Another Facebook privacy issue?

It would be nice if everyone could see more privacy protection.

Online advertising offers marketers the chance to aim ads at very specific groups of people — say, golf players in Illinois who make more than $150,000 a year and vacation in Hawaii.

But two recent academic papers show some potential pitfalls of such precise tailoring.

Both papers focus on Facebook ads and show that in certain circumstances, advertisers — or snoops posing as advertisers — may be able to learn sensitive profile information, like a person’s sexual orientation or religion, even if the person is sharing that information only with a small circle of friends. Facebook does not share such information with advertisers.

The papers come amid an intense focus on vulnerabilities in Facebook’s privacy safeguards.

Read More......

Professional pilot cites civil liberties, refuses TSA body scan

It's unfortunate that it had to come to this. Instead of making a knee jerk decision to add expensive body scans that may or may not work (and may be bad for your health) maybe the TSA could have shown everyone why the scans were so valuable. It's an expensive price to pay for our freedom. Not Sarah Palin/Teabagger BS freedom, but the real thing.

The pilot who refused to go through the new full body scan at Memphis International Airport is speaking out.

Michael Roberts says he refused to go through, not because he's a pilot, but instead because he believes nobody should have to be subjected to "a virtual strip search."

Roberts was traveling Friday from his hometown of Memphis to Houston, where he's based as a pilot for ExpressJet Airlines. He says a TSA agent asked him to take off his shoes and enter the new machine. He told the agent he wasn't willing. "I'm not going to do it," he says. "Not once am I going to show them my naked body."

Read More......

Facebook may have yet another privacy problem

It's Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal that is reporting on the story so that angle is not to be discounted. Even so, Facebook has had its share of problems so it's not much of a surprise either.

Many of the most popular applications, or "apps," on the social-networking site Facebook Inc. have been transmitting identifying information—in effect, providing access to people's names and, in some cases, their friends' names—to dozens of advertising and Internet tracking companies, a Wall Street Journal investigation has found.

The issue affects tens of millions of Facebook app users, including people who set their profiles to Facebook's strictest privacy settings. The practice breaks Facebook's rules, and renews questions about its ability to keep identifiable information about its users' activities secure.

Read More......

'Officials are preparing to seek sweeping new regulations for the Internet'

I'd call this an election-year two-fer. It will further depress progressives — and we're already fully depressed — and at the same time further enrage Tea Bag Nation, which is just certain that the "big bad Kenyan" has big bad plans. (Sadly, in this respect they're right.)

Charlie Savage (a hero) in the New York Times:

Federal law enforcement and national security officials are preparing to seek sweeping new regulations for the Internet, arguing that their ability to wiretap criminal and terrorism suspects is “going dark” as people increasingly communicate online instead of by telephone.

Essentially, officials want Congress to require all services that enable communications — including encrypted e-mail transmitters like BlackBerry, social networking Web sites like Facebook and software that allows direct “peer to peer” messaging like Skype — to be technically capable of complying if served with a wiretap order. The mandate would include being able to intercept and unscramble encrypted messages.

The bill, which the Obama administration plans to submit to lawmakers next year, raises fresh questions about how to balance security needs with protecting privacy and fostering innovation. And because security services around the world face the same problem, it could set an example that is copied globally.

Deeper in the article, an FBI official talks about "lawfully authorized intercepts." How about starting now with those, before asking for more?

It began with the War on Cash — gotta track them drug deals, you know; after all, people who are seriously "other" need serious tamping down. And with that (the War on the Other) as a known-good cover story, the War on Privacy proceeds apace. These guys love power, don't they?

Dem or not-Dem, it matters not at all. Thanks, Mr. Change, for showing what we can believe in. Election year, you say? Check.

GP Read More......

Obama wants to monitor 100% of money transfers in and out of US

I expect such overreach from Republicans, but from a Democrat? Shouldn't someone have to prove the real world value first before implementing such an enormous program in this phony war against terror, or whatever they want to call it now. Since the GOP didn't push this they will surely be up in arms but they will be correct. What a horrible move and another breach of personal privacy.

But critics have called it part of a disturbing trend by government security agencies in the wake of the 2001 attacks to seek more access to personal data without adequately demonstrating its utility. Financial institutions say that they already feel burdened byanti-terrorism rules requiring them to provide data, and that they object to new ones.

"These new banking surveillance programs are testing the boundaries of privacy," said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center. "Many consumers both in the United States and outside are likely to object."

"This regulation is outrageous," said Peter Djinis, a lawyer who advises financial institutions on complying with financial rules and a former FinCEN executive assistant director for regulatory policy. "Consider me old-fashioned, but I believe you need to show some evidence of criminality before you are granted unfettered access to the private financial affairs of every individual and company that dares to conduct financial transactions overseas."

Read More......

TSA in Philly searches woman's wallet, employs Full Metal Jacket 'Get Some' tactics

The TSA has spiraled out of control but it's no surprise that this latest problem is in Philadelphia. That has to be my least favorite airport in the world because of people like the ones in this story. In a notoriously unfriendly city (I spent twelve years there), they manage to find the least friendly, obnoxious people around to work at the airport.

Thanks to the atmosphere of fear, the TSA has been able to get away with anything, even if it violates the US Constitution. It's not going to be a surprise if another ACLU lawsuit comes out of this horrible incident. When the TSA response sounds not unlike the crazy helicopter gunner in Full Metal Jacket (they're all guilty) you know there's a problem. Everyone wants to be safe when flying but who wants to use the airlines with this attitude and harassment?

It hardly sounds like she was a threat in the air so why were they picking through her wallet and inspecting receipts and checks? How does that represent a threat to other passengers? What exactly is the mission statement of the TSA? The terrorists have clearly won.

That same screener started emptying her wallet. "He was taking out the receipts and looking at them," she said.

"I understand that TSA is tasked with strengthening national security but [it] surely does not need to know what I purchased at Kohl's or Wal-Mart," she wrote in her complaint, which she sent me last week.

She says she asked what he was looking for and he replied, "Razor blades." She wondered, "Wouldn't that have shown up on the metal detector?"

In a side pocket she had tucked a deposit slip and seven checks made out to her and her husband, worth about $8,000.

Her thought: "Oh, my God, this is none of his business."

Two Philadelphia police officers joined at least four TSA officers who had gathered around her. After conferring with the TSA screeners, one of the Philadelphia officers told her he was there because her checks were numbered sequentially, which she says they were not.

"It's an indication you've embezzled these checks," she says the police officer told her. He also told her she appeared nervous. She hadn't before that moment, she says.

Read More......

Google chief warns of Internet imperiling privacy

Very interesting.

"But Mr Schmidt is completely right on how much information we are giving away online. Right now there are millions of young kids and teenagers who, when they apply for jobs in 10 years' time, will find that there is so much embarrassing stuff about them online that they cannot take down."

Those who wish to delete what they have put up online, meanwhile, may find it next to impossible to entirely erase their cyber past.

"What many people do not realise is that as soon as you put something up online you lose possession and control of that information immediately," said Rik Fergusson, a cyber security expert at Trend Micro. "Anyone can download, store and distribute that information, it's out of your hands."

Ms Snyder, a trainee teacher, had passed all her exams and completed her training. Her academic record was unblemished. That is, until her final summer, when her teachers – out of the blue – deemed that the behaviour she had displayed in her personal life was unbecoming of a teacher.

Her crime? She had uploaded an image of herself, wearing a pirate costume and drinking from a plastic cup on to a social networking site with the caption: "drunken pirate."

Ms Snyder never got the certificate she needed to teach and an attempt to sue the university for it was unsuccessful.

Read More......

Your cell phone photos may be stalking you

Kind of creepy.

When Adam Savage, host of the popular science program “MythBusters,” posted a picture on Twitter of his automobile parked in front of his house, he let his fans know much more than that he drove a Toyota Land Cruiser.

Instructions on how to disable the geotagging feature of an Android phone.
Embedded in the image was a geotag, a bit of data providing the longitude and latitude of where the photo was taken. Hence, he revealed exactly where he lived. And since the accompanying text was “Now it’s off to work,” potential thieves knew he would not be at home.

Security experts and privacy advocates have recently begun warning about the potential dangers of geotags, which are embedded in photos and videos taken with GPS-equipped smartphones and digital cameras. Because the location data is not visible to the casual viewer, the concern is that many people may not realize it is there; and they could be compromising their privacy, if not their safety, when they post geotagged media online.

Read More......

TSA is saving some of those body image scan pics they said they wouldn't save

But don't worry, they're only saving the 35,000 pictures that supposedly don't show anything - they won't save the really scary photos, like the one above (they say) - but why are they saving any of them at all, when they said they wouldn't? And why did it take a Freedom of Information Act request to find out that they were breaking their own promise, if they're not up to anything nefarious?

(Here's Chris' earlier post on why body scanners don't even work anyway.) Read More......

Do you believe young people don't care about privacy?

It's an interesting debate down in Australia. With so much personal data willingly published online, it doesn't sound like a stretch to make the claim that younger people have less of an interest in personal privacy. A younger (~30 years old) colleague posts almost everything online about his life including his specific location via Google. Maybe it's the older generation who worry too much about it? What's your take?

YOUNG people do not care about their privacy and there is little reason to protect it, according to the former Victorian police commissioner Christine Nixon.

They use Twitter and Facebook, she said. They appear on Big Brother. There has been a generational shift.

''Young people don't seem to be bothered,'' she said at last night's IQ2 debate, organised by the St James Ethics Centre and sponsored by the Herald. ''These arguments about protecting people's privacy: in many cases people don't care about their privacy being protected.''

Read More......

Does Australia want to link Internet browsing history to passports?

Creepy, if true though ZDNet is not a fly-by-night source. The Rudd government is getting into some very disturbing territory. It's even more extreme than the EU monitoring.

Last week we were duly shocked by the discovery that the government is looking into a proposal to make ISPs retain a log of every website you ever visit. Now it’s coming out that they may want ISPs to link that information to other personal data like your passport number.

Ben Grubb over at ZDNet broke the original story, and yesterday followed it up with a deeper insight into the proposed scheme. While the government is denying it would capture individual browsing histories, unnamed sources from ISPs are saying that the original data set sent to ISPs from the government said that they’d require allied personal information, including passport numbers.

Read More......

3 states make it illegal to film a cop (lest you catch him breaking the rules/law)

That's outrageous:

In response to a flood of Facebook and YouTube videos that depict police abuse, a new trend in law enforcement is gaining popularity. In at least three states, it is now illegal to record any on-duty police officer.

Even if the encounter involves you and may be necessary to your defense, and even if the recording is on a public street where no expectation of privacy exists.

The legal justification for arresting the "shooter" rests on existing wiretapping or eavesdropping laws, with statutes against obstructing law enforcement sometimes cited. Illinois, Massachusetts, and Maryland are among the 12 states in which all parties must consent for a recording to be legal unless, as with TV news crews, it is obvious to all that recording is underway. Since the police do not consent, the camera-wielder can be arrested. Most all-party-consent states also include an exception for recording in public places where "no expectation of privacy exists" (Illinois does not) but in practice this exception is not being recognized.

I remember hearing of an attempt to do this in Europe - I want to say France - a few years back. Does anyone remember the details? Read More......

Google debating releasing facial recognition technology

Take a photo of a stranger, upload it to Google, and find out everything about the person. That's what we're talking about. It's incredibly cool, and incredibly creepy. But even if Google holds off, others are already working on the same thing. The only thing that could truly stop such technology from going public would be national laws against privacy, like they have in Europe - and like we do NOT have in the United States. Read More......

Tens of thousands of people to be sued for illegally downloading 'Hurt Locker' movie

They're talking 50,000 people. Via Boing Boing:

After filing the lawsuits, the plaintiffs must subpoena ISP records in an effort to match IP addresses with illicit behavior on BitTorrent. According to lawyers at Dunlap's firm, 75 percent of ISPs have cooperated fully. Those that have resisted are mostly doing so, they say, because of the amount of work involved in handing over thousands of names. But the clock may be ticking. For example, in the lawsuit over "Far Cry," Comcast has until next Wednesday to file motions to quash subpoenas. (Here's the stipulation by the parties.) By the end of next week, thousands of Comcast subscribers could be turned over.

Read More......

Even the public toilets in London have video cameras

Besides being like a police state, how do they even manage to monitor so many cameras? They've surely crossed the point of being able to properly monitor all of the cameras but that was no doubt long ago. Do they even care about public privacy at all? Click through to see the photos of the cameras. Creepy. (H/T to reader Bruce.)

You can imagine my surprise after I paid my 50pence to use the public bathroom, walked in and found myself staring at not just one but three ceiling mounted video surveillance cameras. I had to get real close to their enclosures to convince myself that I wasn't seeing things. Not only was it really there, but it was a Pan-Tilt-Zoom model with a microphone to top it off. Must get some great noises coming from there. It has also been reported that London officials are now installing cameras with speakers to allow them to talk as well as see and listen. Perhaps its just me, but I had absolutely no idea that this was legal anywhere, let alone in downtown London, UK. Sure I knew that London has more cameras per square mile than any other country on the planet, but in bathrooms?! How are they getting away with that one? It is appalling!

According to the London Assembly of Liberal Democrats, London has been outfitted with over 500,000 surveillance cameras. Other put the number much higher at 1.4million cameras but nobody is telling what the real number is. Another few 10,000 cameras have been installed in taxis and police cars as well.

Read More......

Airport worker warned after photographing body-scan

Only warned? Wasn't this not even supposed to be possible? Nice job protecting personal privacy and a simple warning is a joke.

The police have issued a warning for harassment against an airport worker after he allegedly took a photo of a female colleague as she went through a full-body scanner at Heathrow airport.

The incident, which occurred at terminal 5 on 10 March, is believed to be the first time an airport worker has been formally disciplined for misusing the scanners.

A Scotland Yard spokesman said: "Police received an allegation regarding an incident that happened at Heathrow Terminal 5 on March 10. A first-instance harassment warning has been issued to a 25-year-old male."

The BAA employee took a photo of his co-worker, Jo Margetson, when she inadvertently went through a scanner.

"I can't bear to think about the body scanner thing," she told the Sun. "I'm totally traumatised. I've spoken to the police about it. I'm in too much of a state to go to work."

NOTE FROM JOHN: How much you want to bet he used his cell phone to snap the photo? I warned this would happen when all the govt officials warned that it would impossible to make a recording of the images. Uh, cell phones, people. Chris is right, the guy should be fired. Otherwise, they just sent the message that everyone is permitted to photograph one naked passenger with impunity. Read More......

Identity fraud increased last year

There are few easy answers but the numbers are heading in the wrong direction and that needs to change. CNBC:

Javelin's annual survey shows that the number of identity fraud victims rose 12 percent to 11.1 million adults last year, and the value of the fraud has increased by 12.5 percent to $54 billion. That's the highest level since the survey was started in 2003.

"This is not a crime of individuals or petty thieves," said Michael Stanfield, CEO of Intersections, one of the survey's sponsors.

According to Stanfield, there is a increase in the number of crime rings — many often working out of Eastern European countries — who are using very organized methods of stealing personal information and using it to conduct identity fraud.

Read More......

Heathrow staff printing out and sharing naked body image scans of airline passengers

Well that didn't take long. Chris mentioned this the other day, but I just saw another article on it, and it's really pretty horrifying. (And for background, I posted photos a while back of just what these body scans show. And Chris posted a video showing how ineffective these scanners really are.)

Claims on behalf of authorities that naked body scanner images are immediately destroyed after passengers pass through new x-ray backscatter devices have been proven fraudulent after it was revealed that naked images of Indian film star Shahrukh Khan were printed out and circulated by airport staff at Heathrow in London.

UK Transport Secretary Lord Adonis said last week that the images produced by the scanners were deleted “immediately” and airport staff carrying out the procedure are fully trained and supervised.

Lord Adonis?

“I was in London recently going through the airport and these new machines have come up, the body scans. You’ve got to see them. It makes you embarrassed – if you’re not well endowed,” said Khan, referring to how the scans produce clear images of a person’s genitals.

“You walk into the machine and everything – the whole outline of your body – comes out,” he said.

“I was a little scared. Something happens [inside the scans], and I came out. Then I saw these girls – they had these printouts. I looked at them. I thought they were some forms you had to fill. I said ‘give them to me’ – and you could see everything inside. So I autographed them for them,” stated Khan.

The story was carried by Yahoo News under the headline “Shah Rukh signs off sexy body-scan printouts at Heathrow”.
Khan’s reference to “girls” with printouts of his naked body scan can only refer to female airport security staff responsible for processing the images produced by the scanners, “professionals” who are supposed to instantly delete the images, according to Lord Adonis.

Are the staff who check the body image scanners permitted to have cell phones? Because if they do, they're still going to take pictures. Not to mention, I thought we were told that not only would these body image scanners not being able to retain a picture, but we were also told that the staff would be in a back room somewhere, totally oblivious to who the individual passengers really were. Then how did they know it was famous Bollywood guy? Read More......

So much for privacy and body scans

That didn't take long. Will everyone else be as amused?

Bollywood superstar Shah Rukh Khan isn't intimidated by the full body-scan machines that have been recently installed at London's airports - in fact, he's been signing off printouts of his X-rays.

Khan, appearing on 'Friday Night With Jonathan Ross' - one of British television's most popular weekend shows - revealed he's been turning the controversial security machines into a public relations opportunity at London's Heathrow airport.

Read More......

Airline passengers in UK not allowed to refuse body scan

The bad guys must be thrilled with how much they've disrupted the western so-called democracies. It's bad enough that the body scanners may not even be effective, but to have no choice about accepting them is salt in the wound. What ever happened to respect for privacy in the West? Police state much?

Airline passengers will have no right to refuse to go through a full-body search scanner when the devices are introduced at Heathrow airport next week, ministers have confirmed.

The option of having a full-body pat-down search instead, offered to passengers at US airports, will not be available despite warnings from the government's Equality and Human Rights Commission that the scanners, which reveal naked bodies, breach privacy rules under the Human Rights Act.

The transport minister Paul Clark told MPs a random selection of passengers would go through the new scanners at UK airports. The machines' introduction would be followed later this year by extra "trace" scanners, which can detect liquid explosives. A draft code of practice covering privacy and health issues is being discussed in Whitehall.

Read More......