Group items tagged

"Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg made some big announcements Wednesday from the company's headquarters in Palo Alto about changes to how users control and organize their information on the service. Zuckerberg has been criticized in the past for not caring about privacy, making statements that worry some. He once told TechCrunch that privacy was no longer the social norm. But the 26-year-old CEO has just done an about face. He told a room full of journalists, "It is a core part of our belief that people own and have control of all the information they upload.""

Can Zuckerberg be trusted not to reverse course - again. His immaturity as a leader and abuse of user trust makes one question everything that comes out of the man's mouth.

Playboy.com journalist Mike Guy underwent waterboarding by a trained member of the U.S. military in the site's new Lab Rat feature. Guy bet that he could endure 15 seconds of the interrogation technique used by the Bush administration on al Qaeda chief Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Abu Zubaydah. Watch the results

Prop 8 maps, a mashup of Google Maps and Prop 8 Donors, shows the names of those who contributed money to the passage of California's Proposition 8, which prohibits same-sex marriage. The mashup also shows the streets where these people live. This kind of mashup is useful, but to some, it's also intrusive and scary. While these contribution records are public record, the idea that your name and mapped street are online could be considered unnecessarily invasive. The mashup offers great information, but is the backlash and privacy invasion worth it? This particular mashup, while not on a news site, raises questions about when and how journalists should use this type of online application.

There were only two of us on the graveyard shift. "If it's not locked up," a colleague at my first newspaper declared as he snatched a folder of papers from our boss' desk and strode towards the office copying machine, "Xerox it." (Old-tongue for photocopy.) That was long before CDs, and USB drives and, certainly, iPods, but the lesson was the same. If you are stupid about protecting company information, shame on you. I guess that's the message behind the "revelation" released in a survey this week that the majority of people who leave their jobs, voluntarily or otherwise, are taking company information with them. Lots of it. My reaction was the same as when I watched my fellow journalist grab and copy whatever it was that had been so carelessly left in the open. I shrugged. (We are by nature an overly curious species, and that overrides our normally dominant ethics gene.) Data Loss Risks During Downsizing conducted by the Ponemon Institute and sponsored by Symantec, was apparently designed to test the hypothesis that in this dire economy (ominous music in background), former employees are going to take important company information out the door. And, in fact, the poll of 945 former employees who left their jobs or were dismissed in the last 12 months showed that 59% stole company data. What kind of data? Email lists, non-financial business information and customer information, including contact lists. Not the secret formula for Coke, not the clinical trial reports on a cure for cancer, no insider information on proposed mergers and acquisitions. Not even a few thousand credit card numbers. Hardly worthy of shock and dismay. This is what a lot of people do when they leave jobs. Are they supposed to? No. Is it wrong? Yeah, but it's sort of like cheating on taxes. Folks rationalize it in a variety of ways, or it just doesn't weigh heavily enough on their conscience to set off an internal alarm. Most of the people who took data - 79% â

As I'm sure you know, former NSA analyst Russell Tice revealed that the agency spied on journalists and ordinary Americans - not just communications between the U.S. and overseas. Speaking on the Keith Olbermann show on MSNBC, Tice said: "The National Security Agency had access to all Americans' communications," he said. "Faxes, phone calls and their computer communications. … They monitored all communications." He made a further appearance on Olbermann Thursday (view above), in which he said that the NSA combined these illegal wiretaps with credit card and financial data. ""This [information] could sit there for ten years and then potentially it marries up with something else and ten years from now they get put on a no-fly list and they, of course, won't have a clue why," Tice said. "This is garnered from algorithms that have been put together to try to just dream-up scenarios that might be information that is associated with how a terrorist could operate," Tice said. "And once that information gets to the NSA, and they start to put it through the filters there . . . and they start looking for word-recognition, if someone just talked about the daily news and mentioned something about the Middle East they could easily be brought to the forefront of having that little flag put by their name that says 'potential terrorist'." Why were they monitoring reporters? New York Times reporter James Risen told Olbermann he thought it was a plot "to have a chilling effect on potential whistleblowers in the government to make them realize that there's a Big Brother out there that will get them if they step out of line."

It's not exactly what anyone might expect to find at a garbage dump in Ghana. Journalism students from the University of British Columbia discovered intact hard drives containing secret international security data and personal information at a digital dumping ground in Ghana, said their teacher, Peter Klein. Mr. Klein, a producer for the PBS television program Frontline and an Emmy Award winning journalist, said the drives included information about U.S. Homeland Security and Pentagon defence contracts as well as social security numbers, credit card numbers, and family photos. The dumps are frequented by criminal gangs in the country, he said. The findings are part of a project by Mr. Klein's graduate students investigating electronic waste, or e-waste. The team also travelled to Guiyu, China, and India, piecing together the afterlife of discarded computers, drives and parts. To find out if cyber criminals could get information stored on the computers, the students bought several hard drives from vendors near the Ghana dumps to test at home in Vancouver. One of the drives came from Northrop Grumman, a large U.S. military contractor. It contained "details about sensitive, multimillion-dollar U.S. government contracts" as well as contracts with the defence intelligence agency and NASA, according to a synopsis of the project on the PBS website.

A law designed to keep college students' grades private often is used for a much different purpose -- to shield universities from potentially embarrassing situations. Some critics say a number of schools are deliberately misreading the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act in order to keep scandals and other unflattering news from hitting the media. "Some schools have good-faith misunderstandings of the law, but there are others that simply see this as a handy excuse to hide behind," says Frank LoMonte, executive director of the Student Press Law Center, which provides student journalists with legal help. Legal experts say part of the problem is that the law is loosely defined. In addition, the potential consequences of violating the law -- namely, that schools would lose their federal funding -- prompt university officials to be conservative in their decisions about releasing information. Those complaints rankle advocates of student privacy, who say that, if anything, the three-decade-old law should be expanded. "Most of these kids are adults, and they should be able to make their own decisions," says Daren Bakst, president of the Council on Law in Higher Education. Congress already reworked the law to clarify when universities can disclose student information, especially involving health and safety matters. Those changes, adopted in January, followed the 2007 shooting rampage at Virginia Tech by a mentally troubled student.

In court papers filed Wednesday, former federal prosecutor Richard Convertino called reporter David Ashenfelter's invocation of the Fifth Amendment, in an attempt to keep from having to reveal his confidential sources, both "speculative" and "unreasonable." Convertino urged the federal district court in Michigan to sanction Ashenfelter and to require him to present further evidence as to why he should not be held in contempt for his refusal at a December deposition to reveal the confidential sources. For the past two years, Convertino has been seeking Ashenfelter's testimony in hopes of boosting his Privacy Act lawsuit against the Department of Justice. Convertino claims DOJ violated the law by leaking to the press details of an investigation into Convertino's conduct during a terrorism trial. At a deposition in December, after Judge Robert Cleland in the Eastern District of Michigan ruled twice that Ashenfelter is not protected by a First Amendment reporter's privilege, the reporter invoked the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.