Group items tagged

A couple in Pittsburgh whose lawsuit claimed that Street View on Google Maps is a reckless invasion of their privacy lost their case. Aaron and Christine Boring sued the Internet search giant last April, alleging that Google "significantly disregarded (their) privacy interests" when Street View cameras captured images of their house beyond signs marked "private road." The couple claimed in their five-count lawsuit that finding their home clearly visible on Google's Street View caused them "mental suffering" and diluted their home value. They sought more than $25,000 in damages and asked that the images of their home be taken off the site and destroyed. However, the U.S. District Court for Western Pennsylvania wasn't impressed by the suit and dismissed it (PDF) Tuesday, saying the Borings "failed to state a claim under any count." Ironically, the Borings subjected themselves to even more public exposure by filing the lawsuit, which included their home address. In addition, the Allegheny County's Office of Property Assessments included a photo of the home on its Web site. The Borings are not alone in their ire toward the Google Maps feature. As reported earlier, residents in California's Humboldt County complained that the drivers who are hired to collect the images are disregarding private property signs and driving up private roads. In January, a private Minnesota community near St. Paul, unhappy that images of its streets and homes appeared on the site, demanded Google remove the images, which the company did. However, Google claims to be legally allowed to photograph on private roads, arguing that privacy no longer exists in this age of satellite and aerial imagery. "Today's satellite-image technology means that...complete privacy does not exist," Google said in its response to the Borings' complaint Not long after the feature launched in May 2007, privacy advocates criticized Google for displaying photographs that included people's faces and car license

"As the federal government readies the third iteration of Einstein, privacy concerns over the intrusion detection system were voiced at a Senate hearing on Tuesday. Philip Reitinger, Department of Homeland Security deputy undersecretary for the National Protection and Programs Directorate, told the Senate Committee on the Judiciary's Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland Security that DHS envisions deploying Einstein 3 as an intrusion prevention system. Einstein 1 monitors network flow and Einstein 2 detects system intrusions. "This more robust version of Einstein would provide the federal government with an improved early warning and an enhanced situational awareness; the ability to automatically detect malicious activity; and the capability to prevent malicious intrusions before harm is done," Reitinger said. But Gregory Nojeim, senior counsel and director of Project Freedom, Security and Technology at the Center for Democracy and Technology, cited press accounts that Einstein 3 would rely on pre-defined signatures of malicious code that might contain personally identified information, and threaten the privacy of law-abiding citizens. "While Einstein 2 merely detected and reported malicious code, Einstein 3 is to have the capability of intercepting threatening Internet traffic before it reaches a government system, raising additional concerns," Nojeim testified. Einstein 3 reportedly could operate within the networks of private telecommunications companies, and Nojeim wondered if the technology could analyze private-to-private communications. "If Einstein were to analyze private-to-private communications, that would likely be an interception under the electronic surveillance laws, requiring a court order," he said. "

The loss of personally identifiable information, such as an individual's Social Security number, name, and date of birth can result in serious harm, including identity theft. Identity theft is a serious crime that impacts millions of individuals each year. Identity theft occurs when such information is used without authorization to commit fraud or other crimes. While progress has been made protecting personally identifiable information in the public and private sectors, challenges remain. GAO was asked to testify on how the loss of personally identifiable information contributes to identity theft. This testimony summarizes (1) the problem of identity theft; (2) steps taken at the federal, state, and local level to prevent potential identity theft; and (3) vulnerabilities that remain to protecting personally identifiable information, including in federal information systems. For this testimony, GAO relied primarily on information from prior reports and testimonies that address public and private sector use of personally identifiable information, as well as federal, state, and local efforts to protect the security of such information. GAO and agency inspectors general have made numerous recommendations to agencies to resolve prior significant information control deficiencies and information security program shortfalls. The effective implementation of these recommendations will continue to strengthen the security posture at these agencies. Identity theft is a serious problem because, among other things, it can take a long period of time before a victim becomes aware that the crime has taken place and thus can cause substantial harm to the victim's credit rating. Moreover, while some identity theft victims can resolve their problems quickly, others face substantial costs and inconvenience repairing damage to their credit records. Some individuals have lost job opportunities, been refused loans, or even been arrested for crimes they did not commit as a result of identit

The loss of personally identifiable information, such as an individual's Social Security number, name, and date of birth can result in serious harm, including identity theft. Identity theft is a serious crime that impacts millions of individuals each year. Identity theft occurs when such information is used without authorization to commit fraud or other crimes. While progress has been made protecting personally identifiable information in the public and private sectors, challenges remain. GAO was asked to testify on how the loss of personally identifiable information contributes to identity theft. This testimony summarizes (1) the problem of identity theft; (2) steps taken at the federal, state, and local level to prevent potential identity theft; and (3) vulnerabilities that remain to protecting personally identifiable information, including in federal information systems. For this testimony, GAO relied primarily on information from prior reports and testimonies that address public and private sector use of personally identifiable information, as well as federal, state, and local efforts to protect the security of such information. GAO and agency inspectors general have made numerous recommendations to agencies to resolve prior significant information control deficiencies and information security program shortfalls. The effective implementation of these recommendations will continue to strengthen the security posture at these agencies. Identity theft is a serious problem because, among other things, it can take a long period of time before a victim becomes aware that the crime has taken place and thus can cause substantial harm to the victim's credit rating. Moreover, while some identity theft victims can resolve their problems quickly, others face substantial costs and inconvenience repairing damage to their credit records. Some individuals have lost job opportunities, been refused loans, or even been arrested for crimes they did not commit as a result of identit

January 26, 2009 - As a presidential candidate, Barack Obama made his position on abortion very clear. During his campaign, he stated that he would sign the Freedom of Choice Act and that he opposed restrictions on Partial Birth Abortions. Now as President, Obama used the 36th anniversary of the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision to reiterate his quite extreme position. Obama made several statements about "ensuring that our daughters have the same rights and opportunities as our sons...." However, his key statement appears to demonstrate an utter misunderstanding of the legal aspects of abortion, was that government "should not intrude on our most private family matters." An Associated Press subheader put it as "the ruling legalizing abortion represented a broader principle that government should not intrude on private family matters." Obama seemingly fails to understand three things about the "right to privacy." First, in that as far as it has been applied to abortion and contraception (Griswold vs. Connecticut); it is not a principle about "family matters." It is a principle purely about individual choice. Under Roe, no one else in the "family" has any say about the abortion decision. If the woman is not married to the father of the baby, he is not "family" anyway. Second, the right to privacy is not absolute. Third and most important, that under Roe, the "right to privacy" is secondary to two considerations about the unborn child: whether or not the unborn child is a "person," or at least "potential life." For these last two, we can turn to Roe itself. The "Right to Privacy" The majority opinion of Roe admits that, "The Constitution does explicitly mention any right of privacy." Majority author Harry Blackmun cites various past court decisions which recognize personal rights that are "fundamental" or "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty." Since these private rights had been found to have extension to areas such as marriage, procreation, contraception

US senators have drafted legislation that would give the federal government unprecedented authority over the nation's critical infrastructure, including the power to shut down or limit traffic on private networks during emergencies. The bill would also establish a broad set of cybersecurity standards that would be imposed on the government and the private sector, including companies that provide software, IT work or other services to networks that are deemed to be critical infrastructure. It would also mandate licenses for all individuals administering to strategically important networks. The bill, which is being co-sponsored by Senate Commerce Committee chairman John Rockefeller IV and Senator Olympia Snowe, was expected to be referred to a senate committee on Wednesday. Shortly after a working draft of the legislation began circulating, some industry groups lined up to criticize it for giving the government too much control over the internet and the private companies that make it possible. "This gives the president too much power and there's too little oversight, if there's any at all," said Gregory Nojeim, senior counsel at the Center for Democracy and Technology. "It gives him the power to act in the interest of national security, a vague term that has been broadly defined." Nojeim was pointing to language in the bill that permits the president to "order the limitation or shutdown of internet traffic to and from any compromised federal government or United States critical infrastructure information system or network" after first declaring a national cybersecurity emergency. A separate provision allows the executive in chief to "order the disconnection of any federal government or United States critical infrastructure information systems or networks in the interest of national security." "It applies to any critical infrastructure," Nojeim added. "Surely, the internet is one." The bill would also require NIST, or the National Institute of Standards and Techn

A surprise legal maneuver by the defense in the Sarah Palin hacking case could undermine key charges carrying the stiffest potential penalties. A lawyer for the Tennessee college student charged with hacking into the Alaska governor's Yahoo e-mail account last year says his client couldn't have violated Palin's privacy because a judge had already declared her e-mails a matter of public record. "He's not suggesting that e-mail can't be private," says Mark Rasch, a former Justice Department cybercrime prosecutor. "He's saying this particular e-mail was not private or personal because of who she is and because it wasn't intimate communication. " Additionally, photos that 20-year-old David Kernell allegedly obtained of Palin and her family were not private since the Palins are "the subjects of untold numbers of photo-ops," the lawyer argued last week, in one of a slew of motions and memorandums attacking the government's four-count federal indictment against Kernell.

Creative lawyer. The kid is still stupid. To me, It says more that Palin didn't get in trouble for using a public web mail account for State business. The kid who reads her email is on trial? What a country.

You have an unlisted phone number, you guard your personal information, you shred your financial papers- so everything is private and safe, right? Would you be alarmed to know that even when you think things are private, a perfect stranger can look you up online, see your address, birth date, past addresses, and even see a photo of your home, down to the detail of your child's play set out in the back yard? Alarmed yet? You should be. Take a look at this website: www.zabasearch.com. Simply plug your name in, and you are likely to be surprised, and probably a bit distressed to see all the information that is readily available online. How could this happen? Easy. Virtually every major change in your life is recorded somewhere in a government document. When you are born, a birth certificate is issued. When you obtain a driver's license, get married, buy a house, file a lawsuit ' all of these events are recorded in public documents easily available to you and to others. Government records are intentionally public in order to enable citizens to monitor the government and to ensure accountability in our society. The challenge is to balance the public's right to information with the individual's right to privacy.

Privacy is Dead. Long Live Privacy? at the 2007 Battle of Ideas conference hosted by the Institute of Ideas.New technology seems to have changed the meaning of privacy, affording individuals the possibility of sharing details of their hitherto private lives in unprecedented ways, from personal blogs to picture sharing and even 'social bookmarking'. For many of us, divulging intimate details of our private lives via social networking websites like MySpace and Facebook has become the norm. But information and communication technologies have also facilitated surveillance and data gathering by government and big businesses. While in some contexts we seem so ready to give up our privacy, in others we seem increasingly anxious to protect it.To what extent are new technologies responsible for the death of privacy? Are privacy concerns simply technophobic, or are we right to worry about a loss of control over personal information? Have new technologies and our enthusiastic adoption of them actually transformed our notions of public and private, and blown apart the wall dividing the two? Why do we worry about Tesco monitoring what we buy, when, according to Sun Microsystems CEO Scott McNealy: 'You have zero privacy anyway. Get over it'? - IoI

How does technology affect my privacy? Most of us have things we want to keep private - from our parents and teachers, from our siblings, from our friends. We all know that it's important not to leave a personal journal or a student card lying around in plain view. But have you ever wondered about how technology affects your privacy? Think about the technology that you use every day - to connect with your friends, to chat online, to download your favourite music. Did you know that technologies like these can be used to monitor your behaviour online? And that this private information can be stored and sold, often without you ever knowing about it? Why should I care? Because all these new technologies can have a significant impact on your personal privacy. And if you know how to use them properly you can control your private information - and make it more difficult for others to use your information without your permission. What do I really know about my privacy? Check out this privacy quiz and find out!

Every time you get online, your privacy comes under attack. Whether it's an overbearing End User License Agreement, contact forms, or just website cookies, there are literally millions of ways that you can let your private information slip away online. One of the best ways to fight invasions of your privacy is to get informed and learn how to prevent it. Read on to find advice, organizations, and other resources that can help you keep your privacy safe online. Guides & Articles These resources have specific advice and information for protecting your online privacy. 1. EFF's Top 12 Ways to Protect Your Online Privacy: Read this guide from the Electronic Frontier Foundation to learn how you can protect private information online. 2. Frequently Asked Questions about Online Privacy: Get answers to questions about online privacy and safety from this resource. 3. Is Your PC Watching You? Find Out!: This article from CNN will help you figure out if your privacy is being violated through your PC. 4. Nameless in Cyberspace: Anonymity on the Internet: Find out why the right to anonymity online is so important to have by reading this article. 5. Consumer Privacy Guide: The Consumer Privacy Guide offers a variety of resources and information for protecting your privacy online. 6. This Email Will Self-Destruct: Learn about email security measures that you can take to protect your privacy. 7. Anti-Spam Resources: Visit this guide to learn how to stop receiving junk email. 8. All About Internet Privacy and Security: Read this guide to learn about security terms and Internet privacy settings. 9. Online Privacy: The Complete Guide to Protect You: WebUpon's guide discusses steps you can take to protect your online privacy. 10. Social Networking and Safety Online: Read this guide to learn how to practice common sense on social networking sites. 11. Internet privacy: Wikipedia's entry on Internet privacy offers a broad view at staying private o

At first glance, Chicago's latest crime-fighting strategy seems to be plucked from a Hollywood screenplay. Someone sees a thief dipping into a Salvation Army kettle in a crowd of shoppers on State Street and dials 911 from a cellphone. Within seconds, a video image of the caller's location is beamed onto a dispatcher's computer screen. An officer arrives and by police radio is directed to the suspect, whose description and precise location are conveyed by the dispatcher watching the video, leading to a quick arrest. That chain of events actually happened in the Loop in December, said Ray Orozco, the executive director of the Chicago Office of Emergency Management and Communications. "We can now immediately take a look at the crime scene if the 911 caller is in a location within 150 feet of one of our surveillance cameras, even before the first responders arrive," Mr. Orozco said. The technology, a computer-aided dispatch system, was paid for with a $6 million grant from the Department of Homeland Security. It has been in use since a trial run in December. "One of the best tools any big city can have is visual indicators like cameras, which can help save lives," Mr. Orozco said. In addition to the city's camera network, Mr. Orozco said, the new system can also connect to cameras at private sites like tourist attractions, office buildings and university campuses. Twenty private companies have agreed to take part in the program, a spokeswoman for Mr. Orozco said, and 17 more are expected to be added soon. Citing security concerns, the city would not say how many cameras were in the system. Mayor Richard M. Daley said this week that the integrated camera network would enhance regional security as well as fight street crime. Still, opponents of Mr. Daley's use of public surveillance cameras described the new system as a potential Big Brother intrusion on privacy rights. "If a 911 caller reports that someone left a backpack on the sidewalk, wil

A group of federal agencies and private organizations, including the National Security Agency and the Department of Homeland Security, has released a set of guidelines defining the top 20 things organizations should do to prevent cyberattacks. The Consensus Audit Guidelines (CAG) describe the 20 key actions, referred to as security controls, that organizations should take to defend their computer systems. The controls are expected to become baseline best practices for computer security, following further public- and private-sector review. CAG is being led by John Gilligan, formerly the CIO for both the U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Department of Energy, and a member of the Obama transition team dealing with IT in the Department of Defense and various intelligence agencies. "We are in a war, a cyberwar," Gilligan said on a media conference call. "And the federal government is one of many large organizations that are being targeted. Our ability at present to detect and defend against these attacks is really quite weak in many cases." Borrowing an analogy he attributed to an unnamed federal CIO, Gilligan said, "We're bleeding badly and we really need triage and we need to focus on things that will keep this patient alive." The CAG initiative represents part of a larger effort, backed by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, D.C., to implement recommendations from the CSIS Commission report on Cybersecurity for the 44th Presidency.

Reports on Tuesday of a New Zealand man who purchased a secondhand MP3 player containing the personal information of U.S. soldiers highlighted the federal government's continuing inability to protect private information on unauthorized, third-party storage devices. New Zealander Chris Ogle bought a used MP3 player in Oklahoma about a year ago, according to New Zealand's public television station, ONE News. A few weeks ago, when he plugged the player into his computer to download a song, Ogle found 60 military files stored on the device, which included names, addresses, and phone and Social Security numbers of U.S. soldiers. The files also contained what appears to be a mission briefing and lists of equipment deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. Most of the files are dated 2005. ONE News reported that some of the phone numbers on the player are still active. "The more I look at it, the more I see and the less I think I should be," Ogle told ONE News. Ogle offered to return the MP3 player to U.S. officials if requested. Privacy experts say the breach is just the latest example of the federal government's inability to manage the security risk posed by removable storage devices. In November the Defense Department banned the use of removable storage devices after reports that hardware that can be inserted into a USB drive could infect the computer with viruses and worms. A Pentagon spokesman said the military is aware of the latest report form New Zealand, but does not know of any action the department has taken. Michael Maloof, chief technology officer for the information security firm TriGeo Network Security in Post Falls, Idaho, said individuals do not view devices like MP3 players as computers that can store large amounts of private data. "Myself and security experts have been saying for some time that phones and MP3 players are really mass storage devices," he said. The military should "ban all mass storage devices. It may make some people unhappy, but you see the

As your day ticks by, it seems that everything you do can leave a data trail. From your purchases online to the resumes you post, to health care transactions made with your insurance cards, you probably are exposing your own personal data to possible snooping, fraud, or identify theft. "Having so much sensitive information available makes it even more difficult for other organizations to release information that is effectively anonymous," says Latanya Sweeney, associate professor of computer science, technology and policy, and director of Carnegie Mellon's Data Privacy Lab. Sweeney demonstrated that birth date, gender and 5-digit ZIP code is enough to identify 87 percent of people in the U.S. One year ago, Sweeney started to pull together a group of faculty who were looking at issues relating to privacy and security, and working toward possible solutions. In the Internet age, few areas of our private lives-and what U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis called "the right to be left alone"- remain untouched by technology. Lorrie Cranor, associate research professor in the School of Computer Science, and director of Carnegie Mellon's Usable Privacy and Security Laboratory, describes Carnegie Mellon as "the place to be for privacy research." She explains, "There's a concentration of researchers and experts here that you just don't find at any other university." So how do these Carnegie Mellon experts suggest you protect yourself when you find the information technology that drives your everyday life to be more sophisticated than you are? Here is a sample of some of their creative solutions-your wake-up call for keeping your data "self" both private and secure.

Maryland is poised to jump ahead of the rest of the nation in health information technology on Tuesday when Gov. Martin O'Malley signs a bill intended to coax doctors into using electronic medical records. The computerized files are seen as the foundation of a national health information network that proponents say will improve care, advance medical knowledge and save the country tens of billions of dollars annually. But with the startup costs to individual doctors in the tens of thousands of dollars, many smaller practices have been slow to move from clipboard to computer screen. With today's bill signing, Maryland will become the first state requiring private insurance companies to offer doctors financial incentives to adopt the technology, state officials say. Doctors who do not bring an electronic medical records system on line by 2015 could face penalties. "This is where government and private health care providers can come together to really improve not only the quality of care but also, hopefully, create some costs savings as well," O'Malley said. "Health IT is the future of health care in our country, and we want Maryland to lead the way."

The owner of a website onto which a purportedly stolen Goldman Sachs Group Inc computer code was downloaded has declined to say whether or not other people accessed the code while it was on the site. Roopinder Singh, who runs file storage website xp-dev.com, told Reuters in London on Friday that computer files show whether or not the valuable code -- which U.S. prosecutors have charged former Goldman employee Sergey Aleynikov with stealing -- was viewed by others, but he declined to say what they show due to the scale of the case. According to Singh, accounts at xp-dev.com initially have a privacy setting that only lets the user see them. However, users can change that setting to allow other people to view files. "Private is the default," he said. "You then have the option ... You can explicitly either share it (or keep it private)." He declined to say what the settings on Aleynikov's account were.

The U.S. Department of Justice's indictment of Albert Gonzalez on Monday seems to have all the elements of a Hollywood crime drama: A hacker gains access to millions of credit and debit card numbers and has the power to take down a nation. Too bad for Tinseltown, the attack itself was about as sexy and a pile of routers. According to the indictment, Gonzalez, 28, gained a foothold into the systems of credit card processors such as Heartland Payment Systems ( HPY - news - people ) and retailers like OfficeMax ( OMX - news - people ), Barnes & Noble ( BKS - news - people ) and TJX Cos. ( TJX - news - people ) using an amateur hacking technique called "wardriving," which uses wireless access points to find vulnerable networks from which to launch attacks. Once connected to those private networks, Gonzalez used a well-known technique called "SQL injection" to trick Web applications into forking over private information that gave him deeper access into networks. Even though it sounds complicated, techies liken this kind of hack to simply turning the front doorknob to get into a house.

Yesterday, CBC radio's morning show, the current, featured Lessons From The Identity Trail co-author, Ian Kerr, who discussed the book and a number of contemporary challenges that privacy faces in light of emerging technologies with guest host, Nancy Wilson. Below is the the text of Nancy Wilson's introduction and a link to the podcast of the full length interview in segment #3 of the show. To some people the Internet is the world's biggest commons ... a global public square. For others, it's a realm of shadowy, anonymous figures hiding behind online aliases. But anonymity is becoming less and less a feature of life online. We aired a clip with one perspective on that trend, posted last May on the website, Mobuzz.tv. Taking responsibility for your actions on line may be just one way you relinquish privacy. Every day, millions of Canadians hop on the Internet to check their e-mail, chat with their friends on social networking sites, book a vacation or buy a gift. And each time they click on a purchase or post a picture, they give up a little bit of their privacy. With this explosion of information technology - there are those who warn that our anonymity and our right to privacy is in jeopardy. That's the premise of a new book called On The Identity Trail: Anonymity, Privacy and Identity in a Networked Society. Academics, governments and private corporations around the world contributed to the book, which examines how technology is changing the nature of our private lives, and what it means to be "anonymous."

"Google has said that its world-roving Street View cars have been collecting information sent over open WiFi networks, contradicting previous assurances by the company. This means that Google may have collected emails and other private information if they traveled over WiFi networks while one of the cars was in range. Previously, the company said no payload data was ever intercepted."

IT companies seem to shoot their own effort in the foot on a regular basis. Usually due to a lack of process. The dot com bubble was small compared to what may be coming for trust in IT services.

"Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg told a live audience yesterday that if he were to create Facebook again today, user information would by default be public, not private as it was for years until the company changed dramatically in December. In a six-minute interview on stage with TechCrunch founder Michael Arrington, Zuckerberg spent 60 seconds talking about Facebook's privacy policies. His statements were of major importance for the world's largest social network - and his arguments in favor of an about-face on privacy deserve close scrutiny. Zuckerberg offered roughly 8 sentences in response to Arrington's question about where privacy was going on Facebook and around the web. The question was referencing the changes Facebook underwent last month. Your name, profile picture, gender, current city, networks, Friends List, and all the pages you subscribe to are now publicly available information on Facebook. This means everyone on the web can see it; it is searchable. I"

Zuckerberg should not be trusted with your personal data. The range of reader comments in response to this article are worth a read.