Group items tagged

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 funny. Was it just a month ago that we were enjoying the holiday respite, wondering what 2009 would have in store for us? Mind you, I didn't have any delusions. After the breaches, news events and regulatory issues of 2008, I didn't think we were going to turn the calendar page and emerge in a new world of a healthy economy and soaring consumer confidence. But neither did I think, four weeks later, we'd already have our first major security breach of the year - Heartland Payment Systems (HPY) and that it would so dominate our industry's attention. I get it, though, why we're so enamored of this case. It speaks to our biggest fears, first of all, that unknown electronic assailants can sneak into our systems and pry away our customers' names and critical information. Then there's the unknown enormity - we truly don't know how big this breach was. And, finally, it hits home. For you, the banking institution, you're the one left replacing your customers' cards and explaining why. For me, the banking customer ... well, mine is one of the banks doing the explaining. Needless to say, we're monitoring accounts closely. So, we were among the first to break the Heartland story when it first broke last Tuesday, and we've continued to follow it closely. After the initial media surge, where we saw news outlets and solutions providers tripping over one another to opine over what they think happened to Heartland and what it all means, here is what I believe we've learned so far from the case: 1) The Damage Goes Far Beyond the Breach. Heartland execs absolutely did the right thing by stepping forward last week and saying "We were breached," but the company has suffered for it ever since. The market responded to the news by gutting the company's value from over $14 per share last Tuesday to a low of just under $8 this week. Reputationally, you just can't measure the damage - Heartland is now synonymous with "breach," and that's a tough tag to shake. Unable to answer quest

"It was fascinating to read your thoughts about our recent conversation in CSO (see The Many Challenges of Finding Work as a CISO/CSO"). And when I say "fascinating," I mean in the sense of watching Nascar: a lot of predictable left turns and some really embarrassing, squirm-inducing shots of the fans. I do like you, I think you're a nice guy, and so I wanted to give you some feedback about the interview process and what you're going to need to change to be successful. I don't think you're going to enjoy reading this. But maybe some of those hours that you're spending maintaining that "vast database" of yours could be better spent understanding why we hired someone who understands they're an engineer."

One of the most enlightening articles I have seen on the value of security to corporate America.

The inability to discard worthless items even though they appear to have no value is known as compulsive hoarding syndrome. Ben Rothke explains why it's a bad habit in the world of IT security. The inability to discard worthless items even though they appear to have no value is known as compulsive hoarding syndrome. If the eccentric Collyer brothers had a better understanding of destruction practices, they likely would not have been killed by the very documents and newspapers they obsessively collected. While most organizations don't hoard junk and newspapers like Homer and Langley Collyer did, they do need to keep information such as employee personnel records, financial statements, contracts and leases and more. Given the vast amount of paper and digital media that amasses over time, effective information destruction policies and practices are now a necessary part of doing business and will likely save organizations time, effort and heartache, legal costs as well as embarrassment and more. In December 2007, the Federal Trade Commission announced a $50,000 settlement with American Mortgage Company of Northbrook, Illinois, over charges the company violated the FTC's Disposal, Safeguards, and Privacy rules by failing to properly dispose of documents containing consumers' credit and personally identifiable information. In announcing the settlement, the FTC put all companies on notice that it is taking such failures seriously. A $50,000 settlement might seem low when measured against the potential for financial harm to individuals as a result of the company's negligence, but in addition to the negative PR for American Mortgage, the settlement includes an obligation to obtain an audit, every two years for the next 10 years, from a qualified, independent, third-party professional to ensure that its security program meets the standards of the order. Any similar failures by this company during the next decade will be met with more severe punishment. That, indeed, is a

Educating consumers about what behavioral targeting is and is not up to, deep within the cookies of their browser, seems to be a bit like alternative energy development. Pretty much everyone says the industry should be doing more about it, and yet it is hard to see where and with whom it starts. Most online materials related to BT are pitched to one end of the value chain, marketers. It's not clear to me that most of the companies in this space are even comfortable talking directly to consumers, let alone taking the time to develop an accessible language to describe their process. Specific Media controls the BehavioralTargeting.com domain and uses it to educate marketers about its methods. Even the Wikipedia entry for this field is really an explanation for advertisers. This is understandable, since most people who are familiar with the term likely come from the industry. But it seems to me the industry misses an opportunity to practice more often, and in more places, what it knows ultimately needs to be done. You guys need to find better, clearer, simpler ways to explain what it is you are doing in our browsers -- and why you are doing it. And what are the real benefits and risks a consumer incurs by tacitly agreeing to your presence? Isn't every possible point of contact with a suspicious consumer a teachable moment? In an earlier post, I recounted how I struck some retargeting gold when FetchBack tagged and remarketed me during my travels online. An opt-out option is clearly available at the front page of the FetchBack site. Unfortunately, from there you either opt-out (kick over to the Network Advertising Initiative site) or click into a long scrolling privacy policy that doesn't actually get around to explaining retargeting until a few screens down.

A new report from the Progress & Freedom Foundation says that officials in some states want to pass legislation that would extend the Children Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) from covering children under 13 to covering teens until they're 18. COPPA, which became law in 1998, requires verifiable parental consent before a child under 13 can provide personally identifiable information to a Web site that caters to children. Expanding the law to cover teens till they're 18, according to the report, would "require Web sites to obtain more information about both minors and their parents, which runs counter to the original goal of the Act: protecting the privacy of minors." Ultimately, say the authors, "this would actually make minors less 'safe online.'" In this podcast, the report's co-author, PFF Senior Fellow Adam Thierer, explains the original COPPA law and why, in his opinion, the expanded law could have a chilling effect on the free speech rights of minors. The podcast runs 11:30

If you've been advertising online for a long time, you may have gone through stages: sticking with banner ads at first, and then going with search engine advertising, and maybe putting your ads on a publisher network belonging to a search engine or an advertising company. Most of the time you probably tried to put your ad in a matching context. That might be the wrong approach. I've written before about behavioral advertising, also known as behavioral targeting. You can read my first article about it here. If the topic of behavioral targeting intrigues you, you might also want to read about behavioral retargeting. Before I plunge into the content and focus of this article, though, let me give you a quick definition. Behavioral advertising is a form of online advertising that follows the user around. For example, a web surfer who has just priced some flights on an airline's website might be shown a travel-related ad when he surfs to the next website in which he's interested, which might be for the local pizza joint. The theory behind behavioral advertising is, in a sense, pretty simple. Most people are bombarded with ads most of the time, especially when web surfing. As a result, we tune them out. Because of the usual advertising practices, we might be better at tuning out ads that are in the same context as the content we're reading. In other words, someone reading content on a web site about where the best ski slopes are just might have completely ignored an ad for your lovely Aspen getaway. To rise above this clamor, it's necessary to hit web surfers with a surprise, something that doesn't fit the normal context. Think about it: aren't you more likely to stare at someone talking into a banana than a cell phone? That's the theory, but it's new enough that researchers and marketers are still doing surveys to prove or disprove it. The most recent one was conducted by BL Labs and released by ad network BlueLithium. You'd probably expect it to

making best indexing in goggle and bing. RADJASEOTEA is a master of backlinks. You want indexing in goggle and bing. LOOK THIS www.fiverr.com/radjaseotea/making-best-super-backlink-143445

"In dire economic times such as these, companies are scouring their internal functionalities seeking ways to run "leaner and meaner." Operations and personnel that do not ostensibly contribute to profit are at risk. And nowhere are employees more vulnerable than in New York City, the nation's center for financial services, an industry particularly devastated. Because the influence of privacy on profit is not immediately apparent, managers searching for excisable fat will doubtless be attracted to the privacy function, concluding that it makes no contribution to the bottom line. But although many view privacy solely as a legal concept, it often provides important commercial benefits. Where privacy does indeed contribute to profit, chopping away at privacy will be counterproductive, slicing off meat and bone, rather than fat. If management is not educated to this fact, the privacy function will be at unnecessary risk. There are 11 reasons why privacy may benefit the bottom line, which should be raised with management."

Compliance should not be an end in itself. There is much more that can be gained by understanding the spirit of the regulation! Consumer Privacy is really about Consumer Trust. Customers who take the time to voice concerns over your company's practices are likely sensitive to potential misuse of their data, interested in causing embarrassment or fishing for grounds for a lawsuit.

When I initially speak with clients about, or lecture on the need for a structured organizational change management (OCM) program, a common question is whether simply having a communication plan to broadcast news about the change is a good substitute.

"There's a known weakness in browsers which we wrote about in the book. Every time we talked with someone about it, they'd ask us why we didn't start a company that took advantage of the loophole, and the answer was, well, it's creepy. The loophole basically lets you see where else your visitors have been on the Internet. Well, it's now out in the open, in two forms: Beencounter, and Haveyourfriendsbeenthere. To be perfectly clear, the site won't show you everything your visitors surf-just whether or not they've been to a set of sites you define. Here's how it works:"

"A federal prosecutor tracked down a Seattle fraud suspect in Mexico this year through his Facebook posts. A man's Twitter messages to fellow demonstrators at a recent protest in Pittsburgh led to an FBI search of his home and short-lived charges of interfering with police. The CIA and other U.S. intelligence agencies reportedly are investing in a software firm that monitors half a million social networking Web sites each day. There's nothing wrong with law enforcement agencies' using Internet technology to investigate crimes, Bay Area privacy advocates say. But they want the federal government to say how, when and why its agents look at Americans' social networking accounts."

"Barack Obama's consumer-friendly FCC is asking Verizon Wireless to explain why it recently doubled Early Termination Fees for its customers. The company has until Dec. 17 to explain "the rationale" behind the higher fees. The inquiry comes after Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn) introduced a bill that would curb the penalties customers are required to pay for early cancellation of a wireless contract. On Nov. 15, Verizon raised the early termination fee for "advanced devices" to $350, from $175 earlier. "

"Lora Bentley spoke with Anzen analysts Megan Brister and Jordan Prokopy via e-mail regarding behavioral advertising - what companies are doing, what regulators want to do and what we, as advertising consumers, need to know. With their coworker Miyo Yamashita, the analysts recently wrote a guest opinion for IT Business Edge. Bentley: Why are so many concerned about privacy when it comes to behavioral advertising? What is it about the Internet that convinces consumers that information they share there is not being used? Brister and Prokopy: Most concerns stem from the lack of transparency around data disclosure practices. While consumers may value a Web site's product and service offerings, they are generally unaware that businesses share their information with an extensive group of other businesses in order to deliver targeted advertising. This group includes news Web sites, advertising networks, profiling services, and Web analytics providers, to name a few. As Pamela Jones Harbour, a Commissioner at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), discussed at the FTC Roundtable earlier this week, there is an asymmetry between consumer perceptions and business realities. Once consumers are informed of businesses' data handling practices, they will want to have more control over how businesses manage their information. As we discuss in our article, some businesses engaged in online behavioral advertising have been slow to adopt transparent consumer data management policies. This is a concern particularly for vulnerable groups, such as minors or non-English speaking consumers, because they may not understand legally written policies. Consumer advocacy groups argue that without knowledge and control over the collection, use, and disclosure of data, Web sites may misuse or expose sensitive data about consumers' health, lifestyles and finances."

"CRM systems are full of data that's valuable to your company. Or at least, it better be. But CRM systems are not at the top of the list for external hackers, so why should it be on your priority list for an ILP/DLP system? Let's start by clearing up a misconception: the external hacker is rarely your biggest concern, particularly for a CRM system. The most dangerous breaches come from your own employees, particularly the disgruntled ones. Given the number of layoffs and the turnover of sales reps these days, the risk has grown. Your employees not only have access to a significant amount of data, but also know what the data means and how to separate the marginal from the important."

Despite the recent revelations - and subsequent Congressional hearings - about the use (and misuse) of personal data by companies doing business on the Internet, companies aren't about to stop collecting and trying to use it to improve their results. And why should they, when the more data companies use, the better their chances of selling you more products and services, at better returns? According to Sandy Pentland, a professor at MIT's Media Lab, the best chance people may have of controlling their data online is a modern version of "if you can't beat them, join them."

There was no way I was ever going to convince my parents that Jimi Hendrix's music was good. More than anything, the youth culture was defined by its music. The chasm it created was called "the generation gap" a metaphor for the ideological differences that separated us. There is a new generation gap. It's not defined through music or politics or fashion, those ideas are shared much more among the generations than before. This time it's about privacy. My generation came of age thinking about "1984", the looming threat of "Big Brother" watching over all of us all of the time. It was the government or some group which would monitor all of our actions, know all our habits: who we associate with, what we watch, what buy. 1984 came and went. Nothing like "Big Brother" happened unless you count Apple computer's historic "Big Brother" commercial which ends with the slogan: "On January 24th, Apple Computer will introduce Macintosh. And you'll see why 1984 won't be like "1984". They were right - 2009 is. Personal details used to be considered private. We were careful about who knew what about us and certainly didn't post pictures of our friends, families and fantasies for all to see. Privacy does not seem to be valued anymore. Giving up one's privacy has become a rite of passage. It's what you leave at the portal when you sign up for any of the social networking sites on the internet. The sites are free - as long as you don't calculate the value of your identity, demographics, viewing and buying habits to advertisers. This isn't new, the Nielsen Ratings service has been assembling viewer information since the 1950s for television advertisers, but its methods were primitive in comparison to the two way constant information gathering that's done on the internet. In March 2009, Google initiated the use of "behavioral targeting", which uses information collected on someone's web-browsing behavior, such as the pages they have visited or the searches they have made, to selec

A national security panic spread through the Internet yesterday after a report by The Wall Street Journal suggested "terabytes" of classified data on the F-35 Lightning II had been stolen by hackers. Today the Pentagon and Lockheed Martin responded to the allegations saying they are untrue, and I believe them. Defense Department spokesman Bryan Whitman said, "I'm not aware of any specific concerns." That's a key phrase. Lockheed Martin--the F-35 superjet's primary contractor--also commented "We actually believe The Wall Street Journal was incorrect in its representation of successful cyber attacks on the F-35 program." And the company's CFO Bruce Tanner added "I've not heard of that, and to our knowledge there's never been any classified information breach." While it's easy to argue that these responses are merely a smokescreen to save political face, the language is much more direct than a plain old "no comment." Typically, companies protect themselves in this sort of situation by denying the existing or potential hackers any public information on the success or failure of hack attempts, obscuring the level of secrecy of any stolen data. In the F-35 case it looks like the denials are much firmer, and that suggests the developers of the JSF are confident in their security systems. It's an echo of alleged data leaks via F-35 contractor BAE Systems last year, that were later withdrawn due to lack of evidence that leaks had occurred. Government and defense contractor computer networks face a pretty continuous rate of hack attempts. As a result such companies have even more stringent data security protocols in place than normal organizations. They're still not absolutely impervious to hacking, of course, as no such system ever is. So that's why the most highly classified data--critical to the super-secret offensive and defensive capabilities of hardware like the F-35--is typically stored on computers that have an extremely low-tech "air gap firewall". They're not co

There is an old axiom in marketing circles that it costs more money to acquire new customers than to retain and service your old ones. In this precarious financial environment, the focus for many companies is now on keeping the existing customers satisfied, rather than worrying only about adding new ones to the fold. Since the business environment has slowed for now, showing your clients additional "value added" services rather than simply a lower price, for example, will be critical. Companies should be taking an introspective look for differentiating factors in the areas of security and privacy "value," and how they can leverage what they uncover - a competitive advantage. How can an organization best position their privacy and security programs to be used as a competitive advantage? First, of course, you need to ensure that your privacy and security program is robust, well-tested, formally documented and meets or exceeds whatever legislation that your company is subject to or regulated against. It is also important to give your customers a point of reference about the validity of your programs so they easily translate the value into a currency they recognize. Further, you should take advantage of any other internal and external audits, assessments and oversights that you can reasonably share with external parties by crafting the results of these documents as a consumable for external parties. It has been my experience that clients, especially their security teams, really appreciate this effort. Another innovative way to deliver a competitive advantage today is in the realm of vendor management. This discipline is quickly becoming an increasingly high-profile topic of discussion and interest between clients, customers and their service providers. The onus is on you anyway to demonstrate oversight of your third-party service provider(s). This is where you should also have the "value add" conversation and validate why your clients placed their trus

www.killdo.de.gg Most quality online stores. Know whether you are a trusted online retailer in the world. Whatever we can buy very good quality. and do not hesitate. Everything is very high quality. Including clothes, accessories, bags, cups. Highly recommended. This is one of the trusted online store in the world. View now www.retrostyler.com

After Google issued an official raspberry to South Korea - by sidestepping its "real name" law by simply disabling comments and uploads - the Korean government has taken to pounding the table and turning beet red. Korean reporter Koo Bonkwo sent me an email with his latest report on the situation. The Hankyoreh reports that the Korea Communications Commission is "in an uproar" over Google's actions. According to an unnamed official at KCC: The people higher up said that they could not just leave Google alone and told us to find something to punish them with, so the related team is researching possible illegalities. At a meeting of a National Assembly committee that deals with communciations, KCC chairman Choi See-joong, railed to members: They are speaking as though Korea is a backwards Internet nation that is intensifying its Internet censorship. Why are you just standing around doing nothing?

Like this http://www.hdfilmsaati.net Film,dvd,download,free download,product... ppc,adword,adsense,amazon,clickbank,osell,bookmark,dofollow,edu,gov,ads,linkwell,traffic,scor,serp,goggle,bing,yahoo.ads,ads network,ads goggle,bing,quality links,link best,ptr,cpa,bpa. www.killdo.de.gg