Wednesday, December 14, 2011


Too good at what they do? In “Ye Olde Days” IBM mainframes logged everything that happened on the machine (SMF files) That allowed us to monitor for errors; predict growth of applications; see who accessed what, when, etc.
Carrier IQ Gets Transparent About Its Mobile Monitoring
December 13, 2011 by Dissent
John Paczkowski has an interview with Carrier IQ CEO Larry Lenhart, and Andrew Coward, the company’s VP of marketing. You can read it on All Things D. Here’s a snippet:
You say your software doesn’t keep a log of location, keylog and SMS information, yet Trevor Eckhart’s video appeared to show that. What was going on there?
Coward: What he was looking at there was an Android log file. And to be blunt, there was information there that shouldn’t have been. In order for Carrier IQ to get information off a device, we work with the manufacturers to deliver that information through an API. That information shouldn’t show up in an Android log file. We don’t read from Android log files; we don’t see Android log files. That info just shouldn’t be there. And, ultimately, what goes in that log file is up to the manufacturer.
So that’s not your log file in the video?
Coward: No. It’s just an Android system log file.
Now don’t you want to read more of the interview?
Related: Understanding Carrier IQ Technology (pdf, Dec. 12, 2011)


When you come late to the party, try and make a big entrance?
"According to this AP report, the National Transportation Safety Board says 'States should ban all driver use of cell phones and other portable electronic devices, except in emergencies.' 'The recommendation, unanimously agreed to by the five-member board, applies to both hands-free and hand-held phones and significantly exceeds any existing state laws restricting texting and cellphone use behind the wheel.' So what about all the cars today that come with built-in computers, navigation, internet capabilities, and cell phones?"


Who says (some) judges don't understand technology? It's the law I'm not sure of...
"A Minnesota man violated a restraining order obtained by his ex-girlfriend by blogging about her mental health and sexual issues, and sending links to posts on the blog to her family, friends, and co-workers. The judge then extended the restraining order by 50 years, ordered the guy never to write about his ex on the Internet and ordered him to delete the blog he created. Even though there was no evidence that what he had written was false, the judge said the ex-girlfriend's 'right to be free from harassment' outweighed the guy's 'right to free speech.' 'I believe it's rare, if not unprecedented, for a court to order an entire blog deleted,' says technology law professor Eric Goldman."


I like the logic! Can it be extended?
PA: Court Denies Defense Motion Seeking To Obtain Plaintiff’s Social Network Information
December 13, 2011 by Dissent
Attorney Scott Cooper points us to a decision that bucks what seems to be an emerging trend in requiring people to turn over their social media logins to opposing parties in litigation:
Last week, the Court of Common Pleas in Franklin County, Pennsylvania in Arcq v. Fields et al, No. 2008-2430 (Herman J. Franklin Co. Dec. 7, 2011) addressed the issue regarding the discoverability of a Plaintiff’s social network profile and information. After filing a lawsuit as a result of injuries sustained in a car accident, the Plaintiff objected to interrogatories seeking social network information by arguing that the materials are not relevant and the Plaintiff has a reasonable expectation of privacy to such information. The Defendants argued that under other trial court cases, and one from the same court, the information is discoverable.
The trial court finds that there is one glaring difference the present case has from the others, and that is that the request of the Defendants in Arcq is not the result of viewing the public portion of the Plaintiff’s profile.
Read more on InjuryBoard.com.
Scott kindly sent me the opinion, and I was encouraged to see a court deny what appears to me to to have been a fishing expedition. The defendant’s counsel offered no evidence that the plaintiff even had any social media account on any platform. As the court indicated, all the defendant offered was a “belief” that the plaintiff had a MySpace account and a “belief” that the plaintiff might have other accounts on Facebook, etc. A Google search that I conducted turned up no evidence of any James Arcq or Jim Arcq on MySpace, Facebook, or LinkedIn. Maybe that explains the unsupported “belief.”
In any event, I am pleased to see a court distinguish between discovery requests based on public profiles that suggest that there’s more to be uncovered that could be relevant and fishing expeditions that might needlessly intrude on privacy.

(Related)
What Makes an Expectation of Privacy “Reasonable”? A Response to Chief Justice Roberts
December 13, 2011 by Dissent
Orin Kerr writes:
During the oral argument a few weeks ago in United States v. Jones, Chief Justice Roberts had some very interesting questions about the Fourth Amendment’s “reasonable expectation of privacy” test. I fear that the Chief Justice’s questions may reflect a common misunderstanding of the test. In this post, I wanted to explain the Chief’s possible error, and explain how I think the reasonable expectation of privacy test is supposed to work.
Read his commentary on The Volokh Conspiracy.


Sounds like they should also have one of those “workplace safety” signs that proclaim “___ days since our last Security Breach!”
UK: Communications providers should log personal data security breaches monthly, Information Commissioner says
December 13, 2011 by admin
The ICO recommends the monthly report in a new section in its guidance on security breach notifications. Public electronic communications service providers must alert it in the event of any security breaches relating to users’ personal data.
The guidance also states that if the breach is of a particularly serious nature, providers need to notify the ICO as soon as possible using a new standard notification form.
Read more on Out-Law.com


I suppose they couldn't wait for International Privacy Day...
EPIC Launches Campaign Urging Public Comment on Facebook Privacy Settlement
December 14, 2011 by Dissent
From EPIC.org:
EPIC launched the “Fix FB Privacy Fail” campaign to encourage the public to support improvements to a settlement between Facebook and the FTC. The settlement follows from complaints filed by EPIC and other consumer and privacy organizations in 2009 and 2010 over Facebook’s decision to change its users’ privacy settings in a way that made users’ personal information more widely available to the public and to Facebook’s business partners. Although the proposed settlement is far-reaching, there are several ways in which it could be improved. EPIC has recommended that the FTC require Facebook to restore the privacy settings users had in 2009; give users access to all of the data that Facebook keeps about them; stop making facial recognition profiles without users’ consent; make the results of the government privacy audits public; and stop secretly tracking users across the web. The period for public comment on the proposed settlement ends on December 30. The campaign also allows users to sign on to the petition without using Facebook. For more information, see EPIC: FTC Facebook Settlement

(Related?) Interesting because the article assumes “Big Companies” monitor these media and yet we don't teach classes in how to use any of them!
How to Get Big Companies to Listen to Your Complaint
Go straight to webchat
Share your pain on Facebook
Tweet about it
Make a YouTube video


At one time, this would have been played big by Republicans. I don't think any of the current candidates even remember those days...
In U.S., Fear of Big Government at Near-Record Level
December 13, 2011 19:53 Source: Gallup
From the report:
Americans' concerns about the threat of big government continue to dwarf those about big business and big labor, and by an even larger margin now than in March 2009. The 64% of Americans who say big government will be the biggest threat to the country is just one percentage point shy of the record high, while the 26% who say big business is down from the 32% recorded during the recession. Relatively few name big labor as the greatest threat.


I'm going to have strong words with my local library!
Silicon Valley Library Lends Google Chromebooks

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)