What is the future of privacy, surveillance and policing technologies under Trump?; CBS News, June 22, 2017

Jonathan Ernst, CBS News; What is the future of privacy, surveillance and policing technologies under Trump?

"As developing policing technologies continue to outpace laws restricting their use, and as Mr. Trump and top members of his administration like Attorney General Jeff Sessions take a hard line against illegal immigration, terrorism and crime, experts in constitutional law and civil liberties fear the lack of an accompanying conversation on privacy protections could contribute to the erosion of Fourth Amendment rights.

The Fourth Amendment guarantees the "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures."

"I think we will see a push from the Trump administration to expand surveillance powers, and that of course could directly implicate Fourth Amendment protections," said Christopher Slobogin, a professor at Vanderbilt University Law School who has studied and written on Fourth Amendment, privacy and surveillance issues for years.

"And they're going to push I think also for greater militarization of the police, which could affect Fourth Amendment issues," Slobogin added."

Cisco wants to balance privacy with security; SFGate, June 20, 2017

Marissa Lang, SFGate; Cisco wants to balance privacy with security

"It’s a common trade-off in cybersecurity: Do you want privacy, or do you want protection?

To be more secure, businesses typically have to accept some level of surveillance, inviting third-party companies to track traffic and monitor network data for intruders, threats or malicious software.

Cisco wants to do away with that choice."

The Supreme Court Phone Location Case Will Decide the Future of Privacy; Mother Board, June 16, 2017

Stephen Vladeck, MotherBoard; The Supreme Court Phone Location Case Will Decide the Future of Privacy

"Later this year, the Supreme Court will decide if police can track a person’s cell phone location without a warrant. It's the most important privacy case in a generation.

For all of the attention paid to former FBI Director Jim Comey's highly anticipated testimony before the Senate intelligence committee last Thursday, the most important constitutional law development from last week took place across the street (and three days earlier), when the Supreme Court agreed to hear argument in Carpenter v. United States later this year—though exactly when, we're not sure.

Carpenter raises a specific question about whether Americans have an expectation of privacy in historical "cell-site location information" ("CSLI")."

"Modern Privacy Issues"; GoComics, June 14, 2017

Frank and Ernest By Thaves, GoComics; "Modern Privacy Issues"

Privacy in the Cellphone Age; New York Times, June 7, 2017

Editorial Board, New York Times; Privacy in the Cellphone Age

"Odds are you need to use that phone in your pocket many times a day — and doing so leaves you no choice but to constantly relay data revealing your location and movements to Verizon, AT&T or whatever cellphone company you pay for the service. For most people, most of the time, that’s not a concern, if they’re aware of it at all. But how easy should it be for the government to get its hands on that data?

That’s the question at the heart of a major new case the Supreme Court agreed on Monday to hear. The justices’ decision could redefine not only the limits on law enforcement access to cellphone-location records, but the future of surveillance more broadly...

In 2014, Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. wrote that cellphones have become “such a pervasive and insistent part of daily life that the proverbial visitor from Mars might conclude they were an important feature of human anatomy.”

The third-party doctrine needs to be reimagined in light of Americans’ new relationship to technology and their rapidly changing expectations of data privacy.

If not, Congress should follow what several states have already done and pass legislation requiring warrants for phone-location data."

Boy, 11, hacks cyber-security audience to give lesson on 'weaponisation' of toys; Agence France-Presse via Guardian, May 16, 2017

Agence France-Presse via Guardian; 

Boy, 11, hacks cyber-security audience to give lesson on 'weaponisation' of toys

"“Most internet-connected things have a Bluetooth functionality ... I basically showed how I could connect to it, and send commands to it, by recording audio and playing the light,” [Reuben Paul] told AFP later.

“IOT home appliances, things that can be used in our everyday lives, our cars, lights refrigerators, everything like this that is connected can be used and weaponised to spy on us or harm us.”

They could be used to steal private information such as passwords, as remote surveillance to spy on kids, or employ GPS to find out where a person is, he said. More chillingly, a toy could say “meet me at this location and I will pick you up”, Reuben said."

'Echo Is Not Spying On You,' Amazon Lawyer Declares; Inside Counsel, May 12, 2017

C. Ryan Barber, Inside Counsel; 

'Echo Is Not Spying On You,' Amazon Lawyer Declares

"We designed the Echo devices very intentionally to only listen when spoken to … and also be incredibly conspicuous when it is listening,” [Ryan] McCrate said, referring to the ring of LED lights that flash when Alexa perks up.

McCrate’s brief remarks on the panel sounded at times like a promotional pitch touting the lengths the company took to protect consumer privacy. The Echo, he said, was inspired by Star Trek—and Amazon knew that its customers would be familiar with a virtual assistant as a science-fiction concept. But the company, he added, also realized there would be “well-founded” concerns about a product like the Echo."

Chinese Government and Hollywood Launch Snoop-and-Censor Copyright Filter; Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), May 1, 2017

Jeremy Malcolm, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF); 

Chinese Government and Hollywood Launch Snoop-and Censor Copyright Filter

"Two weeks ago the Copyright Society of China (also known as the China Copyright Association) launched its new 12426 Copyright Monitoring Center, which is dedicated to scanning the Chinese Internet for evidence of copyright infringement. This frightening panopticon is said to be able to monitor video, music and images found on "mainstream audio and video sites and graphic portals, small and medium vertical websites, community platforms, cloud and P2P sites, SmartTV, external set-top boxes, aggregation apps, and so on."...

The announcement of China's government-linked 12426 Copyright Monitoring Center is absolutely chilling. It is just as chilling that the governments of the United States and Europe are being lobbied by copyright holders to follow China's lead. Although this call is being heard on both sides of the Atlantic, it has gained the most ground in Europe, where it needs to be urgently stopped in its tracks. Europeans can learn more and speak out against these draconian censorship demands at the Save the Meme campaign website."

Tim Berners-Lee: selling private citizens' browsing data is 'disgusting'; Guardian, April 4, 2017

Sam Thielman, Guardian; 

Tim Berners-Lee: selling private citizens' browsing data is 'disgusting'

"What did you think of the congressional repeal of Federal Communications Commission’s privacy rules?

It’s not the case that an ISP can just spy on people and monetize the data; if they do, they will get taken to court. Obviously the worry is the attitude and the direction. The attitude is really appalling. That bill was a disgusting bill, because when we use the web, we are so vulnerable.

When the internet was new, when people didn’t realize to what extent it would be important to people’s lives, I gave talks pointing out that, actually, when people use the web what they do is really, really intimate. They go to their doctor for a second opinion; they’ve gone to the web for the first opinion on whether it’s cancer. They communicate very intimately with family members that they love. There are things that people do on the web that reveal absolutely everything, more about them than they know themselves sometimes. Because so much of what we do in our lives that actually goes through those left-clicks, it can be ridiculously revealing. You have the right to go to a doctor in privacy where it’s just between you and the doctor. And similarly, you have to be able to go to the web.

Privacy, a core American value, is not a partisan thing. Democrats fight for it and Republicans fight for it too, maybe even more. So I am very shocked that the Republican party has managed to suggest that it should be trashed; if anyone follows up on this direction, there will be a massive pushback – and there must be a massive pushback!

If they take away net neutrality, there will have to be a tremendous amount of public debate as well. You can bet there will be public demonstrations if they do try to take it away."

Trump Is President. Now Encrypt Your Email.; New York Times, March 31, 2017

Max Read, New York Times; Trump Is President. Now Encrypt Your Email.

"As lawyers and civil libertarians point out, federal criminal law is so vast and complicated that it is easy to unwittingly violate it, and even innocent conversation can later be used to build a criminal case. Encrypting your communication isn’t a matter of hiding criminal activity; it’s a matter of ensuring innocuous activity can’t be deemed suspicious by a zealous prosecutor or intelligence agent. Telling a friend that a party is really going to “blow up” when you arrive is less funny when it’s being entered into evidence against you."

With WikiLeaks Claims of C.I.A. Hacking, How Vulnerable Is Your Smartphone?; New York Times, March 7, 2017

Steve Lohr and Katie Benner, New York Times; 

With WikiLeaks Claims of C.I.A. Hacking, How Vulnerable Is Your Smartphone?

"If the documents are accurate, did the C.I.A. violate commitments made by President Barack Obama?

In 2010, the Obama administration promised to disclose newly discovered vulnerabilities to companies like Apple, Google and Microsoft. But the WikiLeaks documents indicate that the agency found security flaws, kept them secret and then used them for surveillance and intelligence gathering.

Why is it so hard to keep these cyberweapons under wraps?

Unlike nuclear weapons, which can be guarded and protected, cyberweapons are “just computer programs which can be pirated like any other,” WikiLeaks notes. “Since they are entirely comprised of information they can be copied quickly with no marginal cost.”

There is a growing black market dedicated to trading these weapons, and government agencies from around the world will pay well for their discovery."

If You Have One Of These Toys In Your House, You May Want To Stop Using It; Huffington Post, February 27, 2017

Ryan Grenoble, Huffington Post; 

If You Have One Of These Toys In Your House, You May Want To Stop Using It

"With a little sleuthing, and some help from CloudPets users willing to serve as guinea pigs, Hunt tracked down some surprisingly personal information on the CloudPets servers. Kids’ names, birthdays (minus the year) and their relationship with authorized users (i.e., parents, grandparents, friends, etc.) were all accessible."

In China, Big Brother isn’t just watching your every move. He may be selling your personal data.; Washington Post, 1/4/17

Simon Denyer, Washington Post; In China, Big Brother isn’t just watching your every move. He may be selling your personal data.

[Kip Currier: This article's chilling real-world information about Chinese authorities' "social credit" score efforts reminded me of Black Mirror's 2016 "Nosedive" episode, starring Bryce Dallas Howard, in which citizens are given crowd-sourced ranking scores that influence all areas of their lives.]

"Sometimes living in China feels like dystopia has already arrived. As thick clouds of choking smog envelop the Chinese capital this week, more bad news has emerged to make life here feel even more like a grim science fiction movie.

Not only are Chinese authorities collecting vast amounts of personal data on all of their citizens, that data is now for sale.

A report in the Southern Metropolis Daily newspaper, translated by the SupChina newsletter and website on Wednesday, found that vast amounts of citizens’ private information can be freely bought by strangers, for very affordable prices...

If that wasn’t bad enough, China is already in the midst of an ambitious plan to centralize everyone’s data and issue everyone a score based on their “social credit.”"

Jonathan Nolan Responds To That Westworld Location Theory; Slashfilm.com, 10/17/16

Peter Sciretta, Slashfilm.com; Jonathan Nolan Responds To That Westworld Location Theory:

Minor spoilers re "Westworld" plot themes

[Kip Currier: Viewers of Season 1 of the popular new HBO series "Westworld"--a reimagined reboot of the 1973 film, based on Michael Crichton's eponymous novel--have increasingly seen the protect-at-all-costs value of Westworld's Intellectual Property, as well as privacy concerns. Showrunners Jonathan Nolan and Lisa Joy Nolan touch on these issues below:]

"In regards to the computer terminals where the Delos staff communicate to their loved ones back home, [Lisa Joy Nolan] says:

Regardless of where they are, the park is very, very vast, and you don’t rotate home often. You don’t have open communication where you can just pick up a phone. Even senior people have to go to the coms room – because [the park is] protecting their intellectual property. We’re hoping to paint a portrait of the culture of the corporation.

[Jonathan] Nolan (who was a showrunner on Person of Interest, a series about a computer system that could analyze all forms of public and private data to predict the future) seems to be very interested in the aspect of big brother looking in on our communications. As for how it relates to Westworld, he says the Delos corporation wants to protect its intellectual property and the privacy of the park’s guests:

In Westworld, the value of the park is all in its intellectual property, it’s all in the code. So regardless of the park’s location, they would be extremely careful with that code and making sure its virtually impossible to smuggle it out of the park. And there’s the privacy of the guests – you’re not going to have a good time in Westworld if somebody is Instagramming your activities. I’m amazed [th]at [sic] Las Vegas has survived the Instagram age. In episode 2, when the guests come in, we don’t see this, but we assume these guys have cell phones that they’re not allowed to bring in the park. We very much think this is a path where culture may be going – that we’ll get over-exposed and sick of the interconnectedness of our lives that we’ll hunger for places [that offer disconnected privacy]. We’ll hunger for a moment where we can go back toward having some privacy."

The (alleged) Russian hack of the DNC should be one of the biggest stories of the year. Why isn’t it?; Washington Post, 7/26/16

Paul Waldman, Washington Post; The (alleged) Russian hack of the DNC should be one of the biggest stories of the year. Why isn’t it? :

"...[T]here’s something utterly bizarre about the kind of coverage this story is getting. Evidence currently suggests that the Russian government may have attempted to sway the results of the U.S. presidential election. I put that in italics, because it ought to be in screaming 72-point headlines on every front page in America. And yet, it’s being treated like just one more odd story in a wacky election year, not much more important than the latest fundraising numbers or which ethnic group Donald Trump has insulted most recently...

That being said, this hack represents something profoundly different from what we’ve seen before. We’ve known that foreign intelligence services from countries like China and Russia have in the past attempted to infiltrate not only government networks but those of other political organizations and actors, like the parties. What distinguishes this attack is that it wasn’t just for the purposes of surveillance. They weren’t trying to figure out what Americans are up to, they were trying to intervene to change the results of our election. Goldsmith suggests some even more frightening possibilities:

What if the hackers interspersed fake but even more damning or inflammatory emails that were hard to disprove? What if hackers break in to computers to steal or destroy voter registration information? What if they disrupted computer-based voting or election returns in important states during the presidential election? The legitimacy of a presidential election might be called into question, with catastrophic consequences. The DNC hack is just the first wave of possible threats to electoral integrity in the United States—by foreign intelligence services, and others.

For all we know, the DNC hack was a trial run for something much more ambitious."

Dilbert, 7/2/16

Scott Adams; Dilbert:

Mom Drone

House defeats privacy measure in wake of Orlando shootings; Politico, 6/16/16

Cory Bennett, Politico; House defeats privacy measure in wake of Orlando shootings:

"The House on Thursday blocked an amendment that opponents said would have taken away critical intelligence tools just four days after the worst mass shooting in U.S. history.

The 198-222 vote is a blow for privacy advocates who have spent years building support for the amendment, which would have barred the government from forcing companies to weaken their encryption for law enforcement. The provision passed the House twice in 2014 and 2015 by wide margins, before being stripped each time during conferences with the Senate.

But Sunday’s deadly assault in Orlando, in which suspected Islamic State supporter Omar Mateen shot and killed 49 people at a gay nightclub, caused a drastic erosion in support for the language...

Numerous hawkish lawmakers have introduced bills to either delay surveillance reforms or strengthen the government’s ability to collect data. A widely supported email privacy bill — which would require law enforcement to seek a warrant before accessing stored email — is even being held up in the Senate over an amendment that would let the FBI use national security letters to obtain email and Internet metadata."

Google Apologizes For Terrible April Fools’ Day Prank; Huffington Post, 4/1/16

Damon Beres, Huffington Post; Google Apologizes For Terrible April Fools’ Day Prank:

"Whatever your thoughts on the joke, it’s a good reminder that Gmail — free as it might be — isn’t a public service. It’s a privately owned product subject to the impulses of corporate enterprise. And yes, many of us are accustomed to our entire lives revolving around it...

At the time, cybersecurity expert Bruce Schneier raised a couple of important points to The Huffington Post.

“You should be concerned that Facebook can without any due process kick you off their network. You should be concerned that Gmail can lock you out of your email. You should be concerned that the U.S. government can spy on anyone,” Schneier said.

“All of these things can happen without knowledge or consent. We are giving these companies an enormous amount of power over our digital selves and therefore our lives,” he added.

The postal service is obligated to deliver your mail. Google is not obligated to provide you a free email service, nor an email service that’s free from bad April Fool’s Day pranks.

That’s a sobering thought, considering how many of us rely on it. As of February, it’s estimated that 1 billion people use Gmail worldwide."

The Sara Fine Institute presents, "Digital Privacy Workshop for Librarians"; iSchool at Pitt, 3/31/16

The Sara Fine Institute presents, "Digital Privacy Workshop for Librarians" :

"Amelia Acker and Leanne Bowler will be co-hosting a Digital Privacy Workshop for Librarians on Thursday, March 31, 2016; 1:00 – 4:00 PM. Students are welcome.

  The workshop will be presented by Alison Macrina of Library Freedom Project and Bruce J. Boni, attorney and president of the ACLU-PA Greater Pittsburgh Chapter. They will present a hands-on, "know your privacy rights" workshop for librarians, demonstrating strategies to help keep library patrons safe from surveillance. Topics include: the government's major surveillance programs and authorizations, federal and local privacy law, and information on how to respond when served with a government information request. The workshop includes a demonstration of practical privacy-enhancing technology tools that can be installed on public PCs or taught to patrons in computer classes.

Details about the workshop and how to register can be found here: https://tockify.com/ischool/detail/168/1459443600000

The Apple Case Will Grope Its Way Into Your Future; New York Times, 2/24/16

Farhad Manjoo, New York Times; The Apple Case Will Grope Its Way Into Your Future:

"To understand what’s at stake in the battle between Apple and the F.B.I. over cracking open a terrorist’s smartphone, it helps to be able to predict the future of the tech industry.

For that, here’s one bet you’ll never lose money on: Digital technology always grows hungrier for more personal information, and we users nearly always accede to its demands. Today’s smartphones hold a lot of personal data — your correspondence, your photos, your location, your dignity. But tomorrow’s devices, many of which are already around in rudimentary forms, will hold a lot more...

But if Apple is forced to break its own security to get inside a phone that it had promised users was inviolable, the supposed safety of the always-watching future starts to fall apart. If every device can monitor you, and if they can all be tapped by law enforcement officials under court order, can anyone ever have a truly private conversation? Are we building a world in which there’s no longer any room for keeping secrets?

“This case can’t be a one-time deal,” said Neil Richards, a professor at the Washington University School of Law. “This is about the future.”

Mr. Richards is the author of “Intellectual Privacy,” a book that examines the dangers of a society in which technology and law conspire to eliminate the possibility of thinking without fear of surveillance. He argues that intellectual creativity depends on a baseline measure of privacy, and that privacy is being eroded by cameras, microphones and sensors we’re all voluntarily surrounding ourselves with."