ILI Student Blog

Blog

  • PRG Privacy Comments

    Professor Ira Rubinstein’s comments to the FTC:

    Comments

    Professor Helen Nissenbaum’s comments:

    NissenbaumIPTFComments

  • Data Protection @ CSLS University of Oxford

    At a recent conference on information ethics, organized by the Uehiro Center at Oxford University, I met David Erdos, who presented work on challenges confronting the EU approach to data protection. Really interesting, particularly for those who believe that the EU has all the answers on privacy protection. Here is some background on the project and its institutional home:

    DP@CSLS is a research strand within Oxford University’s Centre for Socio-Legal Studies which brings together scholars and practitioners interested in data protection, privacy and the regulation of information. The Centre hosts the three-year Data Protection and the Open Society (DPOS) project funded by the Leverhulme Trust. This project explores and seeks to help resolve the tension between data protection and the fundamental values of freedom of expression and information. Four overlapping sub-projects within DPOS look at data protection foundations, media and internet, research governance and transparency initiatives. Student projects on social networking sites and surveillance are also ongoing. These projects examine the relationship technology, privacy and copyright as well the interaction between data protection and general human rights law. In addition, DP@CSLS organizes seminars, study groups and other initiatives designed to promote dialogue on these emerging issues. Currently our events are focused on making a contribution to the debate surrounding the rewriting of the European Data Protection Directive. For further information please visit http://www.csls.ox.ac.uk/dataprotection and http://www.twitter.com/oxondataprotect. To get in touch with DP@CSLS please contact Dr. David Erdos at david[.]erdosATcsls[.]ox[.]ac[.]uk.

  • Washington Post on Domestic Spying

    A in-depth report Monday in the Washington Post describes the expanding apparatus of US domestic intelligence since the September 11th Terrorist Attacks, including fusion centers, the new Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative and the FBI’s Guardian Database. The article is well worth reading, but it is missing a bit of legal context that is important to an understanding the government policy that is driving the change.

    US domestic intelligence is being expanded under the authority of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act (IRTPA) of 2004. This was the first and most comprehensive legal response to the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. It outlined a wholesale rewiring of the domestic intelligence apparatus and the establishment of an Information Sharing Environment (ISE). The nationwide suspicious activity reporting initiative (NSI), which journalists Dana Priest and William M Arkin mention briefly, is the primary focus of the ISE today. It includes its own federal data standard. The “See something say something” campaign which has been getting so much press recently is simply one facet of the NSI, the focus of which up until recently has been training local and state police to be intelligence agents. For a wide range of public documents that provide coverage of the NSI and ISE, see post-doc Kenneth Farrall’s isesar.us web site, developed with the support of NYU’s Department of Media, Culture and Communication and a grant from the Department of Defense.

  • Commerce Department Report

    On December 16, 2010, the U.S. Commerce Department released its report, Policy Framework for Protecting Consumer Privacy Online While Supporting Innovation. It will be interesting to compare and contrast.

  • FTC Staff Issues Privacy Report

    From the FTC: “The Federal Trade Commission, the nation’s chief privacy policy and enforcement agency for 40 years, issued a preliminary staff report today that proposes a framework to balance the privacy interests of consumers with innovation that relies on consumer information to develop beneficial new products and services. The proposed report also suggests implementation of a “Do Not Track” mechanism – likely a persistent setting on consumers’ browsers – so consumers can choose whether to allow the collection of data regarding their online searching and browsing activities.”

    Find the report here.

    Find the full release here.

  • Ultimate Privacy: How to Disappear, Erase Digital Footprints & Vanish Without a Trace

    Interesting Network World article posted in mid September: “As privacy seems harder to hold onto in this digital age, privacy expert Frank Ahearn can help you legally poof and fall off the grid….”

  • Flight attendants union upset over new pat-down procedures

    From a Phoenix local ABC station, widespread complaints over increasingly invasive manual inspections that follow the decision to opt out of body scanning.

  • The Nevercookiemonster

    Short but sweet post demonstrating why proof of concept hacks are very helpful! from SecurityWeek. Click here.

  • Salon: Did the FBI cook up a fake bomb plot?

    Justin Elliot explains how the recent Washington Metro bomb plot case involved questionable use of a paid FBI informant. Story here.

  • Unmasking an Internet User, Piece by Piece

    An impressive and impressively terrifying walk-through of the process of discovering all there is to discover about an internet user, starting with only their IP and email address.