Archive for the ‘Privacy’ Category
Tuesday, December 15th, 2009
Privacy No Comments
Monday, February 2nd, 2009
Privacy No Comments
Monday, December 8th, 2008
Privacy No Comments
Congress has asked for privacy information from Google, microsoft, AOL and Yahoo. Congress wants to know what they are collecting and for how long. Yay congress! Google has already responded saying and showing that they (somewhat shockingly) respect their user’s privacy… at least after 18 months when they anonymize the IP addresses in their logs. Since then, and based on pressure from the EU, Google has decided to half the time that IP addresses are held to 9 months, which is also great. What I don’t understand is why they can’t anonymize them right away…?
In other privacy news:
Monday, September 22nd, 2008
Privacy No Comments
Many times, I’ve had conversations with people (mostly family) about CCTV cameras. Almost everyone who reads the news assumes that crime is out of control and that our cities are quickly approaching anarchy. However, as anyone who’s taken CRIM101 in university knows: crime rates have been dropping for the past 25 years… and indeed are at all-time lows. Some would argue that CCTV cameras have played a part in this trend. To those people I’d show one example: London. London has over 250,000 CCTV cameras throughout the city… even Orwell would be impressed… however London’s crime rate is still very high in comparison to many equally big cities: “Only three percent of crimes have been solved using CCTV footage, and offenders aren’t afraid of being caught on video”. CCTV is an invasion of our privacy and is only going to get worse as facial recognition software improves. Governments should ban these cameras if we have any hope of maintaining even a semblance of privacy.
Wednesday, July 16th, 2008
Privacy 1 Comment
- Michael Geist (law prof from University of Ottawa) has created a site called ioptout which supposedly allows you opt out of e-mail and phone spam. Does it work? I’m not sure yet. Certainly it will only apply to advertisers from Canada… but certainly a good idea and worth signing up for!
- Why do we have to sign-up for a non-government created list? Because Bell got the contract for the Canadian Do-Not-Call list and hasn’t done anything useful to implement it yet. Isn’t it just a database? I could set it up for them in about 10 minutes!
- Speaking of spam, the canadian Red Dot Campaign aims to reduce your junk snail mail. Get a sticker, put it on your mailbox and voila you shouldn’t get any more anonymous junk mail. Saves a few trees too!
- Bubble and Laser printers all print secret watermarks onto the paper they print which allows print outs to be traced back to their owners (well in theory, in practice this is probably close to impossible). Recent finds have concluded that these secret watermarks probably break EU privacy laws (and really they should break everyone’s privacy laws!).
- A new program called BTGuard routes your P2P traffic through Canada to protect your privacy. This service probably slows down your BT traffic and Canada’s laws are only slightly better than US laws but pretty interesting none-the-less.
- I’ve often been a bit freaked out typing in my password in an internet cafe while traveling. Its sooo easy to have a completely hidden keyboard scanner recording all input and who knows what the security of that machine is (usually not very good I’d guess). Here is a nice little article on 5 tips for internet security while traveling. I’ve got another tip, change your password when you get back to your home computer… couldn’t hurt.
Tuesday, April 22nd, 2008
Privacy No Comments
Monday, February 11th, 2008
Privacy 1 Comment
- Shinanigoat passed along this story of motorists being forced to give blood at roadside stops all over the US. Its not a Police State… really!
- Speaking of the US Police State, AT&T responds to Congress’ request for more information about wiretapping: “Unfortunately, under current circumstances, we are unable to respond with specificity to your inquiries,” wrote AT&T in a statement to the House Committee. “That is because, on many issues that appear to be of central concern to you, responsive information, if any, is within the control of the executive branch… Moreover, the United States, through sworn declaration from the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), has formally invoked the state secrets privilege to prevent AT&T from either confirming or denying facts about alleged intelligence operations and activities that are central to your inquiries.”
- The US’s all-seeing satellites could be focused on the US itself. Love this DHS quote “”the NAO will rely on existing, longstanding practice and procedures established by the Intelligence Community to ensure the appropriate protection of privacy and civil liberties”. Ironic that there is huge-and-cry now that the satellites that are spying on the rest of the world are now potentially being used to spy on the US itself.
- The Democrats version of the spying bill is really no better than the Republicans existing practices. How can this possibly be good for our rights? This kind of thing makes me scared of what a Democratically lead governemnet will do in the US.
- Speaking of wiretapping, it has been revealed that Comcast charges to the US Government $1000 per wiretap. How much is your feeling of safety worth?
- TorrentFreak has a nice little review of your choices for Anonymous internet traffic. The conclusion is that you don’t have a lot of choice.
- Hushmail (the free, supposedly completely private e-mail provider, that I’ve used on numerous occassions) has been secretly passing PGP Keys to the US Government. So much for your privacy.
Wednesday, November 21st, 2007
Privacy No Comments
A US Federal Judge has found two sections of the FISA act of the US Patriot Act are unconstitutional under the 4th amendment (no unlawful search or seisure):
“Now, for the first time in our Nation’s history, the government can conduct surveillance to gather evidence for use in a criminal case without a traditional warrant, as long as it presents a non-reviewable assertion that it also has a significant interest in the targeted person for foreign intelligence purposes,” wrote Judge Aiken in her opinion.
I don’t know enough about the the US law system to know what this means but I assume it means that unless there is an appeal that these sections can no longer be used by law officials. This is also the first (of hopefully many) chinks in the armour of Bush’s domestic wiretapping program.
Tuesday, October 2nd, 2007
Privacy No Comments