a lot of questions:
Why did it happen this year? Is it really the earliest in the satellite record? What makes the ice vulnerable? Composition, thickness, temperature? Is the ocean driving it or the atmosphere or both (it’s usually both), and what makes this year so unusual? Further down the line, can we model it and use those simulations to understand if this is a single aberration or likely to be more common in the future? And what impact will the earlier breakups have on the ecosystem, the adjacent glaciers and the local community?
Or fieldtrip thus appeared an excellent opportunity to grab some real data on all of these points. Our colleague Henriette Skourup at DTU-Space was kind enough to lend us one of her instruments, which we shipped up last minute to allow us to do an add-on. It is all currently sitting there waiting for us.
Unfortunately the sea ice is not waiting for us, if the photos from my colleague in Qaanaaq, Aksel are anything to go by.
A large and widening crack in the sea ice in front of Qaanaaq. The small objects on the sea ice (fishing gear?) suggest we were not the only ones surprised). Credit: Aksel Ascanius, DMI
The high winds which grounded our plane have also been busy on the sea ice, which is falling apart in the bay with surprising speed as far as I can see. We are still waiting for today’s optical imagery but the quick look from radar based Sentinel-1 suggests cracks widening rapidly as the photo above confirms.
Temperature observations from Qaanaaq airport
With a bit of luck we will get to Qaanaaq on Thursday (immaqa) to see if our sea ice research plan can go ahead. At this stage I rather doubt it. But it will very much depend on the next few hours. The wind speeds are quite high still but the temperature which was well above freezing has now dropped down to just below.
Wind observations from Qaanaaq airport
We are fortunate that we work with local hunters on the sea ice who are immensely experienced. The first rule is always safety first. We do have *a lot* of other work to do and rather fewer days to do it all in, so either way we’ll be busy. Ffor now, it’s keep checking in with the weather, the satellite images and our friends in Qaanaaq and use the time in Ilulissat wisely – in our case, it’s time to write some papers. And one of them is all about sea ice.
To be continued…
All satellite imagery on this page is from the European Space Agency Sentinel-2 mission, processed on the Copernicus EO Browser – a FREE!! and easy to use entry point to use ESA data. Weather observations are from Qaanaaq airport, operated by Mittarfeqarfiit A/S – Grønlands Lufthavne (Greenland Airports) and processed by DMI. It’s actually pretty nice how much high quality data we have access to these days…
This fieldwork is undertaken as part of the PRECISE (Predicting Ice Sheets on Earth) project funded by the Novo Nordisk Foundation and by the ESA Climate Change Initiative for Sea Ice and the Climate Modelling Research Group
#Arctic #fieldwork #Greenland #Qaanaaq #satelliteData #Science #SeaIce

#arctic #fieldwork #greenland #qaanaaq #satellitedata #science
Sterna Paradisaea @[email protected] · 2025-05-20 · 16:47 UTC

Falling Apart…
I’m writing this from a hotel room in Ilulissat, rather than Qaanaaq where I had intended to be arriving shortly, because our plane has been cancelled due to bad weather (at time of writing the airport was measuring gusts of 14 m/s, so I’m actually quite glad it was cancelled).
Weather and flight cancellations are an eternal hazard when doing fieldwork in Greenland, but in this case it also means an impact on our planned fieldwork, because the sea ice is falling apart. And rather earlier than usual (though we have not yet done a systematic review to prove this). In fact, part of the reason for coming here in May (instead of my usual March trip) was to investigate an interesting event that happened earlier this spring. In the animation of satellite pictures below you can see the sea ice rather dramatically falling apart in mid-April and then again at the end of April.
The March to May sea ice season from Sentinel 2 in NW Greenland
To understand what is happening and why it’s unusual, first a bit of background. As I have written before, my DMI colleagues have been working up in NW Greenland for about 15 years on a programme of ocean measurements in the fjord (see map below). I joined about 5 years ago, working in the melange zone of the glaciers at the head of Inglefield Bredning (PSA: a paper we recently submitted about this programme will hopefully be online soon). We use the sea ice as highway and stable platform for observations, so it’s pretty important for us and came to the conclusion it wa squite important for some parts of the glaciers too. The local community, with whom we work closely use it also for travelling, hunting and fishing from. It’s extremely important for them.
The region of North West Greenland we’re talking about
Normally there’s pretty thick (~1m) sea ice covering the whole of Inglefield Bredning (Gulf of Inglefield, also known as Kangerlussuaq, but not that one) out to the islands of Qeqertarsuaq and Kiatak. You can seen an example of what this looks like normally in the satellite animation from 2020, which happens to be when my first trip out on to the sea ice in Qaanaaq took place at the end of May and beginning of June. We were actually very lucky, we had great weather, got very close to the ice edge and watched narwhals swimming out in the North Water polynya. (Yes, sometimes I wonder how I managed to get this job too). The animation below is Sentinel-2 images as cloud free as I could find them from that first field season. As you can see, the sea ice already in March was much much more extensive than this year at the same time. And perhaps that is part of the answer.
It’s probably worth pointing out at this stage that although there were some pretty warm (unusually so) spikes in March and April, the sea ice breakup in April was probably largely driven by ocean swell, and perhaps some winds which were strong, though not excessively so as far as we can see in the observations. The latest break-up seems to be driven also by high winds.
Back to our current field season. We had in fact planned a brief trip up here already – I am currently setting up a project looking at snow processes with the team and we had planned to install and test some new instruments and protocol that we hope to use in Antarctica later this year (more on all of that later hopefully). However, as the soon to be published preprint shows, I and the team have developed pretty extensive sea ice interests recently, so this unusual behaviour rather piqued our curiosity.
We have a lot of questions:
Why did it happen this year? Is it really the earliest in the satellite record? What makes the ice vulnerable? Composition, thickness, temperature? Is the ocean driving it or the atmosphere or both (it’s usually both), and what makes this year so unusual? Further down the line, can we model it and use those simulations to understand if this is a single aberration or likely to be more common in the future? And what impact will the earlier breakups have on the ecosystem, the adjacent glaciers and the local community?
Or fieldtrip thus appeared an excellent opportunity to grab some real data on all of these points. Our colleague Henriette Skourup at DTU-Space was kind enough to lend us one of her instruments, which we shipped up last minute to allow us to do an add-on. It is all currently sitting there waiting for us.
Unfortunately the sea ice is not waiting for us, if the photos from my colleague in Qaanaaq, Aksel are anything to go by.
A large and widening crack in the sea ice in front of Qaanaaq. The small objects on the sea ice (fishing gear?) suggest we were not the only ones surprised). Credit: Aksel Ascanius, DMI
The high winds which grounded our plane have also been busy on the sea ice, which is falling apart in the bay with surprising speed as far as I can see. We are still waiting for today’s optical imagery but the quick look from radar based Sentinel-1 suggests cracks widening rapidly as the photo above confirms.
Temperature observations from Qaanaaq airport
With a bit of luck we will get to Qaanaaq on Thursday (immaqa) to see if our sea ice research plan can go ahead. At this stage I rather doubt it. But it will very much depend on the next few hours. The wind speeds are quite high still but the temperature which was well above freezing has now dropped down to just below.
Wind observations from Qaanaaq airport
We are fortunate that we work with local hunters on the sea ice who are immensely experienced. The first rule is always safety first. We do have *a lot* of other work to do and rather fewer days to do it all in, so either way we’ll be busy. Ffor now, it’s keep checking in with the weather, the satellite images and our friends in Qaanaaq and use the time in Ilulissat wisely – in our case, it’s time to write some papers. And one of them is all about sea ice.
To be continued…
All satellite imagery on this page is from the European Space Agency Sentinel-2 mission, processed on the Copernicus EO Browser – a FREE!! and easy to use entry point to use ESA data. Weather observations are from Qaanaaq airport, operated by Mittarfeqarfiit A/S – Grønlands Lufthavne (Greenland Airports) and processed by DMI. It’s actually pretty nice how much high quality data we have access to these days…
This fieldwork is undertaken as part of the PRECISE (Predicting Ice Sheets on Earth) project funded by the Novo Nordisk Foundation and by the ESA Climate Change Initiative for Sea Ice and the Climate Modelling Research Group
#Arctic #fieldwork #Greenland #Qaanaaq #satelliteData #Science #SeaIce

#seaice #science #satellitedata #qaanaaq #greenland #fieldwork
Palm Oil Detectives @[email protected] · 2023-06-17 · 15:10 UTC
RSPO’s Dubious “Sustainability”: 30 Years of Deceit

Ecolabels like RSPO and FSC are involved in networks of extensive greenwashing. They exist to conceal corporations’ environmental damage rather than fighting it. With three decades dubious promises from environmental certifications, World Rainforest Movement calls for a swift end to this disgraceful palm oil, soy and timber industry greenwashing. You can help resist palm oil colonialism and ecocide #Boycottpalmoil #Boycott4Wildlife every time you shop!

#Ecolabels like #RSPO and #FSC are accused of greenwashing, hiding corporations’ environmental #ecocide from consumers 💩🛒 rather than fighting #corruption. Fight back with your wallet and #Boycottpalmoil 🌴🪔🩸🧐🙊⛔️ #Boycott4Wildlife @palmoildetect https://palmoildetectives.com/2023/06/18/certification-ecolabels-dubious-sustainability-30-years-of-deceit-and-violence/
Share to BlueSky Share to Twitter
World Rainforest Movement and Palm Oil Detectives call for an end to #palmoil #greenwashing from #RSPO “sustainable” palm oil 🙊🧐⛔️ Resist the greenwash and #Boycottpalmoil #Boycott4Wildlife in the supermarket! 🌴💀🩸🚫 @palmoildetect https://palmoildetectives.com/2023/06/18/certification-ecolabels-dubious-sustainability-30-years-of-deceit-and-violence/
Share to BlueSky Share to Twitter
This article was originally published by World Rainforest Movement as “Certification schemes on “sustainability”: 30 years of deceit and violence” on 25 March, 2023 and was republished with permission here alongside other reports from World Health Organisation, Global Witness and others. Read original.

The shelves in supermarkets and stores are full of certified products. The packaging displays different labels indicating products were made with “sustainable” paper or wood, food or cosmetic products made with “sustainable” palm oil, “responsible” soybeans and so on and so forth.
Even when it comes to buying an airplane ticket, consumers can pay a little more
to ensure that their carbon emissions are (supposedly) “neutralised”, so as to guarantee that much touted “sustainability”.
Read more: WHO Bulletin Report: Palm Oil and Human Health Impacts

So why is there this need for so many labels and forms of certification? What is actually being certified? And who is benefiting from this?
After 30 years of certification schemes with environmental and social bias, what is clear is that the only “sustainability” that they guarantee is that of corporations’ lucrative business.
The first environmental certification mechanism for a specific product (wood) and its production chain emerged in the early 1990s, with the creation of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). Although its origin is connected with civil society pressure on corporations, FSC has been fully incorporated into the production logic of logging companies operating in forests, of giant paper and pulp corporations using tree monoculture plantations, as well as of producers and distributors of consumer goods.
Over time, having shown that it did not constitute any threat – on the contrary: an opportunity – to the accumulation strategy of the corporations involved, other sectors started creating similar mechanisms. Hence, starting in the 2000s, initiatives and so-called roundtables for “sustainable” or “responsible” production of palm oil, soybeans, cocoa, sugarcane, among others, proliferated.
Greenwashing ecocide – Agropalma & Orangutan Land Trust
Read more: Greenwashing Ecocide: Agropalma and Orangutan Land Trust

100 NGOS signed a public statement denouncing the RSPO in late 2022
Read more

These “sustainable” initiatives have various aspects in common
1. They are dominated, compromised and funded by corporate interests
They are schemes that present themselves as non-profit associations including many apparently diverse actors and interests (companies, NGOs, governments etc.) However, in practice, the business sector participants andtheir allies, like the big conservationist NGOs, dominate these initiatives and impose their interests in a highly unequal power relation between the members.
2. They promote toothless and unenforceable guidelines
They are mechanisms that establish operational guidelines and directives for companies to adhere to on a voluntary bases, leaving no possibility of legal consequences when rules are broken – rules formulated and judged by the companies themselves, it should be noted.
3. They promote an endless growth model of capitalism in spite of our limited and finite natural world
They are initiatives submitted to the logic of the market and its expansion, that is to say, certification labels have become important both to obtain funding for companies’ expansion projects and to win over consumers, mainly urban consumers and those from the global North. Read more about the limits of the Endless growth model.
4. The mechanism for conflict resolution is set and decided upon by the certification label itself – amplifying racial and gender inequities
They are mechanisms headquartered in countries of the North, and with management boards mainly composed of men and white people, leaving the rural communities of the South that have to face the certified plantations, to play the role of mere receivers of determinations imposed from outside about the use of the space where they live. And if they want to question the actions of any of the certified companies, they must submit to the protocol created by the certification system itself on how to proceed.
5. They use greenwashing language and false promises even though this does not reflect reality
Certification schemes are used by companies as defence mechanisms whenever they are faced with criticism over the impacts of their activities:
“Our products are certified…”, “The project has certification…”, as if this has guaranteed that there is no cause for concern.
One way or another, such certification mechanisms have not stopped the destructive expansion of industrial tree plantations, oil palms, soy, etc. Read more about using Design and Words as a greenwashing tool.
6. The predatory nature of corporate land-grabbing and expansionism cannot ever work in favour of indigenous peoples
A still from the documentary: by Mama Malind su Hilang (Our Land Has Gone) Nanang Sujana Watch on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqYoRh1aApg
Certification labels have not been able to resolve the conflicts generated with traditional communities and Indigenous Peoples. Nor do they have the potential to do so, since they are designed to allow the continuity and expansion of corporate accumulation patterns that are intrinsically dependent on a predatory dynamic.
In fact, the main common denominator of such certification schemes is that they guarantee a green label to the companies involved, thus contributing to their primary objective, i.e., the maximisation of profit.
7. Certification labels like FSC and RSPO are vital to for companies gain consumer buy-in and greenwash away harms
Certifiers have hence become a key element through which companies seek to legitimize their territorial and economic expansion in the global South, deceiving consumers with the “sustainability” discourse.
In other words, these destructive corporations need certification labels to obtain some legitimacy in the eyes of consumers and investors, bearing in mind the vast number of reports, news and studies showing their harmful effects, such as:
- Violent corporate land-grabbing aided by private enforcement or military/police intervention
- Problematic, deceptive or non-existent community consultation processes
- Contamination by agro-chemicals and its human health and environmental impacts
- Soil degradation
- Dangerous and humiliating jobs
- Sexual abuse and other forms of violence against women
- Child slavery and indentured slavery
among many other impacts related to extensive monoculture plantations.
This permits one to affirm without reservation that certification itself has become an underlying cause of deforestation.
https://vimeo.com/735353691

10 Tactics of Sustainable Palm Oil Greenwashing

Greenwashing Tactic #1: Hidden Trade Off
When a brand makes token changes while continuing with deforestation, ecocide or human rights abuses in another part of their business – this is ‘Hidden Trade Off’
For example, Nestle talks up satellite monitoring to stop palm oil deforestation. Yet…
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #2: No Proof
Greenwashing Tactic 5. Palm oil companies make environmental claims without providing proof or evidence of these claims or using spurious evidence.
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #3: Vagueness
Claiming a brand or commodity is ‘green’ or ‘sustainable’ based on broad generalisations, unclear language or vague statements Jump to section Greenwashing: Vagueness in Language Greenwashing: Vagueness in certification standards Reality: Auditing of RSPO a failure Quote: EIA: Who Watches…
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #4: Fake Labels
Claiming a brand or commodity is green based on unreliable, ineffective endorsements or eco-labels such as the RSPO, Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) or FairTrade coffee and cocoa. Greenwashing: Fake Labels and fake certifications Ecolabels are designed to reassure consumers that…
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #5: Irrelevance and Deflection
Learn how lobbyists use irrelevant information and deflection to shift the conversation away from their environmental harms, e.g. “sustainable” palm oil.
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #6: The Lesser of Two Evils
Claiming that a brand, commodity or industry is greener than others in the same category, in order to excuse ecocide, deforestation, human rights and animal rights abuses. Jump to section Greenwashing: Lesser of Two Evils: Palm Oil Uses Less Land…
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #7: Lying
Greenwashing lies are falsifying support from authorities to back up claims or using spurious research data to back up the greenwashing, boycott palm oil!
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic 8: Design & Words
Greenwashing Tactic 8. Companies use design principles and subliminal language to signal ‘greenness’ and trigger unconscious emotional responses in consumers
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic 9: Partnerships, Sponsorships and Research Funding
Greenwashing Tactic 9. Corporations use NGOs, Zoo partnerships, sponsorships, and research funding to give an industry or brand a ‘green image.
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic 10: Gaslighting, Harassment, Stalking and Threats
Gaslighting, harassing or stalking vocal critics of a brand, commodity or industry certification in order to silence these critics – this is greenwashing!
Read more
Ten Tactics of ‘Sustainable’ Palm Oil Greenwashing
Learn ten marketing and PR tactics used for “sustainble” palm oil greenwashing to justify endless growth by the palm oil industry. Boycott palm oil now!
Read more
New forms of greenwashing: Carbon Credits and Biodiversity Credits
Furthermore, it is important to mention that the idea of certification has been taking on new shapes. With the creation of offset mechanisms for carbon emissions and biodiversity loss, new commodities have emerged already linked to certification mechanisms. In this new market, carbon credits and biodiversity credits – issued by certification schemes – represent a supposed guarantee that greenhouse gas emissions or the destruction of biodiversity are being duly offset elsewhere.
Differently from wood, paper, palm oil or soybeans, where the certification is “added” to the product by means of a label, in the carbon or biodiversity markets it is the
certification itself that makes it feasible for the product to be consumed.
In other words, the commodity in itself is supposedly a guarantee – though a virtual guarantee, obtained through dubious methodologies and permeated by openly suspect interests.
https://youtu.be/X7x4TWazWJg
This compilation of articles from the WRM Bulletin aims to underscore the damaging role played by companies and organisations involved in certification schemes. WRM considers it important to highlight that after three decades with ever more environmental certification labels on the market, it is urgent to put an end to this greenwashing.
Ultimately, instead of combating environmental devastation and the social ills linked
to corporations’ and other players’ operations, these labels cover up and
sustain their destructive logic.

Sexual Exploitation and Violence against Women at the Root of the Industrial Plantation Model
The industrial plantation model is intrinsically linked with patriarchal oppression, serving as a cornerstone for corporate profitability. Companies often exploit women, recognizing their integral role within community dynamics, as a means to augment their bottom line. The intersection of gender and economic exploitation exemplifies the profound social implications of this oppressive system.
Read more
RSPO: outsourcing environmental regulation to oil palm businesses and industry
The RSPO certification, cleverly turning the palm oil industry’s legitimacy crisis to its favor, uses it as a stepping stone to further strengthen the industry’s position. It provides certificates claiming to meet sustainability standards—a clear advantage to the industry. However, it’s important to note that these standards are largely controlled by and designed to benefit companies operating within the palm oil sector itself.
Read more
“Gender” in the palm oil industry and its RSPO label
Implementing gender policies in oil palm companies and the RSPO certification scheme is a start. But do they truly tackle the violence, patriarchy, and racism in the plantation model, or merely mask them? It’s crucial to examine how these policies are enacted and if they genuinely drive substantial change, or just scratch the surface of these systemic issues.
Read more
https://youtu.be/0n4LSP9RCfA

Colombia: Palm-Producing Company Poligrow Plans to Grab more Land under the “Small Producers” Scheme
The harsh realities of violence, mass killings, and forced relocations amid the armed conflict in Colombia have disturbingly paved the way for the expansion of industrial oil palm cultivation. The palm oil company and RSPO member Poligrow, has been significantly implicated in these issues, with credible allegations of land seizure and intimidation tactics within the region of Mapiripán.
Read more
Greenwashing Words: Language that kills forests
Language never operates in a vacuum. Historically, specific terms have been leveraged as tools for exercising control over populations and territories. This article throws light on certain terms which, while seemingly positive, often shield economic interests detrimental to forests, forest animals and forest peoples.
Read more
Africa: The RSPO certification for palm oil plantations is greenwash!
The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) is a widely used certification system promising environmental, safety, and human rights standards in the palm oil industry. However, Friends of the Earth Africa groups contest its effectiveness, citing ongoing environmental degradation, human rights breaches, biodiversity loss, and increased poverty in Africa linked to the activities of palm oil companies.
Read more
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnXISnURIBA

Communities resisting the impunity and impacts of oil palm growers in Ecuador: Cases from Esmeraldas
The palm industry in Ecuador, encompassing 270,000 hectares of plantations, has been using the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) certification to project an image of sustainability, setting itself apart from Asian palm oil. However, critics argue that this certification merely muffles community objections. Resistance from communities such as La Chiquita, Guadualito, and Barranquilla de San Javier in the Esmeraldas region continues to fuel discontent and foster international solidarity.
Read more
RSPO Certification despite land conflicts, violence and criminalisation
Nearly 1,500 members of MALOA in Sierra Leone are challenging RSPO’s certification of a SOCFIN subsidiary. They cite a string of conflicts and grievances tied to land use. This move follows controversial certifications of SOCFIN group’s operations in Nigeria, Cameroon, and Ivory Coast. Critics question if RSPO, perceived as industry-biased, can truly guarantee sustainability and human rights in the palm oil sector.
Read more
Are FSC and RSPO accomplices in crime? Agropalma’s Unresolved Land Question in the Brazilian Amazon
The Palmas del Ixcán company in Guatemala is accused of implementing systematic dispossession of land from indigenous communities for oil palm cultivation, using tactics such as deceptive RSPO certification and independent producers. The company’s strategic approach replaced the traditional collective land management by indigenous people in the Municipality of Ixcán, which had been disrupted by development plans since the 1960s. Despite filing a complaint to the RSPO and participating in consultations, the communities found their concerns disregarded, leading them to criticize the RSPO and label it a sham, asserting that its true intention is to facilitate palm planting at any cost.
Read more
Water is life – stop planting palms! reads a sign in Guatemala
“Water is life. Stop planting oil palms”. Photo: Movimiento Social Intercultural del Pueblo de Ixcán, Guatemala
This article was originally published by World Rainforest Movement as “Certification schemes on “sustainability”: 30 years of deceit and violence” on 25 March, 2023 and was republished with permission alongside other reports from World Health Organisation, Global Witness and others. Read original.
ENDS

Read more about human rights abuses and greenwashing associated with “sustainable” palm oil

So-called ‘Net Zero’ Flights Flush Rainforest Carbon Into the Sky
Virgin Atlantic airlines now uses ‘sustainable aviation fuel’ however experts call it greenwashing and industry spin causing climate change. Boycott palm oil!
Read more
Oreo Maker Linked to Ongoing Deforestation and Human Rights Abuses
Mondelēz International who make Oreos keep sourcing palm oil from suppliers linked to violence and deforestation. Their RSPO certification is pure greenwash!
Read more
Parrot Deaths Highlight Urgent Need to Reform CITES
The legal trade is largely to blame for African grey parrots becoming endangered. Regulator CITES is broken allowing exploitation, massive reform needed now!
Read more
Seeing Forest As Merely A Carbon “Commodity”: Dangerous Greenwashing
Commodifying forests as merely an investment for ‘carbon credits’ has many dangerous loopholes that human rights to indigenous peoples, take action!
Read more
Finance giants fuel $8.9 trillion deforestation economy
Forest 500 report shows 150 of the world’s largest financial institutions invested nearly $9 trillion in deforestation-linked industries. Support EUDR!
Read more Load more posts
Something went wrong. Please refresh the page and/or try again.

Take Action in Five Ways
1. Join the #Boycott4Wildlife on social media and subscribe to stay in the loop: Share posts from this website to your own network on Twitter, Mastadon, Instagram, Facebook and Youtube using the hashtags #Boycottpalmoil #Boycott4Wildlife.
- Twitter
- Facebook
- Instagram
- WordPress
- YouTube
- Mail
- Mastodon
Enter your email address
Sign Up
Join 3,179 other subscribers
2. Contribute stories: Academics, conservationists, scientists, indigenous rights advocates and animal rights advocates working to expose the corruption of the palm oil industry or to save animals can contribute stories to the website.

Wildlife Artist Juanchi Pérez
Read more
Mel Lumby: Dedicated Devotee to Borneo’s Living Beings
Read more
Anthropologist and Author Dr Sophie Chao
Read more
Health Physician Dr Evan Allen
Read more
The World’s Most Loved Cup: A Social, Ethical & Environmental History of Coffee by Aviary Doert
Read more
How do we stop the world’s ecosystems from going into a death spiral? A #SteadyState Economy
Read more
3. Supermarket sleuthing: Next time you’re in the supermarket, take photos of products containing palm oil. Share these to social media along with the hashtags to call out the greenwashing and ecocide of the brands who use palm oil. You can also take photos of palm oil free products and congratulate brands when they go palm oil free.

https://twitter.com/CuriousApe4/status/1526136783557529600?s=20

https://twitter.com/PhillDixon1/status/1749010345555788144?s=20

https://twitter.com/mugabe139/status/1678027567977078784?s=20

4. Take to the streets: Get in touch with Palm Oil Detectives to find out more.
5. Donate: Make a one-off or monthly donation to Palm Oil Detectives as a way of saying thank you and to help pay for ongoing running costs of the website and social media campaigns. Donate here
Pledge your support
#auditFraud #Boycott4wildlife #BoycottPalmOil #corruption #deforestation #ecocide #ecolabels #fraud #FSC #greenwashing #humanRights #indigenousRights #landRights #landgrabbing #OrangutanLandTrust #palm #palmOilDeforestation #palmoil #RSPO #RSPOGreenwashing
#auditfraud #boycott4wildlife #boycottpalmoil #corruption #deforestation #ecocide
Palm Oil Detectives @[email protected] · 2023-06-17 · 15:10 UTC
RSPO’s Dubious “Sustainability”: 30 Years of Deceit

Ecolabels like RSPO and FSC are involved in networks of extensive greenwashing. They exist to conceal corporations’ environmental damage rather than fighting it. With three decades dubious promises from environmental certifications, World Rainforest Movement calls for a swift end to this disgraceful palm oil, soy and timber industry greenwashing. You can help resist palm oil colonialism and ecocide #Boycottpalmoil #Boycott4Wildlife every time you shop!

#Ecolabels like #RSPO and #FSC are accused of greenwashing, hiding corporations’ environmental #ecocide from consumers 💩🛒 rather than fighting #corruption. Fight back with your wallet and #Boycottpalmoil 🌴🪔🩸🧐🙊⛔️ #Boycott4Wildlife @palmoildetect https://palmoildetectives.com/2023/06/18/certification-ecolabels-dubious-sustainability-30-years-of-deceit-and-violence/
Share to BlueSky Share to Twitter
World Rainforest Movement and Palm Oil Detectives call for an end to #palmoil #greenwashing from #RSPO “sustainable” palm oil 🙊🧐⛔️ Resist the greenwash and #Boycottpalmoil #Boycott4Wildlife in the supermarket! 🌴💀🩸🚫 @palmoildetect https://palmoildetectives.com/2023/06/18/certification-ecolabels-dubious-sustainability-30-years-of-deceit-and-violence/
Share to BlueSky Share to Twitter
This article was originally published by World Rainforest Movement as “Certification schemes on “sustainability”: 30 years of deceit and violence” on 25 March, 2023 and was republished with permission here alongside other reports from World Health Organisation, Global Witness and others. Read original.

The shelves in supermarkets and stores are full of certified products. The packaging displays different labels indicating products were made with “sustainable” paper or wood, food or cosmetic products made with “sustainable” palm oil, “responsible” soybeans and so on and so forth.
Even when it comes to buying an airplane ticket, consumers can pay a little more
to ensure that their carbon emissions are (supposedly) “neutralised”, so as to guarantee that much touted “sustainability”.
Read more: WHO Bulletin Report: Palm Oil and Human Health Impacts

So why is there this need for so many labels and forms of certification? What is actually being certified? And who is benefiting from this?
After 30 years of certification schemes with environmental and social bias, what is clear is that the only “sustainability” that they guarantee is that of corporations’ lucrative business.
The first environmental certification mechanism for a specific product (wood) and its production chain emerged in the early 1990s, with the creation of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). Although its origin is connected with civil society pressure on corporations, FSC has been fully incorporated into the production logic of logging companies operating in forests, of giant paper and pulp corporations using tree monoculture plantations, as well as of producers and distributors of consumer goods.
Over time, having shown that it did not constitute any threat – on the contrary: an opportunity – to the accumulation strategy of the corporations involved, other sectors started creating similar mechanisms. Hence, starting in the 2000s, initiatives and so-called roundtables for “sustainable” or “responsible” production of palm oil, soybeans, cocoa, sugarcane, among others, proliferated.
Greenwashing ecocide – Agropalma & Orangutan Land Trust
Read more: Greenwashing Ecocide: Agropalma and Orangutan Land Trust

100 NGOS signed a public statement denouncing the RSPO in late 2022
Read more

These “sustainable” initiatives have various aspects in common
1. They are dominated, compromised and funded by corporate interests
They are schemes that present themselves as non-profit associations including many apparently diverse actors and interests (companies, NGOs, governments etc.) However, in practice, the business sector participants andtheir allies, like the big conservationist NGOs, dominate these initiatives and impose their interests in a highly unequal power relation between the members.
2. They promote toothless and unenforceable guidelines
They are mechanisms that establish operational guidelines and directives for companies to adhere to on a voluntary bases, leaving no possibility of legal consequences when rules are broken – rules formulated and judged by the companies themselves, it should be noted.
3. They promote an endless growth model of capitalism in spite of our limited and finite natural world
They are initiatives submitted to the logic of the market and its expansion, that is to say, certification labels have become important both to obtain funding for companies’ expansion projects and to win over consumers, mainly urban consumers and those from the global North. Read more about the limits of the Endless growth model.
4. The mechanism for conflict resolution is set and decided upon by the certification label itself – amplifying racial and gender inequities
They are mechanisms headquartered in countries of the North, and with management boards mainly composed of men and white people, leaving the rural communities of the South that have to face the certified plantations, to play the role of mere receivers of determinations imposed from outside about the use of the space where they live. And if they want to question the actions of any of the certified companies, they must submit to the protocol created by the certification system itself on how to proceed.
5. They use greenwashing language and false promises even though this does not reflect reality
Certification schemes are used by companies as defence mechanisms whenever they are faced with criticism over the impacts of their activities:
“Our products are certified…”, “The project has certification…”, as if this has guaranteed that there is no cause for concern.
One way or another, such certification mechanisms have not stopped the destructive expansion of industrial tree plantations, oil palms, soy, etc. Read more about using Design and Words as a greenwashing tool.
6. The predatory nature of corporate land-grabbing and expansionism cannot ever work in favour of indigenous peoples
A still from the documentary: by Mama Malind su Hilang (Our Land Has Gone) Nanang Sujana Watch on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqYoRh1aApg
Certification labels have not been able to resolve the conflicts generated with traditional communities and Indigenous Peoples. Nor do they have the potential to do so, since they are designed to allow the continuity and expansion of corporate accumulation patterns that are intrinsically dependent on a predatory dynamic.
In fact, the main common denominator of such certification schemes is that they guarantee a green label to the companies involved, thus contributing to their primary objective, i.e., the maximisation of profit.
7. Certification labels like FSC and RSPO are vital to for companies gain consumer buy-in and greenwash away harms
Certifiers have hence become a key element through which companies seek to legitimize their territorial and economic expansion in the global South, deceiving consumers with the “sustainability” discourse.
In other words, these destructive corporations need certification labels to obtain some legitimacy in the eyes of consumers and investors, bearing in mind the vast number of reports, news and studies showing their harmful effects, such as:
- Violent corporate land-grabbing aided by private enforcement or military/police intervention
- Problematic, deceptive or non-existent community consultation processes
- Contamination by agro-chemicals and its human health and environmental impacts
- Soil degradation
- Dangerous and humiliating jobs
- Sexual abuse and other forms of violence against women
- Child slavery and indentured slavery
among many other impacts related to extensive monoculture plantations.
This permits one to affirm without reservation that certification itself has become an underlying cause of deforestation.
https://vimeo.com/735353691

10 Tactics of Sustainable Palm Oil Greenwashing

Greenwashing Tactic #1: Hidden Trade Off
When a brand makes token changes while continuing with deforestation, ecocide or human rights abuses in another part of their business – this is ‘Hidden Trade Off’
For example, Nestle talks up satellite monitoring to stop palm oil deforestation. Yet…
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #2: No Proof
Greenwashing Tactic 5. Palm oil companies make environmental claims without providing proof or evidence of these claims or using spurious evidence.
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #3: Vagueness
Claiming a brand or commodity is ‘green’ or ‘sustainable’ based on broad generalisations, unclear language or vague statements Jump to section Greenwashing: Vagueness in Language Greenwashing: Vagueness in certification standards Reality: Auditing of RSPO a failure Quote: EIA: Who Watches…
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #4: Fake Labels
Claiming a brand or commodity is green based on unreliable, ineffective endorsements or eco-labels such as the RSPO, Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) or FairTrade coffee and cocoa. Greenwashing: Fake Labels and fake certifications Ecolabels are designed to reassure consumers that…
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #5: Irrelevance and Deflection
Learn how lobbyists use irrelevant information and deflection to shift the conversation away from their environmental harms, e.g. “sustainable” palm oil.
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #6: The Lesser of Two Evils
Claiming that a brand, commodity or industry is greener than others in the same category, in order to excuse ecocide, deforestation, human rights and animal rights abuses. Jump to section Greenwashing: Lesser of Two Evils: Palm Oil Uses Less Land…
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #7: Lying
Greenwashing lies are falsifying support from authorities to back up claims or using spurious research data to back up the greenwashing, boycott palm oil!
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic 8: Design & Words
Greenwashing Tactic 8. Companies use design principles and subliminal language to signal ‘greenness’ and trigger unconscious emotional responses in consumers
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic 9: Partnerships, Sponsorships and Research Funding
Greenwashing Tactic 9. Corporations use NGOs, Zoo partnerships, sponsorships, and research funding to give an industry or brand a ‘green image.
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic 10: Gaslighting, Harassment, Stalking and Threats
Gaslighting, harassing or stalking vocal critics of a brand, commodity or industry certification in order to silence these critics – this is greenwashing!
Read more
Ten Tactics of ‘Sustainable’ Palm Oil Greenwashing
Learn ten marketing and PR tactics used for “sustainble” palm oil greenwashing to justify endless growth by the palm oil industry. Boycott palm oil now!
Read more
New forms of greenwashing: Carbon Credits and Biodiversity Credits
Furthermore, it is important to mention that the idea of certification has been taking on new shapes. With the creation of offset mechanisms for carbon emissions and biodiversity loss, new commodities have emerged already linked to certification mechanisms. In this new market, carbon credits and biodiversity credits – issued by certification schemes – represent a supposed guarantee that greenhouse gas emissions or the destruction of biodiversity are being duly offset elsewhere.
Differently from wood, paper, palm oil or soybeans, where the certification is “added” to the product by means of a label, in the carbon or biodiversity markets it is the
certification itself that makes it feasible for the product to be consumed.
In other words, the commodity in itself is supposedly a guarantee – though a virtual guarantee, obtained through dubious methodologies and permeated by openly suspect interests.
https://youtu.be/X7x4TWazWJg
This compilation of articles from the WRM Bulletin aims to underscore the damaging role played by companies and organisations involved in certification schemes. WRM considers it important to highlight that after three decades with ever more environmental certification labels on the market, it is urgent to put an end to this greenwashing.
Ultimately, instead of combating environmental devastation and the social ills linked
to corporations’ and other players’ operations, these labels cover up and
sustain their destructive logic.

Sexual Exploitation and Violence against Women at the Root of the Industrial Plantation Model
The industrial plantation model is intrinsically linked with patriarchal oppression, serving as a cornerstone for corporate profitability. Companies often exploit women, recognizing their integral role within community dynamics, as a means to augment their bottom line. The intersection of gender and economic exploitation exemplifies the profound social implications of this oppressive system.
Read more
RSPO: outsourcing environmental regulation to oil palm businesses and industry
The RSPO certification, cleverly turning the palm oil industry’s legitimacy crisis to its favor, uses it as a stepping stone to further strengthen the industry’s position. It provides certificates claiming to meet sustainability standards—a clear advantage to the industry. However, it’s important to note that these standards are largely controlled by and designed to benefit companies operating within the palm oil sector itself.
Read more
“Gender” in the palm oil industry and its RSPO label
Implementing gender policies in oil palm companies and the RSPO certification scheme is a start. But do they truly tackle the violence, patriarchy, and racism in the plantation model, or merely mask them? It’s crucial to examine how these policies are enacted and if they genuinely drive substantial change, or just scratch the surface of these systemic issues.
Read more
https://youtu.be/0n4LSP9RCfA

Colombia: Palm-Producing Company Poligrow Plans to Grab more Land under the “Small Producers” Scheme
The harsh realities of violence, mass killings, and forced relocations amid the armed conflict in Colombia have disturbingly paved the way for the expansion of industrial oil palm cultivation. The palm oil company and RSPO member Poligrow, has been significantly implicated in these issues, with credible allegations of land seizure and intimidation tactics within the region of Mapiripán.
Read more
Greenwashing Words: Language that kills forests
Language never operates in a vacuum. Historically, specific terms have been leveraged as tools for exercising control over populations and territories. This article throws light on certain terms which, while seemingly positive, often shield economic interests detrimental to forests, forest animals and forest peoples.
Read more
Africa: The RSPO certification for palm oil plantations is greenwash!
The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) is a widely used certification system promising environmental, safety, and human rights standards in the palm oil industry. However, Friends of the Earth Africa groups contest its effectiveness, citing ongoing environmental degradation, human rights breaches, biodiversity loss, and increased poverty in Africa linked to the activities of palm oil companies.
Read more
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnXISnURIBA

Communities resisting the impunity and impacts of oil palm growers in Ecuador: Cases from Esmeraldas
The palm industry in Ecuador, encompassing 270,000 hectares of plantations, has been using the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) certification to project an image of sustainability, setting itself apart from Asian palm oil. However, critics argue that this certification merely muffles community objections. Resistance from communities such as La Chiquita, Guadualito, and Barranquilla de San Javier in the Esmeraldas region continues to fuel discontent and foster international solidarity.
Read more
RSPO Certification despite land conflicts, violence and criminalisation
Nearly 1,500 members of MALOA in Sierra Leone are challenging RSPO’s certification of a SOCFIN subsidiary. They cite a string of conflicts and grievances tied to land use. This move follows controversial certifications of SOCFIN group’s operations in Nigeria, Cameroon, and Ivory Coast. Critics question if RSPO, perceived as industry-biased, can truly guarantee sustainability and human rights in the palm oil sector.
Read more
Are FSC and RSPO accomplices in crime? Agropalma’s Unresolved Land Question in the Brazilian Amazon
The Palmas del Ixcán company in Guatemala is accused of implementing systematic dispossession of land from indigenous communities for oil palm cultivation, using tactics such as deceptive RSPO certification and independent producers. The company’s strategic approach replaced the traditional collective land management by indigenous people in the Municipality of Ixcán, which had been disrupted by development plans since the 1960s. Despite filing a complaint to the RSPO and participating in consultations, the communities found their concerns disregarded, leading them to criticize the RSPO and label it a sham, asserting that its true intention is to facilitate palm planting at any cost.
Read more
Water is life – stop planting palms! reads a sign in Guatemala
“Water is life. Stop planting oil palms”. Photo: Movimiento Social Intercultural del Pueblo de Ixcán, Guatemala
This article was originally published by World Rainforest Movement as “Certification schemes on “sustainability”: 30 years of deceit and violence” on 25 March, 2023 and was republished with permission alongside other reports from World Health Organisation, Global Witness and others. Read original.
ENDS

Read more about human rights abuses and greenwashing associated with “sustainable” palm oil

So-called ‘Net Zero’ Flights Flush Rainforest Carbon Into the Sky
Virgin Atlantic airlines now uses ‘sustainable aviation fuel’ however experts call it greenwashing and industry spin causing climate change. Boycott palm oil!
Read more
Oreo Maker Linked to Ongoing Deforestation and Human Rights Abuses
Mondelēz International who make Oreos keep sourcing palm oil from suppliers linked to violence and deforestation. Their RSPO certification is pure greenwash!
Read more
Parrot Deaths Highlight Urgent Need to Reform CITES
The legal trade is largely to blame for African grey parrots becoming endangered. Regulator CITES is broken allowing exploitation, massive reform needed now!
Read more
Seeing Forest As Merely A Carbon “Commodity”: Dangerous Greenwashing
Commodifying forests as merely an investment for ‘carbon credits’ has many dangerous loopholes that human rights to indigenous peoples, take action!
Read more
Finance giants fuel $8.9 trillion deforestation economy
Forest 500 report shows 150 of the world’s largest financial institutions invested nearly $9 trillion in deforestation-linked industries. Support EUDR!
Read more Load more posts
Something went wrong. Please refresh the page and/or try again.

Take Action in Five Ways
1. Join the #Boycott4Wildlife on social media and subscribe to stay in the loop: Share posts from this website to your own network on Twitter, Mastadon, Instagram, Facebook and Youtube using the hashtags #Boycottpalmoil #Boycott4Wildlife.
- Twitter
- Facebook
- Instagram
- WordPress
- YouTube
- Mail
- Mastodon
Enter your email address
Sign Up
Join 3,179 other subscribers
2. Contribute stories: Academics, conservationists, scientists, indigenous rights advocates and animal rights advocates working to expose the corruption of the palm oil industry or to save animals can contribute stories to the website.

Wildlife Artist Juanchi Pérez
Read more
Mel Lumby: Dedicated Devotee to Borneo’s Living Beings
Read more
Anthropologist and Author Dr Sophie Chao
Read more
Health Physician Dr Evan Allen
Read more
The World’s Most Loved Cup: A Social, Ethical & Environmental History of Coffee by Aviary Doert
Read more
How do we stop the world’s ecosystems from going into a death spiral? A #SteadyState Economy
Read more
3. Supermarket sleuthing: Next time you’re in the supermarket, take photos of products containing palm oil. Share these to social media along with the hashtags to call out the greenwashing and ecocide of the brands who use palm oil. You can also take photos of palm oil free products and congratulate brands when they go palm oil free.

https://twitter.com/CuriousApe4/status/1526136783557529600?s=20

https://twitter.com/PhillDixon1/status/1749010345555788144?s=20

https://twitter.com/mugabe139/status/1678027567977078784?s=20

4. Take to the streets: Get in touch with Palm Oil Detectives to find out more.
5. Donate: Make a one-off or monthly donation to Palm Oil Detectives as a way of saying thank you and to help pay for ongoing running costs of the website and social media campaigns. Donate here
Pledge your support
#auditFraud #Boycott4wildlife #BoycottPalmOil #corruption #deforestation #ecocide #ecolabels #fraud #FSC #greenwashing #humanRights #indigenousRights #landRights #landgrabbing #OrangutanLandTrust #palm #palmOilDeforestation #palmoil #RSPO #RSPOGreenwashing
#auditfraud #boycott4wildlife #boycottpalmoil #corruption #deforestation #ecocide
Palm Oil Detectives @[email protected] · 2023-06-17 · 15:10 UTC
RSPO’s Dubious “Sustainability”: 30 Years of Deceit

Ecolabels like RSPO and FSC are involved in networks of extensive greenwashing. They exist to conceal corporations’ environmental damage rather than fighting it. With three decades dubious promises from environmental certifications, World Rainforest Movement calls for a swift end to this disgraceful palm oil, soy and timber industry greenwashing. You can help resist palm oil colonialism and ecocide #Boycottpalmoil #Boycott4Wildlife every time you shop!

#Ecolabels like #RSPO and #FSC are accused of greenwashing, hiding corporations’ environmental #ecocide from consumers 💩🛒 rather than fighting #corruption. Fight back with your wallet and #Boycottpalmoil 🌴🪔🩸🧐🙊⛔️ #Boycott4Wildlife @palmoildetect https://palmoildetectives.com/2023/06/18/certification-ecolabels-dubious-sustainability-30-years-of-deceit-and-violence/
Share to BlueSky Share to Twitter
World Rainforest Movement and Palm Oil Detectives call for an end to #palmoil #greenwashing from #RSPO “sustainable” palm oil 🙊🧐⛔️ Resist the greenwash and #Boycottpalmoil #Boycott4Wildlife in the supermarket! 🌴💀🩸🚫 @palmoildetect https://palmoildetectives.com/2023/06/18/certification-ecolabels-dubious-sustainability-30-years-of-deceit-and-violence/
Share to BlueSky Share to Twitter
This article was originally published by World Rainforest Movement as “Certification schemes on “sustainability”: 30 years of deceit and violence” on 25 March, 2023 and was republished with permission here alongside other reports from World Health Organisation, Global Witness and others. Read original.

The shelves in supermarkets and stores are full of certified products. The packaging displays different labels indicating products were made with “sustainable” paper or wood, food or cosmetic products made with “sustainable” palm oil, “responsible” soybeans and so on and so forth.
Even when it comes to buying an airplane ticket, consumers can pay a little more
to ensure that their carbon emissions are (supposedly) “neutralised”, so as to guarantee that much touted “sustainability”.
Read more: WHO Bulletin Report: Palm Oil and Human Health Impacts

So why is there this need for so many labels and forms of certification? What is actually being certified? And who is benefiting from this?
After 30 years of certification schemes with environmental and social bias, what is clear is that the only “sustainability” that they guarantee is that of corporations’ lucrative business.
The first environmental certification mechanism for a specific product (wood) and its production chain emerged in the early 1990s, with the creation of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). Although its origin is connected with civil society pressure on corporations, FSC has been fully incorporated into the production logic of logging companies operating in forests, of giant paper and pulp corporations using tree monoculture plantations, as well as of producers and distributors of consumer goods.
Over time, having shown that it did not constitute any threat – on the contrary: an opportunity – to the accumulation strategy of the corporations involved, other sectors started creating similar mechanisms. Hence, starting in the 2000s, initiatives and so-called roundtables for “sustainable” or “responsible” production of palm oil, soybeans, cocoa, sugarcane, among others, proliferated.
Greenwashing ecocide – Agropalma & Orangutan Land Trust
Read more: Greenwashing Ecocide: Agropalma and Orangutan Land Trust

100 NGOS signed a public statement denouncing the RSPO in late 2022
Read more

These “sustainable” initiatives have various aspects in common
1. They are dominated, compromised and funded by corporate interests
They are schemes that present themselves as non-profit associations including many apparently diverse actors and interests (companies, NGOs, governments etc.) However, in practice, the business sector participants andtheir allies, like the big conservationist NGOs, dominate these initiatives and impose their interests in a highly unequal power relation between the members.
2. They promote toothless and unenforceable guidelines
They are mechanisms that establish operational guidelines and directives for companies to adhere to on a voluntary bases, leaving no possibility of legal consequences when rules are broken – rules formulated and judged by the companies themselves, it should be noted.
3. They promote an endless growth model of capitalism in spite of our limited and finite natural world
They are initiatives submitted to the logic of the market and its expansion, that is to say, certification labels have become important both to obtain funding for companies’ expansion projects and to win over consumers, mainly urban consumers and those from the global North. Read more about the limits of the Endless growth model.
4. The mechanism for conflict resolution is set and decided upon by the certification label itself – amplifying racial and gender inequities
They are mechanisms headquartered in countries of the North, and with management boards mainly composed of men and white people, leaving the rural communities of the South that have to face the certified plantations, to play the role of mere receivers of determinations imposed from outside about the use of the space where they live. And if they want to question the actions of any of the certified companies, they must submit to the protocol created by the certification system itself on how to proceed.
5. They use greenwashing language and false promises even though this does not reflect reality
Certification schemes are used by companies as defence mechanisms whenever they are faced with criticism over the impacts of their activities:
“Our products are certified…”, “The project has certification…”, as if this has guaranteed that there is no cause for concern.
One way or another, such certification mechanisms have not stopped the destructive expansion of industrial tree plantations, oil palms, soy, etc. Read more about using Design and Words as a greenwashing tool.
6. The predatory nature of corporate land-grabbing and expansionism cannot ever work in favour of indigenous peoples
A still from the documentary: by Mama Malind su Hilang (Our Land Has Gone) Nanang Sujana Watch on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqYoRh1aApg
Certification labels have not been able to resolve the conflicts generated with traditional communities and Indigenous Peoples. Nor do they have the potential to do so, since they are designed to allow the continuity and expansion of corporate accumulation patterns that are intrinsically dependent on a predatory dynamic.
In fact, the main common denominator of such certification schemes is that they guarantee a green label to the companies involved, thus contributing to their primary objective, i.e., the maximisation of profit.
7. Certification labels like FSC and RSPO are vital to for companies gain consumer buy-in and greenwash away harms
Certifiers have hence become a key element through which companies seek to legitimize their territorial and economic expansion in the global South, deceiving consumers with the “sustainability” discourse.
In other words, these destructive corporations need certification labels to obtain some legitimacy in the eyes of consumers and investors, bearing in mind the vast number of reports, news and studies showing their harmful effects, such as:
- Violent corporate land-grabbing aided by private enforcement or military/police intervention
- Problematic, deceptive or non-existent community consultation processes
- Contamination by agro-chemicals and its human health and environmental impacts
- Soil degradation
- Dangerous and humiliating jobs
- Sexual abuse and other forms of violence against women
- Child slavery and indentured slavery
among many other impacts related to extensive monoculture plantations.
This permits one to affirm without reservation that certification itself has become an underlying cause of deforestation.
https://vimeo.com/735353691

10 Tactics of Sustainable Palm Oil Greenwashing

Greenwashing Tactic #1: Hidden Trade Off
When a brand makes token changes while continuing with deforestation, ecocide or human rights abuses in another part of their business – this is ‘Hidden Trade Off’
For example, Nestle talks up satellite monitoring to stop palm oil deforestation. Yet…
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #2: No Proof
Greenwashing Tactic 5. Palm oil companies make environmental claims without providing proof or evidence of these claims or using spurious evidence.
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #3: Vagueness
Claiming a brand or commodity is ‘green’ or ‘sustainable’ based on broad generalisations, unclear language or vague statements Jump to section Greenwashing: Vagueness in Language Greenwashing: Vagueness in certification standards Reality: Auditing of RSPO a failure Quote: EIA: Who Watches…
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #4: Fake Labels
Claiming a brand or commodity is green based on unreliable, ineffective endorsements or eco-labels such as the RSPO, Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) or FairTrade coffee and cocoa. Greenwashing: Fake Labels and fake certifications Ecolabels are designed to reassure consumers that…
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #5: Irrelevance and Deflection
Learn how lobbyists use irrelevant information and deflection to shift the conversation away from their environmental harms, e.g. “sustainable” palm oil.
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #6: The Lesser of Two Evils
Claiming that a brand, commodity or industry is greener than others in the same category, in order to excuse ecocide, deforestation, human rights and animal rights abuses. Jump to section Greenwashing: Lesser of Two Evils: Palm Oil Uses Less Land…
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #7: Lying
Greenwashing lies are falsifying support from authorities to back up claims or using spurious research data to back up the greenwashing, boycott palm oil!
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic 8: Design & Words
Greenwashing Tactic 8. Companies use design principles and subliminal language to signal ‘greenness’ and trigger unconscious emotional responses in consumers
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic 9: Partnerships, Sponsorships and Research Funding
Greenwashing Tactic 9. Corporations use NGOs, Zoo partnerships, sponsorships, and research funding to give an industry or brand a ‘green image.
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic 10: Gaslighting, Harassment, Stalking and Threats
Gaslighting, harassing or stalking vocal critics of a brand, commodity or industry certification in order to silence these critics – this is greenwashing!
Read more
Ten Tactics of ‘Sustainable’ Palm Oil Greenwashing
Learn ten marketing and PR tactics used for “sustainble” palm oil greenwashing to justify endless growth by the palm oil industry. Boycott palm oil now!
Read more
New forms of greenwashing: Carbon Credits and Biodiversity Credits
Furthermore, it is important to mention that the idea of certification has been taking on new shapes. With the creation of offset mechanisms for carbon emissions and biodiversity loss, new commodities have emerged already linked to certification mechanisms. In this new market, carbon credits and biodiversity credits – issued by certification schemes – represent a supposed guarantee that greenhouse gas emissions or the destruction of biodiversity are being duly offset elsewhere.
Differently from wood, paper, palm oil or soybeans, where the certification is “added” to the product by means of a label, in the carbon or biodiversity markets it is the
certification itself that makes it feasible for the product to be consumed.
In other words, the commodity in itself is supposedly a guarantee – though a virtual guarantee, obtained through dubious methodologies and permeated by openly suspect interests.
https://youtu.be/X7x4TWazWJg
This compilation of articles from the WRM Bulletin aims to underscore the damaging role played by companies and organisations involved in certification schemes. WRM considers it important to highlight that after three decades with ever more environmental certification labels on the market, it is urgent to put an end to this greenwashing.
Ultimately, instead of combating environmental devastation and the social ills linked
to corporations’ and other players’ operations, these labels cover up and
sustain their destructive logic.

Sexual Exploitation and Violence against Women at the Root of the Industrial Plantation Model
The industrial plantation model is intrinsically linked with patriarchal oppression, serving as a cornerstone for corporate profitability. Companies often exploit women, recognizing their integral role within community dynamics, as a means to augment their bottom line. The intersection of gender and economic exploitation exemplifies the profound social implications of this oppressive system.
Read more
RSPO: outsourcing environmental regulation to oil palm businesses and industry
The RSPO certification, cleverly turning the palm oil industry’s legitimacy crisis to its favor, uses it as a stepping stone to further strengthen the industry’s position. It provides certificates claiming to meet sustainability standards—a clear advantage to the industry. However, it’s important to note that these standards are largely controlled by and designed to benefit companies operating within the palm oil sector itself.
Read more
“Gender” in the palm oil industry and its RSPO label
Implementing gender policies in oil palm companies and the RSPO certification scheme is a start. But do they truly tackle the violence, patriarchy, and racism in the plantation model, or merely mask them? It’s crucial to examine how these policies are enacted and if they genuinely drive substantial change, or just scratch the surface of these systemic issues.
Read more
https://youtu.be/0n4LSP9RCfA

Colombia: Palm-Producing Company Poligrow Plans to Grab more Land under the “Small Producers” Scheme
The harsh realities of violence, mass killings, and forced relocations amid the armed conflict in Colombia have disturbingly paved the way for the expansion of industrial oil palm cultivation. The palm oil company and RSPO member Poligrow, has been significantly implicated in these issues, with credible allegations of land seizure and intimidation tactics within the region of Mapiripán.
Read more
Greenwashing Words: Language that kills forests
Language never operates in a vacuum. Historically, specific terms have been leveraged as tools for exercising control over populations and territories. This article throws light on certain terms which, while seemingly positive, often shield economic interests detrimental to forests, forest animals and forest peoples.
Read more
Africa: The RSPO certification for palm oil plantations is greenwash!
The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) is a widely used certification system promising environmental, safety, and human rights standards in the palm oil industry. However, Friends of the Earth Africa groups contest its effectiveness, citing ongoing environmental degradation, human rights breaches, biodiversity loss, and increased poverty in Africa linked to the activities of palm oil companies.
Read more
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnXISnURIBA

Communities resisting the impunity and impacts of oil palm growers in Ecuador: Cases from Esmeraldas
The palm industry in Ecuador, encompassing 270,000 hectares of plantations, has been using the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) certification to project an image of sustainability, setting itself apart from Asian palm oil. However, critics argue that this certification merely muffles community objections. Resistance from communities such as La Chiquita, Guadualito, and Barranquilla de San Javier in the Esmeraldas region continues to fuel discontent and foster international solidarity.
Read more
RSPO Certification despite land conflicts, violence and criminalisation
Nearly 1,500 members of MALOA in Sierra Leone are challenging RSPO’s certification of a SOCFIN subsidiary. They cite a string of conflicts and grievances tied to land use. This move follows controversial certifications of SOCFIN group’s operations in Nigeria, Cameroon, and Ivory Coast. Critics question if RSPO, perceived as industry-biased, can truly guarantee sustainability and human rights in the palm oil sector.
Read more
Are FSC and RSPO accomplices in crime? Agropalma’s Unresolved Land Question in the Brazilian Amazon
The Palmas del Ixcán company in Guatemala is accused of implementing systematic dispossession of land from indigenous communities for oil palm cultivation, using tactics such as deceptive RSPO certification and independent producers. The company’s strategic approach replaced the traditional collective land management by indigenous people in the Municipality of Ixcán, which had been disrupted by development plans since the 1960s. Despite filing a complaint to the RSPO and participating in consultations, the communities found their concerns disregarded, leading them to criticize the RSPO and label it a sham, asserting that its true intention is to facilitate palm planting at any cost.
Read more
Water is life – stop planting palms! reads a sign in Guatemala
“Water is life. Stop planting oil palms”. Photo: Movimiento Social Intercultural del Pueblo de Ixcán, Guatemala
This article was originally published by World Rainforest Movement as “Certification schemes on “sustainability”: 30 years of deceit and violence” on 25 March, 2023 and was republished with permission alongside other reports from World Health Organisation, Global Witness and others. Read original.
ENDS

Read more about human rights abuses and greenwashing associated with “sustainable” palm oil

So-called ‘Net Zero’ Flights Flush Rainforest Carbon Into the Sky
Virgin Atlantic airlines now uses ‘sustainable aviation fuel’ however experts call it greenwashing and industry spin causing climate change. Boycott palm oil!
Read more
Oreo Maker Linked to Ongoing Deforestation and Human Rights Abuses
Mondelēz International who make Oreos keep sourcing palm oil from suppliers linked to violence and deforestation. Their RSPO certification is pure greenwash!
Read more
Parrot Deaths Highlight Urgent Need to Reform CITES
The legal trade is largely to blame for African grey parrots becoming endangered. Regulator CITES is broken allowing exploitation, massive reform needed now!
Read more
Seeing Forest As Merely A Carbon “Commodity”: Dangerous Greenwashing
Commodifying forests as merely an investment for ‘carbon credits’ has many dangerous loopholes that human rights to indigenous peoples, take action!
Read more
Finance giants fuel $8.9 trillion deforestation economy
Forest 500 report shows 150 of the world’s largest financial institutions invested nearly $9 trillion in deforestation-linked industries. Support EUDR!
Read more Load more posts
Something went wrong. Please refresh the page and/or try again.

Take Action in Five Ways
1. Join the #Boycott4Wildlife on social media and subscribe to stay in the loop: Share posts from this website to your own network on Twitter, Mastadon, Instagram, Facebook and Youtube using the hashtags #Boycottpalmoil #Boycott4Wildlife.
- Twitter
- Facebook
- Instagram
- WordPress
- YouTube
- Mail
- Mastodon
Enter your email address
Sign Up
Join 3,179 other subscribers
2. Contribute stories: Academics, conservationists, scientists, indigenous rights advocates and animal rights advocates working to expose the corruption of the palm oil industry or to save animals can contribute stories to the website.

Wildlife Artist Juanchi Pérez
Read more
Mel Lumby: Dedicated Devotee to Borneo’s Living Beings
Read more
Anthropologist and Author Dr Sophie Chao
Read more
Health Physician Dr Evan Allen
Read more
The World’s Most Loved Cup: A Social, Ethical & Environmental History of Coffee by Aviary Doert
Read more
How do we stop the world’s ecosystems from going into a death spiral? A #SteadyState Economy
Read more
3. Supermarket sleuthing: Next time you’re in the supermarket, take photos of products containing palm oil. Share these to social media along with the hashtags to call out the greenwashing and ecocide of the brands who use palm oil. You can also take photos of palm oil free products and congratulate brands when they go palm oil free.

https://twitter.com/CuriousApe4/status/1526136783557529600?s=20

https://twitter.com/PhillDixon1/status/1749010345555788144?s=20

https://twitter.com/mugabe139/status/1678027567977078784?s=20

4. Take to the streets: Get in touch with Palm Oil Detectives to find out more.
5. Donate: Make a one-off or monthly donation to Palm Oil Detectives as a way of saying thank you and to help pay for ongoing running costs of the website and social media campaigns. Donate here
Pledge your support
#auditFraud #Boycott4wildlife #BoycottPalmOil #corruption #deforestation #ecocide #ecolabels #fraud #FSC #greenwashing #humanRights #indigenousRights #landRights #landgrabbing #OrangutanLandTrust #palm #palmOilDeforestation #palmoil #RSPO #RSPOGreenwashing
#rspogreenwashing #rspo #palmoil #palmoildeforestation #palm #orangutanlandtrust
Palm Oil Detectives @[email protected] · 2023-06-17 · 15:10 UTC
RSPO’s Dubious “Sustainability”: 30 Years of Deceit

Ecolabels like RSPO and FSC are involved in networks of extensive greenwashing. They exist to conceal corporations’ environmental damage rather than fighting it. With three decades dubious promises from environmental certifications, World Rainforest Movement calls for a swift end to this disgraceful palm oil, soy and timber industry greenwashing. You can help resist palm oil colonialism and ecocide #Boycottpalmoil #Boycott4Wildlife every time you shop!

#Ecolabels like #RSPO and #FSC are accused of greenwashing, hiding corporations’ environmental #ecocide from consumers 💩🛒 rather than fighting #corruption. Fight back with your wallet and #Boycottpalmoil 🌴🪔🩸🧐🙊⛔️ #Boycott4Wildlife @palmoildetect https://palmoildetectives.com/2023/06/18/certification-ecolabels-dubious-sustainability-30-years-of-deceit-and-violence/
Share to BlueSky Share to Twitter
World Rainforest Movement and Palm Oil Detectives call for an end to #palmoil #greenwashing from #RSPO “sustainable” palm oil 🙊🧐⛔️ Resist the greenwash and #Boycottpalmoil #Boycott4Wildlife in the supermarket! 🌴💀🩸🚫 @palmoildetect https://palmoildetectives.com/2023/06/18/certification-ecolabels-dubious-sustainability-30-years-of-deceit-and-violence/
Share to BlueSky Share to Twitter
This article was originally published by World Rainforest Movement as “Certification schemes on “sustainability”: 30 years of deceit and violence” on 25 March, 2023 and was republished with permission here alongside other reports from World Health Organisation, Global Witness and others. Read original.

The shelves in supermarkets and stores are full of certified products. The packaging displays different labels indicating products were made with “sustainable” paper or wood, food or cosmetic products made with “sustainable” palm oil, “responsible” soybeans and so on and so forth.
Even when it comes to buying an airplane ticket, consumers can pay a little more
to ensure that their carbon emissions are (supposedly) “neutralised”, so as to guarantee that much touted “sustainability”.
Read more: WHO Bulletin Report: Palm Oil and Human Health Impacts

So why is there this need for so many labels and forms of certification? What is actually being certified? And who is benefiting from this?
After 30 years of certification schemes with environmental and social bias, what is clear is that the only “sustainability” that they guarantee is that of corporations’ lucrative business.
The first environmental certification mechanism for a specific product (wood) and its production chain emerged in the early 1990s, with the creation of the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC). Although its origin is connected with civil society pressure on corporations, FSC has been fully incorporated into the production logic of logging companies operating in forests, of giant paper and pulp corporations using tree monoculture plantations, as well as of producers and distributors of consumer goods.
Over time, having shown that it did not constitute any threat – on the contrary: an opportunity – to the accumulation strategy of the corporations involved, other sectors started creating similar mechanisms. Hence, starting in the 2000s, initiatives and so-called roundtables for “sustainable” or “responsible” production of palm oil, soybeans, cocoa, sugarcane, among others, proliferated.
Greenwashing ecocide – Agropalma & Orangutan Land Trust
Read more: Greenwashing Ecocide: Agropalma and Orangutan Land Trust

100 NGOS signed a public statement denouncing the RSPO in late 2022
Read more

These “sustainable” initiatives have various aspects in common
1. They are dominated, compromised and funded by corporate interests
They are schemes that present themselves as non-profit associations including many apparently diverse actors and interests (companies, NGOs, governments etc.) However, in practice, the business sector participants andtheir allies, like the big conservationist NGOs, dominate these initiatives and impose their interests in a highly unequal power relation between the members.
2. They promote toothless and unenforceable guidelines
They are mechanisms that establish operational guidelines and directives for companies to adhere to on a voluntary bases, leaving no possibility of legal consequences when rules are broken – rules formulated and judged by the companies themselves, it should be noted.
3. They promote an endless growth model of capitalism in spite of our limited and finite natural world
They are initiatives submitted to the logic of the market and its expansion, that is to say, certification labels have become important both to obtain funding for companies’ expansion projects and to win over consumers, mainly urban consumers and those from the global North. Read more about the limits of the Endless growth model.
4. The mechanism for conflict resolution is set and decided upon by the certification label itself – amplifying racial and gender inequities
They are mechanisms headquartered in countries of the North, and with management boards mainly composed of men and white people, leaving the rural communities of the South that have to face the certified plantations, to play the role of mere receivers of determinations imposed from outside about the use of the space where they live. And if they want to question the actions of any of the certified companies, they must submit to the protocol created by the certification system itself on how to proceed.
5. They use greenwashing language and false promises even though this does not reflect reality
Certification schemes are used by companies as defence mechanisms whenever they are faced with criticism over the impacts of their activities:
“Our products are certified…”, “The project has certification…”, as if this has guaranteed that there is no cause for concern.
One way or another, such certification mechanisms have not stopped the destructive expansion of industrial tree plantations, oil palms, soy, etc. Read more about using Design and Words as a greenwashing tool.
6. The predatory nature of corporate land-grabbing and expansionism cannot ever work in favour of indigenous peoples
A still from the documentary: by Mama Malind su Hilang (Our Land Has Gone) Nanang Sujana Watch on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqYoRh1aApg
Certification labels have not been able to resolve the conflicts generated with traditional communities and Indigenous Peoples. Nor do they have the potential to do so, since they are designed to allow the continuity and expansion of corporate accumulation patterns that are intrinsically dependent on a predatory dynamic.
In fact, the main common denominator of such certification schemes is that they guarantee a green label to the companies involved, thus contributing to their primary objective, i.e., the maximisation of profit.
7. Certification labels like FSC and RSPO are vital to for companies gain consumer buy-in and greenwash away harms
Certifiers have hence become a key element through which companies seek to legitimize their territorial and economic expansion in the global South, deceiving consumers with the “sustainability” discourse.
In other words, these destructive corporations need certification labels to obtain some legitimacy in the eyes of consumers and investors, bearing in mind the vast number of reports, news and studies showing their harmful effects, such as:
- Violent corporate land-grabbing aided by private enforcement or military/police intervention
- Problematic, deceptive or non-existent community consultation processes
- Contamination by agro-chemicals and its human health and environmental impacts
- Soil degradation
- Dangerous and humiliating jobs
- Sexual abuse and other forms of violence against women
- Child slavery and indentured slavery
among many other impacts related to extensive monoculture plantations.
This permits one to affirm without reservation that certification itself has become an underlying cause of deforestation.
https://vimeo.com/735353691

10 Tactics of Sustainable Palm Oil Greenwashing

Greenwashing Tactic #1: Hidden Trade Off
When a brand makes token changes while continuing with deforestation, ecocide or human rights abuses in another part of their business – this is ‘Hidden Trade Off’
For example, Nestle talks up satellite monitoring to stop palm oil deforestation. Yet…
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #2: No Proof
Greenwashing Tactic 5. Palm oil companies make environmental claims without providing proof or evidence of these claims or using spurious evidence.
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #3: Vagueness
Claiming a brand or commodity is ‘green’ or ‘sustainable’ based on broad generalisations, unclear language or vague statements Jump to section Greenwashing: Vagueness in Language Greenwashing: Vagueness in certification standards Reality: Auditing of RSPO a failure Quote: EIA: Who Watches…
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #4: Fake Labels
Claiming a brand or commodity is green based on unreliable, ineffective endorsements or eco-labels such as the RSPO, Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) or FairTrade coffee and cocoa. Greenwashing: Fake Labels and fake certifications Ecolabels are designed to reassure consumers that…
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #5: Irrelevance and Deflection
Learn how lobbyists use irrelevant information and deflection to shift the conversation away from their environmental harms, e.g. “sustainable” palm oil.
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #6: The Lesser of Two Evils
Claiming that a brand, commodity or industry is greener than others in the same category, in order to excuse ecocide, deforestation, human rights and animal rights abuses. Jump to section Greenwashing: Lesser of Two Evils: Palm Oil Uses Less Land…
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic #7: Lying
Greenwashing lies are falsifying support from authorities to back up claims or using spurious research data to back up the greenwashing, boycott palm oil!
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic 8: Design & Words
Greenwashing Tactic 8. Companies use design principles and subliminal language to signal ‘greenness’ and trigger unconscious emotional responses in consumers
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic 9: Partnerships, Sponsorships and Research Funding
Greenwashing Tactic 9. Corporations use NGOs, Zoo partnerships, sponsorships, and research funding to give an industry or brand a ‘green image.
Read more
Greenwashing Tactic 10: Gaslighting, Harassment, Stalking and Threats
Gaslighting, harassing or stalking vocal critics of a brand, commodity or industry certification in order to silence these critics – this is greenwashing!
Read more
Ten Tactics of ‘Sustainable’ Palm Oil Greenwashing
Learn ten marketing and PR tactics used for “sustainble” palm oil greenwashing to justify endless growth by the palm oil industry. Boycott palm oil now!
Read more
New forms of greenwashing: Carbon Credits and Biodiversity Credits
Furthermore, it is important to mention that the idea of certification has been taking on new shapes. With the creation of offset mechanisms for carbon emissions and biodiversity loss, new commodities have emerged already linked to certification mechanisms. In this new market, carbon credits and biodiversity credits – issued by certification schemes – represent a supposed guarantee that greenhouse gas emissions or the destruction of biodiversity are being duly offset elsewhere.
Differently from wood, paper, palm oil or soybeans, where the certification is “added” to the product by means of a label, in the carbon or biodiversity markets it is the
certification itself that makes it feasible for the product to be consumed.
In other words, the commodity in itself is supposedly a guarantee – though a virtual guarantee, obtained through dubious methodologies and permeated by openly suspect interests.
https://youtu.be/X7x4TWazWJg
This compilation of articles from the WRM Bulletin aims to underscore the damaging role played by companies and organisations involved in certification schemes. WRM considers it important to highlight that after three decades with ever more environmental certification labels on the market, it is urgent to put an end to this greenwashing.
Ultimately, instead of combating environmental devastation and the social ills linked
to corporations’ and other players’ operations, these labels cover up and
sustain their destructive logic.

Sexual Exploitation and Violence against Women at the Root of the Industrial Plantation Model
The industrial plantation model is intrinsically linked with patriarchal oppression, serving as a cornerstone for corporate profitability. Companies often exploit women, recognizing their integral role within community dynamics, as a means to augment their bottom line. The intersection of gender and economic exploitation exemplifies the profound social implications of this oppressive system.
Read more
RSPO: outsourcing environmental regulation to oil palm businesses and industry
The RSPO certification, cleverly turning the palm oil industry’s legitimacy crisis to its favor, uses it as a stepping stone to further strengthen the industry’s position. It provides certificates claiming to meet sustainability standards—a clear advantage to the industry. However, it’s important to note that these standards are largely controlled by and designed to benefit companies operating within the palm oil sector itself.
Read more
“Gender” in the palm oil industry and its RSPO label
Implementing gender policies in oil palm companies and the RSPO certification scheme is a start. But do they truly tackle the violence, patriarchy, and racism in the plantation model, or merely mask them? It’s crucial to examine how these policies are enacted and if they genuinely drive substantial change, or just scratch the surface of these systemic issues.
Read more
https://youtu.be/0n4LSP9RCfA

Colombia: Palm-Producing Company Poligrow Plans to Grab more Land under the “Small Producers” Scheme
The harsh realities of violence, mass killings, and forced relocations amid the armed conflict in Colombia have disturbingly paved the way for the expansion of industrial oil palm cultivation. The palm oil company and RSPO member Poligrow, has been significantly implicated in these issues, with credible allegations of land seizure and intimidation tactics within the region of Mapiripán.
Read more
Greenwashing Words: Language that kills forests
Language never operates in a vacuum. Historically, specific terms have been leveraged as tools for exercising control over populations and territories. This article throws light on certain terms which, while seemingly positive, often shield economic interests detrimental to forests, forest animals and forest peoples.
Read more
Africa: The RSPO certification for palm oil plantations is greenwash!
The Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) is a widely used certification system promising environmental, safety, and human rights standards in the palm oil industry. However, Friends of the Earth Africa groups contest its effectiveness, citing ongoing environmental degradation, human rights breaches, biodiversity loss, and increased poverty in Africa linked to the activities of palm oil companies.
Read more
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnXISnURIBA

Communities resisting the impunity and impacts of oil palm growers in Ecuador: Cases from Esmeraldas
The palm industry in Ecuador, encompassing 270,000 hectares of plantations, has been using the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) certification to project an image of sustainability, setting itself apart from Asian palm oil. However, critics argue that this certification merely muffles community objections. Resistance from communities such as La Chiquita, Guadualito, and Barranquilla de San Javier in the Esmeraldas region continues to fuel discontent and foster international solidarity.
Read more
RSPO Certification despite land conflicts, violence and criminalisation
Nearly 1,500 members of MALOA in Sierra Leone are challenging RSPO’s certification of a SOCFIN subsidiary. They cite a string of conflicts and grievances tied to land use. This move follows controversial certifications of SOCFIN group’s operations in Nigeria, Cameroon, and Ivory Coast. Critics question if RSPO, perceived as industry-biased, can truly guarantee sustainability and human rights in the palm oil sector.
Read more
Are FSC and RSPO accomplices in crime? Agropalma’s Unresolved Land Question in the Brazilian Amazon
The Palmas del Ixcán company in Guatemala is accused of implementing systematic dispossession of land from indigenous communities for oil palm cultivation, using tactics such as deceptive RSPO certification and independent producers. The company’s strategic approach replaced the traditional collective land management by indigenous people in the Municipality of Ixcán, which had been disrupted by development plans since the 1960s. Despite filing a complaint to the RSPO and participating in consultations, the communities found their concerns disregarded, leading them to criticize the RSPO and label it a sham, asserting that its true intention is to facilitate palm planting at any cost.
Read more
Water is life – stop planting palms! reads a sign in Guatemala
“Water is life. Stop planting oil palms”. Photo: Movimiento Social Intercultural del Pueblo de Ixcán, Guatemala
This article was originally published by World Rainforest Movement as “Certification schemes on “sustainability”: 30 years of deceit and violence” on 25 March, 2023 and was republished with permission alongside other reports from World Health Organisation, Global Witness and others. Read original.
ENDS

Read more about human rights abuses and greenwashing associated with “sustainable” palm oil

So-called ‘Net Zero’ Flights Flush Rainforest Carbon Into the Sky
Virgin Atlantic airlines now uses ‘sustainable aviation fuel’ however experts call it greenwashing and industry spin causing climate change. Boycott palm oil!
Read more
Oreo Maker Linked to Ongoing Deforestation and Human Rights Abuses
Mondelēz International who make Oreos keep sourcing palm oil from suppliers linked to violence and deforestation. Their RSPO certification is pure greenwash!
Read more
Parrot Deaths Highlight Urgent Need to Reform CITES
The legal trade is largely to blame for African grey parrots becoming endangered. Regulator CITES is broken allowing exploitation, massive reform needed now!
Read more
Seeing Forest As Merely A Carbon “Commodity”: Dangerous Greenwashing
Commodifying forests as merely an investment for ‘carbon credits’ has many dangerous loopholes that human rights to indigenous peoples, take action!
Read more
Finance giants fuel $8.9 trillion deforestation economy
Forest 500 report shows 150 of the world’s largest financial institutions invested nearly $9 trillion in deforestation-linked industries. Support EUDR!
Read more Load more posts
Something went wrong. Please refresh the page and/or try again.

Take Action in Five Ways
1. Join the #Boycott4Wildlife on social media and subscribe to stay in the loop: Share posts from this website to your own network on Twitter, Mastadon, Instagram, Facebook and Youtube using the hashtags #Boycottpalmoil #Boycott4Wildlife.
- Twitter
- Facebook
- Instagram
- WordPress
- YouTube
- Mail
- Mastodon
Enter your email address
Sign Up
Join 3,179 other subscribers
2. Contribute stories: Academics, conservationists, scientists, indigenous rights advocates and animal rights advocates working to expose the corruption of the palm oil industry or to save animals can contribute stories to the website.

Wildlife Artist Juanchi Pérez
Read more
Mel Lumby: Dedicated Devotee to Borneo’s Living Beings
Read more
Anthropologist and Author Dr Sophie Chao
Read more
Health Physician Dr Evan Allen
Read more
The World’s Most Loved Cup: A Social, Ethical & Environmental History of Coffee by Aviary Doert
Read more
How do we stop the world’s ecosystems from going into a death spiral? A #SteadyState Economy
Read more
3. Supermarket sleuthing: Next time you’re in the supermarket, take photos of products containing palm oil. Share these to social media along with the hashtags to call out the greenwashing and ecocide of the brands who use palm oil. You can also take photos of palm oil free products and congratulate brands when they go palm oil free.

https://twitter.com/CuriousApe4/status/1526136783557529600?s=20

https://twitter.com/PhillDixon1/status/1749010345555788144?s=20

https://twitter.com/mugabe139/status/1678027567977078784?s=20

4. Take to the streets: Get in touch with Palm Oil Detectives to find out more.
5. Donate: Make a one-off or monthly donation to Palm Oil Detectives as a way of saying thank you and to help pay for ongoing running costs of the website and social media campaigns. Donate here
Pledge your support
#auditFraud #Boycott4wildlife #BoycottPalmOil #corruption #deforestation #ecocide #ecolabels #fraud #FSC #greenwashing #humanRights #indigenousRights #landRights #landgrabbing #OrangutanLandTrust #palm #palmOilDeforestation #palmoil #RSPO #RSPOGreenwashing
#auditfraud #boycott4wildlife #boycottpalmoil #corruption #deforestation #ecocide
moby dickgirl @[email protected] · 2022-11-29 · 07:56 UTC

CW: Several Problems Press: Several problems — The Courier-Mail, 27 November 2022; CW: transphobia

27. "[Barber] said he follows Australian guidelines promoted by AusPath — a group of health professionals working with trans people — that says gender affirming care is evidence-based and saves lives."
What an absolutely delightful paragraph. For relatively few words, there is so much going on.
#AusPATH are the AUStralian Professional Association for Transgender Health, the Australian affiliate of #WPATH, and the peak body for trans health in Australia. AusPATH are "a group of health professionals working with trans people" in much the same way that the #AustralianArmy are "a group of people in green clothes who like guns".
Being the peak body, AusPATH don't "promote" guidelines; they set them. Nor is their setting of guidelines simply a matter of ineffectually wringing their hands and saying, "well, doctors *should* do this, we'd *like* it if they did, pretty please". As noted above, civil action for medical malpractice rests largely on whether the defendant provided the standard of care which would be reasonably expected from a medical practitioner of that kind acting under those circumstances [1]. Those standards of care are precisely what AusPATH (and WPATH) define.
AusPATH can literally "promote" guidelines in the common meaning alternative to the one used here, i.e., raising them up. They can endorse a protocol used by an individual clinic or in a small area, and distribute it under their own aegis. That just effectively makes it another standard they set, though, not some other thing they're shilling for.
Finally, the fact that gender-affirming care is evidence-based and saves lives isn't a matter of what either Barber or AusPATH "say"; it's simply true [2] [3] [4].
SECTION NOTES
[1] https://www.armstronglegal.com.au/commercial-law/qld/tort-law/medical-negligence/
[2] https://www.wired.com/story/gender-affirming-care-improves-mental-health-and-may-save-lives/
[3] https://www.columbiapsychiatry.org/news/gender-affirming-care-saves-lives
[4] https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/health-wellness/2022/10/20/transgender-nonbinary-gender-affirming-health-care/10496028002/

#auspath #wpath #australianarmy
Martin Böttger @[email protected] · 2025-10-18 · 10:05 UTC

Verhaltensscanner
In Mannheim: Hier wird die Überwachung getestet, die so viele Städte wollen
Viele deutsche Städte wünschen sich Videoüberwachung mit KI-gestützter Verhaltenserkennung. Die wird seit sieben Jahren in Mannheim getestet. Ein Besuch der überwachten Orte zeigt, was diese Form der Überwachung mit den Menschen in einer Stadt macht – und wie schlecht die Technologie funktioniert.
„Popeln würde ich hier lieber nicht“, sagt Svenja. Die Enddreißigerin steht auf dem Mannheimer Marktplatz und beäugt argwöhnisch eine Dachkante. Dort sind sechs Kameras installiert. Fünf davon zeigen ungefähr in ihre Richtung. Die sechste ist eine dreh-, kipp- und zoomfähige Kuppelkamera, bei der nur die kameraführende Person in der Polizei-Leitstelle weiß, was sie gerade filmt. Svenja dreht sich um und sieht eine weitere Kuppelkamera. „Das ist ja überhaupt nicht gruselig“, sagt sie und lacht trocken.
Svenja wusste bis eben nicht, dass sie gefilmt wird. Und auch nicht, dass eine Software ihr Verhalten analysiert und bei bestimmten Bewegungen Alarm auslöst. Ein Reporter von netzpolitik.org hat sie darauf aufmerksam gemacht. Es ist nicht so, dass sie regelmäßig in der Nase popeln würde, wie sie beteuert. Aber als sie die Kameras sieht, spürt sie direkt den Drang zur Selbstbeschränkung. Dass ihr erster Gedanke dabei der Nasenreinigung galt, ist ihr unangenehm. Sie bittet uns, für diesen Artikel ihren Vornamen zu ändern.
70 Kameras filmen den öffentlichen Raum in Mannheim. Bei 46 dieser Kameras untersucht eine Software die Bewegungsmuster der überwachten Menschen. Dafür verwandelt sie die Personen in Strichmännchen mit Knotenpunkten an den Gelenken und erfasst, wie sich die Gliedmaßen bewegen. So soll die Software vor allem Schläge, Tritte, Schubse, Rempler und Würgegriffe erkennen, aber auch andere Bewegungen wie Stehen, Gehen, Rennen, Rad- und Rollerfahren, Taumeln, Tanzen, Sitzen, etwas Tragen und jemanden Umarmen. Auch aggressive oder defensive Körperhaltungen soll die Software detektieren, so die Mannheimer Polizei.
„Mannheimer Modell“ haben die Verantwortlichen das Projekt genannt, das seit 2018 im Einsatz ist. Die Software soll dabei nicht nur Bewegungsmuster von mutmaßlich kriminellen Handlungen erfassen, sondern auch „Normalsituationen“, so die Mannheimer Polizei. Das sei erforderlich, „um diese von den polizeilich relevanten Sachverhalten abzugrenzen.“
Eine sogenannte KI schaut also mit 46 Augen permanent zu, was Menschen in Mannheim so treiben. Die Stadt ist ein Reallabor – und Passant*innen wie Svenja sind so etwas wie Labormäuse.
So arbeiten die Überwachenden
Die Aufnahmen der Mannheimer Kameras laufen im Führungs- und Lagezentrum des Polizeipräsidiums Mannheim zusammen. Dort beobachten Polizist*innen das Geschehen in der Stadt permanent auf einer Vielzahl von Bildschirmen. Wenn die Software ein verdächtiges Bewegungsmuster erkennt, ertönt ein Alarm. Auf einem der Bildschirme erscheint ein Hinweisfenster. In diesem sehen die Beamt*innen die Situation, die den Alarm ausgelöst hat, umrahmt von einem gelben Rechteck; daneben das Livebild der entsprechenden Überwachungskamera. Die zuständige Person entscheidet dann, ob die Polizei einschreitet, erklärt die Mannheimer Polizei weiter.
Mindestens 72 Stunden, also drei Tage lang, werden die Bilder gespeichert. Bei polizeilicher Relevanz bleiben sie sogar bis zu 28 Tage im System; bei Verwendung als Beweismittel noch länger. Die Mannheimer Polizei will mit der Software ihre Einsatzbelastung senken und Effizienz steigern.
Die gruselige Anziehungskraft der KI-Überwachung
Das Mannheimer Modell löst bei vielen Sicherheitsbehörden und -politiker*innen Begehrlichkeiten aus. Seit dem ersten September 2025 läuft es auch hinter Hamburger Kameras. Laut dem Fraunhofer-Institut für Optronik, Systemtechnik und Bildauswertung (Fraunhofer IOSB), das die Technologie entwickelt, haben weitere Städte und Kommunen Interesse bekundet. In Berlin wollen die Regierungsparteien das Polizeigesetz ändern, um den Einsatz der Technologie zu erlauben. In Hessen liegt diese Erlaubnis bereits vor; Innenminister Roman Poseck (CDU) nennt das Mannheimer Modell „vorbildhaft“. In Baden-Württemberg hat die grün-schwarze Landesregierung angekündigt, es ausweiten zu wollen, das nächste Testgelände ist Heidelberg.
Thomas Strobl (CDU), Innenminister des grün-schwarz regierten Baden-Württemberg, nannte das Mannheimer Modell im Mai 2025 einen „nationalen Leuchtturm“. Anlässlich der Verlängerung der Trainingsphase im Jahr 2023 sagte er, es sei „Vorbild für Maßnahmen an Kriminalitätsschwerpunkten im ganzen Land, wenn nicht europaweit.“ Christian Specht (CDU), heute Mannheims Oberbürgermeister, hat die KI-Überwachung im Jahr 2018 als Sicherheitsdezernent auf den Weg gebracht. Er fügte hinzu: „Viele sicherheitspolitische Augen sind gespannt auf uns gerichtet.“
Zu Beginn der automatisierten Verhaltenskontrolle in Mannheim gab es einigen Protest. Eine Gruppe namens „George-Orwell-Ultras“ riet in einem satirischen Video dazu, sich hinter Frachtcontainern auf dem Alten Messplatz vor der Erfassung durch die Kameras zu schützen. Ein Bündnis linker Gruppen lud zum Silent Dance gegen Überwachung; die lokalen Grünen unterstützten eine Petition dagegen. Heute sind die Grünen in Mannheim weniger kritisch. „Mehr Kameras sollen es nicht werden“, sagt die Kreisvorsitzende Tamara Beckh. Die Videoüberwachung könne ergänzend sinnvoll sein, „wir wollen aber eher auf eine personelle Stärkung der Polizei setzen“.
Die Gefahr der Ausweitung
Jackenwetter, Dauerregen. Die Mannheimer Innenstadt ist dennoch sehr belebt an diesem Mittwochvormittag im September 2025. Menschen, die Kapuzen tragen, eilen mit gesenkten Köpfen über den Bahnhofsvorplatz. Tobias Roser steht zwischen ihnen unter seinem Regenschirm und zeigt um sich. „Da, da, da und da“, sagt er. Roser weiß genau, wo die Kameras hängen. Er lebt hier in der Gegend um den Hauptbahnhof und muss sie täglich passieren.
Roser ist Mitglied der Linksjugend solid, der Jugendorganisation der Partei Die Linke. Er fürchtet, dass die automatisierte Verhaltensanalyse ein großer Schritt hin zu einem Überwachungsstaat ist, „den man dann schlüsselfertig übergibt, wenn die Radikalen an die Macht kommen“. Wenn man einmal mit KI-gestützter Überwachung angefangen habe, läge es nahe, weiter aufzurüsten: etwa mit Technologie, die Gesichter erkennt, Lippen liest oder Menschen am Gang identifiziert.
Zwei Erweiterungen des Mannheimer Modells sind bereits geplant: Die Software soll in Zukunft bestimmte Gegenstände, etwa Waffen, erkennen. Und wenn sie eine mutmaßliche Straftat entdeckt, können die gefilmten Gesichter bald vom Landeskriminalamt durch eine Gesichtersuchmaschine gejagt werden. Im September 2024 hat die Landesregierung beschlossen, Lizenzen für eine solche Software zu kaufen.
Die Polizei hat auch nach sieben Jahren keine Ahnung, was die Verhaltenskontrolle bringt
Das Mannheimer Modell ist auch nach sieben Jahren weit von einem evidenzbasierten Betrieb entfernt. Die Vision seiner Fans sind schwarze Bildschirme, die nur anspringen, wenn die Software einen Alarm generiert. Tatsächlich wird dieses Konzept in der Mannheimer Videoüberwachungszentrale bisher nur auf einem einzelnen Bildschirm erprobt. Daneben gibt es zahlreiche weitere Monitore, auf denen weiter Beamt*innen das Geschehen in der Stadt beobachten. Der versprochene Vorteil für die Privatsphäre ist in der Praxis also nicht gegeben.
Die Mannheimer Polizei kann oder will auf Anfrage zudem nicht sagen, wie oft die Software angeschlagen hat und wie oft dadurch eine strafbare Handlung entdeckt wurde. „Der für das Projekt ablesbare Erfolg besteht in der stetigen Weiterentwicklung des Systems und kann zum derzeitigen Projektstand nicht mit Kennzahlen dargestellt werden“, schreibt sie.
Zu Beginn des Projekts hoffte die Mannheimer Polizei noch, das System könne irgendwann auch die Bewegungen bei einem Drogendeal oder Taschendiebstahl erkennen. Das zeigt die auf dem Kanal der Filmakademie Baden-Württemberg veröffentlichte Dokumentation „all eyes on you“. Heute schreibt die Polizei: „Ob das Ziel der Detektion von feinmotorischen Handlungsweisen erreicht werden kann, kann derzeit nicht beantwortet werden.“
Nach aktuellem Stand läuft das Projekt bis 2026. Eine unabhängige Evaluation ist nicht geplant. Nur das Landespolizeipräsidium im Innenministerium soll das Projekt nach seinem Abschluss begutachten. Der Landesdatenschutzbeauftragte Baden-Württemberg schreibt auf Anfrage von netzpolitik.org, dass die Maßnahme wegen der hohen Eingriffsintensität in Grundrechte eigentlich regelmäßig evaluiert werden müsse.
Noch steht die Überwachung rechtlich auf dünnem Eis
Die softwarebasierte Verhaltenserkennung begann mit Kameras am Willy-Brandt-Platz vor dem Mannheimer Hauptbahnhof und am Paradeplatz und wurde dann auf die Kurpfalzstraße – meist Breite Straße genannt –, den Marktplatz und zuletzt den Alten Messplatz ausgedehnt. Die Verwaltung hatte zudem geprüft, ob es nach dem aktuellen Polizeigesetz erlaubt ist, auch am Plankenkopf und auf dem südlichen Bahnhofsvorplatz Kameras aufzustellen, musste die Pläne jedoch verwerfen. „Bei beiden Bereichen konnte kein Kriminalitätsbrennpunkt begründet werden, weshalb die rechtlichen Möglichkeiten für einen Videoschutz nicht vorliegen“, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei auf Anfrage von netzpolitik.org.
Rechtliche Voraussetzung für die Überwachung ist ein im Vergleich zum restlichen Stadtgebiet erhöhtes Aufkommen von Straftaten. Sinkt die relative Kriminalitätsbelastung deutlich, müssen die KI-Kameras nach baden-württembergischem Polizeigesetz wieder abgebaut werden. Deshalb musste die Stadt auch die Kameras, die sie ab 2001 aufgestellt hatte, im Jahr 2007 wieder entfernen. Nur der nördliche Bahnhofsvorplatz ist bis heute durchgängig videoüberwacht.
Die von der Polizei erfasste Straßenkriminalität in den überwachten Gebieten liegt nach einem zwischenzeitlichen Tief wieder auf der Höhe des Jahres vor der Einführung der Videoüberwachung. Die Drogendelikte sind nach Angaben der Polizei zum Teil deutlich zurückgegangen; das entspricht dem Trend in der gesamten Stadt. Besonders aussagekräftig ist die Kriminalitätsbelastung allerdings nicht. Denn die Zahl der erfassten Straftaten steigt automatisch dort, wo die Polizei genauer hinschaut.
Videoüberwachung nach Gefühl
Künftig will sich die Polizei in Mannheim bei der Überwachung des öffentlichen Raums durch Kameras nicht einmal mehr an den eigenen Kennzahlen orientieren müssen, sondern sie von der Kriminalitätsentwicklung entkoppeln. Laut Polizei soll ein Rechtsgutachten untersuchen, ob auch „strukturelle Kriminalitätsbrennpunkte“ per Video überwacht werden dürfen. Gemeint sind Orte, die aus Sicht der Polizei durch soziale, wirtschaftliche und infrastrukturelle Faktoren eine „erhöhte Tatgelegenheitsstruktur“ aufweisen – unabhängig davon, ob dort tatsächlich solche Taten erfasst wurden. Das würde der Polizei viel Spielraum geben, um Überwachung an immer mehr Orten zu legitimieren.
Laut einer Antwort der Stadt Mannheim auf eine Anfrage der Grünen aus dem Jahr 2024 arbeitet die Stadt an einer Novellierung des Polizeigesetzes von Baden-Württemberg mit, um solche „strukturellen Kriminalitätsbrennpunkte“ auch landesweit einzuführen. Somit wäre Videoüberwachung selbst dann möglich, wenn die Zahl der erfassten Straftaten sinkt.
Dieser Ansatz erinnert an das hessische Polizeigesetz. Dort ist die Rede von„Angsträumen“ und „gefühlten Kriminalitätsschwerpunkten“. Sie zeichnen sich ebenfalls durch „Tatgelegenheitsstrukturen“ aus und würden von der Bevölkerung gemieden, so die Begründung der entsprechenden Änderung des Polizeigesetzes, die im Dezember 2024 verabschiedet wurde.
Der baden-württembergische Datenschutzbeauftragte warnt davor, Gesetze zu verabschieden, die Gefühle zur Grundlage polizeilicher Maßnahmen machen. Die Aufsichtsbehörde verstehe zwar den Drang, das Sicherheitsgefühl der Bürger*innen ernst zu nehmen. Sie sehe aber Gefahren, wenn der Staat Maßnahmen mit hoher Eingriffsintensität für die Grundrechte mit Gefühlen begründe. „Der Staat muss für seine Bürger_innen berechenbar und sein Handeln nachvollziehbar und vorhersehbar sein. Vor diesem Hintergrund erschließt sich uns nicht, wie man mit der Intention in Freiheitsrechte einzugreifen, Gefühle oder Eindrücke objektivieren und rationalisieren könnte.“
Worauf die Kameras zielen, will die Polizei geheimhalten
Während die Polizei in Mannheim den öffentlichen Raum zunehmend durchleuchten möchte, will sie sich selbst nicht in die Karten schauen lassen. Eine Karte mit den genauen Positionen und Ausrichtungen der Kameras will die Behörde auf Anfrage nicht herausgeben – aus „polizeitaktischen Gründen“. Es gibt zwar eine Karte mit rot markierten Überwachungszonen auf der Website der Stadt und eine leicht abweichende mit blau markierten Überwachungszonen auf der Website der Polizei, aber beide weichen von der Realität ab.
So ist dort beispielsweise die Kurpfalzbrücke nicht markiert. Dabei wurde diese mindestens zeitweise von einer Kamera überwacht. Das hat der Prozess eines Mannes gezeigt, der mit Hilfe der Überwachungsbilder eine Verurteilung wegen Widerstand gegen Vollstreckungsbeamte abwehren konnte. Wieso die Kamera einen Bereich abgebildet hat, der nicht entsprechend gekennzeichnet ist, hat die Polizei bis Redaktionsschluss nicht beantwortet.
Die Kurpfalzstraße auf Höhe des Paradeplatzes ist auf der Karte der Stadt ebenfalls nicht als überwacht markiert, dabei zeigen mehrere Kameras deutlich darauf. Die Karte der Polizei zählt dieses Areal zur überwachten Zone; ebenso das südliche Ende des Alten Messplatzes. Laut der Karte der Stadt Mannheim ist dieser Bereich von der Überwachung ausgenommen; dabei sagte ein Polizist 2024, dass er zumindest teilweise von Kameras erfasst wird. Eine Sprecherin der Stadt schreibt auf Anfrage, die Karte solle nur einen „groben Überblick“ geben.
Eine detaillierte Karte mit den Kamera-Ausrichtungen und erfassten Arealen hätte vermutlich auch nur eine kurze Gültigkeit. Im Zuge von Optimierungen komme es gelegentlich vor, dass Kameras nachjustiert werden, schreibt die Polizei auf netzpolitik.org-Anfrage. Protokolle dazu gebe es nicht. Private Immobilien, sowie Areale „die nicht in den videogeschützten Bereich fallen“, würden aber verpixelt.
Die Software braucht viele Schlägereien
Eine Hürde bei der Entwicklung der Verhaltenserkennung ist der Mangel an Beispielen für reale Straftaten. Die Software kann nur dann einen Schlag von einem Fistbump unterscheiden, wenn sie beides häufig zu sehen bekommt.
In der Praxis gibt es in deutschen Innenstädten viel weniger Schlägereien als für KI-Forschende wünschenswert wäre. „Wie sich im Verlauf des Projektes zeigte, stehen leider nur sehr begrenzt öffentliche Daten zur Verfügung“, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei. Wohl auch deshalb haben Polizist*innen Schlägereien zum KI-Training simuliert. Gestellte Situationen spielen „eine wichtige Rolle“, schreibt das Fraunhofer IOSB, das die Software entwickelt.
Der Datenwissenschaftler Heiko Paulheim von der Universität Mannheim sieht das kritisch. Wenn die Datengrundlage der Software zum großen Teil aus inszenierten Kämpfen zwischen meist weißen und männlich gelesenen Polizisten bestünde, könne das darauf hinauslaufen, dass die KI bei Frauen und BIPoC weniger zuverlässig funktioniert und öfter zu Unrecht anschlägt.
Auch auf anderem Wege können marginalisierte Gruppen vermehrt ins Visier der KI-basierten Überwachung geraten. Die Mannheimer Software erkennt beispielsweise auch liegende Menschen – und wer in der Öffentlichkeit liegt, ist oft obdachlos. Bislang darf die Software nur bei Hinweisen auf eine Straftat Alarm schlagen. Die Landesregierung plant aber, den Einsatz der Verhaltenserkennung auch gegen Menschen in einer mutmaßlich hilflosen Lage zu erlauben.
Wer das Mannheimer Modell zahlt – und wem die Software gehört
In der Kooperation zwischen Stadt und Polizei Mannheim und dem Fraunhofer IOSB teilen sich die Parteien die Kosten. Die Polizei zahlte 190.000 Euro für Videoarbeitsplätze und Videomanagementsoftware, Speicher- und Serverstruktur. „Personalkosten wurden nicht erhoben“, schreibt sie. Die Stadt zahlte 860.000 Euro für Erwerb, Montage und Verkabelung der Kameras. Das Fraunhofer IOSB finanziert die Software-Entwicklung.
Die Software des Mannheimer Modells gehört dem Fraunhofer IOSB. Es habe sich vertraglich verpflichtet, auf eine kommerzielle Verwertung „vorerst zu verzichten“, schreibt das Institut an netzpolitik.org. Die Polizei Baden-Württemberg könne die Software, wenn sie marktreif werden sollte, kostenfrei nutzen, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei.
Die Trainingsdaten für das Mannheimer Modell liefern Menschen in Mannheim – oftmals nichtsahnend – kostenlos.
Drogendeals knapp außerhalb des Videobilds
Der Wilde Wein, der die Fassade der Alten Feuerwache am Alten Messplatz erobert hat, umrankt acht Kameras. Vor ihren Linsen springen und gleiten Skateboarder über selbstgebaute Rampen und Rails, Kinder planschen in den Fontänen eines Brunnens, Menschen konsumieren offen Cannabis und Lachgas – und den Spritzen auf dem Boden zufolge wohl auch mehr.
So berichtet es der Journalist Manuel Schülke bei einem Spaziergang über den Platz. Er ist Redakteur beim hyperlokalen Nachrichtenportal Neckarstadtblog und hat sich ausgiebig mit der Mannheimer Videoüberwachung beschäftigt. Schülke sagt: „Ich habe meine Zweifel, dass die bringt, was sie soll.“ Zu häufig lese er im Polizeibericht von Straftaten im Überwachungsbereich, bei denen keine Streife rechtzeitig vor Ort war und trotz Videoaufzeichnung Zeug*innen gesucht werden. „Da hat die Abschreckung nicht funktioniert und die anschließende Strafverfolgung ist auch mau“, sagt er.
Damit die Kameras potenzielle Kriminelle nicht einfach in die Nebenstraßen verdrängen, sind bestimmte Polizist*innen dazu abgestellt, um die videoüberwachten Areale zu patrouillieren. Sie sollen auch eingreifen, wenn eine Kamera eine Straftat filmt.
Schülke zufolge spielen sich Drogendelikte auf dem Platz oftmals knapp außerhalb des überwachten Bereichs ab, etwa in einem anliegenden Parkhaus oder dort, wo der Platz an die Neckarwiese grenzt. Im November 2024 hat die Polizei in diesem Teilareal eine Razzia gegen Drogenhändler*innen durchgeführt.
Schülke hatte zur Einführung der Kameras versucht, Beispielbilder zu bekommen, die zeigen, welche Bereiche die Kameras am Platz aufnehmen; die Polizei habe die Antwort aus ermittlungstaktischen Gründen verweigert. „Es gibt da uneinsehbare Areale und die wollen nicht, dass das jemand weiß“, sagt der Journalist.
Gut einsehbar für die Kameras seien dagegen die Eingänge zu sensitiven Einrichtungen aus dem Gesundheitsbereich, darunter Praxen für Psychotherapie, ein Zentrum für sexuelle Gesundheit und eine psychologische Beratungsstelle für queere Menschen.
Das denken die Mannheimer*innen über die Überwachung
Nino (56) steht auf der Kurpfalzstraße nahe des Marktplatzes und meint, die Mannheimer Kameras gut zu kennen. Dann kreist sein Zeigefinger aber doch erst einmal orientierungslos, während er mit der anderen Hand sein Bier festhält. „Ah da“, sagt Nino nach einer Weile und deutet auf eines der Geräte. „Ich finds scheiße“, sagt er. Da ist Nino nicht allein. Fünf Prozent der Mannheimer*innen versuchen laut einer Untersuchung von 2022/23, die überwachten Areale möglichst zu vermeiden.
Manuela (52) und Karin (77) wollen gerade den Marktplatz überqueren. Manuela sagt, als “Monnemerinnen“ seien sie inzwischen an die Überwachung gewöhnt, aber für sie sei sie nicht nötig. Sie und Karin fühlten sich hier sicher, auch nachts. „Und wenn die noch 1.000 Kameras aufhängen, macht das die Welt auch nicht besser“, sagt Karin. Manuela erinnert an den Polizisten Rouven Laur, der 2024 hier auf dem Marktplatz erstochen wurde. „Wer was machen will, der macht das auch mit Kameras“, sagt sie.
Manuela, Karin und Nino sind drei von insgesamt zwölf Passant*innen, die wir in Mannheim auf die Kameras angesprochen haben. Die drei wussten von den Kameras, die sie beobachten – die anderen neun aber nicht.
Das könnte auch an der zurückhaltenden Beschilderung liegen. Die weißen Warntafeln sind so groß wie ein DIN-A3-Papier und hängen ziemlich hoch. Sie sind unauffällig gefärbt und mit viel Text in kleiner Schriftgröße bestückt. Dort stehen Kontaktdaten der Polizei, ihres Datenschutzbeauftragten und der zuständigen Aufsichtsbehörde; Zweck und Rechtsgrundlage der Datenverarbeitung, Betroffenenrechte und Speicherdauer. Daneben ist ein Kamerasymbol im Bierdeckelformat zu sehen. Kein Wort von softwarebasierter Verhaltenskontrolle.
Interessant ist der Kontrast zu den Schildern „Richtiges Verhalten bei aggressivem Betteln“, die Passant*innen dazu aufrufen, bettelnde Menschen dem Ordnungsamt zu melden. Diese Schilder sind doppelt so groß wie die Kamera-Warnschilder und knallrot.
Martin Schwarzbeck ist seit 2024 Redakteur bei netzpolitik.org. Er hat Soziologie studiert, als Journalist für zahlreiche Medien gearbeitet, von ARD bis taz, und war zuletzt lange Redakteur bei Berliner Stadtmagazinen, wo er oft Digitalthemen aufgegriffen hat. Martin interessiert sich für Machtstrukturen und die Beziehungen zwischen Menschen und Staaten und Menschen und Konzernen. Ein Fokus dabei sind Techniken und Systeme der Überwachung, egal ob von Staatsorganen oder Unternehmen. Dieser Beitrag ist eine Übernahme von netzpolitik, gemäss Lizenz Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 4.0.

#christianspecht #fraunhoferiosb #linksjugendsolid #mannheim #manuelschulke #neckarstadtblog
Jürgen Trittin @[email protected] · 2025-10-18 · 10:05 UTC

Verhaltensscanner
In Mannheim: Hier wird die Überwachung getestet, die so viele Städte wollen
Viele deutsche Städte wünschen sich Videoüberwachung mit KI-gestützter Verhaltenserkennung. Die wird seit sieben Jahren in Mannheim getestet. Ein Besuch der überwachten Orte zeigt, was diese Form der Überwachung mit den Menschen in einer Stadt macht – und wie schlecht die Technologie funktioniert.
„Popeln würde ich hier lieber nicht“, sagt Svenja. Die Enddreißigerin steht auf dem Mannheimer Marktplatz und beäugt argwöhnisch eine Dachkante. Dort sind sechs Kameras installiert. Fünf davon zeigen ungefähr in ihre Richtung. Die sechste ist eine dreh-, kipp- und zoomfähige Kuppelkamera, bei der nur die kameraführende Person in der Polizei-Leitstelle weiß, was sie gerade filmt. Svenja dreht sich um und sieht eine weitere Kuppelkamera. „Das ist ja überhaupt nicht gruselig“, sagt sie und lacht trocken.
Svenja wusste bis eben nicht, dass sie gefilmt wird. Und auch nicht, dass eine Software ihr Verhalten analysiert und bei bestimmten Bewegungen Alarm auslöst. Ein Reporter von netzpolitik.org hat sie darauf aufmerksam gemacht. Es ist nicht so, dass sie regelmäßig in der Nase popeln würde, wie sie beteuert. Aber als sie die Kameras sieht, spürt sie direkt den Drang zur Selbstbeschränkung. Dass ihr erster Gedanke dabei der Nasenreinigung galt, ist ihr unangenehm. Sie bittet uns, für diesen Artikel ihren Vornamen zu ändern.
70 Kameras filmen den öffentlichen Raum in Mannheim. Bei 46 dieser Kameras untersucht eine Software die Bewegungsmuster der überwachten Menschen. Dafür verwandelt sie die Personen in Strichmännchen mit Knotenpunkten an den Gelenken und erfasst, wie sich die Gliedmaßen bewegen. So soll die Software vor allem Schläge, Tritte, Schubse, Rempler und Würgegriffe erkennen, aber auch andere Bewegungen wie Stehen, Gehen, Rennen, Rad- und Rollerfahren, Taumeln, Tanzen, Sitzen, etwas Tragen und jemanden Umarmen. Auch aggressive oder defensive Körperhaltungen soll die Software detektieren, so die Mannheimer Polizei.
„Mannheimer Modell“ haben die Verantwortlichen das Projekt genannt, das seit 2018 im Einsatz ist. Die Software soll dabei nicht nur Bewegungsmuster von mutmaßlich kriminellen Handlungen erfassen, sondern auch „Normalsituationen“, so die Mannheimer Polizei. Das sei erforderlich, „um diese von den polizeilich relevanten Sachverhalten abzugrenzen.“
Eine sogenannte KI schaut also mit 46 Augen permanent zu, was Menschen in Mannheim so treiben. Die Stadt ist ein Reallabor – und Passant*innen wie Svenja sind so etwas wie Labormäuse.
So arbeiten die Überwachenden
Die Aufnahmen der Mannheimer Kameras laufen im Führungs- und Lagezentrum des Polizeipräsidiums Mannheim zusammen. Dort beobachten Polizist*innen das Geschehen in der Stadt permanent auf einer Vielzahl von Bildschirmen. Wenn die Software ein verdächtiges Bewegungsmuster erkennt, ertönt ein Alarm. Auf einem der Bildschirme erscheint ein Hinweisfenster. In diesem sehen die Beamt*innen die Situation, die den Alarm ausgelöst hat, umrahmt von einem gelben Rechteck; daneben das Livebild der entsprechenden Überwachungskamera. Die zuständige Person entscheidet dann, ob die Polizei einschreitet, erklärt die Mannheimer Polizei weiter.
Mindestens 72 Stunden, also drei Tage lang, werden die Bilder gespeichert. Bei polizeilicher Relevanz bleiben sie sogar bis zu 28 Tage im System; bei Verwendung als Beweismittel noch länger. Die Mannheimer Polizei will mit der Software ihre Einsatzbelastung senken und Effizienz steigern.
Die gruselige Anziehungskraft der KI-Überwachung
Das Mannheimer Modell löst bei vielen Sicherheitsbehörden und -politiker*innen Begehrlichkeiten aus. Seit dem ersten September 2025 läuft es auch hinter Hamburger Kameras. Laut dem Fraunhofer-Institut für Optronik, Systemtechnik und Bildauswertung (Fraunhofer IOSB), das die Technologie entwickelt, haben weitere Städte und Kommunen Interesse bekundet. In Berlin wollen die Regierungsparteien das Polizeigesetz ändern, um den Einsatz der Technologie zu erlauben. In Hessen liegt diese Erlaubnis bereits vor; Innenminister Roman Poseck (CDU) nennt das Mannheimer Modell „vorbildhaft“. In Baden-Württemberg hat die grün-schwarze Landesregierung angekündigt, es ausweiten zu wollen, das nächste Testgelände ist Heidelberg.
Thomas Strobl (CDU), Innenminister des grün-schwarz regierten Baden-Württemberg, nannte das Mannheimer Modell im Mai 2025 einen „nationalen Leuchtturm“. Anlässlich der Verlängerung der Trainingsphase im Jahr 2023 sagte er, es sei „Vorbild für Maßnahmen an Kriminalitätsschwerpunkten im ganzen Land, wenn nicht europaweit.“ Christian Specht (CDU), heute Mannheims Oberbürgermeister, hat die KI-Überwachung im Jahr 2018 als Sicherheitsdezernent auf den Weg gebracht. Er fügte hinzu: „Viele sicherheitspolitische Augen sind gespannt auf uns gerichtet.“
Zu Beginn der automatisierten Verhaltenskontrolle in Mannheim gab es einigen Protest. Eine Gruppe namens „George-Orwell-Ultras“ riet in einem satirischen Video dazu, sich hinter Frachtcontainern auf dem Alten Messplatz vor der Erfassung durch die Kameras zu schützen. Ein Bündnis linker Gruppen lud zum Silent Dance gegen Überwachung; die lokalen Grünen unterstützten eine Petition dagegen. Heute sind die Grünen in Mannheim weniger kritisch. „Mehr Kameras sollen es nicht werden“, sagt die Kreisvorsitzende Tamara Beckh. Die Videoüberwachung könne ergänzend sinnvoll sein, „wir wollen aber eher auf eine personelle Stärkung der Polizei setzen“.
Die Gefahr der Ausweitung
Jackenwetter, Dauerregen. Die Mannheimer Innenstadt ist dennoch sehr belebt an diesem Mittwochvormittag im September 2025. Menschen, die Kapuzen tragen, eilen mit gesenkten Köpfen über den Bahnhofsvorplatz. Tobias Roser steht zwischen ihnen unter seinem Regenschirm und zeigt um sich. „Da, da, da und da“, sagt er. Roser weiß genau, wo die Kameras hängen. Er lebt hier in der Gegend um den Hauptbahnhof und muss sie täglich passieren.
Roser ist Mitglied der Linksjugend solid, der Jugendorganisation der Partei Die Linke. Er fürchtet, dass die automatisierte Verhaltensanalyse ein großer Schritt hin zu einem Überwachungsstaat ist, „den man dann schlüsselfertig übergibt, wenn die Radikalen an die Macht kommen“. Wenn man einmal mit KI-gestützter Überwachung angefangen habe, läge es nahe, weiter aufzurüsten: etwa mit Technologie, die Gesichter erkennt, Lippen liest oder Menschen am Gang identifiziert.
Zwei Erweiterungen des Mannheimer Modells sind bereits geplant: Die Software soll in Zukunft bestimmte Gegenstände, etwa Waffen, erkennen. Und wenn sie eine mutmaßliche Straftat entdeckt, können die gefilmten Gesichter bald vom Landeskriminalamt durch eine Gesichtersuchmaschine gejagt werden. Im September 2024 hat die Landesregierung beschlossen, Lizenzen für eine solche Software zu kaufen.
Die Polizei hat auch nach sieben Jahren keine Ahnung, was die Verhaltenskontrolle bringt
Das Mannheimer Modell ist auch nach sieben Jahren weit von einem evidenzbasierten Betrieb entfernt. Die Vision seiner Fans sind schwarze Bildschirme, die nur anspringen, wenn die Software einen Alarm generiert. Tatsächlich wird dieses Konzept in der Mannheimer Videoüberwachungszentrale bisher nur auf einem einzelnen Bildschirm erprobt. Daneben gibt es zahlreiche weitere Monitore, auf denen weiter Beamt*innen das Geschehen in der Stadt beobachten. Der versprochene Vorteil für die Privatsphäre ist in der Praxis also nicht gegeben.
Die Mannheimer Polizei kann oder will auf Anfrage zudem nicht sagen, wie oft die Software angeschlagen hat und wie oft dadurch eine strafbare Handlung entdeckt wurde. „Der für das Projekt ablesbare Erfolg besteht in der stetigen Weiterentwicklung des Systems und kann zum derzeitigen Projektstand nicht mit Kennzahlen dargestellt werden“, schreibt sie.
Zu Beginn des Projekts hoffte die Mannheimer Polizei noch, das System könne irgendwann auch die Bewegungen bei einem Drogendeal oder Taschendiebstahl erkennen. Das zeigt die auf dem Kanal der Filmakademie Baden-Württemberg veröffentlichte Dokumentation „all eyes on you“. Heute schreibt die Polizei: „Ob das Ziel der Detektion von feinmotorischen Handlungsweisen erreicht werden kann, kann derzeit nicht beantwortet werden.“
Nach aktuellem Stand läuft das Projekt bis 2026. Eine unabhängige Evaluation ist nicht geplant. Nur das Landespolizeipräsidium im Innenministerium soll das Projekt nach seinem Abschluss begutachten. Der Landesdatenschutzbeauftragte Baden-Württemberg schreibt auf Anfrage von netzpolitik.org, dass die Maßnahme wegen der hohen Eingriffsintensität in Grundrechte eigentlich regelmäßig evaluiert werden müsse.
Noch steht die Überwachung rechtlich auf dünnem Eis
Die softwarebasierte Verhaltenserkennung begann mit Kameras am Willy-Brandt-Platz vor dem Mannheimer Hauptbahnhof und am Paradeplatz und wurde dann auf die Kurpfalzstraße – meist Breite Straße genannt –, den Marktplatz und zuletzt den Alten Messplatz ausgedehnt. Die Verwaltung hatte zudem geprüft, ob es nach dem aktuellen Polizeigesetz erlaubt ist, auch am Plankenkopf und auf dem südlichen Bahnhofsvorplatz Kameras aufzustellen, musste die Pläne jedoch verwerfen. „Bei beiden Bereichen konnte kein Kriminalitätsbrennpunkt begründet werden, weshalb die rechtlichen Möglichkeiten für einen Videoschutz nicht vorliegen“, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei auf Anfrage von netzpolitik.org.
Rechtliche Voraussetzung für die Überwachung ist ein im Vergleich zum restlichen Stadtgebiet erhöhtes Aufkommen von Straftaten. Sinkt die relative Kriminalitätsbelastung deutlich, müssen die KI-Kameras nach baden-württembergischem Polizeigesetz wieder abgebaut werden. Deshalb musste die Stadt auch die Kameras, die sie ab 2001 aufgestellt hatte, im Jahr 2007 wieder entfernen. Nur der nördliche Bahnhofsvorplatz ist bis heute durchgängig videoüberwacht.
Die von der Polizei erfasste Straßenkriminalität in den überwachten Gebieten liegt nach einem zwischenzeitlichen Tief wieder auf der Höhe des Jahres vor der Einführung der Videoüberwachung. Die Drogendelikte sind nach Angaben der Polizei zum Teil deutlich zurückgegangen; das entspricht dem Trend in der gesamten Stadt. Besonders aussagekräftig ist die Kriminalitätsbelastung allerdings nicht. Denn die Zahl der erfassten Straftaten steigt automatisch dort, wo die Polizei genauer hinschaut.
Videoüberwachung nach Gefühl
Künftig will sich die Polizei in Mannheim bei der Überwachung des öffentlichen Raums durch Kameras nicht einmal mehr an den eigenen Kennzahlen orientieren müssen, sondern sie von der Kriminalitätsentwicklung entkoppeln. Laut Polizei soll ein Rechtsgutachten untersuchen, ob auch „strukturelle Kriminalitätsbrennpunkte“ per Video überwacht werden dürfen. Gemeint sind Orte, die aus Sicht der Polizei durch soziale, wirtschaftliche und infrastrukturelle Faktoren eine „erhöhte Tatgelegenheitsstruktur“ aufweisen – unabhängig davon, ob dort tatsächlich solche Taten erfasst wurden. Das würde der Polizei viel Spielraum geben, um Überwachung an immer mehr Orten zu legitimieren.
Laut einer Antwort der Stadt Mannheim auf eine Anfrage der Grünen aus dem Jahr 2024 arbeitet die Stadt an einer Novellierung des Polizeigesetzes von Baden-Württemberg mit, um solche „strukturellen Kriminalitätsbrennpunkte“ auch landesweit einzuführen. Somit wäre Videoüberwachung selbst dann möglich, wenn die Zahl der erfassten Straftaten sinkt.
Dieser Ansatz erinnert an das hessische Polizeigesetz. Dort ist die Rede von„Angsträumen“ und „gefühlten Kriminalitätsschwerpunkten“. Sie zeichnen sich ebenfalls durch „Tatgelegenheitsstrukturen“ aus und würden von der Bevölkerung gemieden, so die Begründung der entsprechenden Änderung des Polizeigesetzes, die im Dezember 2024 verabschiedet wurde.
Der baden-württembergische Datenschutzbeauftragte warnt davor, Gesetze zu verabschieden, die Gefühle zur Grundlage polizeilicher Maßnahmen machen. Die Aufsichtsbehörde verstehe zwar den Drang, das Sicherheitsgefühl der Bürger*innen ernst zu nehmen. Sie sehe aber Gefahren, wenn der Staat Maßnahmen mit hoher Eingriffsintensität für die Grundrechte mit Gefühlen begründe. „Der Staat muss für seine Bürger_innen berechenbar und sein Handeln nachvollziehbar und vorhersehbar sein. Vor diesem Hintergrund erschließt sich uns nicht, wie man mit der Intention in Freiheitsrechte einzugreifen, Gefühle oder Eindrücke objektivieren und rationalisieren könnte.“
Worauf die Kameras zielen, will die Polizei geheimhalten
Während die Polizei in Mannheim den öffentlichen Raum zunehmend durchleuchten möchte, will sie sich selbst nicht in die Karten schauen lassen. Eine Karte mit den genauen Positionen und Ausrichtungen der Kameras will die Behörde auf Anfrage nicht herausgeben – aus „polizeitaktischen Gründen“. Es gibt zwar eine Karte mit rot markierten Überwachungszonen auf der Website der Stadt und eine leicht abweichende mit blau markierten Überwachungszonen auf der Website der Polizei, aber beide weichen von der Realität ab.
So ist dort beispielsweise die Kurpfalzbrücke nicht markiert. Dabei wurde diese mindestens zeitweise von einer Kamera überwacht. Das hat der Prozess eines Mannes gezeigt, der mit Hilfe der Überwachungsbilder eine Verurteilung wegen Widerstand gegen Vollstreckungsbeamte abwehren konnte. Wieso die Kamera einen Bereich abgebildet hat, der nicht entsprechend gekennzeichnet ist, hat die Polizei bis Redaktionsschluss nicht beantwortet.
Die Kurpfalzstraße auf Höhe des Paradeplatzes ist auf der Karte der Stadt ebenfalls nicht als überwacht markiert, dabei zeigen mehrere Kameras deutlich darauf. Die Karte der Polizei zählt dieses Areal zur überwachten Zone; ebenso das südliche Ende des Alten Messplatzes. Laut der Karte der Stadt Mannheim ist dieser Bereich von der Überwachung ausgenommen; dabei sagte ein Polizist 2024, dass er zumindest teilweise von Kameras erfasst wird. Eine Sprecherin der Stadt schreibt auf Anfrage, die Karte solle nur einen „groben Überblick“ geben.
Eine detaillierte Karte mit den Kamera-Ausrichtungen und erfassten Arealen hätte vermutlich auch nur eine kurze Gültigkeit. Im Zuge von Optimierungen komme es gelegentlich vor, dass Kameras nachjustiert werden, schreibt die Polizei auf netzpolitik.org-Anfrage. Protokolle dazu gebe es nicht. Private Immobilien, sowie Areale „die nicht in den videogeschützten Bereich fallen“, würden aber verpixelt.
Die Software braucht viele Schlägereien
Eine Hürde bei der Entwicklung der Verhaltenserkennung ist der Mangel an Beispielen für reale Straftaten. Die Software kann nur dann einen Schlag von einem Fistbump unterscheiden, wenn sie beides häufig zu sehen bekommt.
In der Praxis gibt es in deutschen Innenstädten viel weniger Schlägereien als für KI-Forschende wünschenswert wäre. „Wie sich im Verlauf des Projektes zeigte, stehen leider nur sehr begrenzt öffentliche Daten zur Verfügung“, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei. Wohl auch deshalb haben Polizist*innen Schlägereien zum KI-Training simuliert. Gestellte Situationen spielen „eine wichtige Rolle“, schreibt das Fraunhofer IOSB, das die Software entwickelt.
Der Datenwissenschaftler Heiko Paulheim von der Universität Mannheim sieht das kritisch. Wenn die Datengrundlage der Software zum großen Teil aus inszenierten Kämpfen zwischen meist weißen und männlich gelesenen Polizisten bestünde, könne das darauf hinauslaufen, dass die KI bei Frauen und BIPoC weniger zuverlässig funktioniert und öfter zu Unrecht anschlägt.
Auch auf anderem Wege können marginalisierte Gruppen vermehrt ins Visier der KI-basierten Überwachung geraten. Die Mannheimer Software erkennt beispielsweise auch liegende Menschen – und wer in der Öffentlichkeit liegt, ist oft obdachlos. Bislang darf die Software nur bei Hinweisen auf eine Straftat Alarm schlagen. Die Landesregierung plant aber, den Einsatz der Verhaltenserkennung auch gegen Menschen in einer mutmaßlich hilflosen Lage zu erlauben.
Wer das Mannheimer Modell zahlt – und wem die Software gehört
In der Kooperation zwischen Stadt und Polizei Mannheim und dem Fraunhofer IOSB teilen sich die Parteien die Kosten. Die Polizei zahlte 190.000 Euro für Videoarbeitsplätze und Videomanagementsoftware, Speicher- und Serverstruktur. „Personalkosten wurden nicht erhoben“, schreibt sie. Die Stadt zahlte 860.000 Euro für Erwerb, Montage und Verkabelung der Kameras. Das Fraunhofer IOSB finanziert die Software-Entwicklung.
Die Software des Mannheimer Modells gehört dem Fraunhofer IOSB. Es habe sich vertraglich verpflichtet, auf eine kommerzielle Verwertung „vorerst zu verzichten“, schreibt das Institut an netzpolitik.org. Die Polizei Baden-Württemberg könne die Software, wenn sie marktreif werden sollte, kostenfrei nutzen, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei.
Die Trainingsdaten für das Mannheimer Modell liefern Menschen in Mannheim – oftmals nichtsahnend – kostenlos.
Drogendeals knapp außerhalb des Videobilds
Der Wilde Wein, der die Fassade der Alten Feuerwache am Alten Messplatz erobert hat, umrankt acht Kameras. Vor ihren Linsen springen und gleiten Skateboarder über selbstgebaute Rampen und Rails, Kinder planschen in den Fontänen eines Brunnens, Menschen konsumieren offen Cannabis und Lachgas – und den Spritzen auf dem Boden zufolge wohl auch mehr.
So berichtet es der Journalist Manuel Schülke bei einem Spaziergang über den Platz. Er ist Redakteur beim hyperlokalen Nachrichtenportal Neckarstadtblog und hat sich ausgiebig mit der Mannheimer Videoüberwachung beschäftigt. Schülke sagt: „Ich habe meine Zweifel, dass die bringt, was sie soll.“ Zu häufig lese er im Polizeibericht von Straftaten im Überwachungsbereich, bei denen keine Streife rechtzeitig vor Ort war und trotz Videoaufzeichnung Zeug*innen gesucht werden. „Da hat die Abschreckung nicht funktioniert und die anschließende Strafverfolgung ist auch mau“, sagt er.
Damit die Kameras potenzielle Kriminelle nicht einfach in die Nebenstraßen verdrängen, sind bestimmte Polizist*innen dazu abgestellt, um die videoüberwachten Areale zu patrouillieren. Sie sollen auch eingreifen, wenn eine Kamera eine Straftat filmt.
Schülke zufolge spielen sich Drogendelikte auf dem Platz oftmals knapp außerhalb des überwachten Bereichs ab, etwa in einem anliegenden Parkhaus oder dort, wo der Platz an die Neckarwiese grenzt. Im November 2024 hat die Polizei in diesem Teilareal eine Razzia gegen Drogenhändler*innen durchgeführt.
Schülke hatte zur Einführung der Kameras versucht, Beispielbilder zu bekommen, die zeigen, welche Bereiche die Kameras am Platz aufnehmen; die Polizei habe die Antwort aus ermittlungstaktischen Gründen verweigert. „Es gibt da uneinsehbare Areale und die wollen nicht, dass das jemand weiß“, sagt der Journalist.
Gut einsehbar für die Kameras seien dagegen die Eingänge zu sensitiven Einrichtungen aus dem Gesundheitsbereich, darunter Praxen für Psychotherapie, ein Zentrum für sexuelle Gesundheit und eine psychologische Beratungsstelle für queere Menschen.
Das denken die Mannheimer*innen über die Überwachung
Nino (56) steht auf der Kurpfalzstraße nahe des Marktplatzes und meint, die Mannheimer Kameras gut zu kennen. Dann kreist sein Zeigefinger aber doch erst einmal orientierungslos, während er mit der anderen Hand sein Bier festhält. „Ah da“, sagt Nino nach einer Weile und deutet auf eines der Geräte. „Ich finds scheiße“, sagt er. Da ist Nino nicht allein. Fünf Prozent der Mannheimer*innen versuchen laut einer Untersuchung von 2022/23, die überwachten Areale möglichst zu vermeiden.
Manuela (52) und Karin (77) wollen gerade den Marktplatz überqueren. Manuela sagt, als “Monnemerinnen“ seien sie inzwischen an die Überwachung gewöhnt, aber für sie sei sie nicht nötig. Sie und Karin fühlten sich hier sicher, auch nachts. „Und wenn die noch 1.000 Kameras aufhängen, macht das die Welt auch nicht besser“, sagt Karin. Manuela erinnert an den Polizisten Rouven Laur, der 2024 hier auf dem Marktplatz erstochen wurde. „Wer was machen will, der macht das auch mit Kameras“, sagt sie.
Manuela, Karin und Nino sind drei von insgesamt zwölf Passant*innen, die wir in Mannheim auf die Kameras angesprochen haben. Die drei wussten von den Kameras, die sie beobachten – die anderen neun aber nicht.
Das könnte auch an der zurückhaltenden Beschilderung liegen. Die weißen Warntafeln sind so groß wie ein DIN-A3-Papier und hängen ziemlich hoch. Sie sind unauffällig gefärbt und mit viel Text in kleiner Schriftgröße bestückt. Dort stehen Kontaktdaten der Polizei, ihres Datenschutzbeauftragten und der zuständigen Aufsichtsbehörde; Zweck und Rechtsgrundlage der Datenverarbeitung, Betroffenenrechte und Speicherdauer. Daneben ist ein Kamerasymbol im Bierdeckelformat zu sehen. Kein Wort von softwarebasierter Verhaltenskontrolle.
Interessant ist der Kontrast zu den Schildern „Richtiges Verhalten bei aggressivem Betteln“, die Passant*innen dazu aufrufen, bettelnde Menschen dem Ordnungsamt zu melden. Diese Schilder sind doppelt so groß wie die Kamera-Warnschilder und knallrot.
Martin Schwarzbeck ist seit 2024 Redakteur bei netzpolitik.org. Er hat Soziologie studiert, als Journalist für zahlreiche Medien gearbeitet, von ARD bis taz, und war zuletzt lange Redakteur bei Berliner Stadtmagazinen, wo er oft Digitalthemen aufgegriffen hat. Martin interessiert sich für Machtstrukturen und die Beziehungen zwischen Menschen und Staaten und Menschen und Konzernen. Ein Fokus dabei sind Techniken und Systeme der Überwachung, egal ob von Staatsorganen oder Unternehmen. Dieser Beitrag ist eine Übernahme von netzpolitik, gemäss Lizenz Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 4.0. Einige Minuten war der Autor falsch benannt.

Über Martin Schwarzbeck - netzpolitik:
Unter der Kennung "Gastautor:innen" fassen wir die unterschiedlichsten Beiträge externer Quellen zusammen, die wir dankbar im Beueler-Extradienst (wieder-)veröffentlichen dürfen. Die Autor*innen, Quellen und ggf. Lizenzen sind, soweit bekannt, jeweils im Beitrag vermerkt und/oder verlinkt.

#christianspecht #fraunhoferiosb #linksjugendsolid #mannheim #manuelschulke #neckarstadtblog
Martin Böttger @[email protected] · 2025-10-18 · 10:05 UTC

Verhaltensscanner
In Mannheim: Hier wird die Überwachung getestet, die so viele Städte wollen
Viele deutsche Städte wünschen sich Videoüberwachung mit KI-gestützter Verhaltenserkennung. Die wird seit sieben Jahren in Mannheim getestet. Ein Besuch der überwachten Orte zeigt, was diese Form der Überwachung mit den Menschen in einer Stadt macht – und wie schlecht die Technologie funktioniert.
„Popeln würde ich hier lieber nicht“, sagt Svenja. Die Enddreißigerin steht auf dem Mannheimer Marktplatz und beäugt argwöhnisch eine Dachkante. Dort sind sechs Kameras installiert. Fünf davon zeigen ungefähr in ihre Richtung. Die sechste ist eine dreh-, kipp- und zoomfähige Kuppelkamera, bei der nur die kameraführende Person in der Polizei-Leitstelle weiß, was sie gerade filmt. Svenja dreht sich um und sieht eine weitere Kuppelkamera. „Das ist ja überhaupt nicht gruselig“, sagt sie und lacht trocken.
Svenja wusste bis eben nicht, dass sie gefilmt wird. Und auch nicht, dass eine Software ihr Verhalten analysiert und bei bestimmten Bewegungen Alarm auslöst. Ein Reporter von netzpolitik.org hat sie darauf aufmerksam gemacht. Es ist nicht so, dass sie regelmäßig in der Nase popeln würde, wie sie beteuert. Aber als sie die Kameras sieht, spürt sie direkt den Drang zur Selbstbeschränkung. Dass ihr erster Gedanke dabei der Nasenreinigung galt, ist ihr unangenehm. Sie bittet uns, für diesen Artikel ihren Vornamen zu ändern.
70 Kameras filmen den öffentlichen Raum in Mannheim. Bei 46 dieser Kameras untersucht eine Software die Bewegungsmuster der überwachten Menschen. Dafür verwandelt sie die Personen in Strichmännchen mit Knotenpunkten an den Gelenken und erfasst, wie sich die Gliedmaßen bewegen. So soll die Software vor allem Schläge, Tritte, Schubse, Rempler und Würgegriffe erkennen, aber auch andere Bewegungen wie Stehen, Gehen, Rennen, Rad- und Rollerfahren, Taumeln, Tanzen, Sitzen, etwas Tragen und jemanden Umarmen. Auch aggressive oder defensive Körperhaltungen soll die Software detektieren, so die Mannheimer Polizei.
„Mannheimer Modell“ haben die Verantwortlichen das Projekt genannt, das seit 2018 im Einsatz ist. Die Software soll dabei nicht nur Bewegungsmuster von mutmaßlich kriminellen Handlungen erfassen, sondern auch „Normalsituationen“, so die Mannheimer Polizei. Das sei erforderlich, „um diese von den polizeilich relevanten Sachverhalten abzugrenzen.“
Eine sogenannte KI schaut also mit 46 Augen permanent zu, was Menschen in Mannheim so treiben. Die Stadt ist ein Reallabor – und Passant*innen wie Svenja sind so etwas wie Labormäuse.
So arbeiten die Überwachenden
Die Aufnahmen der Mannheimer Kameras laufen im Führungs- und Lagezentrum des Polizeipräsidiums Mannheim zusammen. Dort beobachten Polizist*innen das Geschehen in der Stadt permanent auf einer Vielzahl von Bildschirmen. Wenn die Software ein verdächtiges Bewegungsmuster erkennt, ertönt ein Alarm. Auf einem der Bildschirme erscheint ein Hinweisfenster. In diesem sehen die Beamt*innen die Situation, die den Alarm ausgelöst hat, umrahmt von einem gelben Rechteck; daneben das Livebild der entsprechenden Überwachungskamera. Die zuständige Person entscheidet dann, ob die Polizei einschreitet, erklärt die Mannheimer Polizei weiter.
Mindestens 72 Stunden, also drei Tage lang, werden die Bilder gespeichert. Bei polizeilicher Relevanz bleiben sie sogar bis zu 28 Tage im System; bei Verwendung als Beweismittel noch länger. Die Mannheimer Polizei will mit der Software ihre Einsatzbelastung senken und Effizienz steigern.
Die gruselige Anziehungskraft der KI-Überwachung
Das Mannheimer Modell löst bei vielen Sicherheitsbehörden und -politiker*innen Begehrlichkeiten aus. Seit dem ersten September 2025 läuft es auch hinter Hamburger Kameras. Laut dem Fraunhofer-Institut für Optronik, Systemtechnik und Bildauswertung (Fraunhofer IOSB), das die Technologie entwickelt, haben weitere Städte und Kommunen Interesse bekundet. In Berlin wollen die Regierungsparteien das Polizeigesetz ändern, um den Einsatz der Technologie zu erlauben. In Hessen liegt diese Erlaubnis bereits vor; Innenminister Roman Poseck (CDU) nennt das Mannheimer Modell „vorbildhaft“. In Baden-Württemberg hat die grün-schwarze Landesregierung angekündigt, es ausweiten zu wollen, das nächste Testgelände ist Heidelberg.
Thomas Strobl (CDU), Innenminister des grün-schwarz regierten Baden-Württemberg, nannte das Mannheimer Modell im Mai 2025 einen „nationalen Leuchtturm“. Anlässlich der Verlängerung der Trainingsphase im Jahr 2023 sagte er, es sei „Vorbild für Maßnahmen an Kriminalitätsschwerpunkten im ganzen Land, wenn nicht europaweit.“ Christian Specht (CDU), heute Mannheims Oberbürgermeister, hat die KI-Überwachung im Jahr 2018 als Sicherheitsdezernent auf den Weg gebracht. Er fügte hinzu: „Viele sicherheitspolitische Augen sind gespannt auf uns gerichtet.“
Zu Beginn der automatisierten Verhaltenskontrolle in Mannheim gab es einigen Protest. Eine Gruppe namens „George-Orwell-Ultras“ riet in einem satirischen Video dazu, sich hinter Frachtcontainern auf dem Alten Messplatz vor der Erfassung durch die Kameras zu schützen. Ein Bündnis linker Gruppen lud zum Silent Dance gegen Überwachung; die lokalen Grünen unterstützten eine Petition dagegen. Heute sind die Grünen in Mannheim weniger kritisch. „Mehr Kameras sollen es nicht werden“, sagt die Kreisvorsitzende Tamara Beckh. Die Videoüberwachung könne ergänzend sinnvoll sein, „wir wollen aber eher auf eine personelle Stärkung der Polizei setzen“.
Die Gefahr der Ausweitung
Jackenwetter, Dauerregen. Die Mannheimer Innenstadt ist dennoch sehr belebt an diesem Mittwochvormittag im September 2025. Menschen, die Kapuzen tragen, eilen mit gesenkten Köpfen über den Bahnhofsvorplatz. Tobias Roser steht zwischen ihnen unter seinem Regenschirm und zeigt um sich. „Da, da, da und da“, sagt er. Roser weiß genau, wo die Kameras hängen. Er lebt hier in der Gegend um den Hauptbahnhof und muss sie täglich passieren.
Roser ist Mitglied der Linksjugend solid, der Jugendorganisation der Partei Die Linke. Er fürchtet, dass die automatisierte Verhaltensanalyse ein großer Schritt hin zu einem Überwachungsstaat ist, „den man dann schlüsselfertig übergibt, wenn die Radikalen an die Macht kommen“. Wenn man einmal mit KI-gestützter Überwachung angefangen habe, läge es nahe, weiter aufzurüsten: etwa mit Technologie, die Gesichter erkennt, Lippen liest oder Menschen am Gang identifiziert.
Zwei Erweiterungen des Mannheimer Modells sind bereits geplant: Die Software soll in Zukunft bestimmte Gegenstände, etwa Waffen, erkennen. Und wenn sie eine mutmaßliche Straftat entdeckt, können die gefilmten Gesichter bald vom Landeskriminalamt durch eine Gesichtersuchmaschine gejagt werden. Im September 2024 hat die Landesregierung beschlossen, Lizenzen für eine solche Software zu kaufen.
Die Polizei hat auch nach sieben Jahren keine Ahnung, was die Verhaltenskontrolle bringt
Das Mannheimer Modell ist auch nach sieben Jahren weit von einem evidenzbasierten Betrieb entfernt. Die Vision seiner Fans sind schwarze Bildschirme, die nur anspringen, wenn die Software einen Alarm generiert. Tatsächlich wird dieses Konzept in der Mannheimer Videoüberwachungszentrale bisher nur auf einem einzelnen Bildschirm erprobt. Daneben gibt es zahlreiche weitere Monitore, auf denen weiter Beamt*innen das Geschehen in der Stadt beobachten. Der versprochene Vorteil für die Privatsphäre ist in der Praxis also nicht gegeben.
Die Mannheimer Polizei kann oder will auf Anfrage zudem nicht sagen, wie oft die Software angeschlagen hat und wie oft dadurch eine strafbare Handlung entdeckt wurde. „Der für das Projekt ablesbare Erfolg besteht in der stetigen Weiterentwicklung des Systems und kann zum derzeitigen Projektstand nicht mit Kennzahlen dargestellt werden“, schreibt sie.
Zu Beginn des Projekts hoffte die Mannheimer Polizei noch, das System könne irgendwann auch die Bewegungen bei einem Drogendeal oder Taschendiebstahl erkennen. Das zeigt die auf dem Kanal der Filmakademie Baden-Württemberg veröffentlichte Dokumentation „all eyes on you“. Heute schreibt die Polizei: „Ob das Ziel der Detektion von feinmotorischen Handlungsweisen erreicht werden kann, kann derzeit nicht beantwortet werden.“
Nach aktuellem Stand läuft das Projekt bis 2026. Eine unabhängige Evaluation ist nicht geplant. Nur das Landespolizeipräsidium im Innenministerium soll das Projekt nach seinem Abschluss begutachten. Der Landesdatenschutzbeauftragte Baden-Württemberg schreibt auf Anfrage von netzpolitik.org, dass die Maßnahme wegen der hohen Eingriffsintensität in Grundrechte eigentlich regelmäßig evaluiert werden müsse.
Noch steht die Überwachung rechtlich auf dünnem Eis
Die softwarebasierte Verhaltenserkennung begann mit Kameras am Willy-Brandt-Platz vor dem Mannheimer Hauptbahnhof und am Paradeplatz und wurde dann auf die Kurpfalzstraße – meist Breite Straße genannt –, den Marktplatz und zuletzt den Alten Messplatz ausgedehnt. Die Verwaltung hatte zudem geprüft, ob es nach dem aktuellen Polizeigesetz erlaubt ist, auch am Plankenkopf und auf dem südlichen Bahnhofsvorplatz Kameras aufzustellen, musste die Pläne jedoch verwerfen. „Bei beiden Bereichen konnte kein Kriminalitätsbrennpunkt begründet werden, weshalb die rechtlichen Möglichkeiten für einen Videoschutz nicht vorliegen“, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei auf Anfrage von netzpolitik.org.
Rechtliche Voraussetzung für die Überwachung ist ein im Vergleich zum restlichen Stadtgebiet erhöhtes Aufkommen von Straftaten. Sinkt die relative Kriminalitätsbelastung deutlich, müssen die KI-Kameras nach baden-württembergischem Polizeigesetz wieder abgebaut werden. Deshalb musste die Stadt auch die Kameras, die sie ab 2001 aufgestellt hatte, im Jahr 2007 wieder entfernen. Nur der nördliche Bahnhofsvorplatz ist bis heute durchgängig videoüberwacht.
Die von der Polizei erfasste Straßenkriminalität in den überwachten Gebieten liegt nach einem zwischenzeitlichen Tief wieder auf der Höhe des Jahres vor der Einführung der Videoüberwachung. Die Drogendelikte sind nach Angaben der Polizei zum Teil deutlich zurückgegangen; das entspricht dem Trend in der gesamten Stadt. Besonders aussagekräftig ist die Kriminalitätsbelastung allerdings nicht. Denn die Zahl der erfassten Straftaten steigt automatisch dort, wo die Polizei genauer hinschaut.
Videoüberwachung nach Gefühl
Künftig will sich die Polizei in Mannheim bei der Überwachung des öffentlichen Raums durch Kameras nicht einmal mehr an den eigenen Kennzahlen orientieren müssen, sondern sie von der Kriminalitätsentwicklung entkoppeln. Laut Polizei soll ein Rechtsgutachten untersuchen, ob auch „strukturelle Kriminalitätsbrennpunkte“ per Video überwacht werden dürfen. Gemeint sind Orte, die aus Sicht der Polizei durch soziale, wirtschaftliche und infrastrukturelle Faktoren eine „erhöhte Tatgelegenheitsstruktur“ aufweisen – unabhängig davon, ob dort tatsächlich solche Taten erfasst wurden. Das würde der Polizei viel Spielraum geben, um Überwachung an immer mehr Orten zu legitimieren.
Laut einer Antwort der Stadt Mannheim auf eine Anfrage der Grünen aus dem Jahr 2024 arbeitet die Stadt an einer Novellierung des Polizeigesetzes von Baden-Württemberg mit, um solche „strukturellen Kriminalitätsbrennpunkte“ auch landesweit einzuführen. Somit wäre Videoüberwachung selbst dann möglich, wenn die Zahl der erfassten Straftaten sinkt.
Dieser Ansatz erinnert an das hessische Polizeigesetz. Dort ist die Rede von„Angsträumen“ und „gefühlten Kriminalitätsschwerpunkten“. Sie zeichnen sich ebenfalls durch „Tatgelegenheitsstrukturen“ aus und würden von der Bevölkerung gemieden, so die Begründung der entsprechenden Änderung des Polizeigesetzes, die im Dezember 2024 verabschiedet wurde.
Der baden-württembergische Datenschutzbeauftragte warnt davor, Gesetze zu verabschieden, die Gefühle zur Grundlage polizeilicher Maßnahmen machen. Die Aufsichtsbehörde verstehe zwar den Drang, das Sicherheitsgefühl der Bürger*innen ernst zu nehmen. Sie sehe aber Gefahren, wenn der Staat Maßnahmen mit hoher Eingriffsintensität für die Grundrechte mit Gefühlen begründe. „Der Staat muss für seine Bürger_innen berechenbar und sein Handeln nachvollziehbar und vorhersehbar sein. Vor diesem Hintergrund erschließt sich uns nicht, wie man mit der Intention in Freiheitsrechte einzugreifen, Gefühle oder Eindrücke objektivieren und rationalisieren könnte.“
Worauf die Kameras zielen, will die Polizei geheimhalten
Während die Polizei in Mannheim den öffentlichen Raum zunehmend durchleuchten möchte, will sie sich selbst nicht in die Karten schauen lassen. Eine Karte mit den genauen Positionen und Ausrichtungen der Kameras will die Behörde auf Anfrage nicht herausgeben – aus „polizeitaktischen Gründen“. Es gibt zwar eine Karte mit rot markierten Überwachungszonen auf der Website der Stadt und eine leicht abweichende mit blau markierten Überwachungszonen auf der Website der Polizei, aber beide weichen von der Realität ab.
So ist dort beispielsweise die Kurpfalzbrücke nicht markiert. Dabei wurde diese mindestens zeitweise von einer Kamera überwacht. Das hat der Prozess eines Mannes gezeigt, der mit Hilfe der Überwachungsbilder eine Verurteilung wegen Widerstand gegen Vollstreckungsbeamte abwehren konnte. Wieso die Kamera einen Bereich abgebildet hat, der nicht entsprechend gekennzeichnet ist, hat die Polizei bis Redaktionsschluss nicht beantwortet.
Die Kurpfalzstraße auf Höhe des Paradeplatzes ist auf der Karte der Stadt ebenfalls nicht als überwacht markiert, dabei zeigen mehrere Kameras deutlich darauf. Die Karte der Polizei zählt dieses Areal zur überwachten Zone; ebenso das südliche Ende des Alten Messplatzes. Laut der Karte der Stadt Mannheim ist dieser Bereich von der Überwachung ausgenommen; dabei sagte ein Polizist 2024, dass er zumindest teilweise von Kameras erfasst wird. Eine Sprecherin der Stadt schreibt auf Anfrage, die Karte solle nur einen „groben Überblick“ geben.
Eine detaillierte Karte mit den Kamera-Ausrichtungen und erfassten Arealen hätte vermutlich auch nur eine kurze Gültigkeit. Im Zuge von Optimierungen komme es gelegentlich vor, dass Kameras nachjustiert werden, schreibt die Polizei auf netzpolitik.org-Anfrage. Protokolle dazu gebe es nicht. Private Immobilien, sowie Areale „die nicht in den videogeschützten Bereich fallen“, würden aber verpixelt.
Die Software braucht viele Schlägereien
Eine Hürde bei der Entwicklung der Verhaltenserkennung ist der Mangel an Beispielen für reale Straftaten. Die Software kann nur dann einen Schlag von einem Fistbump unterscheiden, wenn sie beides häufig zu sehen bekommt.
In der Praxis gibt es in deutschen Innenstädten viel weniger Schlägereien als für KI-Forschende wünschenswert wäre. „Wie sich im Verlauf des Projektes zeigte, stehen leider nur sehr begrenzt öffentliche Daten zur Verfügung“, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei. Wohl auch deshalb haben Polizist*innen Schlägereien zum KI-Training simuliert. Gestellte Situationen spielen „eine wichtige Rolle“, schreibt das Fraunhofer IOSB, das die Software entwickelt.
Der Datenwissenschaftler Heiko Paulheim von der Universität Mannheim sieht das kritisch. Wenn die Datengrundlage der Software zum großen Teil aus inszenierten Kämpfen zwischen meist weißen und männlich gelesenen Polizisten bestünde, könne das darauf hinauslaufen, dass die KI bei Frauen und BIPoC weniger zuverlässig funktioniert und öfter zu Unrecht anschlägt.
Auch auf anderem Wege können marginalisierte Gruppen vermehrt ins Visier der KI-basierten Überwachung geraten. Die Mannheimer Software erkennt beispielsweise auch liegende Menschen – und wer in der Öffentlichkeit liegt, ist oft obdachlos. Bislang darf die Software nur bei Hinweisen auf eine Straftat Alarm schlagen. Die Landesregierung plant aber, den Einsatz der Verhaltenserkennung auch gegen Menschen in einer mutmaßlich hilflosen Lage zu erlauben.
Wer das Mannheimer Modell zahlt – und wem die Software gehört
In der Kooperation zwischen Stadt und Polizei Mannheim und dem Fraunhofer IOSB teilen sich die Parteien die Kosten. Die Polizei zahlte 190.000 Euro für Videoarbeitsplätze und Videomanagementsoftware, Speicher- und Serverstruktur. „Personalkosten wurden nicht erhoben“, schreibt sie. Die Stadt zahlte 860.000 Euro für Erwerb, Montage und Verkabelung der Kameras. Das Fraunhofer IOSB finanziert die Software-Entwicklung.
Die Software des Mannheimer Modells gehört dem Fraunhofer IOSB. Es habe sich vertraglich verpflichtet, auf eine kommerzielle Verwertung „vorerst zu verzichten“, schreibt das Institut an netzpolitik.org. Die Polizei Baden-Württemberg könne die Software, wenn sie marktreif werden sollte, kostenfrei nutzen, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei.
Die Trainingsdaten für das Mannheimer Modell liefern Menschen in Mannheim – oftmals nichtsahnend – kostenlos.
Drogendeals knapp außerhalb des Videobilds
Der Wilde Wein, der die Fassade der Alten Feuerwache am Alten Messplatz erobert hat, umrankt acht Kameras. Vor ihren Linsen springen und gleiten Skateboarder über selbstgebaute Rampen und Rails, Kinder planschen in den Fontänen eines Brunnens, Menschen konsumieren offen Cannabis und Lachgas – und den Spritzen auf dem Boden zufolge wohl auch mehr.
So berichtet es der Journalist Manuel Schülke bei einem Spaziergang über den Platz. Er ist Redakteur beim hyperlokalen Nachrichtenportal Neckarstadtblog und hat sich ausgiebig mit der Mannheimer Videoüberwachung beschäftigt. Schülke sagt: „Ich habe meine Zweifel, dass die bringt, was sie soll.“ Zu häufig lese er im Polizeibericht von Straftaten im Überwachungsbereich, bei denen keine Streife rechtzeitig vor Ort war und trotz Videoaufzeichnung Zeug*innen gesucht werden. „Da hat die Abschreckung nicht funktioniert und die anschließende Strafverfolgung ist auch mau“, sagt er.
Damit die Kameras potenzielle Kriminelle nicht einfach in die Nebenstraßen verdrängen, sind bestimmte Polizist*innen dazu abgestellt, um die videoüberwachten Areale zu patrouillieren. Sie sollen auch eingreifen, wenn eine Kamera eine Straftat filmt.
Schülke zufolge spielen sich Drogendelikte auf dem Platz oftmals knapp außerhalb des überwachten Bereichs ab, etwa in einem anliegenden Parkhaus oder dort, wo der Platz an die Neckarwiese grenzt. Im November 2024 hat die Polizei in diesem Teilareal eine Razzia gegen Drogenhändler*innen durchgeführt.
Schülke hatte zur Einführung der Kameras versucht, Beispielbilder zu bekommen, die zeigen, welche Bereiche die Kameras am Platz aufnehmen; die Polizei habe die Antwort aus ermittlungstaktischen Gründen verweigert. „Es gibt da uneinsehbare Areale und die wollen nicht, dass das jemand weiß“, sagt der Journalist.
Gut einsehbar für die Kameras seien dagegen die Eingänge zu sensitiven Einrichtungen aus dem Gesundheitsbereich, darunter Praxen für Psychotherapie, ein Zentrum für sexuelle Gesundheit und eine psychologische Beratungsstelle für queere Menschen.
Das denken die Mannheimer*innen über die Überwachung
Nino (56) steht auf der Kurpfalzstraße nahe des Marktplatzes und meint, die Mannheimer Kameras gut zu kennen. Dann kreist sein Zeigefinger aber doch erst einmal orientierungslos, während er mit der anderen Hand sein Bier festhält. „Ah da“, sagt Nino nach einer Weile und deutet auf eines der Geräte. „Ich finds scheiße“, sagt er. Da ist Nino nicht allein. Fünf Prozent der Mannheimer*innen versuchen laut einer Untersuchung von 2022/23, die überwachten Areale möglichst zu vermeiden.
Manuela (52) und Karin (77) wollen gerade den Marktplatz überqueren. Manuela sagt, als “Monnemerinnen“ seien sie inzwischen an die Überwachung gewöhnt, aber für sie sei sie nicht nötig. Sie und Karin fühlten sich hier sicher, auch nachts. „Und wenn die noch 1.000 Kameras aufhängen, macht das die Welt auch nicht besser“, sagt Karin. Manuela erinnert an den Polizisten Rouven Laur, der 2024 hier auf dem Marktplatz erstochen wurde. „Wer was machen will, der macht das auch mit Kameras“, sagt sie.
Manuela, Karin und Nino sind drei von insgesamt zwölf Passant*innen, die wir in Mannheim auf die Kameras angesprochen haben. Die drei wussten von den Kameras, die sie beobachten – die anderen neun aber nicht.
Das könnte auch an der zurückhaltenden Beschilderung liegen. Die weißen Warntafeln sind so groß wie ein DIN-A3-Papier und hängen ziemlich hoch. Sie sind unauffällig gefärbt und mit viel Text in kleiner Schriftgröße bestückt. Dort stehen Kontaktdaten der Polizei, ihres Datenschutzbeauftragten und der zuständigen Aufsichtsbehörde; Zweck und Rechtsgrundlage der Datenverarbeitung, Betroffenenrechte und Speicherdauer. Daneben ist ein Kamerasymbol im Bierdeckelformat zu sehen. Kein Wort von softwarebasierter Verhaltenskontrolle.
Interessant ist der Kontrast zu den Schildern „Richtiges Verhalten bei aggressivem Betteln“, die Passant*innen dazu aufrufen, bettelnde Menschen dem Ordnungsamt zu melden. Diese Schilder sind doppelt so groß wie die Kamera-Warnschilder und knallrot.
Martin Schwarzbeck ist seit 2024 Redakteur bei netzpolitik.org. Er hat Soziologie studiert, als Journalist für zahlreiche Medien gearbeitet, von ARD bis taz, und war zuletzt lange Redakteur bei Berliner Stadtmagazinen, wo er oft Digitalthemen aufgegriffen hat. Martin interessiert sich für Machtstrukturen und die Beziehungen zwischen Menschen und Staaten und Menschen und Konzernen. Ein Fokus dabei sind Techniken und Systeme der Überwachung, egal ob von Staatsorganen oder Unternehmen. Dieser Beitrag ist eine Übernahme von netzpolitik, gemäss Lizenz Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 4.0.

#verhaltensscanner #verhaltenserkennung #tobiasroser #thomasstrobl #tamarabeckh #romanposeck
Martin Böttger @[email protected] · 2025-10-18 · 10:05 UTC

Verhaltensscanner
In Mannheim: Hier wird die Überwachung getestet, die so viele Städte wollen
Viele deutsche Städte wünschen sich Videoüberwachung mit KI-gestützter Verhaltenserkennung. Die wird seit sieben Jahren in Mannheim getestet. Ein Besuch der überwachten Orte zeigt, was diese Form der Überwachung mit den Menschen in einer Stadt macht – und wie schlecht die Technologie funktioniert.
„Popeln würde ich hier lieber nicht“, sagt Svenja. Die Enddreißigerin steht auf dem Mannheimer Marktplatz und beäugt argwöhnisch eine Dachkante. Dort sind sechs Kameras installiert. Fünf davon zeigen ungefähr in ihre Richtung. Die sechste ist eine dreh-, kipp- und zoomfähige Kuppelkamera, bei der nur die kameraführende Person in der Polizei-Leitstelle weiß, was sie gerade filmt. Svenja dreht sich um und sieht eine weitere Kuppelkamera. „Das ist ja überhaupt nicht gruselig“, sagt sie und lacht trocken.
Svenja wusste bis eben nicht, dass sie gefilmt wird. Und auch nicht, dass eine Software ihr Verhalten analysiert und bei bestimmten Bewegungen Alarm auslöst. Ein Reporter von netzpolitik.org hat sie darauf aufmerksam gemacht. Es ist nicht so, dass sie regelmäßig in der Nase popeln würde, wie sie beteuert. Aber als sie die Kameras sieht, spürt sie direkt den Drang zur Selbstbeschränkung. Dass ihr erster Gedanke dabei der Nasenreinigung galt, ist ihr unangenehm. Sie bittet uns, für diesen Artikel ihren Vornamen zu ändern.
70 Kameras filmen den öffentlichen Raum in Mannheim. Bei 46 dieser Kameras untersucht eine Software die Bewegungsmuster der überwachten Menschen. Dafür verwandelt sie die Personen in Strichmännchen mit Knotenpunkten an den Gelenken und erfasst, wie sich die Gliedmaßen bewegen. So soll die Software vor allem Schläge, Tritte, Schubse, Rempler und Würgegriffe erkennen, aber auch andere Bewegungen wie Stehen, Gehen, Rennen, Rad- und Rollerfahren, Taumeln, Tanzen, Sitzen, etwas Tragen und jemanden Umarmen. Auch aggressive oder defensive Körperhaltungen soll die Software detektieren, so die Mannheimer Polizei.
„Mannheimer Modell“ haben die Verantwortlichen das Projekt genannt, das seit 2018 im Einsatz ist. Die Software soll dabei nicht nur Bewegungsmuster von mutmaßlich kriminellen Handlungen erfassen, sondern auch „Normalsituationen“, so die Mannheimer Polizei. Das sei erforderlich, „um diese von den polizeilich relevanten Sachverhalten abzugrenzen.“
Eine sogenannte KI schaut also mit 46 Augen permanent zu, was Menschen in Mannheim so treiben. Die Stadt ist ein Reallabor – und Passant*innen wie Svenja sind so etwas wie Labormäuse.
So arbeiten die Überwachenden
Die Aufnahmen der Mannheimer Kameras laufen im Führungs- und Lagezentrum des Polizeipräsidiums Mannheim zusammen. Dort beobachten Polizist*innen das Geschehen in der Stadt permanent auf einer Vielzahl von Bildschirmen. Wenn die Software ein verdächtiges Bewegungsmuster erkennt, ertönt ein Alarm. Auf einem der Bildschirme erscheint ein Hinweisfenster. In diesem sehen die Beamt*innen die Situation, die den Alarm ausgelöst hat, umrahmt von einem gelben Rechteck; daneben das Livebild der entsprechenden Überwachungskamera. Die zuständige Person entscheidet dann, ob die Polizei einschreitet, erklärt die Mannheimer Polizei weiter.
Mindestens 72 Stunden, also drei Tage lang, werden die Bilder gespeichert. Bei polizeilicher Relevanz bleiben sie sogar bis zu 28 Tage im System; bei Verwendung als Beweismittel noch länger. Die Mannheimer Polizei will mit der Software ihre Einsatzbelastung senken und Effizienz steigern.
Die gruselige Anziehungskraft der KI-Überwachung
Das Mannheimer Modell löst bei vielen Sicherheitsbehörden und -politiker*innen Begehrlichkeiten aus. Seit dem ersten September 2025 läuft es auch hinter Hamburger Kameras. Laut dem Fraunhofer-Institut für Optronik, Systemtechnik und Bildauswertung (Fraunhofer IOSB), das die Technologie entwickelt, haben weitere Städte und Kommunen Interesse bekundet. In Berlin wollen die Regierungsparteien das Polizeigesetz ändern, um den Einsatz der Technologie zu erlauben. In Hessen liegt diese Erlaubnis bereits vor; Innenminister Roman Poseck (CDU) nennt das Mannheimer Modell „vorbildhaft“. In Baden-Württemberg hat die grün-schwarze Landesregierung angekündigt, es ausweiten zu wollen, das nächste Testgelände ist Heidelberg.
Thomas Strobl (CDU), Innenminister des grün-schwarz regierten Baden-Württemberg, nannte das Mannheimer Modell im Mai 2025 einen „nationalen Leuchtturm“. Anlässlich der Verlängerung der Trainingsphase im Jahr 2023 sagte er, es sei „Vorbild für Maßnahmen an Kriminalitätsschwerpunkten im ganzen Land, wenn nicht europaweit.“ Christian Specht (CDU), heute Mannheims Oberbürgermeister, hat die KI-Überwachung im Jahr 2018 als Sicherheitsdezernent auf den Weg gebracht. Er fügte hinzu: „Viele sicherheitspolitische Augen sind gespannt auf uns gerichtet.“
Zu Beginn der automatisierten Verhaltenskontrolle in Mannheim gab es einigen Protest. Eine Gruppe namens „George-Orwell-Ultras“ riet in einem satirischen Video dazu, sich hinter Frachtcontainern auf dem Alten Messplatz vor der Erfassung durch die Kameras zu schützen. Ein Bündnis linker Gruppen lud zum Silent Dance gegen Überwachung; die lokalen Grünen unterstützten eine Petition dagegen. Heute sind die Grünen in Mannheim weniger kritisch. „Mehr Kameras sollen es nicht werden“, sagt die Kreisvorsitzende Tamara Beckh. Die Videoüberwachung könne ergänzend sinnvoll sein, „wir wollen aber eher auf eine personelle Stärkung der Polizei setzen“.
Die Gefahr der Ausweitung
Jackenwetter, Dauerregen. Die Mannheimer Innenstadt ist dennoch sehr belebt an diesem Mittwochvormittag im September 2025. Menschen, die Kapuzen tragen, eilen mit gesenkten Köpfen über den Bahnhofsvorplatz. Tobias Roser steht zwischen ihnen unter seinem Regenschirm und zeigt um sich. „Da, da, da und da“, sagt er. Roser weiß genau, wo die Kameras hängen. Er lebt hier in der Gegend um den Hauptbahnhof und muss sie täglich passieren.
Roser ist Mitglied der Linksjugend solid, der Jugendorganisation der Partei Die Linke. Er fürchtet, dass die automatisierte Verhaltensanalyse ein großer Schritt hin zu einem Überwachungsstaat ist, „den man dann schlüsselfertig übergibt, wenn die Radikalen an die Macht kommen“. Wenn man einmal mit KI-gestützter Überwachung angefangen habe, läge es nahe, weiter aufzurüsten: etwa mit Technologie, die Gesichter erkennt, Lippen liest oder Menschen am Gang identifiziert.
Zwei Erweiterungen des Mannheimer Modells sind bereits geplant: Die Software soll in Zukunft bestimmte Gegenstände, etwa Waffen, erkennen. Und wenn sie eine mutmaßliche Straftat entdeckt, können die gefilmten Gesichter bald vom Landeskriminalamt durch eine Gesichtersuchmaschine gejagt werden. Im September 2024 hat die Landesregierung beschlossen, Lizenzen für eine solche Software zu kaufen.
Die Polizei hat auch nach sieben Jahren keine Ahnung, was die Verhaltenskontrolle bringt
Das Mannheimer Modell ist auch nach sieben Jahren weit von einem evidenzbasierten Betrieb entfernt. Die Vision seiner Fans sind schwarze Bildschirme, die nur anspringen, wenn die Software einen Alarm generiert. Tatsächlich wird dieses Konzept in der Mannheimer Videoüberwachungszentrale bisher nur auf einem einzelnen Bildschirm erprobt. Daneben gibt es zahlreiche weitere Monitore, auf denen weiter Beamt*innen das Geschehen in der Stadt beobachten. Der versprochene Vorteil für die Privatsphäre ist in der Praxis also nicht gegeben.
Die Mannheimer Polizei kann oder will auf Anfrage zudem nicht sagen, wie oft die Software angeschlagen hat und wie oft dadurch eine strafbare Handlung entdeckt wurde. „Der für das Projekt ablesbare Erfolg besteht in der stetigen Weiterentwicklung des Systems und kann zum derzeitigen Projektstand nicht mit Kennzahlen dargestellt werden“, schreibt sie.
Zu Beginn des Projekts hoffte die Mannheimer Polizei noch, das System könne irgendwann auch die Bewegungen bei einem Drogendeal oder Taschendiebstahl erkennen. Das zeigt die auf dem Kanal der Filmakademie Baden-Württemberg veröffentlichte Dokumentation „all eyes on you“. Heute schreibt die Polizei: „Ob das Ziel der Detektion von feinmotorischen Handlungsweisen erreicht werden kann, kann derzeit nicht beantwortet werden.“
Nach aktuellem Stand läuft das Projekt bis 2026. Eine unabhängige Evaluation ist nicht geplant. Nur das Landespolizeipräsidium im Innenministerium soll das Projekt nach seinem Abschluss begutachten. Der Landesdatenschutzbeauftragte Baden-Württemberg schreibt auf Anfrage von netzpolitik.org, dass die Maßnahme wegen der hohen Eingriffsintensität in Grundrechte eigentlich regelmäßig evaluiert werden müsse.
Noch steht die Überwachung rechtlich auf dünnem Eis
Die softwarebasierte Verhaltenserkennung begann mit Kameras am Willy-Brandt-Platz vor dem Mannheimer Hauptbahnhof und am Paradeplatz und wurde dann auf die Kurpfalzstraße – meist Breite Straße genannt –, den Marktplatz und zuletzt den Alten Messplatz ausgedehnt. Die Verwaltung hatte zudem geprüft, ob es nach dem aktuellen Polizeigesetz erlaubt ist, auch am Plankenkopf und auf dem südlichen Bahnhofsvorplatz Kameras aufzustellen, musste die Pläne jedoch verwerfen. „Bei beiden Bereichen konnte kein Kriminalitätsbrennpunkt begründet werden, weshalb die rechtlichen Möglichkeiten für einen Videoschutz nicht vorliegen“, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei auf Anfrage von netzpolitik.org.
Rechtliche Voraussetzung für die Überwachung ist ein im Vergleich zum restlichen Stadtgebiet erhöhtes Aufkommen von Straftaten. Sinkt die relative Kriminalitätsbelastung deutlich, müssen die KI-Kameras nach baden-württembergischem Polizeigesetz wieder abgebaut werden. Deshalb musste die Stadt auch die Kameras, die sie ab 2001 aufgestellt hatte, im Jahr 2007 wieder entfernen. Nur der nördliche Bahnhofsvorplatz ist bis heute durchgängig videoüberwacht.
Die von der Polizei erfasste Straßenkriminalität in den überwachten Gebieten liegt nach einem zwischenzeitlichen Tief wieder auf der Höhe des Jahres vor der Einführung der Videoüberwachung. Die Drogendelikte sind nach Angaben der Polizei zum Teil deutlich zurückgegangen; das entspricht dem Trend in der gesamten Stadt. Besonders aussagekräftig ist die Kriminalitätsbelastung allerdings nicht. Denn die Zahl der erfassten Straftaten steigt automatisch dort, wo die Polizei genauer hinschaut.
Videoüberwachung nach Gefühl
Künftig will sich die Polizei in Mannheim bei der Überwachung des öffentlichen Raums durch Kameras nicht einmal mehr an den eigenen Kennzahlen orientieren müssen, sondern sie von der Kriminalitätsentwicklung entkoppeln. Laut Polizei soll ein Rechtsgutachten untersuchen, ob auch „strukturelle Kriminalitätsbrennpunkte“ per Video überwacht werden dürfen. Gemeint sind Orte, die aus Sicht der Polizei durch soziale, wirtschaftliche und infrastrukturelle Faktoren eine „erhöhte Tatgelegenheitsstruktur“ aufweisen – unabhängig davon, ob dort tatsächlich solche Taten erfasst wurden. Das würde der Polizei viel Spielraum geben, um Überwachung an immer mehr Orten zu legitimieren.
Laut einer Antwort der Stadt Mannheim auf eine Anfrage der Grünen aus dem Jahr 2024 arbeitet die Stadt an einer Novellierung des Polizeigesetzes von Baden-Württemberg mit, um solche „strukturellen Kriminalitätsbrennpunkte“ auch landesweit einzuführen. Somit wäre Videoüberwachung selbst dann möglich, wenn die Zahl der erfassten Straftaten sinkt.
Dieser Ansatz erinnert an das hessische Polizeigesetz. Dort ist die Rede von„Angsträumen“ und „gefühlten Kriminalitätsschwerpunkten“. Sie zeichnen sich ebenfalls durch „Tatgelegenheitsstrukturen“ aus und würden von der Bevölkerung gemieden, so die Begründung der entsprechenden Änderung des Polizeigesetzes, die im Dezember 2024 verabschiedet wurde.
Der baden-württembergische Datenschutzbeauftragte warnt davor, Gesetze zu verabschieden, die Gefühle zur Grundlage polizeilicher Maßnahmen machen. Die Aufsichtsbehörde verstehe zwar den Drang, das Sicherheitsgefühl der Bürger*innen ernst zu nehmen. Sie sehe aber Gefahren, wenn der Staat Maßnahmen mit hoher Eingriffsintensität für die Grundrechte mit Gefühlen begründe. „Der Staat muss für seine Bürger_innen berechenbar und sein Handeln nachvollziehbar und vorhersehbar sein. Vor diesem Hintergrund erschließt sich uns nicht, wie man mit der Intention in Freiheitsrechte einzugreifen, Gefühle oder Eindrücke objektivieren und rationalisieren könnte.“
Worauf die Kameras zielen, will die Polizei geheimhalten
Während die Polizei in Mannheim den öffentlichen Raum zunehmend durchleuchten möchte, will sie sich selbst nicht in die Karten schauen lassen. Eine Karte mit den genauen Positionen und Ausrichtungen der Kameras will die Behörde auf Anfrage nicht herausgeben – aus „polizeitaktischen Gründen“. Es gibt zwar eine Karte mit rot markierten Überwachungszonen auf der Website der Stadt und eine leicht abweichende mit blau markierten Überwachungszonen auf der Website der Polizei, aber beide weichen von der Realität ab.
So ist dort beispielsweise die Kurpfalzbrücke nicht markiert. Dabei wurde diese mindestens zeitweise von einer Kamera überwacht. Das hat der Prozess eines Mannes gezeigt, der mit Hilfe der Überwachungsbilder eine Verurteilung wegen Widerstand gegen Vollstreckungsbeamte abwehren konnte. Wieso die Kamera einen Bereich abgebildet hat, der nicht entsprechend gekennzeichnet ist, hat die Polizei bis Redaktionsschluss nicht beantwortet.
Die Kurpfalzstraße auf Höhe des Paradeplatzes ist auf der Karte der Stadt ebenfalls nicht als überwacht markiert, dabei zeigen mehrere Kameras deutlich darauf. Die Karte der Polizei zählt dieses Areal zur überwachten Zone; ebenso das südliche Ende des Alten Messplatzes. Laut der Karte der Stadt Mannheim ist dieser Bereich von der Überwachung ausgenommen; dabei sagte ein Polizist 2024, dass er zumindest teilweise von Kameras erfasst wird. Eine Sprecherin der Stadt schreibt auf Anfrage, die Karte solle nur einen „groben Überblick“ geben.
Eine detaillierte Karte mit den Kamera-Ausrichtungen und erfassten Arealen hätte vermutlich auch nur eine kurze Gültigkeit. Im Zuge von Optimierungen komme es gelegentlich vor, dass Kameras nachjustiert werden, schreibt die Polizei auf netzpolitik.org-Anfrage. Protokolle dazu gebe es nicht. Private Immobilien, sowie Areale „die nicht in den videogeschützten Bereich fallen“, würden aber verpixelt.
Die Software braucht viele Schlägereien
Eine Hürde bei der Entwicklung der Verhaltenserkennung ist der Mangel an Beispielen für reale Straftaten. Die Software kann nur dann einen Schlag von einem Fistbump unterscheiden, wenn sie beides häufig zu sehen bekommt.
In der Praxis gibt es in deutschen Innenstädten viel weniger Schlägereien als für KI-Forschende wünschenswert wäre. „Wie sich im Verlauf des Projektes zeigte, stehen leider nur sehr begrenzt öffentliche Daten zur Verfügung“, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei. Wohl auch deshalb haben Polizist*innen Schlägereien zum KI-Training simuliert. Gestellte Situationen spielen „eine wichtige Rolle“, schreibt das Fraunhofer IOSB, das die Software entwickelt.
Der Datenwissenschaftler Heiko Paulheim von der Universität Mannheim sieht das kritisch. Wenn die Datengrundlage der Software zum großen Teil aus inszenierten Kämpfen zwischen meist weißen und männlich gelesenen Polizisten bestünde, könne das darauf hinauslaufen, dass die KI bei Frauen und BIPoC weniger zuverlässig funktioniert und öfter zu Unrecht anschlägt.
Auch auf anderem Wege können marginalisierte Gruppen vermehrt ins Visier der KI-basierten Überwachung geraten. Die Mannheimer Software erkennt beispielsweise auch liegende Menschen – und wer in der Öffentlichkeit liegt, ist oft obdachlos. Bislang darf die Software nur bei Hinweisen auf eine Straftat Alarm schlagen. Die Landesregierung plant aber, den Einsatz der Verhaltenserkennung auch gegen Menschen in einer mutmaßlich hilflosen Lage zu erlauben.
Wer das Mannheimer Modell zahlt – und wem die Software gehört
In der Kooperation zwischen Stadt und Polizei Mannheim und dem Fraunhofer IOSB teilen sich die Parteien die Kosten. Die Polizei zahlte 190.000 Euro für Videoarbeitsplätze und Videomanagementsoftware, Speicher- und Serverstruktur. „Personalkosten wurden nicht erhoben“, schreibt sie. Die Stadt zahlte 860.000 Euro für Erwerb, Montage und Verkabelung der Kameras. Das Fraunhofer IOSB finanziert die Software-Entwicklung.
Die Software des Mannheimer Modells gehört dem Fraunhofer IOSB. Es habe sich vertraglich verpflichtet, auf eine kommerzielle Verwertung „vorerst zu verzichten“, schreibt das Institut an netzpolitik.org. Die Polizei Baden-Württemberg könne die Software, wenn sie marktreif werden sollte, kostenfrei nutzen, schreibt die Mannheimer Polizei.
Die Trainingsdaten für das Mannheimer Modell liefern Menschen in Mannheim – oftmals nichtsahnend – kostenlos.
Drogendeals knapp außerhalb des Videobilds
Der Wilde Wein, der die Fassade der Alten Feuerwache am Alten Messplatz erobert hat, umrankt acht Kameras. Vor ihren Linsen springen und gleiten Skateboarder über selbstgebaute Rampen und Rails, Kinder planschen in den Fontänen eines Brunnens, Menschen konsumieren offen Cannabis und Lachgas – und den Spritzen auf dem Boden zufolge wohl auch mehr.
So berichtet es der Journalist Manuel Schülke bei einem Spaziergang über den Platz. Er ist Redakteur beim hyperlokalen Nachrichtenportal Neckarstadtblog und hat sich ausgiebig mit der Mannheimer Videoüberwachung beschäftigt. Schülke sagt: „Ich habe meine Zweifel, dass die bringt, was sie soll.“ Zu häufig lese er im Polizeibericht von Straftaten im Überwachungsbereich, bei denen keine Streife rechtzeitig vor Ort war und trotz Videoaufzeichnung Zeug*innen gesucht werden. „Da hat die Abschreckung nicht funktioniert und die anschließende Strafverfolgung ist auch mau“, sagt er.
Damit die Kameras potenzielle Kriminelle nicht einfach in die Nebenstraßen verdrängen, sind bestimmte Polizist*innen dazu abgestellt, um die videoüberwachten Areale zu patrouillieren. Sie sollen auch eingreifen, wenn eine Kamera eine Straftat filmt.
Schülke zufolge spielen sich Drogendelikte auf dem Platz oftmals knapp außerhalb des überwachten Bereichs ab, etwa in einem anliegenden Parkhaus oder dort, wo der Platz an die Neckarwiese grenzt. Im November 2024 hat die Polizei in diesem Teilareal eine Razzia gegen Drogenhändler*innen durchgeführt.
Schülke hatte zur Einführung der Kameras versucht, Beispielbilder zu bekommen, die zeigen, welche Bereiche die Kameras am Platz aufnehmen; die Polizei habe die Antwort aus ermittlungstaktischen Gründen verweigert. „Es gibt da uneinsehbare Areale und die wollen nicht, dass das jemand weiß“, sagt der Journalist.
Gut einsehbar für die Kameras seien dagegen die Eingänge zu sensitiven Einrichtungen aus dem Gesundheitsbereich, darunter Praxen für Psychotherapie, ein Zentrum für sexuelle Gesundheit und eine psychologische Beratungsstelle für queere Menschen.
Das denken die Mannheimer*innen über die Überwachung
Nino (56) steht auf der Kurpfalzstraße nahe des Marktplatzes und meint, die Mannheimer Kameras gut zu kennen. Dann kreist sein Zeigefinger aber doch erst einmal orientierungslos, während er mit der anderen Hand sein Bier festhält. „Ah da“, sagt Nino nach einer Weile und deutet auf eines der Geräte. „Ich finds scheiße“, sagt er. Da ist Nino nicht allein. Fünf Prozent der Mannheimer*innen versuchen laut einer Untersuchung von 2022/23, die überwachten Areale möglichst zu vermeiden.
Manuela (52) und Karin (77) wollen gerade den Marktplatz überqueren. Manuela sagt, als “Monnemerinnen“ seien sie inzwischen an die Überwachung gewöhnt, aber für sie sei sie nicht nötig. Sie und Karin fühlten sich hier sicher, auch nachts. „Und wenn die noch 1.000 Kameras aufhängen, macht das die Welt auch nicht besser“, sagt Karin. Manuela erinnert an den Polizisten Rouven Laur, der 2024 hier auf dem Marktplatz erstochen wurde. „Wer was machen will, der macht das auch mit Kameras“, sagt sie.
Manuela, Karin und Nino sind drei von insgesamt zwölf Passant*innen, die wir in Mannheim auf die Kameras angesprochen haben. Die drei wussten von den Kameras, die sie beobachten – die anderen neun aber nicht.
Das könnte auch an der zurückhaltenden Beschilderung liegen. Die weißen Warntafeln sind so groß wie ein DIN-A3-Papier und hängen ziemlich hoch. Sie sind unauffällig gefärbt und mit viel Text in kleiner Schriftgröße bestückt. Dort stehen Kontaktdaten der Polizei, ihres Datenschutzbeauftragten und der zuständigen Aufsichtsbehörde; Zweck und Rechtsgrundlage der Datenverarbeitung, Betroffenenrechte und Speicherdauer. Daneben ist ein Kamerasymbol im Bierdeckelformat zu sehen. Kein Wort von softwarebasierter Verhaltenskontrolle.
Interessant ist der Kontrast zu den Schildern „Richtiges Verhalten bei aggressivem Betteln“, die Passant*innen dazu aufrufen, bettelnde Menschen dem Ordnungsamt zu melden. Diese Schilder sind doppelt so groß wie die Kamera-Warnschilder und knallrot.
Martin Schwarzbeck ist seit 2024 Redakteur bei netzpolitik.org. Er hat Soziologie studiert, als Journalist für zahlreiche Medien gearbeitet, von ARD bis taz, und war zuletzt lange Redakteur bei Berliner Stadtmagazinen, wo er oft Digitalthemen aufgegriffen hat. Martin interessiert sich für Machtstrukturen und die Beziehungen zwischen Menschen und Staaten und Menschen und Konzernen. Ein Fokus dabei sind Techniken und Systeme der Überwachung, egal ob von Staatsorganen oder Unternehmen. Dieser Beitrag ist eine Übernahme von netzpolitik, gemäss Lizenz Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 4.0.

Über Martin Böttger:
Martin Böttger ist seit 2014 Herausgeber des Beueler-Extradienst. Sein Lebenslauf findet sich hier...
Sie können dem Autor auch via Fediverse folgen unter: @martin.boettger

#christianspecht #fraunhoferiosb #linksjugendsolid #mannheim #manuelschulke #neckarstadtblog
BlueCyberSerpent @[email protected] · 2026-02-16 · 15:37 UTC

ActivityPub Server’s Custom Reply‑Control Extensions Undermine Federation
It seems like Activitbypub developers are extending ActivityPub with optional metadata to fix a lot of its issues, but that is still problematic. Trying to add moderation tools and user control to threads seems to be the ongoing battle. I am fascinated by dumpster fires, so I’ve started looking at the ActivityPub protocol in detail. I tend to become fascinated with things that are going down in flames.
As a brief recap of the problem:
So, one of the very popular features on Bluesky—also popular on Twitter—is the ability to select who can reply to a post. A major issue in the Fediverse is the inability to decide who can reply, and once you block someone, their harassing reply is still there. I honestly thought it was simply a case of them choosing not to add or address it for cultural reasons. What is clear from that thread is that they were always aware that the ActivityPub protocol and most Fediverse implementations don’t provide a universal way to control reply visibility or enforce blocks across instances.
An ActivityPub server that has reply control is GoToSocial. ActivityPub, as defined by the W3C specification, standardizes how servers federate activities. It defines actors, inboxes, outboxes, and activity types (Create, Follow, Like, Announce, etc.) expressed using ActivityStreams 2.0. It also specifies delivery mechanics (including how a Create activity reaches another server’s inbox) and how collections behave.
The specification does not include interaction policy semantics such as “only followers may reply” or “replies require manual approval.” There is no field in the normative vocabulary requiring conforming servers to enforce reply permissions. That category of rule is outside the protocol’s defined contract.
GoToSocial implements reply controls through what it calls interaction policies. These appear as additional properties on ActivityStreams objects using a custom JSON-LD namespace controlled by the GoToSocial project.
JSON-LD permits additional namespaced terms. This means the document remains structurally valid ActivityStreams and federates normally. The meaning of those custom fields, however, comes from GoToSocial’s own documentation and implementation. Other servers can ignore them without violating ActivityPub because they are not part of the interoperable core vocabulary.
Enforcement occurs locally. When a remote server sends a reply—a Create activity whose object references another via inReplyTo—ActivityPub governs delivery, not acceptance criteria. Whether the receiving server checks a reply policy, rejects the activity, queues it, or displays it is determined in the server’s inbox-processing code. The decision to accept, display, or require approval happens after successful protocol-level delivery. This behavior belongs to the application layer.
These are server-side features layered on top of ActivityPub’s transport and data model that are not actually part of ActivityPub. The protocol ensures standardized delivery of activities; however, the server implementation defines additional constraints and user-facing behavior. Two GoToSocial instances may both recognize and act on the same extension fields. However, a different implementation, such as Mastodon, has no obligation under the specification to interpret or enforce GoToSocial’s interactionPolicy properties. These fields function as extension metadata rather than protocol requirements.
The semantics of GoToSocial are not part of the specification’s defined vocabulary and processing rules for ActivityPub. They no longer operate purely at the protocol layer; it has become an application-layer contract implemented by specific servers.
Let’s use the AT Protocol as an example. Bluesky’s direct messages (DMs) are not currently part of the AT Protocol (ATProto). The AT Protocol has nothing that specifies anything for DMs, so DMs are not part of the AT Protocol. The AT Protocol was designed to handle public social interactions, but it does not define private or encrypted messaging. Bluesky implemented DMs at the application level, outside of the core protocol. DMs are centralized and stored on Bluesky’s servers. What is happening with servers like GoToSocial is sort of like that. The difference is that the AT Protocol was designed for different app views; ActivityPub was not.
The issue is the divergence in semantic interpretation that emerges at the interpretation layer. ActivityPub standardizes message delivery and defines common activity types. However, it leaves extension semantics and application-layer policy decisions to individual implementations. Servers may introduce custom JSON-LD namespaces and enforce local behaviors, such as reply restrictions, while remaining protocol-compliant. But, the noise created by divergences are problematic, because it creates unexpected, unintended, and unpredictable behavior.
Divergence appears when implementations rely on non-normative metadata and assume reciprocal handling to preserve a consistent user experience. Behavioral alignment then varies. Syntactic exchange succeeds, but behavioral consistency is not guaranteed. Though instances continue to federate at the transport level, policy semantics and processing logic differ across deployments. Those differences produce inconsistent experiences and results between implementations.
That leads to fragmentation, specifically semantic or behavioral fragmentation and an inconsistent user experiences. ActivityPub ensures syntactic interoperability, but semantic interoperability (everyone interprets and enforces rules the same way) varies. This creates a system that is federated at the transport level yet fragmented in behavior and expectations across implementations. It is funny how the thing that the fediverse touted has made the entire thing very brittle. ActivityPub technically federates correctly, but semantically falls apart once servers start adding their own behavioral rules.

#activitypub #algorithm #algorithmiccuration #algorithmicmanipulation #algorithms #americanculture
faraiwe @[email protected] · 2024-12-12 · 13:47 UTC

A de-centralized, federated network, using a common, NON-COMMERCIAL, #FOSS protocol, such as the #fediverse can actually save lives and fight the onslaught of dezinformatsiya.
#Meshtastic #GMRS devices were used to keep people connected, sending messages through #ActivityPub based clients, during catastrophic weather events which knocked standard comms networks down.
#DTBO socmedia (such as #BlueSky, #Threads, #Telegram, etc) were actively used to disseminate #dezinformatsiya, during those catastrophic events, and other emergencies.
Taking the internet back from walled-garden, corporate, proprietary networks can mean the difference between life or death for many.
Government should not be owned, operated or focused on corporations, but be by People, for People.

#foss #fediverse #meshtastic #gmrs #activitypub #dtbo
Wen Bin :verified: @[email protected] · 2026-02-03 · 03:51 UTC

💡 Understanding core network protocols is fundamental for any aspiring cyber security professional. One of the most common that you will encounter is SMB (Server Message Block).
In my latest video, I provide a detailed, beginner friendly walkthrough of the "DANCING" machine from Hack The Box, focusing entirely on SMB enumeration and access 🚀
You will learn:
🔹 What SMB (Server Message Block) is and how it works
🔹 Common SMB ports (139 & 445) and why they matter
🔹 How to use Nmap for targeted service enumeration such as SMB services
🔹 How to enumerate SMB shares using smbclient
🔹 Understanding anonymous / misconfigured shares
🔹 Downloading files from SMB shares and capturing the flag
This is a perfect starting point for anyone new to ethical hacking.
🎥 Watch the HTB DANCING walkthrough here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpaBWeq9JU8
📂 Full playlist:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2mncq0mb-6iZ6ngDmwGEywmxnCYwO2s_
If you are transitioning into cybersecurity, bug bounty, or pentesting - this series is built for you.
Happy learning and keep hacking ethically 🔐
#CyberSecurity #EthicalHacking #HackTheBox #PenetrationTesting #Learning #TechEducation #BeginnerHacking #HTBStartingPoint #Nmap #KaliLinux #SMB

#cybersecurity #ethicalhacking #hackthebox #penetrationtesting #learning #techeducation
Wen Bin :verified: @[email protected] · 2026-02-03 · 03:51 UTC

💡 Understanding core network protocols is fundamental for any aspiring cyber security professional. One of the most common that you will encounter is SMB (Server Message Block).
In my latest video, I provide a detailed, beginner friendly walkthrough of the "DANCING" machine from Hack The Box, focusing entirely on SMB enumeration and access 🚀
You will learn:
🔹 What SMB (Server Message Block) is and how it works
🔹 Common SMB ports (139 & 445) and why they matter
🔹 How to use Nmap for targeted service enumeration such as SMB services
🔹 How to enumerate SMB shares using smbclient
🔹 Understanding anonymous / misconfigured shares
🔹 Downloading files from SMB shares and capturing the flag
This is a perfect starting point for anyone new to ethical hacking.
🎥 Watch the HTB DANCING walkthrough here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpaBWeq9JU8
📂 Full playlist:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2mncq0mb-6iZ6ngDmwGEywmxnCYwO2s_
If you are transitioning into cybersecurity, bug bounty, or pentesting - this series is built for you.
Happy learning and keep hacking ethically 🔐
#CyberSecurity #EthicalHacking #HackTheBox #PenetrationTesting #Learning #TechEducation #BeginnerHacking #HTBStartingPoint #Nmap #KaliLinux #SMB

#cybersecurity #ethicalhacking #hackthebox #penetrationtesting #learning #techeducation
Wen Bin :verified: @[email protected] · 2026-02-03 · 03:51 UTC

💡 Understanding core network protocols is fundamental for any aspiring cyber security professional. One of the most common that you will encounter is SMB (Server Message Block).
In my latest video, I provide a detailed, beginner friendly walkthrough of the "DANCING" machine from Hack The Box, focusing entirely on SMB enumeration and access 🚀
You will learn:
🔹 What SMB (Server Message Block) is and how it works
🔹 Common SMB ports (139 & 445) and why they matter
🔹 How to use Nmap for targeted service enumeration such as SMB services
🔹 How to enumerate SMB shares using smbclient
🔹 Understanding anonymous / misconfigured shares
🔹 Downloading files from SMB shares and capturing the flag
This is a perfect starting point for anyone new to ethical hacking.
🎥 Watch the HTB DANCING walkthrough here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpaBWeq9JU8
📂 Full playlist:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2mncq0mb-6iZ6ngDmwGEywmxnCYwO2s_
If you are transitioning into cybersecurity, bug bounty, or pentesting - this series is built for you.
Happy learning and keep hacking ethically 🔐
#CyberSecurity #EthicalHacking #HackTheBox #PenetrationTesting #Learning #TechEducation #BeginnerHacking #HTBStartingPoint #Nmap #KaliLinux #SMB

#smb #kalilinux #nmap #htbstartingpoint #beginnerhacking #techeducation
Wen Bin :verified: @[email protected] · 2026-02-03 · 03:51 UTC

💡 Understanding core network protocols is fundamental for any aspiring cyber security professional. One of the most common that you will encounter is SMB (Server Message Block).
In my latest video, I provide a detailed, beginner friendly walkthrough of the "DANCING" machine from Hack The Box, focusing entirely on SMB enumeration and access 🚀
You will learn:
🔹 What SMB (Server Message Block) is and how it works
🔹 Common SMB ports (139 & 445) and why they matter
🔹 How to use Nmap for targeted service enumeration such as SMB services
🔹 How to enumerate SMB shares using smbclient
🔹 Understanding anonymous / misconfigured shares
🔹 Downloading files from SMB shares and capturing the flag
This is a perfect starting point for anyone new to ethical hacking.
🎥 Watch the HTB DANCING walkthrough here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpaBWeq9JU8
📂 Full playlist:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2mncq0mb-6iZ6ngDmwGEywmxnCYwO2s_
If you are transitioning into cybersecurity, bug bounty, or pentesting - this series is built for you.
Happy learning and keep hacking ethically 🔐
#CyberSecurity #EthicalHacking #HackTheBox #PenetrationTesting #Learning #TechEducation #BeginnerHacking #HTBStartingPoint #Nmap #KaliLinux #SMB

#cybersecurity #ethicalhacking #hackthebox #penetrationtesting #learning #techeducation