Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

Personal profiles on Facebook and other social-networking sites are a trove of inappropriate and embarrassing photographs and discomfiting breaches of confidentiality. You might expect that from your friends and even some colleagues - but what about your doctor? A new survey of medical-school deans finds that unprofessional conduct on blogs and social-networking sites is common among medical students. Although med students fully understand patient-confidentiality laws and are indoctrinated in the high ethical standards to which their white-coated profession is held, many of them still use Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Flickr and other sites to depict and discuss lewd behavior and sexual misconduct, make discriminatory statements and discuss patient cases in violation of confidentiality laws, according to the survey, which was published this week in the Journal of the American Medical Association. Of the 80 medical-school deans questioned, 60% reported incidents involving unprofessional postings and 13% admitted to incidents that violated patient privacy. Some offenses led to expulsion from school.

"Scott Fortnum had put in almost a full day of work at his Markham, Ont., office when he decided to "check in" on Foursquare, a location-based social network where users log the names and co-ordinates of the places they visit with a time stamp. The 44-year-old's check-in was marked with a small coral balloon on an embedded Google Map and instantly viewable by the 12 friends he lists on Foursquare - and millions of others. His check-in found its way onto pleaserobme.com, a recently launched website with a mischievous mandate: "listing all those empty homes out there." With March break approaching, many impending vacationers are installing automatic timers on their lights and putting their newspaper subscriptions on hold to deter burglars. Many are also posting on Twitter about when they're leaving and touting their week-long getaway to Jamaica on Facebook - unwittingly letting the online world know exactly when they're away. Mr. Fortnum's check-in appeared this way on Please Rob Me: @sfortnum left home and checked in 30 minutes ago: I'm at ALS Canada (3000 Steeles Ave. E. #200, DVP & Steeles, Toronto.) http://4sq.com/4MmX51 Many Foursquare users such as Mr. Fortnum cross-post their check-ins to Twitter, where they are easy to find through the search function. With some simple coding, Please Rob Me's creators are able to collect those millions of public tweets on their site in real time, highlighting one of the many security concerns that springs from broadcasting one's whereabouts online. Frank Groeneveld, one of the three students from the Netherlands who designed Please Rob Me, says he co-created the site to give members of social networks a wake-up call."

Finally a site that might make someone a profit!

"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."

"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.

"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.

"Google Inc. co-founder Sergey Brin Wednesday said the Internet giant "screwed up" by collecting personal data through wireless networks and promised new oversight as European officials pledged to open investigations of the data collection. Authorities in Germany, Spain and Italy said Wednesday they were investigating Google and its Street View service, which uses camera-equipped vehicles to take street images and mark the location of Wi-Fi networks. Mr. Brin, speaking the same day at Google's developer conference in San Francisco, said the company would put "more internal controls in place" to prevent such data captures in the future, including the hiring of outside help. "Trust is very important to us," Mr. Brin said. "We're going to do everything we can to preserve that trust.""

G apologizes. Again, better to ask forgiveness... If users remain silent & gvt doesn't prosecute, why comply?

Is the price to safeguard America's information systems and networks on a collision course with efforts to rescue the economy? One would hope not, but the $789 billion stimulus package that contains nearly $10 billions for IT-related projects offered very little for cybersecurity. Still, the president sees protecting government and private-sector information systems as crucial to the economic vitality of the country. So, when Acting Senior Director for Cyberspace Melissa Hathaway hands the President her recommendations on securing the nation's information infrastructure later this month, a sharper picture should emerge on how much money the government will need to spend to do just that. What Price Security? The government isn't a spendthrift in protecting its IT networks; it earmarked $6.8 billion a year on cybersecurity this fiscal year, up from $4.2 billion five years ago, according to the White House Office of Management and Budget. But is that enough? Appropriating money to find new and innovative ways to protect our critical information infrastructure doesn't seem to be a government priority, at least not yet. Of the $147 billion the government planned to spend on all types of research and development this fiscal year, only $300 million or 0.2 percent was slated for cybersecurity, according to the Securing Cyberspace in the 44th Presidency report issued by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. By comparison, the budget contained five times as much money $1.5 billion for nanotechnology R&D.

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.

U.S. lawmakers plan to introduce privacy legislation that would limit how Internet service providers can track their users, despite reports that no U.S. ISPs are using such technologies except for legitimate security reasons. Representative Rick Boucher, a Virginia Democrat, and three privacy experts urged lawmakers Thursday at a hearing before the House Energy Commerce subcommittee to pass comprehensive online privacy legislation in the coming months. Advocates of new legislation focused mainly on so-called deep packet inspection (DPI), a form of filtering that network operators can use to examine the content of packets as they travel across the Internet. While DPI can be used to filter spam and identify criminals, the technology raises serious privacy concerns, Boucher said. "Its privacy-intrusion potential is nothing short of frightening," he added. "The thought that a network operator could track a user's every move on the Internet, record the details of every search and read every e-mail ... is alarming."

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

Social networking phenomenon Facebook has beaten out arch-rival and former market leader MySpace by most measures of popularity, except the one that pays the bills. While Facebook has outpaced MySpace in bringing in members - it has 175 million active users at the latest count, compared with around 130 million for MySpace - it has struggled make money from them. While MySpace is closing in on $1 billion in revenues, Facebook generated less than $300 million in sales last year, reports say. Indeed, Facebook's efforts to drum up revenue have led to it repeatedly becoming the target of some of the biggest online privacy protests on the Web. Its most recent fight earlier this month followed Facebook's attempt to redefine its own rules and assert ownership over anything its members posted on the site. The company has since backed off and is rethinking its policies. Why hasn't Facebook benefited from the vaunted "network effect" that makes such services more valuable the more its adds members and connections between them? After all, Facebook is spreading quickly in nearly 100 languages, while MySpace has focused on the United States and five other markets where Web advertising flourishes. The answer may lie in the origins of the five-year-old site started by then Harvard University student Mark Zuckerberg. Its appeal at the outset was that it was a place where users could share tidbits of their personal lives with selected friends and acquaintances. This blurred the distinction between a private space and a public one. MySpace is more explicitly a public place where friends hang out in the equivalent of a cafe or a club and the aim is often to meet new people. Most of all, MySpace is a place to share music with other fans.

Bits readers have a serious case of broadband envy. I've been writing about the debate about how the government might encourage more high-speed Internet use and you've complained loudly that people in other countries have faster, cheaper, more widely available broadband service. Even customer-service representatives of Internet service providers overseas are nicer too. I don't know about manners, but it's easy to find examples that American's broadband is second-rate: In Japan, broadband service running at 150 megabits per second (Mbps) costs $60 a month. The fastest service available now in the United States is 50 Mbps at a price of $90 to $150 a month. In London, $9 a month buys 8 Mbps service. In New York, broadband starts at $20 per month, for 1 Mbps. In Iceland, 83 percent of the households are connected to broadband. In the United States, the adoption rate is 59 percent. There's more than just envy at stake here. President Obama campaigned on a promise of fast broadband service for all. On the White House Web site, he writes "America should lead the world in broadband penetration and Internet access." And the recent stimulus bill requires the Federal Communications Commission to create a national broadband plan in order to make high-speed Internet service both more available and more affordable. I've spent the last week trolling through reports and talking to people who study broadband deployment around the world to see what explains the faster and cheaper service in many countries. We'll start with where the United States isn't doing quite so badly: the basic speed of broadband service. If you take out the countries that have made significant investment in fiber optic networks - Japan, Korea and Sweden - the United States is in the middle of the pack when it comes to network speed.

In the paradises of broadband - Japan, South Korea and Sweden - nearly everyone can surf far faster and far cheaper than anyone in the United States. What is their secret sauce and how can we get some? The short answer is that broadband deployment in those countries was spurred by a combination of heavy government involvement, subsidies and lower corporate profits that may be tough for the economic and political system in the United States to accept. Those countries have also tried to encourage demand for broadband by paying schools, hospitals and other institutions to use high-speed Internet services. Sweden has built one of the fastest and most widely deployed broadband networks in Europe because its government granted tax breaks for infrastructure investments, directly subsidized rural deployment, and, perhaps most significantly, required state-owned municipal utilities to create local backbone networks, reducing the cost for the local telephone company to provide service. Japan let telecommunications companies write down about one-third of their investment in broadband the first year, rather than the usual policy, which requires them to spread the deductions over 22 years. The Japanese government also subsidized low-cost loans for broadband construction and paid for part of the wiring of rural areas.

The U.S. government's director for cybersecurity resigned on Friday, criticizing the excessive role of the National Security Agency in countering threats to the country's computer systems. "He has tendered his resignation," Amy Kudwa, a Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman told Reuters. Former Silicon Valley entrepreneur Rod Beckstrom said in a resignation letter published by the Wall Street Journal it was a "bad strategy" to have the National Security Agency, which is part of the Department of Defense, play a major role in cybersecurity. Beckstrom headed the National Cybersecurity Center, which was created last March to coordinate all government cybersecurity efforts and answers to the Department of Homeland Security. Homeland Security said in a statement that it has a strong relationship with the NSA and continues to work closely with all of its partners to protect the country's cyber networks. Beckstrom wrote to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano on Thursday in his resignation letter that the NSA currently dominates most national cyber efforts. "While acknowledging the critical importance of NSA to our intelligence efforts, I believe this is a bad strategy on multiple grounds," he wrote in the letter posted by the Wall Street Journal on its website. National Security Agency officials could not immediately be reached for comment. Beckstrom said in his letter that the cybersecurity group did not receive adequate support to accomplish its role during the previous administration of President George W. Bush, which only provided the center with five weeks of funding in the last year. His resignation will be effective March 13, the letter said. The newspaper said the Obama administration was conducting a 60-day review of the cybersecurity program started by Bush last year to protect government networks.

(PDF) Information security is a critical consideration for any organization that depends on information systems and computer networks to carry out its mission or business. It is especially important for government agencies, where the public's trust is essential. The dramatic expansion in computer interconnectivity and the rapid increase in the use of the Internet are changing the way our government, the nation, and much of the world communicate and conduct business. Without proper safeguards, they also pose enormous risks that make it easier for individuals and groups with malicious intent to intrude into inadequately protected systems and use such access to obtain sensitive information, commit fraud, disrupt operations, or launch attacks against other computer systems and networks.

The latest phishing scam on Facebook has raised the question yet again as to whether the social networking site is dropping the ball on security measures and properly responding to privacy complaints. Facebook faced consumer fraud charges was investigated by New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo in 2007 for allegedly responding too slowly to user complaints about harassment, pornography, or nudity from the social networking site. As a result, Facebook agreed to settlement requirement requiring it to respond to such complaints within 24 hours. But in a recent string of phishing attacks in which hackers have broken into a user's Facebook account and hit up his or her friends for money with the online chat tool, pretending to be stranded or robbed, a complaint has emerged that the privacy team at Facebook hasn't responded to users in a timely manner. Mark Neely, a Sydney-based management consultant, became aware that his Facebook account was hacked when friends called him to see if he was all right - the hacker had contacted them via Facebook chat saying that Neely had been robbed at gunpoint in London and would need them to wire him money so he could return to Australia. Neely says he filled out two online complaint forms and e-mailed the privacy team at Facebook, but it took them more than 40 hours to respond to him. In the meantime, his friends continued to call him about being contacted by the hacker. Facebook spokesman Barry Schnitt disputes Neely's figure, saying it only took 30 hours to respond. "In this case, we have restored access to the account to the rightful owner, are identifying the means by which the account was compromised (likely malware), and building in technical protections in the Facebook system to address this particular type of scheme," Schnitt said

The key points of the plan closely mirror recommendations offered late last year by a bipartisan commission of computer security experts, which urged then president-elect Obama to set up a high-level post to tackle cyber security, consider new regulations to combat cyber crime and shore up the security of the nation's most sensitive computer networks. The strategy, as outlined in a broader policy document on homeland security priorities posted on the Whitehouse.gov Web site Wednesday, states the following goals: * Strengthen Federal Leadership on Cyber Security: Declare the cyber infrastructure a strategic asset and establish the position of national cyber advisor who will report directly to the president and will be responsible for coordinating federal agency efforts and development of national cyber policy. * Initiate a Safe Computing R&D Effort and Harden our Nation's Cyber Infrastructure: Support an initiative to develop next-generation secure computers and networking for national security applications. Work with industry and academia to develop and deploy a new generation of secure hardware and software for our critical cyber infrastructure. * Protect the IT Infrastructure That Keeps America's Economy Safe: Work with the private sector to establish tough new standards for cyber security and physical resilience. * Prevent Corporate Cyber-Espionage: Work with industry to develop the systems necessary to protect our nation's trade secrets and our research and development. Innovations in software, engineering, pharmaceuticals and other fields are being stolen online from U.S. businesses at an alarming rate. * Develop a Cyber Crime Strategy to Minimize the Opportunities for Criminal Profit: Shut down the mechanisms used to transmit criminal profits by shutting down untraceable Internet payment schemes. Initiate a grant and training program to provide federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies the tools they need to detect and prosecute cyber crime. *

It's been four years since data broker ChoicePoint acknowledged the data security breach that put it in the middle of a media firestorm and pushed data protection to the top of the infosecurity community's priority list. Since then, the business world has made plenty of progress hardening its data defenses -- thanks in part to industry standards like PCI DSS and data breach disclosure laws (click to see state-by-state map) now in place. But the latest data breach to grab headlines illustrates how vulnerable organizations remain to devastating network intrusions. Heartland Payment Systems, the Princeton, N.J.-based provider of credit and debit processing, payment and check management services, admitted Tuesday it was the victim of a data breach some quickly began citing as the largest of its kind. The company discovered last week that malware compromised card data across its network, after Visa and MasterCard alerted Heartland to sinister activity surrounding processed card transactions. The Shadow of ChoicePoint The Heartland breach comes roughly four years after ChoicePoint announced -- as required by California's SB 1386 data breach disclosure law -- that conmen stole personal financial records of more than 163,000 consumers by setting up fake business requests. Since then, much bigger incidents have occurred, most notably the TJX data breach that exposed more than 45 million debit and credit card holders to identity fraud. Heartland President and CFO Robert H.B. Baldwin Jr. said Tuesday that 100 million card transactions occur each month on the compromised systems used to provide processing to merchants and businesses. As of Tuesday, the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse estimated that a total of 251,164,141 sensitive records had been compromised since early 2005. Up to 15 separate cases have been reported since Jan. 1, 2009.

Enterprise employees frequently use social networking tools, most notably Web-based applications. It's no surprise more organizations are wondering what happens if social networking data becomes relevant to an e-discovery investigation. How does an enterprise go about discovering and assessing Web 2.0 data? How responsible is an organization, legally speaking, for the information that's out there in the Web 2.0 world? What risks arise from e-discovery as it relates to Web 2.0 data, and how can you mitigate them? In this tip, we will look at e-discovery as it relates to Web 2.0 and consider the strongest options for minimizing risks to the organization. E-discovery basics We begin with a quick look at what e-discovery is and how it can create risk. Essentially, e-discovery is the electronic extension of the legal process of discovery, which Wikipedia defines as "the pre-trial phase in a lawsuit in which each party through the law of civil procedure can request documents and other evidence from other parties or can compel the production of evidence by using a subpoena or through other discovery devices, such as requests for production and depositions." If you're an IT person, not a lawyer, it's important to note that the rules governing the discovery process now require plaintiffs to address all electronically stored information or ESI. In other words, if your organization faces litigation, it will have to deal with the issue of e-discovery, which will entail a whole lot more than turning over some old emails. Depending upon your role in the organization, the first you may hear of this is a "notice of litigation" with perhaps a "litigation hold directive" containing a "preservation directive." Here is a generic e-discovery request below. Apart from a few limiting factors, such as subject matter, named persons and a specified time period, the scope of such a notice is likely to be broad; blame standard procedure, not some high-powered attorney pushing his or her lu

Changes relating to different aspects of data management have been highlighted as key trends in the IT industry for 2009 in a report by consultancy Deloitte. The falling price of digital storage has caused an irresponsible approach to file management and IT leaders will need to give an increased focus to these issues, says Deloitte, along with finding ways around the rise in physical storage costs. "There are ways to control the escalation of storage costs, such as de-duplication tools that can free up space by reducing duplicate files," says the report. "Companies can assess the impact of individual applications, especially email - which is estimated to take up 25 per cent of enterprise storage capacity," it says. According to Deloitte's research, businesses will become increasingly aggressive when pursuing disputes related to copyright infringement and digital ownership rights. "If undertaking a swift launch of a product or digital application, companies should ensure that no element could lead to litigation," says the report. Despite pointing out that 2009 will be the break-out year for social networks in the business, Deloitte says that such networks will need to be developed with caution to encourage more productivity and balance control with employees' desire for privacy.