What
now, Vladimir?
Ukraine
crisis: Putin warns Ukraine faces 'serious consequences' after
signing EU deal
Russia
has warned there could be 'serious consequences' for Ukraine after
its President Petro Poroshenko signed up to a trade and economic pact
with the European Union, in a deal that has been central to the
crisis in the country.
…
Dmitry Peskov, a spokesman for Mr Putin, told Russian news agencies
that the Kremlin would respond to the EU-Ukraine accord "as soon
as negative consequences arise for the economy". [What
does that mean? Bob]
…
The European Union signed similar association agreements with two
other former Soviet republics, Moldova and Georgia.
Perspective.
Roughly one card in seven.
Study:
14 Percent of Debit Cards Exposed by Breaches in 2013
The
upsurge is chronicled in the 2014 Debit Issuer Study. The report is
now in its ninth edition...
…
According to the report, 84 percent of financial institutions
reissued all exposed cards in response to Target, compared to only 29
percent that typically reissue all exposed cards as a standard
response to breaches.
Unexpected...
This one seems to have grabbed their attention. (Ten times more
work/cost?)
Chris
Sonderby, Facebook Deputy General Counsel, has an update on
Facebook’s attempts to fight bulk warrants from the government:
… Since last summer, we’ve been fighting hard against a set of
sweeping search warrants issued by a court in New York that demanded
we turn over nearly all data from the accounts of 381 people who use
our service, including photos, private messages and other
information. This unprecedented request is by far the largest we’ve
ever received—by a magnitude of more than ten—and we have argued
that it was unconstitutional from the start.
Of the 381 people whose accounts were the subject of these warrants,
62 were later charged in a disability fraud case. This means that no
charges will be brought against more than 300 people whose data was
sought by the government without prior notice to the people affected.
The government also obtained gag orders that prohibited us from
discussing this case and notifying any of the affected people until
now.
We’ve gone to court and repeatedly asserted that these overly broad
warrants–which contain no
date restrictions and allow the government to keep the seized data
indefinitely–violate the privacy rights of the people on
Facebook and ignore Fourth Amendment safeguards against unreasonable
searches and seizures. We fought forcefully against these 381
requests and were told by a
lower court that as an online service provider we didn’t even have
the legal standing to contest the warrants. We complied
only after the appeals court denied our application to stay this
ruling, and after the prosecutor filed a motion to find us in
criminal contempt.
Last Friday, we filed an appellate brief in support of our continuing
efforts to invalidate these sweeping warrants and to force the
government to return the data it has seized and retained.
Immediately after we filed our appeal, the government moved to unseal
the warrants and all court filings, which has allowed us to finally
notify the people whose accounts were affected about the warrants and
our ongoing legal efforts.
But we feel strongly that there is more work to do, and we will
continue our legal fight to retrieve data that has been seized and
retained by the government. We recognize that law enforcement needs
to investigate potential crimes, but we believe all government data
requests must be narrowly tailored, proportionate to the case, and
subject to strict judicial oversight. Moreover, we believe search
warrants for digital information should be specific and narrow in
scope, just like warrants for physical evidence. These restrictions
are critical to preventing overreaching legal requests and protecting
people’s information.
We will continue to fight on your behalf, and we recognize the
importance of this responsibility. We look forward to keeping you
updated about our progress.
Under
the
post, you can see a chronology of developments in the case.
I
don’t often say this, but in this case, good for Facebook! [Ditto!
Bob]
Is
there a review procedure that caught this (if not, why not?) or just
a smart defense attorney?
Andrew
Duffy reports:
A Superior Court judge has tossed out most of the evidence in a drug
trafficking case after ruling that an Ottawa police officer authored
a deliberately misleading application for a cellphone wiretap order.
In a decision released Thursday, Justice Robert Beaudoin said the
bulk of the evidence obtained against Temorshah Hafizi, 40, must be
excluded because of the police transgression, which offended the
accused’s privacy rights.
Such orders are rarely made by judges assessing the constitutionality
of wiretap warrants.
Read
more on Ottawa
Citizen.
A
huge database that makes it possible for every law enforcement
organization to act lke they know you personally (and intimately?)
J.D.
Tuccille writes:
The FBI’s facial
recognition database, into which it wants to put 52 million of
our mugs by the end of 2015, is only part of its larger Next
Generation Identification (NGI) program. The NGI program is
intended to give the feds a full range of means to identify us
according to biometric markers, including facial feature, digitized
fingerprints, photographs of tattoos, scans of the irises of human
eyes…
It’s a lot of data for tagging people, all going into a centralized
system. That has plenty of people worried about misuse, abuse, and
the overall nudge this sort of capability gives us toward a total
surveillance state.
Yesterday, 32 organizations from across the political spectrum,
including the American Civil Liberties Union, the Electronic Frontier
Foundation (EFF), and R Street Institute, asked
Attorney General Eric Holder to explain just how the United
States government plans to use the system it’s building and the
data contained therein.
Read
more on Reason.
Is
this what I'm left with after the Aereo decision?
App
Watch: FilmOn Has Much More Than Broadcast TV
…
Like Aereo, FilmOn offers over-the-air TV channels through a
website and mobile apps. Also similar to Aereo, FilmOn's offerings
are affected by Wednesday's Supreme Court decision saying that such a
setup is prohibited under U.S. copyright law, at least without paying
broadcasters.
While
the case was being argued in court, FilmOn founder Alki David told me
that broadcast channels represent less than 5 percent of what FilmOn
offers, so there's plenty to watch — regardless of the outcome. In
anticipation of the court ruling, I spent part of a recent trip
assessing that claim using a laptop, an iPad, an iPhone and a Samsung
Android phone.
While Aereo's monthly service starts at $8, FilmOn
is free. But you have to put up with a short video ad
before you start watching. You can watch on Windows and Mac
computers, iOS, Android and BlackBerry 10 devices and Roku's
streaming player. You can watch channels live or record up to 10
hours of shows for free. You can also buy more space to store the
shows you record.
…
Besides over-the-air channels, FilmOn offers more than 600 on all
sorts of topics, including fashion, travel, comedy and news.
Most
of the channels are packaged by FilmOn based on programming it owns
or licenses. FilmOn also offers some cable TV channels outright —
little-known ones such as Pivot, a channel launched last year to
target 18 to 34 year olds. It also has TV channels from abroad.
…
There's some truth to that, as long as the content is interesting.
One problem is that FilmOn seems geared toward a young male audience,
so the channels that come up first include College Hotties, Hooters'
Calendar Girls and Live Boxing. In fact, David told me the bikini
and horror channels are among the most popular on FilmOn.
It
takes some patience to find other things to watch. War buffs will
appreciate FilmOn's extensive library of documentaries on World War
II. Immigrants will appreciate news channels from their home
country.
For
some of my students...
31
Premium Android Apps Available for Free on Amazon
…
The Amazon Appstore is giving away 31 paid Android apps, worth more
than $100, for free. The offer will remain valid
until tomorrow (28th June) and you can head over to
Amazon.com to download the various apps that are available as part of
this package.
There
are some things technology was not meant to do! Apparently, lots of
folks haven't gotten the word.
–
is a site that enables you to put your Instagram photos on
marshmallows. Costing $26 for a box of 9, this British service
transforms your photos into multi-sensory delicacies. How about some
selfie marshmallows for your partner? Or perhaps some of your ex to
roast over a fire? The possibilities are endless. What would YOU
put on your marshmallows?
So
that's what my students are doing!
No comments:
Post a Comment