Probably “old school”
crooks who didn't want to be bothered with that newfangled technology
(laptops and thumb drives). No doubt they were looking for paper
records rather than Backup files. Note that even your Backups should
be encrypted!
Lawyers for Actelis
Networks have notified
the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office of the theft of two
safes containing some Human Resources files with personal
information.
In their notification
dated December 13, they explain that two safes with
password-protected files were stolen on December 7 or 8. The
theft was reported to law enforcement.
Files in the safe
contained employment-related records and records pertaining to the
business, including individuals’ names, contact information, and
Social Security numbers.
AN’s Human Resources
department is located in Fremont, California, but the notification
doesn’t actually say where the theft occurred.
Those affected were
notified by letter on December 14 and were advised how to protect
themselves. They were also offered free credit monitoring services.
What is the strategy
here? Security used to mean you had to prove your laptop was in fact
a computer and not a container for weapons. That was reasonable.
Now it seems we are looking for the occasional very stupid terrorist
or pornographer who carries (obvious) incriminating files across the
border. The obvious counter is to store all your work in the Cloud
(or email all your data to yourself) and keep only a copy of the
Constitution on your laptop and your lawyers phone number on your
phone.
From the ACLU:
BROOKLYN
– A federal court today dismissed a lawsuit arguing that the
government should not be able to search and copy people’s laptops,
cell phones, and other devices at border checkpoints without
reasonable suspicion. An appeal is being considered. Government
documents show that thousands of innocent American citizens are
searched when they return from trips abroad.
“We’re
disappointed in today’s decision, which allows the government to
conduct intrusive searches of Americans’ laptops and other
electronics at the border without any suspicion that those devices
contain evidence of wrongdoing,” said Catherine Crump, the American
Civil Liberties Union attorney who argued the case in July 2011.
“Suspicionless searches of devices containing vast amounts of
personal information cannot meet the standard set by the Fourth
Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures.
Unfortunately, these searches are part of a broader pattern of
aggressive government surveillance that collects information on too
many innocent people, under lax standards, and without adequate
oversight.”
The
ACLU, the New York Civil Liberties Union, and the National
Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed the lawsuit in
September 2010 against the Department of Homeland Security. DHS
asserts the right to look though the contents of a traveler’s
electronic devices, and to keep the devices or copy the contents in
order to continue searching them once the traveler has been allowed
to enter the U.S., regardless of whether the traveler is suspected of
any wrongdoing.
The
lawsuit was filed on behalf of Pascal Abidor, a dual French-American
citizen who had his laptop searched and confiscated at the Canadian
border; the National Press Photographers Association, whose members
include television and still photographers, editors, students and
representatives of the photojournalism industry; and the NACDL, which
has attorney members in 25 countries.
Abidor
was travelling from Montreal to New York on an Amtrak train in May
2010 when he had his laptop searched and confiscated by customs
officers. Abidor, an Islamic Studies Ph.D. student at McGill
University, was questioned, taken off the train in handcuffs, and
held in a cell for several hours before being released without
charge. When his laptop was returned 11 days later, there was
evidence that many of his personal files had been searched, including
photos and chats with his girlfriend.
In
June, in response to an ACLU Freedom of Information Act request, DHS
released
its December 2011 Civil Rights/Civil Liberties Impact Assessment of
its electronics search policy, concluding that suspicionless searches
do not violate the First or Fourth Amendments. The report said that
a reasonable suspicion standard is inadvisable because it could lead
to litigation and the forced divulgence of national security
information, and would prevent border officers from acting on
inchoate “hunches,” a method that it says has sometimes proved
fruitful.
Today’s
ruling is available at:
aclu.org/sites/default/files/assets/abidor_decision.pdf
Interesting groups of
people. Perhaps a future Privacy Foundation speaker or two?
Foreign
Policy – THE LEADING GLOBAL THINKERS OF 2013
by Sabrina
I. Pacifici on December 31, 2013
The Constitution and
its Amendments define SOME of our rights of citizens. Clearly
they need to change as we determine that those rights change.
Technology merely enables new ways to violate our rights. The
Amendment need not change, but we do need to recognize the new
threats.
Jennifer Granick
writes:
When
should courts follow legal precedent and when should the law change?
This is a debate that underlies this month’s contrary decisions
about the constitutionality of government collection of telephone
call metadata under section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act. And despite
this week’s dual holdings in favor of the government—on this
issue and on the issue of laptop border searches—a
judicial consensus may be emerging that the Fourth Amendment must
evolve along with technology and government surveillance
capabilities.
Read more on Just
Security.
It's the unpredictable
ones that concern me.
Phil Lee writes:
If
you thought that 2013 was a big year for privacy, then prepare
yourself: it was only the beginning. Many of the privacy stories
whose winding narratives began in 2013 will continue to take
unexpected twists and turns throughout 2014, with several poised to
reach dramatic conclusions – or otherwise spawn spin-offs and
sequels.
Here
are just a few of the stories likely to dominate the privacy
headlines in 2014:
Read his predictions on
Privacy
and Information Law Blog.
...so if we see one
here in Colorado, it's a target.
Feds
announce test sites for drone aircraft
The Federal Aviation
Administration announced six states on Monday that will develop test
sites for drones, a critical next step for the march of the unmanned
aircraft into U.S. skies.
Alaska, Nevada, New
York, North Dakota, Texas and Virginia will host the research sites,
the agency said.
(Related) A much more
interesting and detailed paper on the drones in our future.
DOD
Unmanned Systems Integrated Roadmap FY2013-2038
by Sabrina
I. Pacifici on December 31, 2013
“The purpose of this
Roadmap is to articulate a vision and strategy for the continued
development, production, test, training, operation, and sustainment
of unmanned systems technology across DoD. This Unmanned
Systems Integrated Roadmap establishes a technological vision for
the next 25 years and outlines actions and technologies for DoD and
industry to pursue to intelligently and affordably align with this
vision.”
“Executive Summary -
Unmanned systems continue to deliver new and enhanced battlefield
capabilities to the warfighter. While the demand for unmanned
systems continues unabated today, a number of factors will influence
unmanned program development in the future. Three primary forces are
driving the Department of Defense’s (DoD) approach in planning for
and developing unmanned systems.
1.
Combat operations in Southwest Asia have demonstrated the military
utility of unmanned systems on today’s battlefields and have
resulted in the expeditious integration of unmanned technologies into
the joint force structure. [Military vs. CIA? Bob]
2.
Downward economic forces will continue to constrain Military
Department budgets for the foreseeable future. [CIA has the
budget Bob]
3.
The changing national security environment poses unique challenges.
A strategic shift in national security to the Asia-Pacific Theater
presents different operational considerations based on environment
and potential adversary capabilities that may require unmanned
systems to operate in anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) areas where
freedom to operate is contested. [China isn't going to like
drones overflying “their islands.” Bob]
Sizing up the
competition. I like their “site of your choice” option for some
classes.
[Sample
Security Policies:
http://www.sans.org/security-resources/policies/
I'm doomed. I was
hired to teach Computer Security, with a promise that I could teach a
few Business courses as well, but for the last year all I've been
scheduled for is math, math and more math. Apparently my students
think I can make it understandable. I'm doomed. (Maybe I just point
them to good resources?)
NRICH
- An Excellent Source of Math Lesson Activities
At the end of
yesterday's post of ten
resources for high school and middle school math teachers I asked
for suggestions for additional resources. This morning Colleen
Young (whose blog is a must-read for math teachers) emailed me
with the suggestion of NRICH.
NRICH
is a provider of mathematics curricula and lesson plans covering
everything from basic addition through advanced algebra and geometry.
On NRICH you can find
dozens
of posters to download and print. Each of the posters displays a
mathematics "trick" or challenge question. Teachers can
download and print any of the posters in the collection. Each poster
in the collection is linked to a problem page that contains notes for
teachers using the posters.
No comments:
Post a Comment