Posts Tagged ‘privacy’
Security and privacy for corporates and individuals in the mobile age
August 9th, 2011
Every move I make online is tracked. They haven’t tracked every breath I take yet but – hey - it’s only a question of time.
I’m indebted to Michael Cobb, contributor to Search Security for an illuminating article on Smartphone security. Mike picks up on recent evidence that Apple iPhone and Google Android have been harvesting location-related data. Android has been delivering this information to Google “several times an hour”.
Does Google care, as an organisation that does no evil, that we are not aware of this (until now) and does it, and other Smartphone manufacturers, feel it is ethically and morally right to harvest this data?
Maybe these fierce boys, fighting to control the mobile sector, should think about walking a mile in our moccasins. They might gather some real-life data.
But Mike makes the main point, beyond ethics and morality. This harvesting raises questions about what else can be transmitted without the mobile user’s knowledge. It’s a very big security question for every company.
How can businesses of every size respond effectively to the threat posed by mobile location-based services?
You’ve got to read Mike’s full post if you care about mobile security. He makes the case so well and offers tips that can protect you.
The current mobile internet is a Wild West. Find yourself a good Sheriff.
A word from Mike: “Enterprises can’t blindly trust applications to handle data they can access or gather. Considering, in order to truly mitigate the risks posed by smartphone applications sending data to third parties, a full risk assessment must be carried out on any apps to be used on phones that access the enterprise network.”
God bless that man.
Brian Solis and Chris Beck define the future of being social
August 27th, 2010
I’ve been following the series of video conversations between Brian Solis and Chris Beck, which are extraordinary in their breadth and depth. They are ‘must see’ for anyone involved with social media PR and indeed for anyone who is interested in the future of online communication.
What strikes me is the clarity of thought, the strategic minds at work here. These guys inhabit ‘social’ but also understand the commercial imperatives that underlie many online conversations. My favourite is the discussion on privacy and what constitutes the ‘online self’.
At a time when some commentators are questioning the existence and value of social networks, Brian and Chris offer a positive, inspiring view of the possibilities. Is social media dead? No. Does it present problems? Yes. Can we rise to the challenge? Take a look at these videos and make up your own mind. Personally, I’d say that with people like Brian and Chris leading the discussion, we’re in very safe hands.
You can see the complete series on Brian’s website
Co-developer of the World Wide Web discusses Facebook and privacy
April 30th, 2010
I’ve just come across a fascinating interview with Robert Cailliau, a Belgian computer scientist who, together with Sir Tim Berners Lee, developed the World Wide Web almost 20 years ago. The video was taken by Robin Wauters for Techcrunch.com, during The Next Web conference that has taken place in Amsterdam this week.
If you’re short of time, scroll to the 5.38 mark where Robert explains why he’s not on Facebook, and offers his view on how social networks need to change their position on privacy.
In regards to Facebook, Robert says: “I can get in, but I can’t get out. I don’t know what happens to my data.”
He also goes onto talk about Skype which apparently refused to take his identifier off once he closed his account. “You have no control. You cannot buy something a la carte. You have to agree to the whole block and go in and be bound hands and feet to their terms of service, which is something that I think has to change…we should seriously look at all of these social networks.”
Digital Economy Bill: It’s time for the community to speak out
March 16th, 2010
Last night you could have been forgiven for thinking that we’d stepped back 10 years in internet history, when the House of Lords approved the controversial Digital Economy Bill, which is now expected to be rushed through the Commons before the general election.
The bill, put forward by Business Secretary Lord Mandelson, could give courts the power to block websites which are infringing copyright, and includes plans to suspend the internet accounts of people who persistently download material illegally. This could result in sites such as YouTube – which has, in the past, been criticised by rights owners for hosting unsanctioned video clips of their artists or TV shows – being shut down.
It seems that the rights of the creative artist or “rights holder” are far more important than those of the wider internet community. Once we begin restricting online behaviour, it sets the foundations for greater censorship and ‘Big Brother’ monitoring. The internet has always been a place of anonymity and freedom of expression, but under the new bill, internet freedom could be severely curbed.
If the music industry in particular has a problem with no longer being able to monetise artists’ content effectively owing to the volume of illegal content on the web, then that’s their problem to resolve. One might argue that it’s time they updated their revenue model, rather than attempting to impose draconian measures on the internet community at large.
The BBC’s Bill Thompson puts it really nicely. “We are on the verge of building so many restrictions into online activity that the creativity, inventiveness and sheer joy of life on the net will be squeezed out just to ensure that over-hyped comedians are able to censor videos of their fans waiting for the show to begin.”
Now is the time for people to speak out and defend their rights in the digital world. Social networking provides individuals with the power to get their voice heard…so let’s make the most of it!
** These are my own views, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Liberate Media.
Safer Internet Day and beyond means serious fun with identity and privacy
February 9th, 2010
Safer Internet Day 2010 has again raised awareness of safer and more responsible use of online technology and mobile phones, especially among children and young people globally.
Insafe launched a pan-European quiz on 1st February, for 5-11 and 12-15 year-olds, open to individuals or school classes who compete with the objective of becoming increasingly aware of their role in protecting themselves and others online. An online SID Fair will also showcase participating organizations across the world, and schools are invited to register the events they will be running to mark the day.
SID’s “Think before you post” campaign asks not only young people but also challenges every digital citizen to examine how we deal with identity and privacy in digital environments. It’s a subject that academic colleagues Lorraine Warren and Kieron O’Hara have looked at in some detail.
There’s still a long road before we have constructed a theory and research methodology so Lorraine and Kieron’s early work is extremely valuable in mapping out the terrain.
Lorraine sets up the challenge and the goal really nicely in her recent posts; she argues for more detailed understanding of identity and its consequent effects on our view of online privacy. How, when and where we construct selves online has meaning for how we responsibly manage privacy.
As she says: “The challenge for today’s researchers is to take that thinking forward, and also create new ways of thinking about identity, how it is constructed and performed, not only in Web 2 world, but looking forward into a web 3 world too. In doing so, we can make a useful contribution to the debate on privacy – because identity is the nexus between the individual and society, and where so many of the debates are played out.”
Her views are amplified in a post on privacy and identity in the digital age that deals with separation of multiple online identities
Dr Warren’s University of Southampton colleague Kieron O’Hara, also draws out a few pathfinder ideas in recent papers on the limits of the person, privacy and empowerment which are worth reading in detail(http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/17123/ and http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/18242/).
Out of all these early discussions, we can build a coherent picture that helps us focus on how we understand and engage online; what’s really valuable and worth protecting.
And, as Venessa Miemis argues in her EmergentbyDesign blogpost, as social networks expand they force us to reassess the nature and value of privacy and identity. At the same time, they also engineer an effect that changes relationships and responsibilities. This drives people to position their personal reputation in terms of the value it has to the networks to which they are connected. This echoes Dr O’Hara’s ideas around privacy as a public good and that is an area where open discussion and detailed research would make a positive contribution to our understanding of what we are online.
The debate continues and the Privacy and Identity panel, postponed postponed in January because of ‘snow on the mind’, has now been rearranged for Tuesday 23rd March at The Royal Society in London.
Details of the event are here http://webscience.org/events.html.
Google’s Pirates vs Viacom’s Snoops
July 4th, 2008
No, i’m not talking about a sponsorship-crazed football match; I’m referring to the Google v Viacom lawsuit in the U.S., which, as I’m sure you’ve noticed, has stirred up a whole load of privacy and data issues for us all to argue about over the coming weeks and months.
However, for me, the issue is why request this data in the first place? What is Viacom trying to prove? According to the ruling, Viacom apparently needs access to the personal data of more than 100 million people to build a case against Google’s (YouTube) alleged piracy of various Viacom content, originating from the likes of MTV and Nickelodeon.
No matter how outrageous getting access to all that personal data to fight a court case is, do we really think Viacom has done this to conduct a detailed examination of the viewing habits of millions of people around the world, as some have suggested? Personally I doubt Viacom would be that obvious, but in the cold light of day, i’m struggling with the alternatives.
What can they do? Review all that data, win the case and disrupt the movement of content on the web just because they are fighting a losing battle against content sharing in the long term? Or, somehow use that data to gain advantage.
Seems very odd, especially when the data required to prove YouTube’s piracy, or not, is most likely available via other means.
Maybe Viacom is taking some sort of reverse privacy stand and showing us all how much data large web-based content providers hold on us all, and in fact succeeding where the U.S. Government failed in getting Google to hand over its data.
Maybe it’s just getting one over on Google.
Either way, Google is fighting to be allowed to clean the data of personal information. So we shall see.
Bobbie Johnson offers a good write-up of the story in the Guardian.
June 6th, 2008
It seems that the open online generation is beginning to have second thoughts about the content that it shares with the world via the web.
According to a press complaints commission survey into the media’s use of personal material sourced from social networks, and the web in general, sharing has quickly turned into protecting.
The survey revealed:
- Almost 80% of social networking site users would be more careful about the details they put online if they knew the media might use it.
- 89% wanted guidelines introduced on what the media could use.
- 49% of respondents said it was wrong for the media to use information that they had posted online without asking consent of the person concerned.
- 58% were fairly or very concerned about the lack of control about how they were depicted on websites.
We have already seen the result of employers searching for a prospect’s background on the web and turning up various images and text that the average candidate wouldn’t want their prospective employer to see, and now it’s spread to the media.
To be honest, i have little sympathy for people that freely share content one day but then want the brakes applied when it comes to using that information in the media. I do have some sympathy for people that didn’t know that they were being filmed, or if the content is pure fiction, and in those cases yes, regulation would be advisable, but wholly unenforceable.
However, for those that feel the need to share their most intimate/private moments and content on the web, even in so called ’safe environments’ such as friend-invited Facebook, the old rules still apply. If it’s on the web, it’s in the public domain and you’ve waved your rights.
I even find myself agreeing with the chairman of the PPC, Sir Christopher Meyer, who said: “In the digital age, self-regulation, with its sound principles and speed of operation, has never been more relevant.”
I must be getting old, as this just seems like common sense…
The BBC has the full story.
 |