question of the Kyrgyz Republic

[Андрей Захаров]

In addition, people work in detectives not by the end of vocational schools.
Emerging issues are being resolved now and will also be resolved in the future, regardless of external stimuli ..

Yeah, i.e. we are seriously discussing the legitimacy of the Kyrgyz Republic according to sources that are open and accessible, but "pounding" with colleagues is normal ....: D I'm losing weight with you ...

Igor. "from the street" - such consent may not be obtained during the same oral interview ... (and most likely, such a person will not be able to find a "common language" with the alleged source of information and, as a consequence of this, will not receive information of interest to him ) ... Although everything in life happens of course ... However, from the point of view of the BH Law-Actions regarding the extraction of certain information (from the same sources indicated above), although they would be regulated by the Law ... KR, unlike BH they don’t have such "powers" ... There are many examples that can testify to this ... Just recently, I collected information on a criminal case ... I had to find out a number of circumstances from law enforcement officials ... Moreover, officially ... Employees with whom, so to speak, I conducted an “oral survey” I don’t know at all ... (Very big staff) ... He came, gave his business card, explained the situation ... At first they were very reluctant to go, so to speak, “to contact” ... I did not “paint” that I know their leadership very well ... I just decided to try, "as expected" ... Don’t believe it, when I showed the BH certificate (at their request) issued by the Ministry of Internal Affairs (although I had never done this before, in principle), they went to the “contact” ... Infu (naturally not forbidden turnover, so to speak) -I got it ... And a person would come "from the street" -the same KR ... It is unlikely to have received anything from them ...

 

[Бедеров Игорь Сергеевич]

How so. And the officials explicitly gave written consent to the issuance of personal data from the databases of the Ministry of Internal Affairs or to concoct a fake request for a deuce: D

KR - collects information from a postcard and draws conclusions. Already on the methods of collecting information (by the way, how do you confirm that I collected information ???) there is a fundamental difference. The detective has legal regulation, but initially violates it, for various reasons, we will not deal with them.

Here is another difference. The detective, you correctly noticed, can collect documents for the court. And he must, he has the beginnings of a procedural status. KR - cannot. According to our laws, he is not an expert, not a lawyer, not a specialist. Although, all of these persons. can apply the methods of the Kyrgyz Republic to work and present the received information in court. Who will challenge the lawyer's right to receive facts from OPEN sources confirming the innocence of the client?

All the other CDs (and this, in essence, is the Security Council - which has no status at all, but has connections in the authorities) - probably violate the law if you follow the letter of the law.

BUT!!! Let's turn to the means of work! If a person voluntarily offers his personal data, why not work with them, and this is also in the law! Otherwise, all checkpoints and checkpoints will rise, it will not be possible to fulfill the requirements of the Federal Tax Service for due diligence when concluding contracts, a business card cannot be taken from a person.

Reasonable. But, here we got this personal data (in fact, with the permission of the person, otherwise how else could they be in open sources). What prevents us from drawing conclusions based on these data?

 

[Андрей Захаров]

Igor. extraction of information from "open", so to speak, sources ... Of course, these methods (regarding the collection of information from "open" sources) can be used by representatives of the Kyrgyz Republic, as well as other directions, however ... (the same purely marketing research) ... So no one disputes it ... Another question is the completeness of the collected information that can be collected using methods of obtaining only from open sources and the completeness of information obtained as a result of applying the methods characteristic of the Black Sea Regions, whose activities are regulated by the Law and allows (legally) not to conduct a survey (a method characteristic of marketing research ... also a survey is conducted as a way of obtaining information on VTsIOM, mentioned earlier,), but also a survey (as an example) specific for BH, conducted not in the form of a questionnaire ... Of course, if the information obtained from open sources of information is enough to analyze the activity of something no ... And if not enough ... Obviously, you cannot do without the methods specific for BHD (moreover, regulated by the Law) ... It should be noted that in this case we are discussing purely theoretical problems, so to speak .. .A question of proof — who collected information for the Kyrgyz Republic is a completely different topic As for the information received from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, this is not information from the database: lol:
Regarding the fact that the Kyrgyz Republic allegedly uses only a "postcard" in its activity, the issue is a bit controversial ... By the definition of the same respected Eugene, who gave his interpretation of the difference between the Kyrgyz Republic and just marketing research:
"Conversations with people


The tools we talked about above are the same for marketing and for competitive intelligence. And working with people is what distinguishes competitive intelligence from marketing.
In marketing, think in groups. In intelligence, they know that an individual can be a source of the necessary information. Therefore, in intelligence there are methods of finding such a person and obtaining the necessary information from him.

Why is working with people classified as open source? Yes, because this source is uncovered. If it’s not a trade secret, of course. But even if you accidentally touch on issues that constitute someone else's trade secret, there is nothing to worry about. You simply asked - and you either answered or did not answer. You cannot be sure if someone else’s trade secret is affecting your question or not.

The respondent knows better and no one forces him to answer. And if we are talking about a third party, it’s completely inappropriate to talk about trade secrets, because neither you, nor your interlocutor are the bearers of trade secrets of foreign enterprises for you. This is regulated not by law, but by ethics, and in each case you will decide on the ethics or unethicality of your actions, as well as on the possible consequences (not legal - reputational) of your actions.

We cannot tell in the review material about the whole variety of opportunities for working with people. We only note that, firstly, this is the most delicate part of the work of competitive intelligence, because it’s easier to slip into industrial espionage.

A person possesses information, part of which will never be published anywhere. People know how to store, process, transmit information. They can fill in the missing pieces of information and can generate new information by analyzing the available. And often people give out the most valuable intelligence information, without even realizing that it can be of any value to someone.
It is work with people that is the basis of competitive intelligence work, the rest of the tools in relation to work with people play a supporting role. "
Only these “conversations” here very much resemble the “oral survey”, which is typical for the work of the NPV (regulated, by the way, by the Law ... And mind you, this is not a questionnaire survey ... (which is typical for the same VTsIOM, on the legality of the activities of which Eugene had previously focused his attention, comparing the actions of the Kyrgyz Republic with the actions of VTsIOM ...)

 

[Ющук Евгений Леонидович]

Regarding the fact that the Kyrgyz Republic allegedly uses only a "postcard" in its activity, the issue is a bit controversial ... By the definition of the same respected Eugene, who gave his interpretation of the difference between the Kyrgyz Republic and just marketing research:

He is not in dispute. Absolutely. Because if the source is not closed, it is open. There are two states - “closed” and “not closed”.
And that the conversation reminds someone of an operational survey is not a problem at all. Not every conversation is an operational survey, if only because it is in the work of a private detective, and at the same time it is forbidden to engage in ARD.
The difference between an operational survey as an ORM and a private detective’s conversation is in who and for what purpose it is conducted.

If the opera to investigate the crime - ORM (provided that it is correctly framed). If by the same opera with a friend for a bottle of cognac in order to clarify the fate of a classmate after school - just idle talk, not ORM.
If BH for search purposes - BH work.
If a sales manager for the purpose of understanding the market - just idle talk.
If an individual, for the purpose of collecting evidence and further protecting his rights in court, is also just idle talk.

There is no problem here.

As for the question “I don’t know if it is possible to obtain full information only from open sources” - I will say this. Sometimes you can. sometimes it’s impossible. And sometimes it’s open sources that provide information that others don’t have at all. This is a matter of art and also a combination of circumstances. And sometimes time (for example, when a certain identifier is being monitored that has been identified, but has not yet yielded results). There is no universal recipe.

 

[Андрей Захаров]

Regarding the "art", I completely agree ... Sometimes it also happens, lack of information, also information

 

[Ющук Евгений Леонидович]

Sometimes it also happens — lack of information — also information

I agree

 

[JR Security Consulting Group]

He is not in dispute. Absolutely. Because if the source is not closed, it is open. There are two states - “closed” and “not closed”.
And that the conversation reminds someone of an operational survey is not a problem at all. Not every conversation is an operational survey, if only because it is in the work of a private detective, and at the same time it is forbidden to engage in ARD.
The difference between an operational survey as an ORM and a private detective’s conversation is in who and for what purpose it is conducted.

If the opera to investigate the crime - ORM (provided that it is correctly framed). If by the same opera with a friend for a bottle of cognac in order to clarify the fate of a classmate after school - just idle talk, not ORM.
If BH for search purposes - BH work.
If a sales manager for the purpose of understanding the market - just idle talk.
If an individual, for the purpose of collecting evidence and further protecting his rights in court, is also just idle talk.

There is no problem here.

I agree completely. The issue of identifying the method of obtaining information, and usually in my head. How beneficial to each of us, we come up with. From the series that everyone has his own vision, they spoke about this earlier. No need to attract non-pullable, my opinion.