PRIVACYnotes

Privacy in Public
 

Home | Privacy Links | Opt-Out

   


Archive


PRIVACYnotes #1

PRIVACYnotes #2
PRIVACYnotes #3
PRIVACYnotes #4
PRIVACYnotes #5
PRIVACYnotes #6
PRIVACYnotes #7
PRIVACYnotes #8
PRIVACYnotes #9
PRIVACYnotes #10
PRIVACYnotes #11
PRIVACYnotes #12
PRIVACYnotes #13
PRIVACYnotes #14
PRIVACYnotes #15
PRIVACYnotes #16
PRIVACYnotes #17
PRIVACYnotes #18
PRIVACYnotes #19
PRIVACYnotes #20
PRIVACYnotes #21
PRIVACYnotes #22
PRIVACYnotes #23
PRIVACYnotes #24
PRIVACYnotes #25
PRIVACYnotes #26
PRIVACYnotes #27
PRIVACYnotes #28
PRIVACYnotes #29
PRIVACYnotes #30
PRIVACYnotes #31
PRIVACYnotes #32
PRIVACYnotes #33
PRIVACYnotes #34
PRIVACYnotes #35
PRIVACYnotes #36
PRIVACYnotes #37
PRIVACYnotes #38
PRIVACYnotes #39
PRIVACYnotes #40
PRIVACYnotes #41
HIPAA

PRIVACYnotes Discussion List
Security Protecting Privacy is Good for Business

Respecting Privacy on the Web

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Privacynotes Digest
Security Protecting Privacy is Good for Business
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Published by: Mike Banks Valentine Privacynotes
privacy@Privacynotes.com www.Privacynotes.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
October 10, 2002 Issue # 029
----------------------------------------------------------------------

.....IN THIS DIGEST.....

// -- MODERATOR COMMENT -- //

"Public Privacy Redux" ~ Mike Banks Valentine

// -- PRIVACY NEWS -- //

"The Latest in Privacy Issues"

----------------------------------------------------------------------

// -- MODERATOR COMMENT -- //

==> TOPIC: PUBLIC PRIVACY REDUX

Last week I asked, Do Americans have a right of privacy while in public places? Nobody responded to that query.

This week, the news offers up two groups of privacy advocates asking that same question while making public statements about being watched. One news story [linked below] tells of an activist promoting the use of a simple, inexpensive laser pointer to blind security cameras while another group puts on performances for those same cameras. The camera blinding can't be called illegal as no property damage is done. The performers beg the question, 'what can be believed?' from those security cameras. Because it recorded an event, does it mean it was truth or reality? One can imagine that a new defensive move might be to suggest that actions caught on security videotape were actually performances played to the camera.

What are appropriate limits? We all put on performances when we know we are on camera. What if we act out a crime, but don't actually commit one? Is that wrong, illegal, unethical or simply making public statements in public places because we know we're being watched?

One of my favorite list moderators [who also subscribes to this list] used to threaten to take out his pointy stick when discussion slowed. I would be happy to ask questions directly of the privacy watchers I know are on the list, but you should simply assume that these questions are asked of all 400 of you. Maria? Bob? Marc?

Anyone like to comment on IBM's new Tivoli Privacy Manager? See linked news story below.

I look forward to meeting list members at The Digital ID World conference as this issue goes to 'press' and hope to bring back lots of material for discussion from Eric Norlin, the editor of Digital ID World and Privacynotes list member. If Eric is able to fit me in, I'll be sitting on a panel discussing privacy issues there. See ya next week with a report!

 

// -- PRIVACY NEWS -- //

Moderator note: There are two ways to access previously listed privacy news stories. One is to visit Privacynotes archives, the other (simpler) way is to visit

http://privacynotes.com/privacy_news.html where I also keep a privacy news archive.

International Business Machines Corp. will formally announce on Tuesday its new "digital privacy cop" -- software designed to automatically enforce privacy policies so that sensitive corporate information won't get inadvertently leaked. Currently, companies rely on privacy managers to set rules that employees must follow. IBM's new Tivoli Privacy Manager would make that screening automatic, the company said. For example, a firm's marketing department could be prevented from inadvertently sending out personal information on customers. "Now, employees write a privacy policy on paper for others to follow. "Tivoli Privacy Manager interfaces with other applications," serving as a digital privacy cop for a company.

http://news1.iwon.com/tech/article/id/224577|technology|10-07-2002:

Without dissent, the House passed legislation today to require federal agencies to review the effects on personal privacy of any new regulations that they propose and to let individuals go to court to attack those reviews as inadequate. Representative F. James Sensenbrenner, the Wisconsin Republican who heads the House Judiciary Committee, said the passage of the bill would "reaffirm our fidelity to the fundamental civil liberties cherished by all Americans." Representative Robert C. Scott, Democrat of Virginia, said the bill would help "protect Americans from unjustified or unintended invasions of privacy.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/08/politics/08PRIV.html

Confronted with the unblinking eyes of surveillance cameras, Michael Naimark believes he can hide in plain sight with the aid of a $1 laser pointer. Mr. Naimark, a Silicon Valley artist and technologist, His is a Little Brother response: using inexpensive laser pointers to temporarily blind those omnipresent electronic eyes. But in these security-conscious times, one person's civil liberties can be another's shortsighted anarchy. "We have laws prohibiting jamming police radar. It will be interesting to see if camera-jamming becomes illegal." In New York City, the Surveillance Camera Players, a guerrilla theatre troupe, is placing hand-drawn maps of video camera locations on the Internet and staging brief politically inspired performances in front of the cameras.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/07/technology/07ZZAP.html

A bipartisan report by some of the nation's leading information technology and national security experts recommends that the Bush administration develop a system to share intelligence gathered in the United States and abroad among local, state and federal agencies while developing guidelines to protect against abuses, "Protecting America's Freedom in an Information Age," strongly endorses giving responsibility for analyzing such information not to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, but to a new domestic intelligence center inside President Bush's planned Department of Homeland Security. Unless information provided by state and local officials, as well as the private sector, is shared with Washington, "we may wind up getting all of the disadvantages of invasion of privacy with none of the national security gains,"

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/07/national/07HOME.html

 

privacy@website101.com 5318 E. 2nd St. #789 Long Beach, CA 90803