Privacy in a Technological World

Posted on 21 January 2019 by eehines

In a ruling rejecting an application for a search warrant, Magistrate Judge Kandis Westmore, operating in the Northern District of California, had this remark in particular.

Citizens do not contemplate waiving their civil rights when using new technology, and the Supreme Court has concluded that, to find otherwise, would leave individuals “at the mercy of advancing technology.”

Encouragingly, this remark also cited (via the quote in the remark above) a Supreme Court ruling, Carpenter v United States [citations omitted]:

This is a preview of Privacy in a Technological World. Read the full post (278 words, estimated 1:07 mins reading time)

A Magistrate Judge Gets One Right

Posted on 18 January 2019 by eehines

Of course, the Magistrate Judge Kandis Westmore’s ruling can be overturned on appeal by a District judge in the Northern District of California in which she operates, or on appeal on the ruling’s way up the appellate chain. Nevertheless, her ruling stands, for now.

In its essence Westmore ruled that, even with an otherwise valid search warrant, a person cannot be compelled to unlock a digital device like a cell phone with that person’s biometrics—a fingerprint, a face, or an iris, for example.

This is a preview of A Magistrate Judge Gets One Right. Read the full post (508 words, estimated 2:02 mins reading time)

Italy and the EU

Posted on 24 October 2018 by eehines

Recall Italy’s proposed budget, which defied Brussels by having a larger deficit relative to its GDP than EU budget rules allow. I decried that budget then, and I stand by that disdain.

Now, however,

Italian Economy Minister Giovanni Tria has told the European Commission that Italy will raise its deficit to 2.4% of gross domestic product (GDP), defying eurozone budget rules. In a letter sent to Brussels in response to a formal warning from the EU.

Brussels continues to not like the budget.

This is a preview of Italy and the EU. Read the full post (236 words, estimated 57 secs reading time)

An Investigation

Posted on 2 October 2018 by eehines

No, not that one.

Senator Lyndsey Graham (R, SC) said on Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo that he’s going to investigate [the whole program is interesting, but skip ahead to 15:28 for the Graham interview, which lasts for a bit in its own right] who “destroyed Dr Ford’s trust” by outing her after she had requested anonymity when communicating her charge to her Congresswoman, Anna Eshoo (D, CA), and her Senator, Dianne Feinstein (D, CA). Graham pointed out, too, that there were only three groups of people who knew about Dr Ford’s letter: Feinstein and her staff, Eshoo and her staff, and Dr Ford’s lawyers. Someone or some ones from those groups are the only ones who could have leaked Dr Ford’s letter and outed her. Yes, I’m omitting the obvious fourth—that Dr Ford outed herself.

This is a preview of An Investigation. Read the full post (198 words, estimated 48 secs reading time)

Promise

Posted on 22 September 2018 by eehines

The People’s Republic of China has been rolling out its system for spying on surveilling its citizens for a while now. This is the system that develops social scores for every PRC citizen, and the system has bennies for achieving high scores:

…waived deposits on hotels and rental cars, VIP treatment at airports, discounted loans, priority job applications, and fast-tracking to the most prestigious universities.

Things that can detract from those high scores include

[j]aywalking, late payments on bills or taxes, buying too much alcohol, or speaking out against the government….
Other mooted punishable offences include spending too long playing video games, wasting money on frivolous purchases, and posting on social media….

This is a preview of Promise. Read the full post (212 words, estimated 51 secs reading time)

Abuse and Disinformation

Posted on 29 August 2018 by eehines

Facebook is claiming to be adding a new tool for fighting these on its platform.

The Ad Archive API will allow researchers, journalists, publishers, and watchdog groups to efficiently analyze and search for ads to determine if anything untoward is happening.

Who, though, are going to be authorized access to the databases—which researchers, journalists, publishers, and watchdog groups, and what selection criteria will be used? We’ve already seen how Facebook, under the guise of identifying what it’s pleased to call fake news, has selected “fact checkers” almost exclusively from the Left (a few tokens from the right have been invited)—Associated Press, Snopes.com, ABC News, and Politifact—as a mechanism for making the identification and then deleting the allegedly fake material.

This is a preview of Abuse and Disinformation. Read the full post (204 words, estimated 49 secs reading time)

Business Models Don’t Create Business Rights

Posted on 3 July 2018 by eehines

There’s a lot about which to criticize California, but in one case, early though it is, the State appears to be on the right track. California passed a consumer privacy law, and businesses everywhere are in an uproar over it. The bill

requires [businesses] to offer consumers options to opt out of sharing personal information, and it gives Californians the right to prohibit the sale of their personal data.

Business’ objections center on their premise that it

risked far-reaching damage to everything from retailers’ customer-loyalty programs to data gathering by Silicon Valley tech giants.

This is a preview of Business Models Don’t Create Business Rights. Read the full post (462 words, estimated 1:51 mins reading time)

The Supremes Get One Right

Posted on 24 June 2018 by eehines

The Supreme Court ruled Friday that authorities generally need a search warrant before they can obtain broad access to data that shows the location of cellphone users, a decision that sets privacy boundaries in the digital age.
The court, in a 5-4 opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts, cited the Fourth Amendment’s guarantee to be free from unreasonable government searches.

And

We decline to grant the state unrestricted access to a wireless carrier’s database of physical location information[.]

Yewbetcha.

This is a preview of The Supremes Get One Right. Read the full post (113 words, estimated 27 secs reading time)

Privacy!?

Posted on 20 June 2018 by eehines

You ain’t got no privacy. You don’t need any stinking privacy!

Using facial recognition software in combination with image storage houses like drivers license databases can be highly useful in tracking down criminal suspects.

But the combination can be highly dangerous, too, as this attitude by Joseph Michael, Washington County Deputy State’s Attorney in Maryland, demonstrates:

the expectation of privacy ends when you sit down and smile at the government desk.

Pinellas County (FL) Sheriff Bob Gualtieri argued

This is a preview of Privacy!?. Read the full post (265 words, estimated 1:04 mins reading time)

Another Facebook Fail

Posted on 7 June 2018 by eehines

Chinese firms Huawei, Lenovo, Oppo and TCL were among numerous handset makers that were given access to Facebook data in what the US company said was “a controlled operation.”

The social media giant’s vice president of mobile partnerships, Francisco Varela, confirmed a report in The New York Times Tuesday that Facebook had given Chinese device makers deep access to the data of users’ friends without their explicit consent.

A “controlled operation.” Meaning the accesses were deliberately granted, consents were deliberately not requested in advance. Which raises the question: were any consents actively withheld and those denials ignored by Facebook?

This is a preview of Another Facebook Fail. Read the full post (270 words, estimated 1:05 mins reading time)

A Plebe's Site

Quam bene vivas referre, non quam diu.

Category Archives: Privacy