Imagine the ‘discussion’ if Russia also
manipulated the Net Neutrality repeal. What does Russia have to gain
if it is repealed?
NY Attorney General
Schneiderman estimated
that hundreds of thousands of Americans’ identities were stolen
and used in spam campaigns that support repealing net neutrality. My
research found at least 1.3 million fake pro-repeal comments,
with suspicions about many more. In fact, the sum of fake pro-repeal
comments in the proceeding may number in the millions. In this post,
I will point out one particularly egregious spambot submission, make
the case that there are likely many more pro-repeal spambots yet to
be confirmed, and estimate the public position on net neutrality in
the “organic” public submissions.¹
It takes very little to complete a full dossier.
(And my new favorite phrase!)
Name+DOB+SSN=FAFSA
Data Gold Mine
KrebsOnSecurity has sought to call attention to
online services which expose sensitive consumer data if the user
knows a handful of static details about a person that are broadly for
sale in the cybercrime underground, such as name,
date of birth, and Social Security Number. Perhaps the
most eye-opening example of this is on display at fafsa.ed.gov,
the Web site set up by the U.S.
Department of Education for anyone interested in
applying for federal student financial aid.
Short for the Free
Application for Federal Student Aid,
FAFSA is an extremely lengthy and detailed form required at all
colleges that accept and award federal aid to students.
Visitors to the login page for FAFSA have two
options: Enter either the student’s FSA ID and password, or choose
“enter the student’s information.” Selecting the latter brings
up a prompt to enter the student’s first and last name, followed by
their date of birth and Social Security Number.
Anyone who successfully supplies that information
on a student who has applied for financial aid through FAFSA then
gets to see a
virtual colonoscopy of personal information on that
individual and their family’s finances — including almost 200
different data elements.
Refining my understanding of “The Fourth.”
The Fourth
Amendment Doesn't Recognize a General "Right to be Secure"
… I don't find the “right to be secure”
argument persuasive, and I thought I would say why. Here's the
relevant text:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated[.]
That text does not provide for some sort of
general “right to be secure.” Rather, the text is much more
specific. It states that “the people” have a right “to be
secure” in particular things (“in their persons, houses, papers,
and effects”) against something specific (“unreasonable searches
and seizures”). In ordinary language, if you have a right to be
secure against some specific bad thing, you don't have a general
right to be secure. You just have a right to be secure against that
specific bad thing. Your right is violated if the bad thing happens.
If the bad thing doesn't happen, your right isn't violated.
A truly interesting question.
As machine learning
becomes more powerful, the field’s researchers increasingly find
themselves unable to account for what their algorithms know — or
how they know it.
Jobs for those who lose jobs to automation?
Facebook is
adding 500 more contractors in Germany to help comply with a new law
targeting online hate speech, according
to the Associated Press.
The new personnel, who
will work for a service provider called CCC out of a new office in
the western city of Essen that opened on Thursday, will be
responsible for reviewing content posted to the social media
platform.
The new law, passed by the German parliament in
June, requires social media sites to remove flagged content within 24
hours when the content is obviously illegal. Companies have a week to
remove more ambiguous cases.
It threatens fines of
up to 50 million euros ($59 million) for persistent failure to remove
illegal content.
Not just for kids?
For my students.
