Tag Archive for Electronic Frontier Foundation

| September 28, 2019
Comments Off on Data Privacy End Run

Data Privacy End Run

Data Privacy End RunIn an attempt to end-run stricter data privacy regulation the Business Roundtable, an association of CEOs of America’s largest companies, sent an open letter to the U.S. House and Senate urging the politicians to pass a comprehensive national data privacy law. According to CircleID, the heart of the letter is the creation of federal privacy laws that the companies argue should replace various state-level laws that have already been passed.

CEOs of America's largest companiesThe CEOs want one law that governs all user privacy and data protection across the U.S., which would simplify their lives. From the letter:

Now is the time for Congress to act and ensure that consumers are not faced with confusion about their rights and protections based on a patchwork of inconsistent state laws.

Among the items hidden deep in the CEO’s “consumer privacy framework [more here]” are some onerous provisions.

  • Private individuals should not be allowed to sue companies if those companies violate the data privacy law itself.
  • Potential pay-for-privacy schemes and
  • Overriding existing state data privacy protections already signed into law.

The Data Privacy Blog points out that in 2019, a number of states passed new and expanded data breach notification laws, including:

  • California.
  • data breach notification lawsIllinois,
  • Maine,
  • Maryland,
  • Massachusetts,
  • New Jersey,
  • New York,
  • Oregon,
  • Texas, and
  • Washington.

Also, since July 1, 2019, Delaware, New Hampshire, and Connecticut have enacted laws imposing new cybersecurity requirements on insurance companies.

ZDnet points out that many privacy advocates (and even some tech CEOs) believe the CEOs aren’t really looking after users’ interests, but their own. There’s a belief that companies are trying to aggregate any privacy lawmaking in Congress, where lobby groups can water down any meaningful user protections that may impact bottom lines. Open Secrets reports that the Business Roundtable has spent over $6.6M lobbying in D.C. so far in 2019. As followers of the Bach Seat know, money talk and citizens walk in D.C.

Among the CEOs who were involved in the end run included;

The Data Privacy Blog points out the coincidence that the CEO’s framework comes just months before the California Consumer Protection Act is set to go into effect in 2020.

throw money at the politiciansFollowers of the Bach Seat know many companies make money by selling customers’ personal or device-usage data. Privacy policies with too many teeth could prevent companies from selling your data to pay the CEO’s average salary of $17.2M. The LA Times reports that compensation for American chief executives increased by 940% from 1978 to 2018, while pay for the average worker rose only 12% over the same 40-year period.

rb-

Seems to me that the goal of this proposal of the leading CEO’s is not to protect our privacy. Their goal is to centralize the rule-making in the D.C. swamp and throw money at the politicians to do the Business Roundtable’s bidding. Then the CEOs will be able to maintain the status-quo and normalize the existing digital surveillance system that serves them well.

LobbyingThe CEO’s sudden interest in data privacy has more to do with the growing wave of real reform at the state level and the calculation that Trump will be booted from office and less business-friendly POTUS will take his place in 2020. And little to do with citizen’s privacy.

The digital rights organization Electronic Frontier Foundation supports a private right of action for any national consumer privacy law, as such a right would further enable members of the public to fight back against companies that violate the law.

The EFF wrote the best way to protect ordinary people’s privacy is action.

It is not enough for government to pass laws that protect consumers from corporations … to ensure companies do not ignore them … empower ordinary consumers to bring their own lawsuits against the companies that violate their privacy rights.

Signatures from Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Apple CEO Tim Cook were notably absent from the list although both have, in the past, supported a comprehensive federal privacy law.

Related articles

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

Category: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
| August 7, 2012
Comments Off on Anti-Patent Troll Bill Introduced

Anti-Patent Troll Bill Introduced

A newAnti-Patent Troll Bill Introduced bill introduced in the House of Representatives attempts to deter frivolous patent litigation. The bill would force unsuccessful patent plaintiffs to cover defendants’ legal costs according to Daily Wireless. Introduced by Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) and co-sponsored by Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), the Saving High-Tech Innovators from Egregious Legal Disputes (SHIELD) Act is limited to patents related to computer hardware and software.

House of Representaive“Patent trolls don’t create new technology and they don’t create American jobs,” DeFazio said in a news release. “They pad their pockets by buying patents on products they didn’t create and then suing the innovators who did the hard work and created the product.”

The article explains that patent trolls often buy broad patents. The purchase allows them to file flimsy lawsuits against multiple companies for infringement. Despite very thin evidence to back their lawsuits, companies are often forced to settle. They settle because going to court can easily cost over $1 million in legal costs even if the company prevails, explained DeFazio in a press release.

Loser pays

Electronic Frontier FoundationThe Electronic Frontier Foundation explains the idea behind the SHIELD Act is simple. A plaintiff needs to believe that a defendant actually infringes a valid patent before it sues. If it doesn’t, then the plaintiff could be on the hook for the costs of litigation. They would also have to cover the winning party’s attorneys’ fees (which can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars in some cases).

Fee shifting, often called “loser pays,” is not a new idea. It’s long existed in copyright law, it allows a court to award the winning party costs and fees in certain cases. In patent litigation, the EFF says this type of provision would help tilt the playing field slightly more in favor of the good guys. Fee shifting would empower innovators to fight back while discouraging trolls from threatening lawsuits to start.

The EFF has set up a website defendinnovation.org to lead the battle against patent trolls and reform the U.S. Patent Office.

rb-

Voter apathySigh – Today is primary election day here in the U.S. and I just got back from voting and a whopping 417 people in my neighborhood had voted. There are almost 17,000 people 18 years or old.

Voter apathy has everything to do with everything about where the US is today, including patent reform. Who are the politicians going to listen to?  I have covered the patent mess for a while here, here, here, and here. I doubt the political clout me and my 416 other neighborhood voters even matter when compared to the millions of dollars that Apple, Google, ATT, and the rest spend on lobbyists in Washington and Lansing to buy the legislation they want.

Have a nice day!

Related articles

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

Category: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , , , ,
| July 5, 2012
Comments Off on Declaration of Internet Freedom

Declaration of Internet Freedom

Declaration of Internet FreedomFor too long in the U.S., Congress has attempted to legislate the Internet in favor of big corporations and heavy-handed law enforcement at the expense of its users’ basic Constitutional rights. The Electronic Frontier Foundation writes that Netizens’ strong desire to keep the Internet open and free has been brushed aside as naïve and inconsequential, in favor of lobbyists and special interest groups. Well, no longer.

EFF logoThe EFF and a broad coalition of civil society groups called on elected officials to sign the new Declaration of Internet Freedom and uphold basic rights in the digital world. The Declaration is simple; it offers five core principles that should guide any policy relating to the Internet: stand up for online free expression, openness, access, innovation, and privacy. Sign it here.

 

Declaration of Internet Freedom

Early Signers of Declaration of Internet Freedom

American Civil Liberties UnionCheezburger, Inc.Free Press reddit
Amnesty International Center for Democracy & Technology MacUser magazineTechdirt
BoxeeElectronic Frontier Foundation MozillaTucows

Related articles
  • Amnesty International, Harvard professors sign Declaration of Internet Freedom (nextlevelofnews.com)

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

Category: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , , , ,
| November 26, 2010
Comments Off on HTTPS Everywhere Updated

HTTPS Everywhere Updated

The Electronic Freedom Frontier (EFF) has updated its HTTPS Everywhere security tool to enhance protection for Firefox browser users against webpage security flaws. The new version of HTTPS Everywhere is a response to growing concerns about website vulnerability in the aftermath of the October 2010 release of Firesheep.

MalwareFiresheep is an attack tool that could enable an eavesdropper on a network to take over another user’s web accounts on social networking sites like Facebook or webmail systems such as HotMail if the browser’s connection to the web application either does not use cryptography or does not use it thoroughly enough.

Since the first release of HTTPS Everywhere the Firefox plugin has been downloaded more than half a million times.

Other sites targeted by Firesheep that now receive protection from HTTPS Everywhere include

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

Category: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , , , ,
| October 16, 2010
One comment

Apple Wants to Patent Spyware

Apple Wants to Patent SpywareThe Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is reporting that Apple, Inc., (AAPL) has filed a patent application for a “Systems and Methods for Identifying Unauthorized Users of an Electronic Device. ” The patent is for a device to investigate a user’s identity to decide if that user is “unauthorized.”

Information Apple plans to collect

  • EFF logoThe system can take a picture of the user’s face, “without a flash, any noise, or any indication that a picture is being taken to prevent the current user from knowing he is being photographed“;
  • The system can record the user’s voice, whether or not a phone call is even being made;
  • The system can determine the user’s unique individual heartbeat “signature”;
  • To decide if the device has been hacked, the device can watch for “a sudden increase in memory usage of the electronic device“;
  • The user’s “Internet activity can be monitored or any communication packets that are served to the electronic device can be recorded“; and
  • The device can take a photograph of the surrounding location to find where it is being used.

Who is the responsible party

Apple logoThe EFF believes that as a result of this new technology, Apple will know who you are, where you are, and what you are doing and saying, and even how fast your heart is beating. In some embodiments of Apple’s “invention,” this information “can be gathered every time the electronic device is turned on, unlocked, or used.”  When an “unauthorized use” is detected, Apple can contact a “responsible party.” A “responsible party” may be the device’s owner or as the EFF points out the “responsible party may also be “proper authorities or the police.” Once an unauthorized user is identified, Apple could wipe the device and remotely store the user’s “sensitive data.” Apple’s patent application suggests it may use the technology not just to limit “unauthorized” uses of its phones but also to shut down a stolen phone.

However, the EFF says Apple’s new technology would do much more. The EFF believes that this patented device enables Apple to secretly collect, store, and potentially use sensitive biometric information about the user. This is dangerous in two ways according to the EFF:

  1. It is far more than what is needed just to protect you against a lost or stolen phone. It’s extremely privacy-invasive and it puts you at great risk if Apple’s data on you are compromised. But it’s not only the biometric data that are a concern.
  2. Apple does not explain what it will do with all of this collected information on its users, how long it will keep this information, how it will use this information, or if it will share this information with other third parties. We know based on long experience that if Apple collects this information, law enforcement will come for it, and may even order Apple to turn it on for reasons other than simply returning a lost phone to its owner.
  3. Apple’s technology includes various types of usage monitoring — also very privacy-invasive. This patented process could be used to retaliate against users who jailbreak or tinker with their device in ways that Apple views as “unauthorized” even if it is perfectly legal under copyright law.

rb-

The EFF says this is a new business opportunity: spyware and what they are calling “traitorware.” The patent would allow Apple to find and punish users who tinker with their devices. The EFF says it’s not just spyware, it’s “traitorware,” since it is designed to allow Apple to retaliate against customers who do something Apple doesn’t like.

This patent is downright creepy and invasive — certainly far more than would be needed to respond to the possible loss of a phone. Spyware, and its new cousin traitorware, will hurt customers and companies alike — Apple should shelve this idea before it backfires on both it and its customers.

Steve Jobs wants you

Related articles

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

Category: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,