Searching for "privacy"

free speech and privacy

IT’S THE (DEMOCRACY-POISONING) GOLDEN AGE OF FREE SPEECH

Jan 16, 2018

https://www.wired.com/story/free-speech-issue-tech-turmoil-new-censorship/

My note: the author uses the 1960 military junta in Turkey as an example. Here it is the 2014 “modern” ideological fight of increasingly becoming dictatorial Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan against his citizens by shutting off Twitter: http://time.com/33393/turkey-recep-tayyip-erdogan-twitter/
Here is more on civil disobedience and social media: http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=civil+disobedience

until recently, broadcasting and publishing were difficult and expensive affairs, their infrastructures riddled with bottlenecks and concentrated in a few hands.

When protests broke out in Ferguson, Missouri, in August 2014, a single livestreamer named Mustafa Hussein reportedly garnered an audience comparable in size to CNN’s for a short while. If a Bosnian Croat war criminal drinks poison in a courtroom, all of Twitter knows about it in minutes.

In today’s networked environment, when anyone can broadcast live or post their thoughts to a social network, it would seem that censorship ought to be impossible. This should be the golden age of free speech.

And sure, it is a golden age of free speech—if you can believe your lying eyes. Is that footage you’re watching real? Was it really filmed where and when it says it was? Is it being shared by alt-right trolls or a swarm of Russian bots?
My note: see the ability to create fake audio and video footage:
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/07/15/fake-news-and-video/

HERE’S HOW THIS golden age of speech actually works: In the 21st century, the capacity to spread ideas and reach an audience is no longer limited by access to expensive, centralized broadcasting infrastructure. It’s limited instead by one’s ability to garner and distribute attention. And right now, the flow of the world’s attention is structured, to a vast and overwhelming degree, by just a few digital platforms: Facebook, Google (which owns YouTube), and, to a lesser extent, Twitter.

at their core, their business is mundane: They’re ad brokers

They use massive surveillance of our behavior, online and off, to generate increasingly accurate, automated predictions of what advertisements we are most susceptible to and what content will keep us clicking, tapping, and scrolling down a bottomless feed.

in reality, posts are targeted and delivered privately, screen by screen by screen. Today’s phantom public sphere has been fragmented and submerged into billions of individual capillaries. Yes, mass discourse has become far easier for everyone to participate in—but it has simultaneously become a set of private conversations happening behind your back. Behind everyone’s backs.

It’s important to realize that, in using these dark posts, the Trump campaign wasn’t deviantly weaponizing an innocent tool. It was simply using Facebook exactly as it was designed to be used. The campaign did it cheaply, with Facebook staffers assisting right there in the office, as the tech company does for most large advertisers and political campaigns.

+++++++++
more on privacy in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=privacy

more on free speech in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=free+speech

WhatsApp privacy France

French privacy watchdog raps WhatsApp over Facebook data sharing

 France’s data privacy watchdog may fine messaging app WhatsApp if it does not comply with an order to bring its sharing of user data with parent company Facebook into line with French privacy law.
Separately, Germany’s cartel office said on Tuesday it had found Facebook had abused its dominant market position, in a ruling that questioned the company’s model of monetizing the personal data of its users through targeted advertising.
My note: it seems the EU is gearing toward in increase scrutiny of social media giants regarding users’ privacy:
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2018/01/05/tinder-dating-privacy/ 

++++++++++++
more on privacy in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=privacy

 

Tinder dating privacy

I asked Tinder for my data. It sent me 800 pages of my deepest, darkest secrets

The dating app knows me better than I do, but these reams of intimate information are just the tip of the iceberg. What if my data is hacked – or sold?

Every European citizen is allowed to do so under EU data protection law, yet very few actually do, according to Tinder.

With the help of privacy activist Paul-Olivier Dehaye from personaldata.io and human rights lawyer Ravi Naik, I emailed Tinder requesting my personal data and got back way more than I bargained for.

Some 800 pages came back containing information such as my Facebook “likes”, links to where my Instagram photos would have been had I not previously deleted the associated account, my education, the age-rank of men I was interested in, how many Facebook friends I had, when and where every online conversation with every single one of my matches happened … the list goes on.

Reading through the 1,700 Tinder messages I’ve sent since 2013, I took a trip into my hopes, fears, sexual preferences and deepest secrets. Tinder knows me so well. It knows the real, inglorious version of me who copy-pasted the same joke to match 567, 568, and 569; who exchanged compulsively with 16 different people simultaneously one New Year’s Day, and then ghosted 16 of them.

“What you are describing is called secondary implicit disclosed information,” explains Alessandro Acquisti, professor of information technology at Carnegie Mellon University. “Tinder knows much more about you when studying your behaviour on the app. It knows how often you connect and at which times; the percentage of white men, black men, Asian men you have matched; which kinds of people are interested in you; which words you use the most; how much time people spend on your picture before swiping you, and so on. Personal data is the fuel of the economy. Consumers’ data is being traded and transacted for the purpose of advertising.”.

In May, an algorithm was used to scrape 40,000 profile images from the platform in order to build an AI to “genderise” faces. A few months earlier, 70,000 profiles from OkCupid (owned by Tinder’s parent company Match Group) were made public by a Danish researcher some commentators have labelled a “white supremacist”, who used the data to try to establish a link between intelligence and religious beliefs. The data is still out there.

 

+++++++++++
more on social media dating in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=tinder

Privacy & Security in Today’s Library

Privacy & Security in Today’s Library by Amigos Library Services

The virtuality of privacy and security on the from Plamen Miltenoff

From: Jodie Borgerding [mailto:Borgerding@amigos.org]
Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2017 3:07 PM
To: Miltenoff, Plamen <pmiltenoff@stcloudstate.edu>
Cc: Nicole Walsh <WALSH@AMIGOS.ORG>
Subject: Proposal Submission for Privacy & Security Conference

Hi Plamen,

Thank you for your recent presentation proposal for the online conference, Privacy & Security in Today’s Library, presented by Amigos Library Services. Your proposal, The role of the library in teaching with technology unsupported by campus IT: the privacy and security issues of the “third-party,” has been accepted. I just wanted to confirm that you are still available to present on September 21, 2017 and if you have a time preference for your presentation (11 am, 12 pm, or 2 pm Central). If you are no longer able to participate, please let me know.

Nicole will be touch with you shortly with additional details and a speaker’s agreement.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks!
___________________

Jodie Borgerding Consulting & Education Services Manager Amigos Library Services 1190 Meramec Station Road, Suite 207 | Ballwin, MO  63021-6902 800-843-8482 x2897 | 972-340-2897(direct) http://www.amigos.org | borgerding@amigos.org

+++++++++++++++++

Bio

Dr. Plamen Miltenoff is an Information Specialist and Professor at St. Cloud State University. His education includes several graduate degrees in history and Library and Information Science and terminal degrees in education and psychology.

His professional interests encompass social media, multimedia, Web development and design, gaming and gamification, and learning environments (LEs).

Dr. Miltenoff organized and taught classes such as LIB 290 “Social Media in Global Context” (http://web.stcloudstate.edu/pmiltenoff/lib290/) and LIB 490/590 “Digital Storytelling” (http://web.stcloudstate.edu/pmiltenoff/lib490/) where issues of privacy and security are discussed.

Twitter handle @SCSUtechinstruc

Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/InforMediaServices/

The virtuality of privacy and security on the modern campus:

The role of the library in teaching with technology unsupported by campus IT: the privacy and security issues of the “third-party software” teaching and learning

Abstract/Summary of Your Proposed Session

The virtualization reality changes rapidly all aspects of learning and teaching: from equipment to methodology, just when faculty have finalized their syllabus, they have to start a new, if they want to keep abreast with content changes and upgrades and engagement of a very different student fabric – Millennials.

Mainframes are replaced by microcomputers, microcomputers by smart phones and tablets, hard drives by cloud storage and wearables by IoT. The pace of hardware, software and application upgrade is becoming unbearable for students and faculty. Content creation and methodology becomes useless by the speed of becoming obsolete. In such environment, faculty students and IT staff barely can devote time and energy to deal with the rapidly increasing vulnerability connected with privacy and security.

In an effort to streamline ever-becoming-scarce resources, campus IT “standardizes” campus use of applications. Those are the applications, which IT chooses to troubleshoot campus-wide. Those are the applications recommended to faculty and students to use.

In an unprecedented burgeoning amount of applications, specifically for mobile devices, it is difficult to constraint faculty and students to use campus IT sanctioned applications, especially considering the rapid pace of such applications becoming obsolete. Faculty and students often “stray” away and go with their own choice. Such decision exposes faculty and students, personally, and the campus, institutionally, at risk. In a recent post by THE Journal, attention on campuses is drown to the fact that cyberattacks shift now from mobile devices to IoT and campus often are struggling even with their capability to guarantee cybersecurity of mobile devices on campus. Further, the use of third-party application might be in conflict with the FERPA campus-mandated policies. Such policies are lengthy and complex to absorb, both by faculty and students and often are excessively restrictive in terms of innovative ways to improve methodology and pedagogy of teaching and learning. The current procedure of faculty and students proposing new applications is a lengthy and cumbersome bureaucratic process, which often render the end-users’ proposals obsolete by the time the process is vetted.

Where/what is the balance between safeguarding privacy on campus and fostering security without stifling innovation and creativity? Can the library be the campus hub for education about privacy and security, the sandbox for testing and innovation and the body to expedite decision-making?

Abstract

The pace of changes in teaching and learning is becoming impossible to sustain: equipment evolves in accelerated pace, the methodology of teaching and learning cannot catch up with the equipment changes and atop, there are constant content updates. In an even-shrinking budget, faculty, students and IT staff barely can address the issues above, less time and energy left to address the increasing concerns about privacy and security.

In an unprecedented burgeoning amount of applications, specifically for mobile devices, it is difficult to constraint faculty and students to use campus IT sanctioned applications, especially considering the rapid pace of such applications becoming obsolete. Faculty and students often “stray” away and go with their own choice. Such decision exposes faculty and students, personally, and the campus, institutionally, at risk. In a recent post by THE Journal (http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/06/06/cybersecurity-and-students/), attention on campuses is drawn to the fact of cyberattacks shifting from mobile devices to IoT but campus still struggling to guarantee cybersecurity of mobile devices on campus. Further, the use of third-party applications might be in conflict with the FERPA campus-mandated policies. Such policies are lengthy and complex to absorb, both by faculty and students and often are excessively restrictive in terms of innovative ways to improve methodology and pedagogy of teaching and learning. The current procedure of faculty and students proposing new applications is a lengthy and cumbersome bureaucratic process, which often render the end-users’ proposals obsolete by the time the process is vetted.

Where/what is the balance between safeguarding privacy on campus and fostering security without stifling innovation and creativity? Can the library be the campus hub for education about privacy and security, the sandbox for testing and innovation and the body to expedite decision-making?

http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2017/06/06/cybersecurity-and-students/

Anything else you would like to add

3 take-aways from this session:

  • Discuss and form an opinion about the education-pertinent issues of privacy and security from the broad campus perspective, versus the narrow library one
  • Discuss and form an opinion about the role of the library on campus in terms of the greater issues of privacy and security

Re-examine the thin red line of the balance between standardization and innovation; between the need for security and privacy protection a

++++++++++++++
presentation:
https://www.slideshare.net/aidemoreto/the-virtuality-of-privacy-and-security-on-the 

chat – slide 4, privacy. please take 2 min and share your definition of privacy on campus. Does it differ between faculty and students?  what are the main characteristics to determine privacy

chat – slide 5, security. please take 2 min and share your definition of security on campus regarding electronic activities. Who’s responsibility is security? IT issue [only]?

poles: slide 6, technology unsupported by campus IT, is it worth considering? 1. i am a great believer in my freedom of choice 2. I firmly follow rules and this applies to the use of computer tools and applications 3. Whatever…

chat –  slide 6, why third party applications? pros and cons. E.g. pros – familiarity with third party versus campus-required

pole, slide 6, appsmashing. App smashing is the ability to combine mobile apps in your teaching process. How do you feel about it? 1. The force is with us 2. Nonsense…

pole slide 7 third party apps and the comfort of faculty. How do you see the freedom of using third party apps? 1. All I want, thank you 2. I would rather follow the rules 3. Indifference is my middle name

pole slide 8 Technology standardization? 1. yes, 2. no, 3. indifferent

chat slide 9 if the two major issues colliding in this instance are: standardization versus third party and they have impact on privacy and security, how would you argue for the one or the other?

++++++++++++++++
notes from the conference

 

 

Measuring Library Vendor Cyber Security: Seven Easy Questions Every Librarian Can Ask

http://journal.code4lib.org/articles/11413

Bill Walker: http://www.amigos.org/innovating_metadata

 

+++++++++++++++
more on security in education in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=security

more on privacy in education in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=privacy

student privacy

Report: Tech Companies Are Spying on Children Through Devices and Software Used in Classroom

By Richard Chang 04/17/17

https://thejournal.com/articles/2017/04/17/report-tech-companies-are-spying-on-children-through-devices-and-software-used-in-classroom.aspx

according to a new report from the nonprofit Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), “Spying on Students: School-Issued Devices and Student Privacy

shows that state and federal laws, as well as industry self-regulation, have failed to keep up with a growing education technology industry.

One-third of all K–12 students in the United States use school-issued devices running software and apps that collect far more information on kids than is necessary.

Resource-poor school districts can receive these tools at deeply discounted prices or for free, as tech companies seek a slice of the $8 billion ed tech industry. But there’s a real, devastating cost — the tracking, cataloging and exploitation of data about children as young as 5 years old.

Our report shows that the surveillance culture begins in grade school, which threatens to normalize the next generation to a digital world in which users hand over data without question in return for free services

EFF surveyed more than 1,000 stakeholders across the country, including students, parents, teachers and school administrators, and reviewed 152 ed tech privacy policies.

“Spying on Students” provides comprehensive recommendations for parents, teachers, school administrators and tech companies to improve the protection of student privacy. Asking the right questions, negotiating for contracts that limit or ban data collection, offering families the right to opt out, and making digital literacy and privacy part of the school curriculum are just a few of the 70-plus recommendations for protecting student privacy contained in the report.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++
more on students and privacy
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=student+privacy
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=privacy+government

https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/blog/2017/03/us-senate-votes-50-48-away-broadband-privacy-rules-let-isps-telecoms-sell-internet-history/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/03/28/the-house-just-voted-to-wipe-out-the-fccs-landmark-internet-privacy-protections/?utm_term=.34ed3dce7494

 

privacy and social media

Yik Yak Users Not So Anonymous After All

By Dian Schaffhauser 10/20/16

https://campustechnology.com/articles/2016/10/20/yik-yak-users-not-so-anonymous-after-all.aspx

yakkers had add personal handles and profiles starting last August. users of mobile app Yik Yak face the ignominy of being truly discoverable. At least that’s what a research team at New York University’s Tandon School of Engineering suggests in a new paper.

You Can Yak but You Can’t Hide: Localizing Anonymous Social Network Users,” being presented at the upcoming ACM Internet Measurements Conference next month, describes how the research team was able to determine the geographical origin of a comment or “yak” and possibly even the person who made the post, thereby making the program susceptible to “localization attacks,” putting the user at risk of being identified.

if a student posted a disparaging remark about a fellow student or a faculty member, “it wouldn’t be difficult” for the victim of the insult to figure out where the offensive commentary was posted from and then pinpoint the probable yakker from there.

++++++++++++++++

more on privacy in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=privacy

your privacy and Google

How to see everything Google knows about you

++++++++++++++++

more on privacy in this IMS blog

http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=privacy

students privacy and social media

Bill seeks to shield students social media info

The proposed social media privacy law, scheduled to be considered by the state Senate Wednesday, bars any institution from asking or requiring an applicant or enrolled student to disclose a user name or password for a personal social media account.

Under the bill, a student could also not be prevented from participating in extracurricular activities if they refuse to disclose social media accounts or provide a list of contacts associated with those accounts.

+++++++++
more on privacy in this IMS blog:

http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=privacy

classroom discussions on privacy

Dear colleagues,

the topics of privacy pertaining technology is becoming ubiquitous.
If you feel that the content of your class material can benefit of such discussions, please let us know.

Please have  some titles, which can help you brainstorm topics for discussions in your classes:

Power, Privacy, and the Internet
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/12/03/power-privacy-internet/

Privacy groups slam Department of Homeland Security social media proposal
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2016/08/24/dhs-social-media-proposal/

FBI quietly changes its privacy rules for accessing NSA data on Americans
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2016/03/09/surveillance-and-privacy/

Facebook canceled a student’s internship after he highlighted a massive privacy issue
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/08/17/facebook-and-privacy/

Samsung’s Privacy Policy Warns Customers Their Smart TVs Are Listening
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/02/10/privacy-smart-devices/

Teenagers, The Internet, And Privacy
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2014/11/05/teenagers-the-internet-and-privacy/

Online privacy: It’s time for a new security paradigm
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2014/09/25/online-privacy-its-time-for-a-new-security-paradigm/

On social media, privacy, etc.
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2014/03/14/on-social-media-privacy-etc/

Hacking the Future: Privacy, Identity, and Anonymity On the Web
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2013/12/03/hacking-the-future-privacy-identity-and-anonymity-on-the-web/

Are We Puppets in a Wired World?
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2013/10/23/pro-domo-sua-are-we-puppets-in-a-wired-world-surveillance-and-privacy-revisited/

How Teens Deal With Privacy and Mobile Apps
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2013/08/28/how-teens-deal-with-privacy-and-mobile-apps/

If you seek  more tangible, hands-on assistance with similar and/or any topics regarding technology, please do not hesitate to contact us.

surveillance and privacy

FBI quietly changes its privacy rules for accessing NSA data on Americans

Classified revisions accepted by secret Fisa court affect NSA data involving Americans’ international emails, texts and phone calls

The FBI has quietly revised its privacy rules for searching data involving Americans’ international communications that was collected by the National Security Agency, US officials have confirmed to the Guardian.

Pro Domo Sua: Are We Puppets in a Wired World? Surveillance and privacy revisited…

More on privacy in this IMS blog:
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/page/2/?s=privacy&submit=Search

more on surveillance in this IMS blog:
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/?s=surveillance&submit=Search

1 2 3 10