Group items tagged

A Swiss insurance worker lost her job after surfing popular social network site Facebook while off sick, her employer said Friday. The woman said she could not work in front of a computer as she needed to lie in the dark but was then seen to be active on Facebook, which insurer Nationale Suisse said in a statement had destroyed its trust in the employee. "This abuse of trust, rather than the activity on Facebook, led to the ending of the work contract," it said. The unnamed woman told the 20 Minuten daily she had been surfing Facebook in bed on her iPhone and accused her employer of spying on her and other employees by sending a mysterious friend request which allows access to personal online activity. Nationale Suisse rejected the accusation of spying and said the employee's Facebook activity had been stumbled across by a colleague in November, before use of the social network site was blocked in the company.

A 10-month cyberespionage investigation has found that 1,295 computers in 103 countries and belonging to international institutions have been spied on, with some circumstantial evidence suggesting China may be to blame. The 53-page report, released on Sunday, provides some of the most compelling evidence and detail of the efforts of politically-motivated hackers while raising questions about their ties with government-sanctioned cyberspying operations. It describes a network which researchers have called GhostNet, which primarily uses a malicious software program called gh0st RAT (Remote Access Tool) to steal sensitive documents, control Web cams and completely control infected computers. "GhostNet represents a network of compromised computers resident in high-value political, economic and media locations spread across numerous countries worldwide," said the report, written by analysts with the Information Warfare Monitor, a research project of the SecDev Group, a think tank, and the Munk Center for International Studies at the University of Toronto. "At the time of writing, these organizations are almost certainly oblivious to the compromised situation in which they find themselves." The analysts did say, however, they have no confirmation if the information obtained has ended up being valuable to the hackers or whether it has been commercially sold or passed on as intelligence. Although evidence shows that servers in China were collecting some of the sensitive data, the analysts were cautious about linking the spying to the Chinese government. Rather, China has a fifth of the world's Internet users, which may include hackers that have goals aligning with official Chinese political positions.

""So many people in America think this does not affect them. They've been convinced that these programs are only targeted at suspected terrorists. … I think that's wrong. … Our programs are not perfect, and it is inevitable that totally innocent Americans are going to be affected by these programs," former CIA Assistant General Counsel Suzanne Spaulding tells FRONTLINE correspondent Hedrick Smith in Spying on the Home Front. 9/11 has indelibly altered America in ways that people are now starting to earnestly question: not only perpetual orange alerts, barricades and body frisks at the airport, but greater government scrutiny of people's records and electronic surveillance of their communications. The watershed, officials tell FRONTLINE, was the government's shift after 9/11 to a strategy of pre-emption at home -- not just prosecuting terrorists for breaking the law, but trying to find and stop them before they strike. President Bush described his anti-terrorist measures as narrow and targeted, but a FRONTLINE investigation has found that the National Security Agency (NSA) has engaged in wiretapping and sifting Internet communications of millions of Americans; the FBI conducted a data sweep on 250,000 Las Vegas vacationers, and along with more than 50 other agencies, they are mining commercial-sector data banks to an unprecedented degree."

It affects each & every US citizen in one way or another. Good video on privacy & security.

"It's one of the newest and most popular stops on the Washington, D.C. tour, and its artifacts of history leave clues for how information security professionals should approach their future. The International Spy Museum has just celebrated its 7th year and its 5 millionth visitor, says Executive Director Peter Earnest, a former CIA officer who's run the museum since its inception. In an exclusive interview, Earnest discusses: the museum's goals and growth plans; who visits the museum and what they get from the experience; lessons to be learned by today's information security professionals. Earnest is a 35-year veteran of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). He served 25 years as a case officer in its Clandestine Service, primarily in Europe and the Middle East. He ran intelligence collection and covert action operations against a range of targets including Soviet Bloc representatives and Communist front organizations. As Museum director, he has played a leading role in its extraordinary success as a Washington attraction. He edits the Museum's book ventures and has frequently been interviewed by the major media in radio, TV, and the press on current intelligence issues."

"Want to know how much phone companies and internet service providers charge to funnel your private communications or records to U.S. law enforcement and spy agencies? That's the question muckraker and Indiana University graduate student Christopher Soghoian asked all agencies within the Department of Justice, under a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed a few months ago. But before the agencies could provide the data, Verizon and Yahoo intervened and filed an objection on grounds that, among other things, they would be ridiculed and publicly shamed were their surveillance price sheets made public. Yahoo writes in its 12-page objection letter (.pdf), that if its pricing information were disclosed to Soghoian, he would use it "to 'shame' Yahoo! and other companies - and to 'shock' their customers.""

By now, many employees are uncomfortably aware that their every keystroke at work, from email on office computers to text messages on company phones, can be monitored legally by their employers. What employees typically don't expect is for the company to spy on them while on password-protected sites using nonwork computers. But even that privacy could be in jeopardy. A case brewing in federal court in New Jersey pits bosses against two employees who were complaining about their workplace on an invite-only discussion group on MySpace.com, a social-networking site owned by News Corp., publisher of The Wall Street Journal. The case tests whether a supervisor who managed to log into the forum -- and then fired employees who badmouthed supervisors and customers there -- had the right to do so. The case has some legal and privacy experts concerned that companies are intruding into areas that their employees had considered off limits. "The question is whether employees have a right to privacy in their non-work-created communications with each other. And I would think the answer is that they do," said Floyd Abrams, a First Amendment expert and partner at Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP in New York. The legal landscape is murky. For the most part, employers don't need a reason to fire nonunion workers. But state laws in California, New York and Connecticut protect employees who engage in lawful, off-duty activities from being fired or disciplined, according to a report prepared by attorneys at the firm Proskauer Rose LLP. While private conversations might be covered under those laws, none of the statutes specifically addresses social networking or blogging. Thus, privacy advocates expect to see more of these legal challenges. In February, three police officers in Harrison, N.Y., were suspended after they allegedly made lewd remarks about the town mayor on a Facebook account. The officers mistakenly thought the remarks were protected with a password, but city officials view

Wikipedia told the controversial U.K. advertising firm Phorm on Thursday not to spy on Wikipedia's users, saying the company's plan to monitor what sites people visit on the net invaded people's privacy. Wikipedia now joins Amazon.co.uk in opting out of the Big-Brother-esque marketing scheme and creating the possibility of a mass opt-out by the net's largest websites. Phorm wants to pay ISPs -- such as British Telecom -- to let it build marketing profiles of its subscribers by installing boxes inside the ISP that monitor every url users visit and every search they run. Using those profiles, Phorm can charge advertisers high rates to serve targeted ads. But in an email sent Thursday, Wikimedia.org told Phorm not to record anything about urls from domains it controls, ranging from Wikiquotes to Wikipedia -- one of the most popular sites on the net. Phorm operates an opt-out system for sites and ISP customers, but it would be virtually impossible to verify if the company actually complied with such requests. "The Wikimedia Foundation requests that our web sites including Wikipedia.org and all related domains be excluded from scanning by the Phorm / BT Webwise system, as we consider the scanning and profiling of our visitors' behavior by a third party to be an infringement on their privacy," the email read, according to a Wikimedia blog post.

Like this http://cheaptravelbooker.com Like this http://cheaptravelbooker.com like this http://killdo.de.gg travel,hotel,fun,hotel new,new offer,hotel best,best hotel,hotel travel,seo,backlinks,edu,gov,ads,indexing,bookmark,killgoggle,gogglesuck,goggle bookmark,kill goggle,yahoo,bing,indexing,quality links,linkwell,traffic boster,index best

Big Brother may be at it again. Behavioral advertising - the tracking of consumer's Internet surfing activity to create tailored ads - has triggered an intense legal controversy that has law firms scrambling to stay on top of a burgeoning practice. Attorneys say that behavioral advertising is raising privacy, litigation and regulation fears among consumer advocates, the electronic commerce and advertising industries and legislators. Law firms are busy helping companies come up with a transparent way of letting consumers know that their online activities are being tracked and possibly shared. "Lawmakers and companies are having a tough time keeping up with this new frontier of Internet privacy issues, and there is growing consumer unrest about behavioral advertising, leading in some cases to consumer rebellion," said Lisa Sotto, a partner and head of the privacy and security data group in the New York office of Richmond, Va.-based Hunton & Williams. "Consumers find this type of tracking intrusive, and businesses are starting to take the consumer reaction seriously," she said. The buzz over behavioral advertising has been building since congressional hearings that were held last year, during which Congress called on Internet service providers (ISPs) to testify about a highly controversial advertising practice known as "deep-packet inspection." The practice gives companies the ability to track every Web site consumers visit and provides a detailed look at everything they're doing, such as where they're going on vacation, who is going, how much they spent on the trip and what credit card was used. But then came the first class action targeting behavioral advertising, filed against Foster City, Calif.-based NebuAd Inc., an online advertising company accused of spying on consumers from several states and allegedly violating their privacy and computer security rights. The lawsuit specifically alleges that NebuAd engaged in deep-packet inspection. Valentine v. Ne

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."

Big Brother may be at it again. Behavioral advertising -- the tracking of consumer's Internet surfing activity to create tailored ads -- has triggered an intense legal controversy that has law firms scrambling to stay on top of a burgeoning practice. Attorneys say that behavioral advertising is raising privacy, litigation and regulation fears among consumer advocates, the electronic commerce and advertising industries and legislators. Law firms are busy helping companies come up with a transparent way of letting consumers know that their online activities are being tracked and possibly shared. "Lawmakers and companies are having a tough time keeping up with this new frontier of Internet privacy issues, and there is growing consumer unrest about behavioral advertising, leading in some cases to consumer rebellion," said Lisa Sotto, a partner and head of the privacy and security data group in the New York office of Richmond, Va.-based Hunton & Williams. "Consumers find this type of tracking intrusive, and businesses are starting to take the consumer reaction seriously," she said. The buzz over behavioral advertising has been building since congressional hearings that were held last year, during which Congress called on Internet service providers (ISPs) to testify about a highly controversial advertising practice known as "deep-packet inspection." The practice gives companies the ability to track every Web site consumers visit and provides a detailed look at everything they're doing, such as where they're going on vacation, who is going, how much they spent on the trip and what credit card was used. But then came the first class action targeting behavioral advertising, filed against Foster City, Calif.-based NebuAd Inc., an online advertising company accused of spying on consumers from several states and allegedly violating their privacy and computer security rights. The lawsuit specifically alleges that NebuAd engaged in deep-packet inspection. Valentine v. Ne

A security breach at credit card processor and payroll services administrator Heartland Payment Systems Inc. has proven costly, driving the company to a first-quarter loss. The nation's sixth-largest payment processor reported a loss of $2.5 million, or 6 cents a share, compared with a profit of $9 million, or 23 cents a share, the year before. The results included expenses and accruals of $12.6 million, or 20 cents a share, resulting from a security breach in which criminals secretly installed spying software on its computer network.

Maintaining privacy is on many people's minds these days, but sometimes that's the last thing they do. Allegations last week that two British tabloids, The Sun and The News of the World, had employed high-technology snoops to listen in on the mobile phone messages of public figures highlighted fears of what can happen when digital data fall into dubious hands. The reports came only days after another privacy debacle, this one self-inflicted. Photos and family information about Sir John Sawers, soon to be Britain's chief spy, appeared in another newspaper, The Mail on Sunday, after his wife posted them on Facebook. While attitudes toward privacy can appear paradoxical, the seeming contradiction is really about something else: control. When people bare their bodies on Facebook or their souls in the digital confessional of Google's search engine, they feel as if they are in charge. Not so, when the private embarrassments come to light unexpectedly.

"Whether a patient comes in for a gall-bladder operation or to have a baby, the routine remains the same for staff at Sharp HealthCare hospitals in San Diego. The front desk checks insurance records to make sure the bills get paid on time. Nurses take vitals and tag their charges with a bar-coded wristband. And behind the scenes, fund-raisers scan the assets of each patient -- to find out whether they're "megarich," "wealthy" or merely "comfortable.""

Is that a microscope following me around? Must get more tin foil to keep them from seeing my thoughts.

Hartmut Mehdorn's days as the boss of German rail operator Deutsche Bahn look to have come to an end as the embattled executive offers his resignation amid a damaging, ongoing data privacy scandal. Mehdorn said he was offering to go because the "destructive debates" over his future were damaging the company. "I have made an offer to terminate my contract with the supervisory board chairman," Mehdorn said Monday, March 20, at a press conference to announce Deutsche Bahn's annual financial results. "I assume that a successor will be appointed before the summer holidays" begin in July. Mehdorn, who has run the state-owned firm since 1999, has been under increasing pressure ever since it was revealed earlier this year that Deutsche Bahn accessed confidential staff data as far back as 1998.

Online spying or behavioral targeting?

A question: If you have 347 followers on the Twitter microblogging service, what are the chances that they'll click on the same online ad you clicked on last night? Advertisers are dying to know. Or, say you and a colleague exchange e-mails on a Saturday night. Can managers assume that you have a tight working relationship? Researchers at IBM and Massachusetts Institute of Technology are investigating. Friendships aren't what they used to be. We now have tools, from e-mail to social networks, to keep in touch with people who a decade ago would have drifted into distant memories. Practically every hand we shake and every business card we exchange can lead to an invitation, sometimes within minutes, for a "friendship" on LinkedIn or Facebook. And unless we sever them, these ties could linger for the rest of our lives. What do these relationships say about us and the people in our networks? Companies armed with rich new data and powerful computers are beginning to explore these questions. They're finding that digital friendships speak volumes about us as consumers and workers, and decoding the data can lead to profitable insights. Calculating the value of these relationships has become a defining challenge for businesses and individuals. Marketers are leading the way. They're finding that if our friends buy something, there's a better-than-average chance we'll buy it, too. It's a simple insight but one that could lead to targeted messaging in an age of growing media clutter.