The United States legislative system won’t always give you what you want. A lot of times, it’ll give you the exact opposite. Like CISPA for instance. But the real beauty of it all is transparency; if you don’t feel adequately represented it’s a piece of cake to figure out exactly who to yell at. More »
After being squashed in the Senate last year, the CISPA bill has made a reappearance in the House of Representatives once again, and it passed with flying colors. The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, as it’s called, passed in the House by a majority vote of 288 to 127. It’s now on to the Senate to get a yea or nay.
The announcement of the passed bill was made by the House Intelligence Committee via Twitter, who also noted that CISPA passed the House with 92 Democrats voting for the bill “despite the President’s veto threat.” The committee also mentions that there was overwhelming bipartisan majority, and Committee Chairman Mike Rogers said that, by passing the bill, the House has “shown how bipartisanship works.”
However, there’s still grave concern over privacy issues. CISPA’s plan is to essentially dig up information on you by allowing companies to share your data with the government in order to strengthen security against various cyber threats. The bill is now one one step closer to becoming a law thanks to today’s House passing.
Furthermore, unlike SOPA, President Obama may sign the CISPA bill to officially make it a law. He has signed an executive cybersecurity order, and he’s been urging Congress the past few months to create legislation that would broaden the order. However, the White House said that it would veto CISPA if significant changes weren’t made to the bill.
House passes CISPA bill with flying colors is written by Craig Lloyd & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.
CISPA, or the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, or “the worst privacy disaster our country has ever faced” has just passed through the House of Representatives with an astounding majority of 288 to 127. More »
The popularity of two-factor authentication is too much for Microsoft, as they will buckle under the pressure and offer two-factor authentication for all 700 million Microsoft accounts. The company announced today that they will be rolling out the new feature over the next few days, giving Microsoft users a little more piece of mind.
Two-factor authentication will protect an entire Microsoft account, including services like Skype and Xbox Live. Currently, the only Microsoft services that offers two-factor authentication are for credit card activities on various websites and services such as commerce.microsoft.com and xbox.com, and SkyDrive.
Two-factor authentication is essentially a new form of credentials. Instead of only needing a password, users are also required to have some sort of device to confirm logging in, such as a mobile phone. Whenever you log into an unknown computer, Microsoft will ask for your password as well as send you a unique code to your mobile phone that you will then enter in into the login screen.
You can set up two-factor authentication on Microsoft’s Account Management page, but as aforementioned, you may not see the new feature pop up until later in the week. We highly recommend setting it up if you rely on your Microsoft account a lot. Even with a secure password, hackers can still get in, but having two-factor authentication makes it much more difficult.
Microsoft begins rolling out two-factor authentication is written by Craig Lloyd & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.
Let’s face it: Facebook privacy is something of a misnomer — it’s hard to use “Facebook” and “privacy” in the same sentence without it being considered negative. However, the social networking giant knows it, and it has announced that it will be partnering up with 19 state attorneys general in order to raise awareness for teen privacy on Facebook.
Facebook will be working with the National Association of Attorneys General in order to promote privacy awareness and provide general tips to teenagers on how to use Facebook’s privacy settings. Of course, many of us could use a lesson on how to keep our profiles private, but it seems teenagers are the main culprits.
More state attorneys general might hop on board in the future, but so far 19 of them will contribute to the initiative. Each of the 19 states will create their own informational videos on how to better manage your Facebook profile, as well as provide a general tip sheet with various. There will also be videos created by Facebook that will answer questions on privacy.
Frankly, we’re glad to see that Facebook is taking some initiative when it comes to privacy on the internet, and teaching people how to effectively use their services. Facebook is seen the brunt of criticism over its privacy practices over the past few years, and it looks like they’re finally coming around to their senses.
[via All Things D]
Facebook partnering with attorneys general for privacy awareness is written by Craig Lloyd & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.
Google executive chairman Eric Schmidt has voiced his concerns over the use of civilian drones. In an interview with The Guardian, he states that civilian drones could potentially be used irresponsibly, and can compromise a person’s privacy. He also addresses concerns that these miniature drones can potentially be used as a terrorist weapon. He says that terrorists can strap weapons, like IEDs (improved explosive devices), to the drones.
He provides a scenario in which drones can invade a person’s privacy. He says,
“How would you feel if your neighbour went over and bought a commercial observation drone that can launch from their backyard. It just flies over your house all day. How would you feel about it?”
He says that while its understandable why the government would want to use drones, it’s another thing when drones start becoming available to everyone. While drones have a very practical use, like India’s use of drones to combat rhinoceros poaching, it can also be used in a negative way if it falls into the wrong hands. One major concern is people using drones to stalk people and peep in on them.
While voicing his concerns that mini-drones can be used as weapons, he says,
“I’m not going to pass judgment on whether armies should exist, but I would prefer to not spread and democratize the ability to fight war to every single human being. It’s got to be regulated… It’s one thing for governments, who have some legitimacy in what they’re doing, but have other people doing it… it’s not going to happen.”
He stated back in January that Terrorists can equip drones with IEDs, and that “could result in conflict between civil and military drones.” He continued by saying,
“Or it could happen over the US-Mexico border. Maybe we’ll even see the world’s first drone strike against cyber-terrorists. That’s how seriously evil part of this could be.”
As drones become more advanced in technology, and as they become more affordable to the average consumer, privacy and safety concerns are on the rise. Back in early March, there was a scare when an unmanned drone was hovering around the JFK International Airport, just 200 feet away from one of the airplanes. The Government Accountability Office warned Congress that as drones became more commonplace, major issues will arise surrounding privacy, security, and safety.
[via BBC]
Google’s Eric Schmidt asks for increased regulation for civilian drones is written by Brian Sin & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.
Everyone knows the IRS is our nation’s tax collector, but it is also a law enforcement organization tasked with investigating criminal violations of the tax laws. New documents released to the ACLU under the Freedom of Information Act reveal that the IRS Criminal Tax Division has long taken the position that the IRS can read your emails without a warrant-a practice that one appeals court has said violates the Fourth Amendment (and we think most Americans would agree). More »
Looks like the IRS believes it can read your emails, Facebook Chats, Twitter Direct Messages, SMS messages, and more without needing to obtain a search warrant beforehand. However, a ruling in the 2010 case, U.S. v. Warshak, by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals states that accessing someone’s email messages without obtaining a warrant first violates the Fourth Amendment.
According to an IRS 2009 Search Warrant Handbook discovered by the American Civil Liberties Union, the IRS says,
“Emails and other transmissions generally lose their reasonable expectation of privacy and thus their Fourth Amendment protection once they have been sent from an individual’s computer.”
The ACLU says that under the currently outdated Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), if an email is in an email provider’s server for more than 180 days, or has been opened, it does not require a warrant to access. Authorities can access the emails with just an administrative subpoena. Luckily, the ruling in the U.S v. Warshak protects individuals from unreasonable searches by the government. However, the main fear is whether or not the IRS would be abiding by the Warshak ruling throughout the entire country, or if its only going to be abiding by it throughout the Sixth Circuit.
When the IRS issued edits to its Internal Revenue Manual in March 2011, one year after the Warshak ruling, it still decided to keep its original policy. The manual states that under ECPA,
Investigators can obtain everything in an account except for unopened e-mail or voice mail stored with a provider for 180 days or less using a [relevant-and-material-standard]court order.
Even on today’s date, the Internal Revenue Manual retains the same policy that a warrant is not required to search emails stored for more than 180 days. The IRS strongly believes that emails, or any form of communication held in electronic storage, is not protected by the Fourth Amendment. Back in 2009, the IRS Criminal Tax Division’s Office of Chief Counsel stated,
“The Fourth Amendment does not protect communications held in electronic storage, such as email messages stored on a server, because internet users do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in such communications.”
The office echoed its stance in 2010 at a presentation, stating, “4th Amendment Does Not Protect Emails Stored on Server.” Luckily for us, a lot of companies are all fighting to protect your information and your rights. Amazon, Apple, AT&T, eBay, Google, Intel, Microsoft, Twitter, and many advocacy groups have all asked Congress to update the ECPA to make it clear to the IRS, and other authorities, that they need warrants to access someone’s private, electronic conversations.
[via CNET]
IRS believes it can read your emails, chats, and more without a warrant is written by Brian Sin & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.
Since its unveiling, many individuals have been vocal about Facebook Home concerns, speculating about privacy and what information the service many gather. To mitigate the worries and clarify the issues, Facebook has released answers to several questions that have been posed repeatedly, talking about what information it gathers, how privacy works with it, and more.
Facebook clarified that users can continue to access the social network on their handsets the same way they currently do – there’s no need to use Home if you don’t want it. If you do choose to use the service, you can likewise ditch it any time you want, turning it off under “Settings” or removing it from the lockscreen. This way, users can try it out, but aren’t obligated to keep it.
As far as what information Home gathers, Facebook says that it collects data on how users use the service, such as what apps the user places in the Home launcher. It also pulls information about how the app is interacted with, such as commenting and liking. On pre-installed devices, Home will display notifications and Facebook collects certain information from the notification, with the exception of its content. This data is stored for 90 days, after which point indentifying information is removed.
Another big question is whether Home gathers data about other applications and how they are used. The answer is “no.” In the example given, Facebook would get data about an app that is launched using the app launcher, but it would not receive any information about how that app is used. Likewise, location information is used the same way the regular Facebook app uses it, and location services can be disabled by the user. For more information, you can check out the Data Use Policy.
[via Facebook]
Facebook addresses Home privacy concerns is written by Brittany Hillen & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.
Some of the discussion about Facebook Home since its debut yesterday has related to concerns that it gives the social network too much access to user’s information, and now Facebook has responded. Its blog post specifies that Home is subject to the same controls as everything else in a user’s Facebook account. It states that Facebook will not track user’s location any differently than the existing app, and while it could see what apps are launched, it can’t observe what actions are taken within them beyond the already existing Facebook API hooks. As far as information that is collected, it will have a list of apps that are in the Home launcher, and tracks data including which apps are responsible for notification, which is kept identifiable for up to 90 days.
Filed under: Cellphones, Software, Mobile, Google, Facebook
Source: Facebook Blog
This is site is run by Sascha Endlicher, M.A., during ungodly late night hours. Wanna know more about him? Connect via Social Media by jumping to about.me/sascha.endlicher.
