In the digital age that we live in today, we are constantly exposing our personal information online. From using cell phones and GPS devices to online shopping and sending e-mail, the things we do and say online leave behind ever-growing trails of personal information. The ACLU believes that Americans shouldn’t have to choose between using new technology and keeping control of your private information. Each week, we feature some of the most interesting news related to technology and civil liberties that we’ve spotted from the previous week.
By Jay Stanley, Senior Policy Analyst, ACLU Speech, Privacy and Technology Project at 5:47pm
A roundup of some items that caught our eye recently, but we haven’t had a chance to write about.
San Francisco’s MUNI train system is installing new “intelligent” cameras that will track and monitor commuters, raising an alarm when it spots “anomalous activities,” which it will identify by learning over time what is “normal.” It always surprises me when cutting-edge surveillance technologies are introduced in the Bay Area (see BART, phone cutoffs in, and bar cameras). Don’t people know that Northern California is home to perhaps the most tech-savvy and privacy-aware population in the country?
By Jay Stanley, Senior Policy Analyst, ACLU Speech, Privacy and Technology Project at 2:54pm
The American Library Association has created an excellent public education resource on the privacy issues facing our society – a web site called privacyrevolution.org.
The ALA has long been a staunch defender of privacy and free speech, and a frequent ally of the ACLU on those issues. In fact, libraries have been the scene of many free speech battles in recent years. If you think about it, librarians are our natural allies since libraries exemplify the democratic ideal of citizens’ access to information, while protecting those citizens’ right to keep their inquiries and interests private. As the site explains:
By Zachary Katznelson, Senior Staff Attorney, ACLU National Security Project & Jay Stanley, Senior Policy Analyst, ACLU Speech, Privacy and Technology Project at 10:01am
Much current cybersecurity discourse is inspired by a vivid and compelling image: terrorists remotely taking over dams, nuclear power plants or other critical infrastructure in order to wreak havoc and kill large numbers of Americans. In one revealing incident, congressional staffers pushing for new government powers argued that their legislation was needed to prevent cyber attackers from accessing a system that could “cause the floodgates to come open at the Hoover Dam and kill thousands of people.” There’s only one problem: officials at the Dam told reporters that “Hoover Dam and important facilities like it are not connected to the internet.” The incident shows that threat inflation combined with the power of a vivid image or narrative can override facts and drive policy. Congress should be aware of the facts before charging forward with privacy-busting legislation like the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act.
Time Warner Cable recently asked a federal court to quash subpoenas it received seeking the identities of thousands of its customers. The subpoenas came as part of several lawsuits filed by members of the movie industry who allege the individuals downloaded certain movies using BitTorrent.
The lawsuits were all filed by the Washington, D.C., law firm "U.S. Copyright Group" (USCG). Six virtually identical lawsuits have been filed already in D.C. implicating thousands of individuals, and numerous subpoenas have been issued to Internet service providers (ISPs) seeking the names and addresses of users who allegedly downloaded certain movies. Several ISPs have complied, but Time Warner Cable moved to quash the three subpoenas it received.
“Some 26 percent of Android apps in Google Play can access personal data, such as contacts and email, and 42 percent, GPS location data – in many cases, whether they need it or not... Other findings from the research: 31 percent of the apps access phone calls or phone numbers, and 9 percent employ permissions that could cost the user money, such as incurring premium SMS text message charges.” See AlsoExposing Your Personal Information – There’s An App for That [Juniper Networks – Daniel Hoffman]
The ACLU and Electronic Frontier Foundation have filed an amicus brief in what will be the first case in the country to address the constitutional implications of a so-called “stingray,” a little known device that can be used to track a suspect’s location and engage in other types of surveillance. We argue that if the government wants to use invasive surveillance technology like this, it must explain the technology to the courts so they can perform their judicial oversight function as required by the Constitution
By Anna Salem, ACLU of Northern California at 3:50pm
In the digital age that we live in today, we are constantly exposing our personal information online. From using cell phones and GPS devices to online shopping and sending e-mail, the things we do and say online leave behind ever-growing trails of personal information. The ACLU believes that Americans shouldn’t have to choose between using new technology and keeping control of your private information. Each week, we feature some of the most interesting news related to technology and civil liberties that we’ve spotted from the previous week.
By Anna Salem, ACLU of Northern California at 3:55pm
In the digital age that we live in today, we are constantly exposing our personal information online. From using cell phones and GPS devices to online shopping and sending e-mail, the things we do and say online leave behind ever-growing trails of personal information. The ACLU believes that Americans shouldn’t have to choose between using new technology and keeping control of your private information. Each week, we feature some of the most interesting news related to technology and civil liberties that we’ve spotted from the previous week.
By Jay Stanley, Senior Policy Analyst, ACLU Speech, Privacy and Technology Project at 3:42pm
I recently came across a very nice essay on “The Stupidity of Computers” by David Auerbach, which is really much more interesting than that truism of a headline might suggest.
Auerbach starts with the observation that computers “are the undisputed chess champions of the world, but they can’t understand a simple English conversation.” The point is a commonplace, almost clichéd one—but Auerbach quickly builds on it, slowly moving to a stunning punch line of a thesis that is thought-provoking and fresh.
By Jay Stanley, Senior Policy Analyst, ACLU Speech, Privacy and Technology Project at 5:38pm
A few links that have caught our eye this past week:
Paul Rosenzweig has posted a nice piece on Lawfare on the reasons to be skeptical of the need for cybersecurity regulation. He breaks cybersecurity down into its constituent parts (as we have urged) of cybercrime, cyber espionage, and truly catastrophic “digital Pearl Harbor” attacks. He suggests that the first two do not justify regulation, and (like us) is skeptical about the degree of risk of the third. In explaining that skepticism, he provides an elegant analysis of the electric grid, the taking down of which is a frequent cyber-attack scenario, and makes the point that the pro-regulation viewpoint “mistakes vulnerability for risk”—in other words, there can be a vulnerability in a system, but still a low risk that anyone will actually be able to or try to exploit it.
Time Warner Cable recently asked a federal court to quash subpoenas it received seeking the identities of thousands of its customers. The subpoenas came as part of several lawsuits filed by members of the movie industry who allege the individuals downloaded certain movies using BitTorrent.
