One of the problems that plague the internet today is identity theft. Users are concerned about how they can guard themselves from this risk. Although some technically skillful ones could by themselves find means to do so, many would still depend on experts for information. Simple internet users are always at risk of losing their identity. This results to various problems that could be avoided only if they knew how to defend themselves.

One expert along this field is Darrell West, vice president and director of both Governance Studies and the Center for Technology Innovation in Washington. He has given recommendation to people about how they can guard themselves in the digital world. He has also written materials on subjects about political, policy and legal challenges raised by digital technology.

He has listed down some of the logical ways to preserve online security. The user should practice “choosing non-obvious passwords” and using different passwords for different accounts. One should avoid using his or her partner’s name, date of birth, hometown, and other obvious personal data. Obviously, these data are now uploaded to social networking or other public sites. Data miners could plainly do some tricks and they could take one’s identity.

Would you rather forget privacy and share photos without restrictions not just with friends but even with strangers? Bill Nguyen’s newly developed photo-sharing network that is aptly called Color can do just like that. Though relatively new, this new application promises to capture a fairly good share of the market. To recall, Nguyen sold his music-streaming company Lala to Apple in 2009 for around $80 million. This new application that he created could be another sure hit.

Color has been designed for iPhone and Android devices. It lets you share your pictures with anyone within 150 feet. Color as a photo-sharing application is very much similar to other mobile apps like Instagram or PicPiz. The great advantage is its proximity-based sharing functionality. This is the reason why users find this friendlier.

Any two users using the application near each other have so much to enjoy. Color notes it automatically and records these events. The people you hang out with most appears higher up on your contact list. The person’s ranking goes down as the frequency of being together decreases. Color does not give significance to whether you know these persons you get close to most often. As long as they are within the 150-meter radius, Color will count them as friends.

Have you ever tried to read the “Privacy Policy” of some of the most popular tech companies or networking sites like Facebook? Granting that you were able to read the small fonts and the thousands of words, were you able to clearly understand? This is the truth: Privacy policies are too difficult to understand. Facebook admitted this truth and proposed for a different way of disclosing its privacy policy to its consumers. This is aimed at making its privacy policy easier to understand.

For quite a number of years, Facebook and Google have been competing to present “better” versions of privacy policies. Up to this time, the battle is still to be won. Specifically, these two companies want to make privacy policies more user-friendly. This means “easy to understand, more visual and interactive, and more relevant to users’ concerns”.

So what does Facebook mean by “presenting something different”? Facebook has presented the results for user comments. It has replaced the term “Privacy Policy” with “Data Use Policy”. This change might have been the result of the complaints by privacy advocates. They said that the term “Privacy Policy” is “misleading because these generally describe how and when data is shared”.

There is a series of committee hearings about the state of online consumer privacy; the first one was conducted last March 16, 2011. This was held by the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. The main topic of the hearing focused on online commercial practices. These are practices that involve collecting, maintaining, using and disseminating large amounts of consumer information. These may also involve those that are very sensitive and private in nature.

There were several persons who gave their testimonies; the first one was FTC Chairman Liebowitz. At first he described recent efforts by the FTC to protect consumer privacy. This is done through law enforcement, education, and policy initiatives. After which he mentioned some highlights from the Staff Report on consumer privacy. Finally he discussed issues related to the “Do Not Track” proposal. He enumerated five important principles that any “Do Not Track” proposal should include.

First is the universal implementation of a Do Not Track system. This would save the consumers from repeatedly opting out of tracking on different sites. Second, the choice mechanism should be user-friendly. This means that any user should easily find or have access to it and should be easy to use. Third, the system should be persistent and should not be easily deleted by ordinary technical means. It should resist deletion when a user clears his or her cookies or updates the browser. Fourth, it should be capable of allowing users to opt out of advertising and tracking at the same time. Fifth, it should be “perfect”, meaning with no loopholes, be enforceable and effective.

One supervisor at the University of Iowa used a baby monitor to find out if secretaries are talking too much. Claiming that their privacy was violated, the secretaries have decided to file a complaint against Supervisor Palm Snider. Invoking the provisions of the medical privacy law, they have asked the assistance of their union in taking the right steps. Snider on the other hand said that she had a valid reason for doing so.

Snider alleged that one worker complained to her about excessive chatter. In order to find out if the allegation was true, she then thought of using the baby monitor. Without the secretaries’ knowledge, she hid the device in their work area. On Monday morning of the following week, a worker accidentally found the gadget.

Top University of Iowa officials wasted no time to meet with employees when news spread all over the university. They admitted that the supervisor was wrong when she attempted to use a hidden baby monitor to determine whether secretaries were talking too much. They also declared that there was no violation of privacy laws because the device did not pick up any conversation.

Yasir Afifi was disappointed when he found out that government has been following him for quite a long time. Believing that he is law abiding, he filed charges against some FBI agents. Afifi discovered a GPS device on his car when he brought it to a mechanic. The 20-year old American-born student of Egyptian descent was surprised why he was put under surveillance.

The mechanic was fixing the car when he discovered the GPS device. With the aid of magnets, it was securely positioned between the right rear wheel and exhaust. Both of them could not name what it was so they posted its picture online. But things turned out very differently. While he was driving two days later, agents who were wearing bullet-proof vests pulled him over. They insisted that he return the piece of mechanism.

He was backed by the Council on American-Islamic Relations in filing the case. He stated that there was infringement on his civil rights because the FBI agents did it without warrant. His lawyers deduced that his Middle East roots and repeated travels there might have caused such action. He has two brothers in Egypt who are under his support. His father was a famous Islamic-American community head who died last year.

An FBI representative decided to keep the details of the court case and how the agency kept track of Afifi. According to him, the FBI works under fixed Department of Justice and FBI rule. It should execute the most suitable investigative steps or techniques as provided by law. It goes without saying that rules have been set to guard civil and constitutional rights.

Afifi is pursuing a career in business marketing at Mission College while working as computer salesman at the same time. He declared at a news conference that agents did not give clear answers as to the grounds why he is being closely observed. He did not contradict allegations that he makes frequent phone calls overseas. This could be the cause for such FBI action, but he insisted that he has been law abiding since then.

Privacy violation issues revolve around how the surveillance was conducted. Washington appeals court resolved that the gathering of GPS data from individuals is deemed a “search” so that it requires a warrant. The Obama administration in justification to FBI’s action said the court’s judgment was “vague and unworkable”. Further it insisted that government could no longer use GPS as an important tool in surveillance if the court would not overturn its decision.

In Washington, Federal treasury officials found an odd connection between missing children cases and tax returns. They examined more than 1,700 of these cases and this is what they found out. More than 1/3 of them had been declared on tax returns by relatives that are suspects for their abduction. Many domestic cases of child abduction are still left unsolved and the children never found.

Working together, Sen. Amy Klobuchar and missing children’s advocate Patty Wetterling knocked at law enforcement agencies. They suggested that tax returns of suspected abductors contain data that might lead to the suspects. According to them, law enforcement agencies should be authorized to gain access at the tax return data of these “suspects”. They believe that these would help in locating missing children across the U.S.

Klobuchar argued that the state should not be very strict with keeping private those tax return records. Because they contain data that could potentially lead to the solution of these cases they should be made available. Klobuchar is a former Hennepin County attorney who describes overprotecting tax information data as making “no sense”. If the state would protect privacy, then it should also exhaust all possible means in trying to find out where the kids are.

Supporters of civil liberties on the other hand see that divulging tax information to law enforcers would create more problems. Privacy laws around taxes are one of the strongest in the U.S. Allowing tax information to become “public” would also invite other compelling interests. Examples could be those of health care information and other government services.

Wetterling has lost a son named Jacob. He was abducted neat their St. Joseph home in 1989 at age 11. He is still missing. The missing child advocate said that they don’t “care about jurisdictional boundaries”. All they care about as parents is “getting their child back”. Wetterling said this in a testimony during the congressional panel hearing in support to Klobuchar’s bill.

The senator noted that some situations such as overdue student loans would allow the IRS to disclose tax information data. This is contained as a list of exceptions in the tax code with regard to privacy. She further added that “there’s no reason why missing children shouldn’t be added to the list”. From the foregoing, it is clear that there is a need to strike a balance between protecting privacy rights and finding missing children.

Pedestrians and people at rail and bus stations and special events venues do not know that they are being scanned. Yes, at times without their knowledge, they are subjected to x-rays that may be harmful to health. This is another issue of privacy invasion yet it was not revealed that it does exist.

The Electronics Privacy Information Center (EPIC) has obtained documents that suggest a signing of contract to this effect. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has tapped the services of providers to develop new mobile and static scanning systems. The contract signed was worth millions of dollars and was intended specifically for detection of explosives.

Through a request under the Freedom of Information Act filed last year, EPIC was able to obtain the documents from the DHS. The documents show that Siemens Corporate Research and Northeastern University was tasked on a special assignment. It is to design and develop an Intelligent Pedestrian Surveillance platform. Specifically, it would be one that could detect improvised explosive devices hidden in backpacks and under clothing.

This system uses X-rays, capable of quickly scanning through vehicles and buildings for concealed explosives and contraband. Several cameras are mounted on a so-called Z Backscatter Van that secretly scans moving pedestrians for possible threats. Basically, a Z Backscatter Van is a new type of mobile threat detection system.

The other contract covered a scanning system that would be used at entrances to special events or other points of interest. Rapiscan Systems was tasked to develop this walk-through X-ray screening system. This will be installed along corridors where people are scanned without their knowledge. This is capable of detecting hidden metallic and high-density plastic objects on people as far as 10 meters away.

EPIC said that the documents it contain parts that describe of a plans by DHS to use the scanners secretly. A critic said that DHS seems to believe that “it has that wide authority to implement its national security goals”. Of course that could be accepted, but the question of breach of privacy rights should also be given due consideration.