The world seems to be closing in on everyone’s privacy. Different privacy issues emerge here and there, and people are likely to lose this one important aspect of their lives. It is not only online privacy that has cried out for the attention of privacy advocates. This time, shopping cards have been included on the list of items that pose privacy risks.

It has been said that supermarkets are collecting a wealth of data via electronic shopper cards, or e-cards. This collected information could then be linked with some other biometric technology, and with additional technology, a person’s in-depth personal database could be formed. To make matters worse, this may happen without the permission or knowledge of the person concerned.

How did shopping cards get onto the list of items that pose privacy risks? Researches were conducted to get a picture of how stores lure people into using them. Card experts say that there is nothing special about e-cards even though they are advertised as giving savings benefits to shoppers. There are no real savings since the prices of the items that are included in the “deals” are actually inflated.

New internet technology is provided to consumers almost every day, trying to improve the online experiences of users. Webcams and microphones have found their usefulness in making online communication complete with audio and video. In turn, users try working with what is being introduced to them, either for free or for a charge. Through social networking, people get to share their thoughts, even their likes and dislikes.

Online criminals never snooze. They are constantly trying to find ways of how to use these new tools for their gain. Today, even legitimate programs and features are attacked by cyber criminals, by appearing to be similar helpful tools. One of these attacks is called “clickjacking”, or known in technical terms as user interface (UI) redressing. It is a kind of ploy that lures users into initiating some unwelcome actions without becoming suspicious.

Financial transactions have been made easier and readily available with internet technology. Businessmen have discovered how to make use of the internet in their work. They are no longer limited to being in their offices to talk with clients. On top of this, they can complete their financial transactions even during travels or while on vacations. They do not have to make repeated visits to the bank or have face-to-face meetings with their associates.

Businesses used to complete most of these transactions using desktop computers. With laptops and notebooks, transactions were made even more handy and simpler. It is very easy for them to keep track of their financial records regardless of their location. Today, businessmen are using smart phones because of their portability and ease of use. They discovered that these gadgets can be used for purposes other than social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter.

It was discovered in a survey that a good number of people are using their smart phones to transmit personal and financial information. They do so in order to provide information for online banking, shopping or social networking. There are about 17% of smart phone owners who use their device for financial transactions. This statistic has also attracted the attention of online criminals. They use this knowledge to take advantage of people and make money at the risk of others.

Here is yet another example of a run of the mill case of identity theft. The identity theft was committed by a “desperate” woman from New Jersey, just to get even with her ex-boyfriend. This is a case of impersonation that has practically succeeded in ruining one person’s image online. The woman managed to create a bogus Facebook page using her ex-boyfriend’s name, photo and some personal information. From there, she posted inflammatory comments, and a judge ruled that she can be prosecuted for identity theft. Now this is another reason to think further about the case’s wider implications for cyber speech.

The woman pretended to be her ex-boyfriend, who was a police narcotics detective. The posts appeared to be made by him, but all of them were “self-destructive”. One of the comments mentioned that he was “high all the time”. Others were about his admission to activities like frequenting prostitutes and escort services, and that he had herpes.

Such cases of impersonation are always done to obtain some kind of benefit for one’s own self or to injure or defraud another. It can be recalled that the issues of online impersonation and cyber bullying came to light in 2006. It was after the suicide of a 13-year-old girl who was targeted online by a fictitious 13-year old boy. After investigation, it came out that the “boy” was actually the mother of another teenage girl.

As the Christmas season draws near, people start doing some early holiday shopping. For retailers, this part of the year is the most lucrative. This also goes the same with identity thieves, who expect to make a maximum profit. It is good to follow some tips to stay away from them and see to it that they do not enjoy the holidays at your expense.

Beware of skimming when paying at the cash register. Be alert when the store clerk takes your credit card and swipes it through a device. You might not suspect anything because you just believe that this device is the credit card reader, however, there is a machine that copies the information from the card’s magnetic strip, giving your information to the thief. Clearly, purchases can then be charged to your card.

As much as possible, use credit cards instead of debit cards because the credit cards have more protection associated with them. When you have multiple credit cards, choose only one to use for all your holiday purchases. It will be easier for you to track your transactions and to prevent any suspicious activity. There is nothing better than using cash for your purchases because it does not carry any of your personal information.

Where can young people seek protection while online? Who shall take the responsibility of giving this needed protection to them? These are some questions that parents and government are still trying to answer. There have been many debates about online safety for children, but the fact remains that children need help. Today’s internet technology provides unlimited, but dangerous access to children. They can have online access at home, on the street, or in the schools. This easy access makes children vulnerable to possible harm because of their enthusiasm to interact with the technology.

During a recent free discussion participated in by concerned groups, various observations regarding online safety were shared. Research results showed that 60% of 12- to 15-year-old children use the internet without adult supervision. The danger of allowing these children to explore on their own is their exposure to pornography. Their inquisitiveness could lead them to sites that show indecent images. They would finally end up on pornographic sites and could then become addicted.

These children are very young and are most vulnerable, so that is why they need to be protected. However, they also need the internet to gain access to the vast wealth of knowledge that it offers. To address this issue, children’s interaction with the online world should be regulated. Parents are believed to be the most suitable agents of regulation. Even the best online safety technology can never replace the parents’ influence over their children.

Social networking sites never stop offering new features and services. Each of them hopes to give better online experiences to their users. Several times, some of these sites have been plagued with privacy issues that, in general, have always been resolved. The more widely known sites like Facebook, Twitter and Google+1 were created to accommodate users of all ages. There are no strict restrictions as to who can become friends with whom, in terms of age.

There is a social networking site that is now gaining widespread popularity among teens. It is called MyYearbook, and it was created specifically for teens ages 13 and up, who want to meet new friends online. It was initially created by siblings David and Catherine Cook in 2005, when they were high school students. The two asked the help of their older brother, Geoff to invest in their project. This site was activated at Montgomery High School, where they attended.

But now, it seems that the site is no longer just for teens who want to connect with friends. A parent has alleged that his 12-year old daughter, who uses the site, is in danger. He said that his daughter told him that she was receiving some messages from men that contained lewd language. It was then that he got the suspicion that the site is being used by older men who were looking for sex. According to him, just as younger children could fake their age, older men can do the same so that they can register to the site.

Health care in the U.S. is now facing some privacy issues as health records of patients need to be disclosed. This is made even more complicated by claims that the U.S. Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary has a double standard when it comes to defending patients’ privacy rights. Although the present administration claims that it never takes health privacy for granted, chances are that this privacy will be compromised.

This started when a state representative pointed out that the present HHS Secretary’s stand on patient privacy rights is contrary to her previous actions while she was still working for Planned Parenthood in Kansas. She is said to have used privacy as an excuse in order to defend the abortion activity there. She managed to forbid the disclosure of anonymous abortion information to the state.

The U.S. Supreme Court might look into how strip searches in jails are being done due to privacy issues. It seems that suspects who are arrested on minor charges are forced to undress and shower while jail guards stand by. It is said that the jail policy on strip searches is aimed at addressing the problem of weapons or drugs being hidden by inmates. What makes the process questionable is that everyone is subjected to such searches, even those arrested on minor charges. As it is, the law does not exempt anyone from a strip search before entering the jail’s general population.

There is an uncertainty of which should take higher priority – privacy rights of people in jail, or the need for authorities to maintain safety. An attorney took the position that the court should draw a line that defines privacy intrusion. This definition is especially needed when there is no reason to believe that the suspect is hiding anything.

A car dealer arrested due to failure to pay fines asked the help of an attorney. He said that he was forced by the jail guards to take off his clothes two times. He was told to open his mouth and lift his genitals in their presence. He added that he was made to bend over and cough so the guards could see if he was hiding anything inside his body.

There is a plan to update the U.S. online privacy rule for children to include teenagers, aged 13 to 17. This proposition ignited debates during hearings in Congress as members did not have a common stand on whether or not to include teenagers. At present, the law gives the parents of children under the age of 13 the right to decide what information about their children can be collected by websites and other providers. If this rule would be revised, the parents of teenagers would also be able to decide what information can be collected from this age group.

Those who support the revisions say that there is really a need to approve them. According to supporters, teenagers are not mature enough to judge, or even be aware of the dark side of the internet. They observe that children have grown more and more technologically savvy, which enables them to easily cope with the fast changing technology. However, their ability to self-regulate cannot keep in pace with these changes. This can result in privacy problems, thus the need to extend the age bracket for online children privacy laws.

Websites and other providers must obtain verifiable consent from parents before they can collect information from children. This means that consent must really be given by parents. In the new consent procedures, more sophisticated verification methods would be put into place. Two of these would be video-conferencing and electronic scans of consent forms signed by parents. Without one of these, no website can collect, use, or disclose the personal information of children.