For geeks only: corrupt judges and PM Netanyahu's Cyber Authority
Deceit in electronic signatures in Net-HaMishpat (case management system of the courts)? Senior Israeli cyber security experts are asked to opine.
Patent evidence indicates serious deceit in judges' electronic signatures in Net-HaMishpat. The matter was central to the Judge Varda Alshech "Fabricated Protocols" scandal - perhaps the worst and best documented judicial corruption case in the history of the State of Israel.
The matter was also examined by international experts in a series of academic conferences on e-government, and by the professional staff of the UN Human Rights Council. The UN Human Rights High Commissioner's report on Israel summarized it: "integrity and validity of any legal and judicial record from Israel is dubious at best".
In contrast, the Israeli Supreme Court has recently refused to rule in the matter, in an appeal, originating in "fabricated" protocol, pertaining to detained blogger Lori Shem-Tov, and "fabricated" judgment records, pertaining to falsely imprisoned Roman Zadorov. On the way, the Supreme Court issued a precedential ruling that a criminal appeal was of "civil nature", and tried to extort NIS 20,000 in deposit for fees...
Now, senior Israeli cyber security experts are asked to opine. However, the best Israeli cyber security experts are directly remunerated by the "Cyber Authority" in the Prime Minister's office, which has established in recent years "Cyber-security Research Centers" in all major Israeli universities. The Cyber Authority itself was established by Eviatar Matania, PhD, a political appointee, who has been recently replaced by Yigal Unna, another political appointee...
In an extremely unusual incident in April 2017, Shin-Bet Head, Mossad Head, Deputy IDF Chief of Staff and Ministry of Defense CEO publicly denounced the establishment of the "Cyber Authority" in the Prime Minister's office. MK Nachman Shai - former IDF Spokesman and a security expert stated: "an undemocratic measure".
The obvious concerns are that such circumstances cause senior cyber-security experts, such as Prof Yitzhak Ben-Israel – Tel-Aviv University, Prof Michael Ben-Or – Hebrew University,
Prof Eli Biham – Technion, Prof Danny Dolev - Hebrew University, Prof Yuval Elovici – Ben-Gurion University, Prof Yehuda Lindell – Bar-Ilan University, Prof Benny Pinkas – Bar-Ilan University, not to perform their public ethical duties - to warn the public at large against serious deceit in government cyber systems.
Prof Asa Kasher – Tel-Aviv University and Hebrew University - who is uniquely qualified, given his background in applied mathematics, and his extensive public activity in writing scores of "Ethics Codes" for the government, was also asked to opine in this matter.
Read the complete post:http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/2018/06/2018-05-31-for-geeks-only-corrupt.html
Figure. Senior Israeli cyber security experts,who were asked to opine regarding deceit in electronic signatures in the courts: Prof Yitzhak Ben-Israel – Tel-Aviv University, Prof Michael Ben-Or – Hebrew University, Prof Eli Biham – Technion, Prof Danny Dolev - Hebrew University, Prof Yuval Elovici – Ben-Gurion University, Prof Asa Kasher – Tel-Aviv University and Hebrew University, Prof Yehuda Lindell – Bar-Ilan University, Prof Benny Pinkas – Bar-Ilan University.
__
Figure. The Judge Varda Alshech "Fabricated Protocols" scandal is no doubt one of the worst judicial corruption scandals in the history of the State of Israel. The 2012 Ombudsman of the Judiciary Decision in this matter makes it clear that the "fabrication" was based on perversion of electronic signatures in Net-HaMishpat - case management system of the courts. Judge Varda Alshech has never been held accountable for her criminality - Deceit and Breach of Trust.
___
Figure. Ombudsman of the Judiciary, Supreme Court Justice (ret) Eliezer Goldberg's 2012 Decision in the Judge Varda Alshech "Fabricated Protocols" scandal generated unique documentation, pertaining to the operation of Net-HaMishpat system. Protocol, decision, or judgment record, which is not electronically signed, pursuant to the Electronic Signature Act (2001) - is merely an invalid "Draft". The Decision also documents that there is no way for the public at large and parties in court cases to distinguish between valid and effectual court records and "Drafts" (since the judges hide the "detached electronic signatures").
___
Figure. Judges systematically deny public access to the electronic signature data in Net-HaMishpat. However, in cases where such access was gained, it turned out that there were no true electronic signatures, pursuant to the Electronic Signature Act (2002), in Net-HaMishpat system at all.
___
Figure. The 2016 inauguration of the Technion "Cyber Security Research Center": Prof Peretz Lavie - Technion President, Eviatar Matania, PhD - Head of the Cyber Authority in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office, and Prof Eli Biham - the Technion's "Cyber Security Research Center" Head. A series of academic papers document serious deceit in government cyber systems in Israel. Such papers propose the thesis, that establishment of the "Cyber Security Research Centers" in all major universities in Israel by direct funding from the PM Office, in fact silences the best experts in the field, and causes them not to perform their ethical public duty - to warn the public at large against deceit by government.
___
Tel-Aviv, May 31 - request for an opinion, pertaining to integrity of Net-HaMishpat - case management system of the courts - has been forwarded today to some of the most senior experts in the field in Hebrew University, Bar-Ilan University, Tel-Aviv University and the Technion. All of them are also active as senior officers in Cyber Security Research Centers, which have been established in recent years in major Israeli universities. Additionally, Prof Asa Kasher was asked to opine in this matter, given his unique qualifications: His background in applied mathematics, and his extensive public activity in writing scores of "Ethics Codes" for the Israeli government.
The request notes that it has a two-fold purpose:
a) For filing a petition with the High Court of Justice against Director of the Courts, Judge Yigal Marzel and others – to explain: Why they should not order the implementation of valid electronic signatures for the judges, pursuant to the Electronic Signature Act (2001), overt to parties and to the public at large, in Net-HaMishpat system?
b) For research – in various academic papers and international reports I proposed the thesis that circumstances in the State of Israel in part originate in "social disintegration", or "loss of social contract" – where the intelligentsia fails to loyally perform its duties in a civil society.
Attached to the request were examples of judicial decisions, including senseless reasoning, denying access to inspect electronic signature data, pertaining to decisions and judgments of the false life imprisonment of Roman Zadorov, the ongoing detention of blogger Lori Shem-Tov, and vindication of senior Israeli Police commander Niso Shaham of sex offenses...
Following is the request, forwarded today to the cyber security experts
Deceit in electronic signatures in Net-HaMishpat (case management system of the courts)? Senior Israeli cyber security experts are asked to opine.
Patent evidence indicates serious deceit in judges' electronic signatures in Net-HaMishpat. The matter was central to the Judge Varda Alshech "Fabricated Protocols" scandal - perhaps the worst and best documented judicial corruption case in the history of the State of Israel.
The matter was also examined by international experts in a series of academic conferences on e-government, and by the professional staff of the UN Human Rights Council. The UN Human Rights High Commissioner's report on Israel summarized it: "integrity and validity of any legal and judicial record from Israel is dubious at best".
In contrast, the Israeli Supreme Court has recently refused to rule in the matter, in an appeal, originating in "fabricated" protocol, pertaining to detained blogger Lori Shem-Tov, and "fabricated" judgment records, pertaining to falsely imprisoned Roman Zadorov. On the way, the Supreme Court issued a precedential ruling that a criminal appeal was of "civil nature", and tried to extort NIS 20,000 in deposit for fees...
Now, senior Israeli cyber security experts are asked to opine. However, the best Israeli cyber security experts are directly remunerated by the "Cyber Authority" in the Prime Minister's office, which has established in recent years "Cyber-security Research Centers" in all major Israeli universities. The Cyber Authority itself was established by Eviatar Matania, PhD, a political appointee, who has been recently replaced by Yigal Unna, another political appointee...
In an extremely unusual incident in April 2017, Shin-Bet Head, Mossad Head, Deputy IDF Chief of Staff and Ministry of Defense CEO publicly denounced the establishment of the "Cyber Authority" in the Prime Minister's office. MK Nachman Shai - former IDF Spokesman and a security expert stated: "an undemocratic measure".
The obvious concerns are that such circumstances cause senior cyber-security experts, such as Prof Yitzhak Ben-Israel – Tel-Aviv University, Prof Michael Ben-Or – Hebrew University,
Prof Eli Biham – Technion, Prof Danny Dolev - Hebrew University, Prof Yuval Elovici – Ben-Gurion University, Prof Yehuda Lindell – Bar-Ilan University, Prof Benny Pinkas – Bar-Ilan University, not to perform their public ethical duties - to warn the public at large against serious deceit in government cyber systems.
Prof Asa Kasher – Tel-Aviv University and Hebrew University - who is uniquely qualified, given his background in applied mathematics, and his extensive public activity in writing scores of "Ethics Codes" for the government, was also asked to opine in this matter.
Read the complete post:http://inproperinla.blogspot.com/2018/06/2018-05-31-for-geeks-only-corrupt.html
Figure. Senior Israeli cyber security experts,who were asked to opine regarding deceit in electronic signatures in the courts: Prof Yitzhak Ben-Israel – Tel-Aviv University, Prof Michael Ben-Or – Hebrew University, Prof Eli Biham – Technion, Prof Danny Dolev - Hebrew University, Prof Yuval Elovici – Ben-Gurion University, Prof Asa Kasher – Tel-Aviv University and Hebrew University, Prof Yehuda Lindell – Bar-Ilan University, Prof Benny Pinkas – Bar-Ilan University.
__
Figure. The Judge Varda Alshech "Fabricated Protocols" scandal is no doubt one of the worst judicial corruption scandals in the history of the State of Israel. The 2012 Ombudsman of the Judiciary Decision in this matter makes it clear that the "fabrication" was based on perversion of electronic signatures in Net-HaMishpat - case management system of the courts. Judge Varda Alshech has never been held accountable for her criminality - Deceit and Breach of Trust.
___
Figure. Ombudsman of the Judiciary, Supreme Court Justice (ret) Eliezer Goldberg's 2012 Decision in the Judge Varda Alshech "Fabricated Protocols" scandal generated unique documentation, pertaining to the operation of Net-HaMishpat system. Protocol, decision, or judgment record, which is not electronically signed, pursuant to the Electronic Signature Act (2001) - is merely an invalid "Draft". The Decision also documents that there is no way for the public at large and parties in court cases to distinguish between valid and effectual court records and "Drafts" (since the judges hide the "detached electronic signatures").
___
Figure. Judges systematically deny public access to the electronic signature data in Net-HaMishpat. However, in cases where such access was gained, it turned out that there were no true electronic signatures, pursuant to the Electronic Signature Act (2002), in Net-HaMishpat system at all.
___
Figure. The UN Human Rights High Commissioner's report on Israel (2018) noted serious deterioration in integrity of law and justice agencies... "validity and integrity of any legal and judicial records of Israel should be deemed dubious at best."
___ Figure. The 2016 inauguration of the Technion "Cyber Security Research Center": Prof Peretz Lavie - Technion President, Eviatar Matania, PhD - Head of the Cyber Authority in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office, and Prof Eli Biham - the Technion's "Cyber Security Research Center" Head. A series of academic papers document serious deceit in government cyber systems in Israel. Such papers propose the thesis, that establishment of the "Cyber Security Research Centers" in all major universities in Israel by direct funding from the PM Office, in fact silences the best experts in the field, and causes them not to perform their ethical public duty - to warn the public at large against deceit by government.
___
Tel-Aviv, May 31 - request for an opinion, pertaining to integrity of Net-HaMishpat - case management system of the courts - has been forwarded today to some of the most senior experts in the field in Hebrew University, Bar-Ilan University, Tel-Aviv University and the Technion. All of them are also active as senior officers in Cyber Security Research Centers, which have been established in recent years in major Israeli universities. Additionally, Prof Asa Kasher was asked to opine in this matter, given his unique qualifications: His background in applied mathematics, and his extensive public activity in writing scores of "Ethics Codes" for the Israeli government.
The request notes that it has a two-fold purpose:
a) For filing a petition with the High Court of Justice against Director of the Courts, Judge Yigal Marzel and others – to explain: Why they should not order the implementation of valid electronic signatures for the judges, pursuant to the Electronic Signature Act (2001), overt to parties and to the public at large, in Net-HaMishpat system?
b) For research – in various academic papers and international reports I proposed the thesis that circumstances in the State of Israel in part originate in "social disintegration", or "loss of social contract" – where the intelligentsia fails to loyally perform its duties in a civil society.
Attached to the request were examples of judicial decisions, including senseless reasoning, denying access to inspect electronic signature data, pertaining to decisions and judgments of the false life imprisonment of Roman Zadorov, the ongoing detention of blogger Lori Shem-Tov, and vindication of senior Israeli Police commander Niso Shaham of sex offenses...
Following is the request, forwarded today to the cyber security experts
May
31,
2018
Prof
Yitzhak Ben-Israel – Tel-Aviv University
Prof
Michael Ben-Or – Hebrew University
Prof
Eli Biham – Technion
Prof
Danny Dolev - Hebrew University
Prof
Yuval Elovici – Ben-Gurion University
Prof
Asa Kasher – Tel-Aviv University and Hebrew University
Prof
Yehuda Lindell – Bar-Ilan University
Prof
Benny Pinkas – Bar-Ilan University
By
email
RE:
Request for opinion regarding judges’ electronic signatures in
Net-HaMishpat – case management system of the Israeli courts
Your
response within 14 days is kindly requested. Time is of
the essence.
Dear
Sirs:
Please
accept instant request as individuals and as a group – for
providing opinions pertaining to judges’ electronic signatures in
Net-HaMishpat – case management system of the Israeli courts.
Your
opinions are requested for a two-fold purpose:
a)
For filing a petition with the High Court of Justice against Director
of the Courts, Judge Yigal Marzel and others – to explain: Why they
should not order the implementation of valid electronic signatures
for the judges, pursuant to the Electronic Signature Act
(2001), overt to parties and the public, in Net-HaMishpat system?
b)
For research – in various academic papers and international reports
I proposed the thesis that circumstances in the State of Israel in
part originate in social disintegration, or loss of social contract –
where the intelligentsia fails to loyally perform its duties in a
civil society.
The
factual foundation:
a)
Electronic signatures were a central issue in the Judge Varda Alshech
“Fabricated Protocols” scandal. Based on Ombudsman of the
Judiciary, Supreme Court Justice (ret) Eliezer Goldberg Decision
(88/12/Tel-Aviv District) (Attachment A), a reasonable person
would conclude:
-
Electronic signature application exists in Net-HaMishpat, pursuant to the Electronic Signature Act (2001), and “detached electronic signatures” are produced for judicial records;
-
Each and every judge, who is authorized to use Net-HaMishpat, is issued an electronic signature device, pursuant to the Electronic Signature Act (2001), and
-
Judges are required to sign each and every protocol, decision and judgment, using electronic signatures, pursuant to the Electronic Signature Act (2001); since absent a signature pursuant to the Electronic Signature Act (2001), such documents are merely invalid “drafts”, lacking finality and taking of responsibility by the judge.
b)
Repeat requests to exercise inspection of judges’ electronic
signature data, pertaining to protocols, decisions and judgments,
show:
-
Judges systematically deny inspection of electronic signature data, pertaining to decisions and judgments (Attachment B). In contrast, Israeli law says: “Every person is permitted to inspect decisions, which are not lawfully prohibited for publication”; the term “Inspection” is defined including “receipt of computer output”, [1] and the Supreme Court declared that the right to inspect is “a fundamental principle in any democratic regime… constitutional, supra-statutory…” [2]
-
In cases, where ways were found to inspect the purported judges’ electronic signature data, pertaining to protocols, decisions, or judgments, which were purportedly served on parties by the courts, only two types of data were discovered, both of them dubious at best in my opinion (Attachment C).
Such
findings raise suspicions that in Net-HaMishpat system there is no
electronic signature application for the judges, pursuant to the
Electronic
Signature Act
(2001). Moreover
– that the judges systematically try to hide such fact.
Your
opinion is requested, pertaining to the purported electronic
signature data, Type A and Type B, demonstrated in Attachment C (for
comparison purpose, Attachment C also provides a partial example of
an attorney’s electronic signature in Net-HaMishpat). The question
is:
Could
such data be deemed examples of judges’ electronic signatures
pursuant to the Electronic
Signature Act
(2001), pertaining
to protocols, decisions and judgments, which are electronic records
in Net-HaMishpat?
Obviously,
such matter has the highest public policy significance relative to
the fundamental rights of all residents of the State of Israel –
Liberty, property, due
process,
fair
and public
hearing,
etc.
The
circumstances, which are outlined here, appear incredible
- 17 years after the Electronic
Signature Act
(2001) went into effect, 8 years after Net-HaMishpat system was
implemented in the courts, and 6 years after the Ombudsman of the
Judiciary Decision in the Judge Varda Alshech “Fabricated
Protocols” scandal… All
of that in a high-tech, “start-up nation”...
In
my opinion, your standing as senior academic staff in public
universities, and given that most of you are key personnel in
publicly funded “Cybersecurity Research Centers”, and given Prof
Asa Kasher’s position as a senior expert of government and author
of dozens of Ethics Codes, you should provide your opinion in this
matter.
Truly,
Joseph
Zernik, PhD
Human
Rights Alert – NGO (RA)
CC:
Wide distribution
1 Regulations of the Courts-Inspection of Court Files (2003)
2 Supreme Court 2009 Judgment in Association for Civil Rights in Israel v Minister of Justice et al (5917/97)
Attachment
A – quotes from Ombudsman of the Judiciary, Supreme Court Justice
(ret) Eliezer Goldberg Decision (88/12/Tel-Aviv District)
Paragraph
19
In
her February 05, 2012 and February 12, 2012 responses, the Hon Judge
stated that there are no two versions of the Protocol document.
Version A is a “ Draft Protocol”… while Version B is a “Formal
Protocol”, which was electronically signed… From the Hon Judge’s
explanation it also concluded, that as far as Net-HaMishpat system is
concerned… as long as a protocol is not electronically
signed by the judge, it is a draft protocol… only after it is
electronically signed it becomes a findal protocol. [underlines in
the original – jz]
Paragraph
21
In
his February 21, 2012 letter, Mr Yardeni writes: “… it is
impossible to distinguish in protocol printouts between a
protocol,which is signed using a graphic signature and a protocol,
which is signed using an electronic signature...”
Paragraph
22
Such
matter was also noted in Attorney Laser’s April 15, 2012 letter,
whereby: “According to our investigation, the Protocol, subject of
your inquiry, was never electronically signed...”
Paragraph
23
On
March 13, 2012, I asked the Hon Judge to address that fact, that
there is no version of the protocol in the system, which is
electronically signed…
Paragraph
25
On
February 19, 2012, I inquired with the Director of Administration of
Courts, and asked to investigate, whether the finding is at all
possible, that to this date there is no electronically signed
protocol…
Paragraph
36
Work
Instruction 114/10 states: “In the electronic court file era,
judgments are signed using a secure electronic signature...” Such
statement is consistent with the statements in the May 01, 2012
Attorney Barak Laser letter [Legal Counsel of the Administration of
Courts – jz] to the Office of Ombudsman of the Judiciary: “Output
of an electronically signed output is deemed a copy, pursuant to the
Electronic
Signature Act
(2001), Article
6(b).
Paragraph
37
Therefore,
absent an electronically signed Protocol, “True Copy of the
Original” stamp shouldn’t have been impressed…
Paragraph
38
The
March 21, 2012 “Chronological Report”, which was prepared by the
Internal Audit Department of the Administration of Courts, was
brought for my inspection… The Report also says: “...the judge’s
electronic signature constitutes the true of the protocol and its
transformation from a “draft” document to a “final”
document...”
Paragraph
39
I
have nothing to add but fully join the conclusions of the above
referenced Report. The judges should be indoctrinated,
as soon as possible, regarding the significance of electronically
signing protocols and decisions (see also Regulations
Civil of Court Procedure (1984),
Regulation 190(a), which provides that “decision shall be in
writing and signed by the judges, who were seated in court”)...
Attachment
B – Judges’ Decisions on to requests to inspect electronic
signature data, pertaining to protocols, decisions and judgments
a)
State
of Israel v Roman Zadorov
(502-07) – in the Nazareth District Court
Figures.
Nazareth District Court Presiding Judge Avraham Avraham and
his January 25, 2016 Decision
on repeat requests to inspect lawfully made judgment records and
their electronic signature data:
The
Requester repeats his requests, subject
of which, purportedly, is inspection of court records. However,
these are not requests to inspect, but an investigation, which the
Requester is conducting, pertaining to validity of Net-HaMishpat
system and various claims regarding conduct of the judicial panel in
this case. In such matters this court shall not engage…
b)
State
of Israel v Niso Shaham
(31283-10-13)
– in
the Tel-Aviv Magistrate Court
Figure. May 09, 2018 Judge Benny Sagi “Post-it Decision” in State of Israel v Niso Shaham (31283-10-13) – in the Tel-Aviv Magistrate Court:
There
is no right to inspect the “judge’s electronic signature”.
c)
State
of Israel v Lori Shem-Tov (Detainee) et al
(14280-04-17)
in
the Tel-Aviv District Court
To
the degree that the Requester has claims regarding the authenticity
of the protocols, he should address them, using the appropriate
procedure, if it exists, which is not a request to inspect.
Attachment
C – examples of purported electronic signature data from
Net-HaMishpat
1)
Type
A – documents,
where the
purported
“electronic signature application” was never executed at all
The
signature is invalid.
2)
Type B - documents, where the purported
“electronic signature application” was executed in Net-HaMishpat
Figure.
Inspection of the purported
electronic signature of
a “Judgment” in
Net-HaMishpat, which was
purportedly served
on a party:
(1)
“The base certificate of the certifying authority is invalid...”;
(2)
“Issued for: Israeli Courts Authority” - no name of a person
and his/her authority, who is the signer and the lawful holder of
such signature instrument appears among the data;
(3)
“Issued by: Israeli Courts Authority” - there is no entity, which
is recognized by Israeli law, named “Israeli Courts Authority”,
surely there is no such certifying authority, pursuant to the
Electronic
Signature Act
(2001);
(4)
“Valid from: 01/01/2000 to 01/01/2099” - on 01/01/2000, the
Israeli Electronic
Signature Act
was not in effect yet, and the issuance of an electronic signature
instrument ot any person, in his capacity as a judge for 99 years is
invalid, unreasonable conduct;
(5)
No date and time of the purported signature appear at all among the
data.
Such
application wouldn’t be considered an electronic signature
according to common definitions of electronic signatures, and surely
is not an electronic signature pursuant to the Israeli Electronic
Signature Act
(2001).
Such
false, fake
electronic signature application
permits the alteration and adulteration of judicial records, conduct
that undermines the fundamentals of a competent court!
3)
Attorney’s
electronic
signature application in Net-HaMishpat
Figure.
For
comparison purpose, part of the electronic signature data of an
attorney is provided below, from a record, which was electronically
filed in 2011 - “Request for voiding a Judgment, which was rendered
with no defense”. The
electronic signature device,
issued by Comsign LTD, was
used here:
(1)
“Owner’s name: [redacted]” the full name of the electronic
signature instrument’s owner appears among the signature data;
(2)
Capacity - “Attorney” and license number appear under a separate
tab;
(3)
Issuer is identified as
“Comsign
LTD”
- a lawfully recognized Israeli corporation, which is also a lawful
certifying authority, pursuant to the Electronic
Signature Act
(2001);
(4)
“Valid from: September 13, 2009, valid until: September 13, 2012”
- the electronic signature instrument was issued for a reasonable,
limited period;
(5)
Date and time of signature – are provided in a separate tab, as
well as the type and size of electronic file, and encryption keys.
No comments:
Post a Comment
All comments are welcome... especially any tips regarding corruption of the courts in Los Angeles. Anonymous tips are fine. One simple way to do it is from internet cafes, etc.