Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

"Big Brother is watching. That is the message corporations routinely send their employees about using email. But recent cases have shown that employees sometimes have more privacy rights than they might expect when it comes to the corporate email server. Legal experts say that courts in some instances are showing more consideration for employees who feel their employer has violated their privacy electronically. Driving the change in how these cases are treated is a growing national concern about privacy issues in the age of the Internet, where acquiring someone else's personal and financial information is easier than ever. "Courts are more inclined to rule based on arguments presented to them that privacy issues need to be carefully considered," said Katharine Parker, a lawyer at Proskauer Rose who specializes in employment issues. In past years, courts showed sympathy for corporations that monitored personal email accounts accessed over corporate computer networks. Generally, judges treated corporate computers, and anything on them, as company property. Now, courts are increasingly taking into account whether employers have explicitly described how email is monitored to their employees."

The FBI has used a secret form of spyware in a series of investigations designed to nab extortionists, database-deleting hackers, child molesters, and hitmen, according to documents obtained by CNET News. One suspect used Microsoft's Hotmail to send bomb and anthrax threats to an undercover government investigator; another demanded a payment of $10,000 a month to stop cutting cables; a third was an alleged European hitman who was soliciting for business from a Hushmail.com account. CNET News obtained the documents -- totaling hundreds of pages, although nearly all of them were heavily redacted -- this week through a Freedom of Information Act request to the FBI. The FBI spyware, called CIPAV, came to light in July 2007 through court documents that showed how the bureau used it to nab a teenager who was e-mailing bomb threats to a high school near Olympia, Wash. (CIPAV stands for Computer and Internet Protocol Address Verifier.) A June 2007 memo says that the FBI's Deployment Operations Personnel were instructed to "deploy a CIPAV to geophysically locate the subject issuing bomb threats to the Timberline High School, Lacy, Washington. The CIPAV will be deployed via a Uniform Resource Locator (URL) address posted to the subject's private chat room on MySpace.com."

Raises some realistic questions about the American approach to privacy law & regulation. Unfortunately, the article tends to point at the misapplication of laws more heavily than offering the reader an account of the abuses that led us to where we are now. Businesses & government, including the medical industry, freely shared details - or spied on Americans with impunity for decades. The article reminds us that work needs to continue to balance our approach. A Federal law, that sets a floor for privacy requirements, could help reduce conflicting requirements caused by almost every state writing seperate laws because there was a lack of leadership from Washington. American privacy regulations are implemented sectorally - at the industry or State level for example. This leads to many different, and conflicting laws. Privacy is a difficult subject with complex considerations touching aspects of life that have not been questioned for years. This article provides more con than balance, but it reminds us that extreme positions rarely serve anyone well.

Special interest groups and lawyers claim they are defenders of individual privacy. But all that red tape is causing more harm to consumers than good. In a world of tight budgets and sacrificed programs, one sector has continued to grow with the speed and choking effectiveness of kudzu: regulations around privacy. More than 300 privacy-related laws are on the books, in both Washington, D.C. and state capitals. Privacy-related consulting services provided by law and accounting firms are a $500-million-a-year business and have been growing at double digits.

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.

The Government Accountability Office issued another scathing report saying that federal agencies still don't do enough to secure government IT assets. "Persistent weaknesses in information security policies and practices continue to threaten the confidentiality, integrity and availability of critical information and information systems used to support the operations, assets and personnel of most federal agencies," Gregory Wilshusen, GAO director of information security issues, wrote in a 66-page report issued Friday. "Recently reported incidents at federal agencies have placed sensitive data at risk, including the theft, loss, or improper disclosure of personally identifiable information of Americans, thereby exposing them to loss of privacy and identity theft." In a written response accompanying the report, federal CIO Vivek Kundra said OMB is committed to the vision of a secure federal government, and are taking steps to make that vision a reality. OMB, he said, has initiated a review of the language in the current reporting instructions to identify and clarify confusion in the annual reporting. OMB also is working with the CIO Council and the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency to improve guidance to agencies. The GAO report also said that nearly all of the 24 major federal agencies last year had weaknesses in information security controls. "An underlying reason for these weaknesses is that agencies have not fully implemented their information security programs," Wilshusen said. "As a result, agencies have limited assurance that controls are in place and operating as intended to protect their information resources, thereby leaving them vulnerable to attack or compromise."

1. You get what you pay for. 2. Americans do not take information or security as seriously as they do their love for profit & cost savings. If one does not value what they are trying to protect accurately, the investment one is prepared to make will always be insufficient. Then there are hindsight and rationalization (a.k.a. politicians) - Karl The Government Accountability Office issued another scathing report saying that federal agencies still don't do enough to secure government IT assets. "Persistent weaknesses in information security policies and practices continue to threaten the confidentiality, integrity and availability of critical information and information systems used to support the operations, assets and personnel of most federal agencies," Gregory Wilshusen, GAO director of information security issues, wrote in a 66-page report issued Friday. "Recently reported incidents at federal agencies have placed sensitive data at risk, including the theft, loss, or improper disclosure of personally identifiable information of Americans, thereby exposing them to loss of privacy and identity theft." In a written response accompanying the report, federal CIO Vivek Kundra said OMB is committed to the vision of a secure federal government, and are taking steps to make that vision a reality. OMB, he said, has initiated a review of the language in the current reporting instructions to identify and clarify confusion in the annual reporting. OMB also is working with the CIO Council and the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency to improve guidance to agencies. The GAO report also said that nearly all of the 24 major federal agencies last year had weaknesses in information security controls. "An underlying reason for these weaknesses is that agencies have not fully implemented their information security programs," Wilshusen said. "As a result, agencies have limited assurance that controls are in place and operating as intended to protect their inf

Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) has reintroduced a data breach bill that would set tougher rules for government agencies and private sector firms regarding consumers' personal information. This will be the third time around the block for the Personal Data Privacy and Security Act, which has cleared the Judiciary Committee, but never come to a vote on the Senate floor. The bill would preempt the more than 40 state laws laying out requirements for notifying consumers in the event of a data breach, a long-deferred legislative goal that has the general support of the IT industry. But Leahy's bill is about more than just data breaches. Among other things, it would set baseline security information standards for government agencies, something that the Obama administration has begun to work on with the early steps of an overhaul of the government's cybersecurity apparatus. "This is a comprehensive bill that not only deals with the need to provide Americans with notice when they have been victims of a data breach, but that also deals with the underlying problem of lax security and lack of accountability to help prevent data breaches from occurring in the first place," Leahy said in a statement. "Passing this comprehensive data privacy legislation is one of my highest legislative priorities as Chairman of the Judiciary Committee."

You systems administrator knows more about you than you think.

More than one-third of information technology professionals abuse administrative passwords to access confidential data such as colleagues' salary details or board-meeting minutes, according to a survey. Data security company Cyber-Ark surveyed more than 400 senior IT professionals in the United States and Britain, and found that 35 percent admitted to snooping, while 74 percent said they could access information that was not relevant to their role. In a similar survey 12 months ago, 33 percent of IT professionals admitted to snooping. "Employee snooping on sensitive information continues unabated," Udi Mokady, CEO of Cyber-Ark, said in a statement. Cyber-Ark said the most common areas respondents indicated they access are HR records, followed by customer databases, M&A plans, layoff lists and lastly, marketing information. "While seemingly innocuous, (unmanaged privileged) accounts provide workers with the 'keys to the kingdom,' allowing them to access critically sensitive information," Mokady said. When IT professionals were asked what kind of data they would take with them if fired, the survey found a jump compared with a year ago in the number of respondents who said they would take proprietary data and information that is critical to maintaining competitive advantage and corporate security. The survey found a six-fold increase in staff who would take financial reports or merger and acquisition plans, and a four-fold increase in those who would take CEO passwords and research and development plans.

Recommend watching this Frontline report on the secret life of credit cards. Interesting: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/credit/view/ - Karl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Millions of Americans have already seen their credit card limits shrink, and millions more face the same fate as lenders prepare for tougher U.S. consumer protection rules. Since the financial crisis deepened a year ago, credit card companies have been closing millions of inactive accounts, cutting credit limits and raising interest rates to cushion themselves from record loan losses. This is just the beginning of the biggest shake-up in the credit card industry in at least 20 years, analysts said. Credit Suisse analyst Moshe Orenbuch estimated available credit card lines will be cut by about 20 percent, or $1.2 trillion, in coming months, and warned that "further cuts could result from the provisions of the new credit card law."

Millions of Americans have already seen their credit card limits shrink, and millions more face the same fate as lenders prepare for tougher U.S. consumer protection rules. Since the financial crisis deepened a year ago, credit card companies have been closing millions of inactive accounts, cutting credit limits and raising interest rates to cushion themselves from record loan losses. This is just the beginning of the biggest shake-up in the credit card industry in at least 20 years, analysts said. Credit Suisse analyst Moshe Orenbuch estimated available credit card lines will be cut by about 20 percent, or $1.2 trillion, in coming months, and warned that "further cuts could result from the provisions of the new credit card law."

"If you live in Texas, your medical records are definitely up for sale by the state. If you live anywhere else in the United States, they probably are for sale there, too. Medical health records provide key information to researchers, who have lobbied hard to keep them accessible, despite government concerns about the privacy of patient data. The controversy dates back to 1996, when Congress passed the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) to protect patients. "Researchers have very broad access rights to health care records under HIPAA," says Pam Dixon, director of a non-profit called the World Privacy Forum "The rules are pretty loose, and there are a lot of ways to get around them." That's especially true since the act wasn't designed to cover common scenarios today: records stored online in a vast, hackable cloud. In the rush to digitize all electronic health records, Dixon says not everyone is taking the proper steps to de-personalize the data and protect patients."

"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."

"We all know that Internet and communications technology is changing rapidly, creating huge opportunities for business innovation and individual self-expression. Most people are probably not aware, however, that privacy law is not evolving nearly as quickly. It is time to update legal protections to reflect the impact the digital revolution is having on modern life. Cloud computing -- a bit of tech-jargon meaning the use of remote servers to store and process data -- is a great example. The movement of personal and proprietary data off desktop computers and into "the cloud", which is made up of server farms and broadband connections, is a major disruptive trend in computing. Unless our laws change to account for cloud computing and other equally momentous technology developments, the Constitution's protection against unreasonable search and seizure will become a relic of the past. The federal law setting standards for government access to personal communications -- the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) -- was written more than two decades ago, before the Internet took off. "

"The United States House of Representatives took a major step this week toward enacting a national data breach notification law. H.R. 2221, the Data Accountability and Trust Act (DATA), cleared the House with a voice vote. In its current form, DATA requires businesses to notify customers and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) if sensitive information has been exposed to a security breach. If the U.S. Senate can reconcile its own approach to data breach notification legislation with DATA, a new federal standard will emerge. If signed into law by President Barack Obama, a federal data breach ¬law would pre-empt the jumbled mass of dozens of state laws. "You'd be better served by federal legislation if the federal legislation has teeth and doesn't pre-empt the state's law," said California state senator Joe Simitian, speaking to executive editor Scot Petersen in September. "If there was a meaningful standard at the national level, I think many states would be happy to accept it." Aside from the data breach notification required by the HITECH Act, DATA would put into place the first national law of its kind. H.R. 2221 was sponsored by House Subcommittee Chair Rep. Bobby L. Rush of Illinois. The bill specifically states that: "Any person engaged in interstate commerce that owns or possesses data in electronic form containing personal information shall, following the discovery of a breach of security of the system maintained by such person that contains such data -- 1. notify each individual who is a citizen or resident of the United States whose personal information was acquired by an unauthorized person as a result of such a breach of security; and 2. notify the Federal Trade Commission."

"Fomer UCLA Healthcare System researcher Huping Zhou has pleaded guilty to violating parts of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and could be one of the first people in the country convicted under the law, federal authorities announced Friday. After learning he was to be let go, the 48-year-old is alleged to have accessed the UCLA patient records system 323 times during the three-week period, mostly to check out the files of celebrities, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office. The names of the targeted stars have not been revealed. Federal authorities say Zhou admitted to accessing the records -- cruising files that were not necessary to view as part of his job -- under a plea agreement. He'll face a judge for sentencing March 22. It's not clear what kind of punishment the U.S. Attorney's Office will recommend in exchange for his cooperation."

"UC San Francisco said late Tuesday it has alerted 600 patients and others that an external hacker may have obtained "temporary access to emails containing their personal information" as a result of a late September phishing scam. The breach occurred about three months ago, and was investigated in mid-October, but wasn't disclosed to the public until Dec. 15. Corinna Kaarlela, UCSF's news director, told the San Francisco Business Times late Tuesday that individuals whose data may have been compromised were notified between Oct. 21, when an in-depth investigation began, and Dec. 11, when it was completed. UCSF said Tuesday that an unnamed faculty physician in the School of Medicine was victimized in late September by the alleged scam. The physician provided a user name and password in response to an email message fabricated by a hacker, that appeared as if it came from those responsible for upgrading security on UCSF internal computer servers. UCSF's Enterprise Information Security unit subsequently identified the breach and disabled the compromised password. UCSF says it conducted an investigation and in mid-October determined that emails in the physician's account ─ including some containing demographic and clinical information and, in a few cases, Social Security numbers ─ may have been exposed."

"Can personal medical data that has been stripped of its identifiers to protect privacy later be used to identify a specific person? That is the question that the Health and Human Services Department is hoping a research contractor can answer. HHS intends to hire a contractor to demonstrate either the "ability or inability" to re-identify data from a data set that has been de-identified under the Health Information Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) Privacy Rule, according to a Jan. 4 notice on the Federal Business Opportunities Web site. De-identification and re-identification of patient data have become hot issues in the discussion about how to protect patient privacy while advancing adoption of electronic health records. The Obama administration is distributing at least $17 billion in incentive payments to doctors and hospitals who buy and use digital systems for medical data."

"If you're concerned about Google retaining your personal data, then you must be doing something you shouldn't be doing. At least that's the word from Google CEO Eric Schmidt. "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place," Schmidt tells CNBC, sparking howls of incredulity from the likes of Gawker. But the bigger news may be that Schmidt has actually admitted there are cases where the search giant is forced to release your personal data. "If you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines - including Google - do retain this information for some time and it's important, for example, that we are all subject in the United States to the Patriot Act and it is possible that all that information could be made available to the authorities." There's also the possibility of subpoenas. And hacks. But if any of this bothers you, you should be ashamed of yourself. According to Eric Schmidt. Gawker highlights the irony of Schmidt's typically haughty proclamations. After all, this is the man who banned CNet for a year after the news site published information about him it had gleaned from, yes, Google. But the larger point here is that Schmidt isn't even addressing the issue at hand. Per usual. When the privacy question appears, Google likes to talk about the people asking the questions. But the problem lies elsewhere: with the millions upon millions blissfully unaware of the questions. If you're concerned about your online privacy, you can always put the kibosh on Google's tracking cookies. You can avoid signing in to Google accounts. And, yes, you can avoid using Google for anything Eric Schmidt thinks you shouldn't be doing. But most web users don't even realize Google is hoarding their data. CNBC asks Schmidt: "People are treating Google like their most trusted friend. Should they be?" But he answers by scoffing at those who don't trust Google at all. Not that you'd expect anythin

"Got an e-mail list of customers or readers and want to know more about each - such as their full name, friends, gender, age, interests, location, job and education level? Facebook has just the free feature you're looking for, thanks to its recent privacy changes. The hack, first publicized by blogger Max Klein, repurposes a Facebook feature that lets people find their friends on Facebook by scanning through e-mail addresses in their contact list. But as Klein points out, a marketer could take a list of 1,000 e-mail addresses, either legally or illegally collected - and upload those through a dummy account - which then lets the user see all the profiles created using those addresses. Given Facebook's ubiquity and most people's reliance on a single e-mail address, the harvest could be quite rich. Using a simple scraping tool, a marketer could then turn a list of e-mail addresses into a rich, full-fledged set of marketing profiles, with names, pictures, ages, locations, interests, photos, wall posts, affiliations and names of your friends, depending on how users have their profiles set. Run a few algorithms on that data and you can start to make inferences about race, income, sexual orientation and interests. While that information isn't available for all users, Facebook changed its privacy settings in early December so that certain information can't be made private, including one's name, current city, profile picture, gender, networks and friend list (the latter can be somewhat hidden from public view). Anyone with your e-mail address can harvest that information, the company admits."

Probably not limited to FaceBook

For the third time in recent months, Tampa Bay citizens have found themselves the unwanted recipients of patients' private medical records. What's more, in two cases, the recipients' efforts to restore patients' privacy were rebuffed, suggesting the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) is falling far short of its promise to protect and enforce patient privacy.

If the government won't enforce HIPAA, why bother having the law at all. Let patients know they are own their own.

"The number of fraudulent IRS websites taken down in 2008 soared to 3,030, up more than 240 percent from 2007, according to a GAO analysis of Internal Revenue Service data, suggesting a sharp increase by criminals to draw unassuming taxpayers to faux tax agency websites to steal identities and money. In a Government Accountability Office audit, made public Thursday, the GAO credited the IRS for implementing programs to prevent, detect and resolve identity theft, but said the tax agency needs to do a better job in assessing the effectiveness of its initiatives. And, as it relates to potential online abuse, the IRS should be more consistent in enforcing security controls. "

"A simple search query has exposed Google Voice mail messages (audio and transcript) for anyone to see and hear. As first reported here, a user entering "site:https://www.google.com/voice/fm/*" into the Google search bar discovered random voice mail messages belonging to random Google Voice accounts (see screenshot below). Clicking on each revealed not only the audio file and transcript of the call, but it also listed the callers name and phone number as it would if you were checking your own Google Voice voice mail. I was able to replicate the issue and listen to several voice mail messages, including some legitimate ones with potentially sensitive information."