Around the globe, the US has men and women serving in the army. These brave soldiers are defending our country under what can be very harsh conditions. While it can be argued that they chose to serve in the military freely, we still owe them our thanks. It’s up to us to make certain they have everything they need to be safe when deployed. Safety however, is not just making sure they have the military equipment, it also demands that we provide a way to let off steam. The USO does a great job at this with shows right at the front line. Remember, a soldier’s best weapon is his or her mind. If they are well cared for, they will be better prepared. Years ago, all the military had was R & R, letters from home and the USO. Now soldiers on the front line also have access to other entertainment via the Internet.

So what would a soldier want to access on the Internet. Believe it or not, one of the things they do is watch TV online. They can catch their favorite programs or watch sports. Most of the TV networks put their some of their newest episodes online. For others, they can access media sites that aggregate content. Another source for media is the online newspapers like the New York Times. Or maybe they want to read their home town paper online. Today most, if not all papers, have an online version. So between TV, sports, and newspapers, they can catch up on the latest US media and news.

Tweet This Post

A recent PC World article highlights the problem of Privacy, or the lack of it, online.  According the article, the Federal Trade Commission will start looking at enforcing rules for websites.

The issue here is that most people do not even know what information they are giving up when they go to a website.  Tracking cookies, browser information and location are only part of the problem.  Users also enter in information into online forms without knowing where that information is going and how it might be used.  Typically reading a site’s privacy policy is a good first start.  Unfortunately many of these are vague and / or can be updated without notice.

A good rule is to not enter private information online unless you absolutely have to.  Even “good” companies might do bad things.  The article references how Sears was using information online.  They weren’t being evil or malicious, they just did not understand the big privacy picture.

To read the full article, please visit PC World.  However when you read the article, keep in mind this applies to the United States only.   Other countries around the world also have to implement these types of guidelines.  So if you visit a website hosted somewhere outside of the United States, then they have to abide by their country’s rules, not ours.

As we always warn people, do not take your privacy for granted.  It is up to you to protect it.  Privacy may be a right, but it’s not always one that is protected.

Tweet This Post

Internet companies have been in lawmakers sights lately over the treatment of information they gather from their surfers, and how well protected it really is. Essentially, these behavioral advertisers track where you have been and bring you related advertisement. That wouldn’t fly in real life, and people are tired of it happening online.

Lawmakers in the House are taking action. They are writing laws and other new documents that propose to limit the amount of unauthorized snooping that goes on when Internet companies look at your browsing histories. They also wish to educate the public on how they could better protect themselves while online.

While the bill is being debated in congress, there is not enough energy to go all around, with health care and energy conservation taking up most of the floor time. The issue isn’t pigeonholed though, and it will up for consideration next year.

Google, Yahoo, and other search engines and sites to be affected by this bill are a bit torn on where they stand: they want people to have their privacy, but at the same time, they make money through these advertisers.

Tweet This Post

Long gone are the days when two warring factions would line up to face each, announce a start, and then enter the hectic fray. Nowadays, the “old war” of guns, blood, and violence is taking a backseat to a new kind of war: a virtual one.

This new modern warfare occurs on the Internet, and the winner isn’t the one with the least dead or the last standing; he is the one with the enemy Intel stored away nice and safe. In order to protect itself, the U.S. will need a vast and in-depth monitoring system, and we might find an extension of the Patriot Act in the works.

Last month, President Obama unveiled this huge new Internet security overhaul. He insists that all civil liberties will be upheld during any surveillance the system will be doing. His senior officials however, think that the complete upholding of all privacy laws will be difficult to do, when scanning every virtual nook and cranny to scout out terrorist activity.

The National Security Agency (NSA) is the branch that is going to spearhead the virtual protection of the U.S. This agency has been in a bit of controversy in the past for supposed privacy invasion. The nation’s security is not a matter to be taken lightly though, and they can justify every action they make. Some have just felt that they have been a bit more invasive than they need to be.

Tweet This Post

Reported by the Wall Steet Journal:

The Department of Homeland Security will begin the first phase of a satellite surveillance program. Surprisingly, the department has not guaranteed or ensured that the program will not break any privacy laws. The spy program, known as the National Applications Office, is meant to provide government officials (on multiple levels) with access to satellite imagery. This pertains to security needs, such as identifying weaknesses at borders and ports, and was also created with the intentions of assisting emergency response.

Tweet This Post

Reuters and Yahoo! News report that Google has agreed to cut the amount of time it stores users’ web surfing habits from 18 month to only nine months. This is quite a significant drop, especially when taking into account that in March 2007 Google had no policy and kept the information for an indefinite period of time. Google’s new policies, “are part of a broader trend that is increasing across the industry for companies to compete in good privacy practices,” according to Google’s global privacy counsel Peter Fleischer.

Along with the new nine month data retention policy, Google plans to anonymize the data much more quickly. Could this be in response to the Viacom/YouTube issue? This is is a great precautionary measure to protect our Internet privacy from companies like Viacom that want to sue Google so they can obtain users’ records. After nine months the data and the IP address are disassociated and the data can no longer be tracked back to a specific user.

The move to an 18-month data retention policy came about due to the European Union putting pressure on Google to increase their privacy measures. The new nine-month policy was adapted to further refine Google’s privacy protection and keep users much safer while surfing the Internet. The new nine month policy makes Google the alpha male, as far as privacy is concerned. Microsoft still keeps data for 18 months and Yahoo! currently retains data for 13 months.

While this is good news for anyone who surfs the Internet, it is important to remember that your data is being tracked and recorded. Data retention policies are extremely helpful, but ultimately privacy must begin with you. Using an anonymous proxy server will help you be invisible and maintain anonymity while surfing and stay one step ahead of even the most favorable data retention policies.

Tweet This Post

Betty Ostergren, a privacy advocate that posts Social Security numbers she found on the Internet, has been given the thumbs up by a federal judge in Virginia. Computerworld reports that the state government can not stop her from posting the Social Security numbers on her website. At first glance, this privacy issue should enrage a lot of people. Knowing she has your personal information and is posting it all over the Internet would upset a lot of people; but how did she find this information in the first place? She got the information from the Internet and public records. The privacy advocate did this as a lesson, and to start a campaign to show people just how easy it is to find sensitive information about them.

She won the case and it was ruled that she should not have to remove the Social Security numbers from her site since she legally obtained them from public records. While the memorandum does not set a precedent, it is the first step in truly realizing how much we take our Internet privacy for granted. Ostergren’s website, The Virginia Watchdog, presents privacy issues that arise from the government posting personal information on websites. Over the past few years she has repeatedly shown that Social Security numbers have been posted and little has been done to protect personal information.

I can agree with what she is doing. She did not seek out the information from private sources or use illegal methods, she used the Internet and the public sector. Everything she found was attained from government documents that did not conceal the ultra-sensitive information. With the already astonishing number of identity thefts every year, I don’t see how the government posting such private information can help. How about a permanent marker and two seconds to hide the information? Problem solved… Ms. Ostergren also posts the information of high-profile officials, such as former Gov. Jeb Bush, former U.S. Secretary Colin Powell, and some local Virginia officials. I guess it really strikes a nerve and makes them care when their information is up there, and not just the information of the huddled masses.

Tweet This Post

Today we reexamine and update a previous blog posting concerned with you privacy while travelling. A recent article presented by istockanalyst.com discusses how laptop searches cross the line between privacy and security.

Jawad Khaki was returning home from a business trip when he was stopped by customs. Khaki, a corporate executive, told customs everything he had done and everywhere he went. He was then asked to turn on his cellphone, which customs took from him and searched. Customs checked his to-do list and his calender.

This is just one story of the line between privacy and security that is being crossed by customs agents. Does the search and seizure of laptops, cellphones, and PDAs cross the line?

The main question being presented, in both this article and my previous blog post, “What if a traveler’s laptop includes corporate secrets, a lawyer’s confidential documents, a journalist’s notes from a protected source, or personal financial and medical information?” Advocacy groups are concerned with the misuse of information and say they have not gotten any clear answers when posing these questions to the Department of Homeland Security. Two groups have actually filed a lawsuit so they can get that information from Homeland Security.

I understand that sometimes it is necessary to conduct these searches to protect our national security…I am not referring to the time where it does compromise national security, but instead the times where a businessman is travelling and is extensively searched above and beyond what is reasonable. Customs and Border Patrol spokeswoman said that, “The department doesn’t keep seized electronics unless it suspects wrongdoing, and any U.S. citizen’s information that’s copied is kept only if it’s relevant for criminal or national-security investigations.” I do appreciate that, but it needs to be made into official policy.

CBP is using the same reasoning behind checking luggage to check laptops. No reason or probable cause is needed to be searched by customs. There needs to be a distinction between the two. Laptops carry sensitive and personal information, especially if it being used for business travel. The data found on there is an “extension of a person’s professional and personal identity.” The main difference between the search of luggage and the search of a computer, which is also pointed out in the article, is that the luggage can be returned easily…but do you know what has been downloaded and copied off your laptop?

Tough situation…

Tweet This Post

Guardian UK recently published an article updating the information about the E.U./U.S. privacy deal set to make way sometime next year. This deal is intended to help both sides in the war on terrorism. The two agreed in “principle” but still have numerous unresolved issues.

This deal would be a breakthrough, according to the article, for the U.S. since it faces very strict E.U. privacy laws when trying to find information on a suspected terrorist or criminal. Credit card transactions, travel history, and Internet habits are all protected by the E.U. (Look back at this previous post about U.S. and E.U. privacy laws).

While both sides want to get the ball rolling and make this happen, they do recognize that many issues still need to be resolved. Further they are not in a hurry to make something happen at the expense of citizens’ privacy rights. This is especially true with the recent criticisms that have come about from other deals made between the two, especially one where the E.U. gave the U.S. access to private data about passengers traveling to the U.S. A key issue is the misuse of information, which, if happens, will allow E.U. citizens to sue the U.S. under the U.S. privacy act.

Some principles have been agreed on, while others are still being figured out. One of the major principles is that, “information revealing a person’s racial or ethnic origins, political, religious or philosophical views and health or sexual behavior, may not be processed unless domestic legislation provides appropriate safeguards…people should be told about use of their data, which must be supervised by an independent authority.”

Ultimately, I like this idea…assuming the two stay on the right track and continue progress towards ensuring the average Joe is protected. It definitely seems like every intention is being made to protect us…only time will tell how this plays out.

Tweet This Post

A recent report by Freedom Works discussed one of the newest privacy threats we should know about. Congress has sketched a new proposal that would require all merchants’ payment systems to be tracked, recorded, and reported to the federal government.

This legislation will affect any credit card transaction made. Businesses will be required to give up that information once they swipe a card. The hopes of Internet privacy or being able to surf anonymously may be nonexistent if you use Amazon, PayPal, or any other online merchant. The online vendors are also required to divulge the information and report transactions to the government.

Many questions are raised throughout this article such as:

• What is the federal government’s purpose with this kind of detailed data?
• How will this database be secured, and who will have access?
• Many small proprietors use their Social Security number as their tax ID. How will their privacy be protected?
• What compliance costs will this impose on businesses?

These important questions need to be answered before the legislation continues. With the rise of ID Theft and American citizens’ worries about government spying, this legislation seems to completely forgo privacy protection.

Tweet This Post