Thursday, July 07, 2022

Another technology as a potential point of failure. Can’t wait to see what my Ethical Hackers can do with these. Imagine a plate that says, “Unlisted” or your favorite politician’s plate that says “stolen!”

https://www.coloradopolitics.com/legislature/digital-license-plates-coming-to-colorado/article_2cfb2a06-fd57-11ec-87b5-2ffdd50b0399.html?ana=9news

Digital license plates coming to Colorado

Digital license plates will soon be permitted on Colorado roads, thanks to a new law taking effect next month.

The legislation allowing the plates, House Bill 1162, was signed into law by Gov. Jared Polis in April. On Wednesday, the digital license plate developer Reviver announced it has complied with state requirements and will begin selling the plates in Colorado when the bill goes into effect.

Though digital license plates are spreading throughout the country, they aren’t without their critics. The digital plates are significantly more expensive than metal plates and must be bought directly through Reviver, not the DMV. Reviver’s consumer digital license plate costs between $19.95 and $24.95 per month, and those who buy them will still have to buy the traditional metal plates, as well.

In addition, the digital plates emit a wireless signal used for tracking and digital monitoring services, which has raised some concerns about hacking and data privacy.





No doubt well intentioned, but does it open a massive can of worms?

https://gazette.com/health/polis-directs-colorado-agencies-to-withhold-data-from-states-that-may-impose-penalties-on-women/article_0cad12cc-4b07-5668-bebc-d93be6590eed.html

Polis directs Colorado agencies to withhold data from states that may impose penalties on women seeking abortion

Gov. Jared Polis announced Wednesday he has signed an executive order intending to protect the data of those who seek abortions in Colorado.

The order – D 2022 032 – directs state agencies to withhold data, including patient medical records and related billing information, to states that may impose criminal or civil penalties on those who seek or provide abortions.

[The order: https://drive.google.com/file/d/10zvLU35d47Y9DYmG0vFZzI7tJAlACXYg/view



(Related) I’m betting this one doesn’t get as far as finding the can, let alone opening it.

https://www.pogowasright.org/senators-sound-the-alarm-on-privacy-call-for-hipaa-update/

Senators sound the alarm on privacy, call for HIPAA update

Mike Miliard reports:

In a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra on July 1, Senators Michael Bennet, D-Colo., and Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev., called on HHS to use its powers to ensure the HIPAA Privacy Rule is better positioned to protect the health information of patients seeking reproductive healthcare.
The Supreme Court’s recent decision overturning Roe v. Wade has created “profound uncertainty for patients concerning their right to privacy when making the deeply personal decision to have an abortion,” said the senators.

Read more at HealthcareITNews





Questions, questions, questions. Only video is banned. Pictures and audio are Okay?

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/legislature/2022/07/06/recording-police-close-range-now-illegal-new-bill-signed/7816271001/

Close-range recordings of police illegal under bill signed into law by Ducey

People will no longer be allowed to take close-range recordings of Arizona police under a new bill signed into law by Gov. Doug Ducey on Wednesday.

House Bill 2319, sponsored by Rep. John Kavanagh, makes it illegal for anyone within 8 feet of law enforcement activity to record police. Violators could face a misdemeanor, but only after being verbally warned and continuing to record anyway.

Exceptions were made for people at the center of an interaction with police, anyone standing in an enclosed structure on private property where police activity was occurring and occupants of a vehicle stopped by police as long as recording in those instances didn't interfere with police actions.

It goes into effect on Sept. 24.

Kavanagh wrote in an op-ed said HB 2319 was meant to protect officers from potential harm or distraction outside of the incident they were already involved in. He initially introduced the bill with a 15-foot restriction that was later amended down to address concerns it would be unconstitutional.



No comments: