privacy

Schneier: Either Everyone Is Cyber-secure Or No One Is

Presto Vivace sends a new essay from Bruce Schneier called “The Democratization of Cyberattack. Quoting:
When I was working with the Guardian on the Snowden documents, the one top-secret program the NSA desperately did not want us to expose was QUANTUM. This is the NSA’s program for what is called packet injection–basically, a technology that allows the agency to hack into computers.Turns out, though, that the NSA was not alone in its use of this technology. The Chinese government uses packet injection to attack computers. The cyberweapons manufacturer Hacking Team sells packet injection technology to any government willing to pay for it. Criminals use it. And there are hacker tools that give the capability to individuals as well. … We can’t choose a world where the U.S. gets to spy but China doesn’t, or even a world where governments get to spy and criminals don’t. We need to choose, as a matter of policy, communications systems that are secure for all users, or ones that are vulnerable to all attackers. It’s security or surveillance.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Supreme Court Gives Tacit Approval To Warrantless DNA Collection

An anonymous reader writes On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to review a case involving the conviction of a man based solely on the analysis of his “inadvertently shed” DNA. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) argues that this tacit approval of the government’s practice of collecting anyone’s DNA anywhere without a warrant will lead to a future in which people’s DNA are “entered into and checked against DNA databases and used to conduct pervasive surveillance.”

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Supreme Court Gives Tacit Approval To Warrantless DNA Collection

An anonymous reader writes On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to review a case involving the conviction of a man based solely on the analysis of his “inadvertently shed” DNA. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) argues that this tacit approval of the government’s practice of collecting anyone’s DNA anywhere without a warrant will lead to a future in which people’s DNA are “entered into and checked against DNA databases and used to conduct pervasive surveillance.”

Read more of this story at Slashdot.








AVG Announces Invisibility Glasses

BrianFagioli writes So what do these glasses from AVG Innovation Labs actually do? The security firm claims it can protect your identity in this new era of cameras everywhere. From the article: “‘Through a mixture of technology and specialist materials, privacy wearables such as invisibility glasses can make it difficult for cameras or other facial recognition technologies to get a clear view of your identity’, AVG claims. This is still in the prototype phase of testing, though it has been officially announced at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona. There’s a lot of science behind this — a series of infrared lights surrounding the eyes and nose is not visible to other people, but cameras will pick it up making recognition difficult at best. There’s also reflective materials involved, which aids in the blocking, or so it’s claimed.”

Read more of this story at Slashdot.








How Do You Handle the Discovery of a Web Site Disclosing Private Data?

An anonymous reader writes I recently discovered that a partner web site of a financial institution I do business with makes it trivially easy to view documents that do not belong to me. As in, change the document ID in a URL and view someone else’s financial documents. This requires no authentication, only a document URL. (Think along the lines of an online rebate center where you upload documents including credit card statements.) I immediately called customer service and spoke with a perplexed agent who unsurprisingly didn’t know what to do with my call. I asked to speak with a supervisor who took good notes and promised a follow-up internally. I asked for a return call but have not yet heard back. In the meantime, I still have private financial information I consider to be publicly available. I’m trying to be responsible and patient in my handling of this, but I am second guessing how to move forward if not quickly resolved. So, Slashdot, how would you handle this situation?

Read more of this story at Slashdot.








NSA Spying Wins Another Rubber Stamp

schwit1 sends this report from the National Journal: A federal court has again renewed an order allowing the National Security Agency to continue its bulk collection of Americans’ phone records, a decision that comes more than a year after President Obama pledged to end the controversial program. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court approved this week a government request to keep the NSA’s mass surveillance of U.S. phone metadata operating until June 1, coinciding with when the legal authority for the program is set to expire in Congress. The extension is the fifth of its kind since Obama said he would effectively end the Snowden-exposed program as it currently exists during a major policy speech in January 2014. Obama and senior administration officials have repeatedly insisted that they will not act alone to end the program without Congress.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.








When It Comes To Spy Gear, Many Police Ignore Public Records Laws

v3rgEz writes What should take precedence: State public records laws, or contractual agreements between local police, the FBI, and the privately owned Harris Corporation? That’s the question being played out across the country, as agencies are strongly divided on releasing much information, if any, on how they’re using Stingray technology to collect and monitor phone metadata without judicial oversight.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.








Gadgets That Spy On Us: Way More Than TVs

Presto Vivace writes with a reminder that it’s not just Samsung TVs — lots of other gadgets are spying on you “But Samsung’s televisions are far from the only seeing-and-listening devices coming into our lives. If we’re going to freak out about a Samsung TV that listens in on our living rooms, we should also be panicking about a number of other emergent gadgets that capture voice and visual data in many of the same ways. …. Samsung’s competitor, the LG Smart TV, has basically the same phrase about voice capture in its privacy policy: “Please be aware that if your spoken word includes personal or other sensitive information, such information will be among the Voice Information captured through your use of voice recognition features.” It isn’t just TVs, Microsoft’s xBox Kinect, Amazon Echo, GM’s Onstar, Chevrolet’s MyLink and PDRs, Google’s Waze, and Hello’s Sense all have snooping capabilities. Welcome to the world of Stasi Tech.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.








The Disastrous Privacy Consequences of Canada’s Anti-Terrorism Bill

An anonymous reader writes “Canada’s proposed anti-terrorism legislation is currently being debated in the House of Commons, with the government already serving notice that it plans to limit debate. Michael Geist argues that decision has enormous privacy consequences, since the bill effectively creates a “total information awareness” approach that represents a radical shift away from our traditional understanding of public sector privacy protection. The bill permits information sharing across government for an incredibly wide range of purposes, most of which have nothing to do with terrorism and opens the door to further disclosure “to any person, for any purpose.” The cumulative effect is to grant government near-total power to share information for purposes that extend far beyond terrorism with few safeguards or privacy protections.”

Read more of this story at Slashdot.








Privacy: the 21st Century’s Newest Luxury Item

chicksdaddy writes: There is a report today on the 21st century’s newest luxury item: online privacy The Christian Science Monitor writes about the growing market for premium privacy protection tools available to tech-savvy consumers with the desire for online anonymity — and the means to pay for it. The piece profiles new tools from companies like Abine that deliver everything from self-destructing e-mail messages to the 21st century’s equivalent of Kleenex: one-off “throwaway” online identities to keep advertisers, merchants and government snoops at bay. Privacy experts, however, doubt that the new tools will tip the scales of online privacy in favor of consumers and away from governments and advertisers. “Consumers really don’t have a fighting chance,” says Andrea Matwyshyn of Princeton University. “Technology moves entirely too fast.” She and others see the need for both bigger fixes and the level of Internet infrastructure and law. “As a consumer protection matter, there needs to be a floor,” she said. “Just as there are laws protecting renters from substandard housing, or car buyers from ‘lemons,’ there need to be regulations that create a buffer between consumers and companies.”

Read more of this story at Slashdot.