CyberCriminal.com

Securiport LLC

We are investigating Securiport LLC for allegedly attempting to conceal critical reviews and adverse news from Google by improperly submitting copyright takedown notices. This includes potential violations such as impersonation, fraud, and perjury.

PARTIES INVOLVED : Securiport LLC

ALLEGATIONS : Perjury, Fraud, Impersonation

INCIDENT DATE : 07 November 2023

INVESTIGATED BY : Ethan Katz

TOOLS USED : Lumen, SecurityTrails

CASE NO : 3793/A/2025

CRIME TYPE : Intellectual Property Scam

PUBLISHED ON : 27 Nov 2024

Securiport LLC
Due Diligence
Get everything we know about Securiport LLC in one downloadable PDF document
Is This About You?
We encourage you to share details of the actual perpetrators and get your story straight.

What We Are Investigating?

Our firm is launching a comprehensive investigation into Securiport LLC over allegations that it has been suppressing critical reviews and unfavorable Google search results by fraudulently misusing DMCA takedown notices. These actions, if proven, could constitute serious legal violations—including impersonation, fraud, and perjury.

We conducted comprehensive analyses of fraudulent copyright takedown requests, meritless legal complaints, and other unlawful efforts to suppress public access to critical information. Our reporting sheds light on the prevalence and modus operandi of a structured censorship network, often funded and used by criminal enterprises, oligarchs and criminal entities seeking to manipulate public perception and bypass AML checks conducted by financial organisations.

The fake DMCA notices in this investigation appears to have been strategically deployed to remove negative content from Google search results illegally. Based on this pattern, we have reasonable grounds to infer that Securiport LLC - or an entity acting at its behest - is directly or indirectly complicit in this cyber crime.

In most such cases, such ops are executed by rogue, fly-by-night 'Online Reputation Management' agencies acting on behalf of their clients. If evidence establishes that the subject knowingly benefited from or facilitated this scam, it may be deemed an 'accomplice' or an 'accessory' to the crime.

What are they trying to censor

Securiport LLC—a U.S.-based firm specializing in aviation and immigration security solutions. While the company touts its mission to “empower governments with smarter border control and innovative technology civil aviation solutions that keep travelers safe and borders secure,” a closer examination reveals a tapestry woven with controversy, public outcry, and allegations of censorship.

The Gambia Debacle: A Case Study in Controversial Contracting

In 2019, The Gambia’s government entered into a contract with Securiport to enhance security measures at Banjul International Airport. The agreement introduced a $20 security fee for every departing and arriving passenger—a move that swiftly ignited public uproar. Citizens and travelers alike questioned the legitimacy and transparency of this levy, viewing it as an undue financial burden.

The National Audit Office (NAO) of The Gambia conducted a thorough review of the Securiport contract, uncovering several alarming findings:

Exemption Breaches: Key government officials, including those holding diplomatic passports, were exempted from paying the security fee, directly contravening the terms outlined in the contract. This selective application not only violated the agreement but also fostered perceptions of inequality and favoritism.

Financial Discrepancies: The audit highlighted significant financial losses, estimating a potential deficit of approximately 274.9 million dalasis (around $5.3 million USD) due to procurement breaches and the aforementioned exemptions. Such losses raised red flags about the fiscal responsibility and oversight exercised in the deal.

Tourism Impact: Concerns were raised that the additional fee could deter tourists, potentially redirecting them to more affordable destinations. This apprehension was not unfounded, as reports emerged of travelers canceling trips in response to the levy, posing a threat to The Gambia’s tourism-dependent economy.

Public Outcry and Governmental Dissonance

The imposition of the security fee and the revelations from the NAO audit sparked widespread public discontent. Social media platforms became arenas for citizens to voice their frustration, with many decrying the perceived injustice of the fee’s selective application and its potential ramifications on the nation’s tourism sector.

Compounding the controversy, internal divisions within the Gambian government came to light. The Office of the President appeared to have overridden advice from competent authorities, pushing forward with the Securiport contract despite evident concerns. This move led to accusations of procedural breaches related to tax laws, procurement processes, and public finance regulations.

Securiport’s Response and Reputation Management

In the face of mounting criticism, Securiport’s founder and CEO, Dr. Enrique Segura, broke his silence to defend the company’s global reputation. He emphasized Securiport’s two-decade track record in delivering advanced border management and threat assessment solutions worldwide. Dr. Segura asserted that the contract with The Gambia was established through legal channels, with a government technical team studying and recommending the agreement. He also clarified that all traveler data collected is owned and maintained solely by The Gambia Immigration Department, countering claims of data mismanagement.

Despite these assurances, the negative publicity surrounding Securiport’s contracts and the associated security fees posed significant reputational risks. Allegations of non-transparent procurement processes and the imposition of additional fees on travelers led to public distrust and criticism. Such adverse news had the potential to deter potential clients and partners, impacting the company’s business prospects.

Allegations of Censorship and Information Suppression

Beyond the contractual controversies, Securiport has faced allegations of attempting to suppress unfavorable information. Reports suggest that the company engaged in efforts to remove negative media coverage and reviews, actions perceived by critics as attempts to control the narrative and mitigate reputational damage. Such endeavors, if substantiated, raise ethical questions about transparency and the lengths to which the company might go to protect its image.

Broader Implications and the Call for Due Diligence

The Securiport saga in The Gambia serves as a cautionary tale for governments and institutions considering partnerships with private security firms. It underscores the imperative for:

Transparent Procurement Processes: Ensuring that contracts are awarded based on merit, with clear terms and conditions, can prevent potential financial losses and public dissent.

Public Engagement: Engaging citizens in discussions about policies that directly affect them, such as the introduction of new fees, can foster trust and cooperation.

Vigilant Oversight: Regular audits and reviews of contracts can identify and address discrepancies early, safeguarding public funds and interests.

Conclusion

While Securiport LLC positions itself as a leader in border control and civil aviation security, the controversies surrounding its operations in The Gambia cast a shadow over its proclaimed mission. The imposition of security fees, alleged contractual breaches, and attempts to suppress adverse media coverage paint a complex picture that warrants scrutiny. As governments worldwide grapple with balancing security needs and public interest, the Securiport case underscores the necessity of transparency, accountability, and ethical conduct in public-private partnerships.

  • https://lumendatabase.org/notices/44288776
  • https://lumendatabase.org/notices/44790310
  • https://lumendatabase.org/notices/44375951
  • https://lumendatabase.org/notices/37244347
  • 07 November 2023
  • 02 September 2024
  • 19 September 2024
  • 05 September 2024
  • 05 September 2024
  • Galiano Lubbers
  • Galiano Lubbers
  • Galiano Lubbers
  • News Times pvt.ltd
  • http://newscapital.kesug.com/2024/09/03/securiport-letat-malien-prive-de-ses-100/
  • http://newscapital.kesug.com/2023/11/01/affaire-securiport-quelle-est-la-responsabilite-de-lanac/
  • http://newscapital.kesug.com/2023/03/01/barrow-justifies-securiport-contract/
  • http://newstimes.42web.io/2023/01/24/securiport-demands-payment-of-d164m-from-govt-nao-reveals/?i=1
  • http://news.abamako.com/h/288584.html
  • https://www.maliweb.net/economie/transport/affaire-securiport-quelle-est-la-responsabilite-de-lanac-3041872.html
  • https://www.voicegambia.com/2023/03/21/barrow-justifies-securiport-contract/
  • https://thepoint.gm/africa/gambia/headlines/securiport-demands-payment-of-d164m-from-govt-nao-reveals
  • http://newscapital.kesug.com/2023/11/01/affaire-securiport-quelle-est-la-responsabilite-de-lanac/

Evidence Box

Evidence and relevant screenshots related to our investigation

Targeted Content and Red Flags

voicegambia.com

Barrow justifies Securiport contract

  • Adverse News
Visit Link

voicegambia.com

Securiport Boss Defends Company’s 20 year ‘Undisputed’ Service Delivery

  • Adverse News
Visit Link

glassdoor.co.in

SECURIPORT

  • Adverse News
Visit Link

About the Author

The author is affiliated with TU Dresden and analyzes public databases such as Lumen Database and Maltego to identify and expose online censorship. In his personal capacity, he and his team have been actively investigating and reporting on organized crime related to fraudulent copyright takedown schemes.

Additionally, his team provides advisory services to major law firms and is frequently consulted on matters pertaining to intellectual property law.

Escalate This Case
Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form.
Checkboxes

Learn All About Fake Copyright Takedown Scam

Or go directly to the feedback section and share your thoughts

How This Was Done

The fake DMCA notices we found always use the 'back-dated article' technique. With this technique, the wrongful notice sender (or copier) creates a copy of a 'true original' article and back-dates it, creating a 'fake original' article (a copy of the true original) that, at first glance, appears to have been published before the true original

What Happens Next?

Based on the feedback, information, and requests received from all relevant parties, our team will formally notify the affected party of the alleged infringement. Following a thorough review, we will submit a counter-notice to reinstate any link that has been removed by Google, in accordance with applicable legal provisions. Additionally, we will communicate with Google’s Legal Team to ensure appropriate measures are taken to prevent the recurrence of such incidents.

You are Never Alone in Your Fight.

Generate public support against the ones who wronged you!

User Reviews

Domain Check

Stop fraud before it happens with unbeatable speed, scale, depth, and breadth.

Recent Checks

Cyber Investigation

Uncover hidden digital threats and secure your assets with our expert cyber investigation services.

Recent Investigation

Threat Alerts

Stay ahead of cyber threats with our daily list of the latest alerts and vulnerabilities.

Threat Alerts

Client Dashboard

Your trusted source for breaking news and insights on cybercrime and digital security trends.

Client Login