Tag Archives: privacy

Google, , , , , ,
How to Avoid High-Risk Hires with Background Checks

The EU’s 2006 passage of the “Right to Be Forgotten” law gives European citizens the ability to force Google and other search engines to remove links to old or irrelevant information.

The passage of that law increases the contrast between legislation regarding online publishing in Europe and the United States. In the U.S. there are still very few legal boundaries constraining the publication and distribution of online content. Authors are free to post most any material anonymously. If anyone finds that material to be damaging, they have little leverage to demand a retraction and no clear target for prosecution. Discussion about new legislation has revolved around freedom of speech issues, issues that have strong advocates.

Understanding the implications of the main U.S. law governing the Internet — Section 230 of The Communications Decency Act – is helpful in knowing how to best protect the privacy, security and reputations of U.S. citizens. That law frees website owners from legal responsibility for what others post on their sites.

There is much discussion in the U.S. about updating Section 230, most recently in The New York Times’ article, What’s Behind the Fight Over Section 230. As reporter Shira Ovide observes:

“…The 26-word law allows websites to make rules about what people can or can’t post without being held legally responsible (for the most part) for the content.

If I accuse you of murder on Facebook, you might be able to sue me, but you can’t sue Facebook. If you buy a defective toy from a merchant on Amazon, you might be able to take the seller to court, but not Amazon. (There is some legal debate about this, but you get the gist.)

The law created the conditions for Facebook, Yelp and Airbnb to give people a voice without being sued out of existence. But now Republicans and Democrats are asking whether the law gives tech companies either too much power or too little responsibility for what happens under their watch.”

The answer is, yes.

 
 
Google, Internet Legal Issues, , , ,
Right to be Forgotten Law

In Europe, privacy is considered a human right. Online harassment is considered a human rights abuse.

In the U.S., there are few laws protecting us against having our personal data published online, or even collected and sold by data publishers. On the internet, any of us can be impersonated, harassed or the focus of “fake news.”

The personal and professional damages caused by online harassment can be so disruptive that my online reputation management practice supports bringing a version of the “Right to be Forgotten” to America—even though the CDA 230, the law that prevents that, is effectively the source of much of our business. We also support the passage of laws that will better protect the online privacy of U.S. citizens and protect them from anonymous harassment and other forms of hate speech, while through our business we find practical ways to protect them now.

My new article on Medium addresses the reasons why it is time to bring the “Right to Be Forgotten” here.

Read it here: The Case for Bringing the Right to be Forgotten to America.

 

 
 
Online reputation management, , , , , , , , , ,

Congress has sent proposed legislation to President Trump that wipes away landmark online privacy protections. According to The Washington Post, that means removing limits from what companies like AT&T, Verizon and others can do with information like your Internet browsing habits, app usage history, location data and Social Security number. It will also reduce rules requiring providers to strengthen safeguards for your data against hackers and thieves.

Not only will Internet providers be able to monitor your behavior online: without your permission, they will be able to use your personal and financial information to sell highly targeted ads. The providers could also sell your information directly to marketers, financial firms and other companies that mine personal data — all of whom could use the data without your consent. In addition, the Federal Communications Commission, which initially drafted the protections, will be forbidden from issuing similar rules in the future.

If this alarms you as much as it does us, the Electronic Frontier Foundation has extensive resources available to help you reclaim your privacy. First and foremost is Surveillance Self-Defense: Tips, Tools and How-to’s for Safer Online Communications. Browse the section for authoritative information on securely removing deleted information from your computer, the most secure email systems, and the basics of encryption as well as an overview of encryption tools.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation is the leading nonprofit organization defending civil liberties in the digital world. Founded in 1990, EFF champions user privacy, free expression, and innovation through impact litigation, policy analysis, grassroots activism, and technology development.   You may not support their stance on all Internet-related issues, but they are an excellent resource if you are concerned with the security of your data. Their site merits revisiting whenever you want to assume more control over your online privacy and security…or just want more insight into what your options are.

 
 
Online reputation management, , , , , , , , , ,

The New York Times has published the article “Hacking Victims Deserve Empathy, Not Ridicule,” reminding us that hacking could easily throw anyone’s life into disarray.

The article cites thegrugq, the author of several practical guides to protecting yourself from hacking. He points out that, “Security is a trade-off against efficiency” and that it can be difficult to make the additional effort when consequences seem remote or unlikely.

But if the hack of AshleyMadison…and Adobe.com…and even the website for Dominos Pizza…tells us anything, the chance of being hacked is no longer remote (check Have I Been Pwned? to see if you already have been). Now is a good time to reconsider what the right level of operational security is for you—and implement it, consistently.

 
 
Branding, , , , , , ,

Lifestyle celebrity Sandra Lee was recently diagnosed with breast cancer. She chose to have a double mastectomy. That is a painful decision many women face. And as a woman that commands a public forum, she is sharing her experience to help other women and raise awareness of the disease.

This isn’t the first time a celebrity has publicly addressed personal struggles with breast cancer. But rarely is the public given such an intimate look at the experience. Sandra Lee’s unvarnished updates about the process—from pensive, brave photographs of her recuperating in her hospital room to serious images of her at home—put a human face on a difficult process.

New York Post’s “Page Six” column is one of many media outlets that has been following her progress, but she has reached her largest audience by publishing the photographs on her Facebook page. A benefit of social media is that it allows individuals to tell their personal stories to the public directly, without any intermediary. So Ms. Lee can keep ownership of her story, telling it day by day and ensuring it is told accurately. Even maintaining that level of control, sharing so personal a story in such an honest fashion is incredibly brave. We salute her choice.

 
 
Crisis Management, , , , , ,

Fortune magazine recently published this article on the newfound popularity of Confide. This app allows users to send emails that disappear after being read, and targets professionals as its user base.

The hack of Sony Pictures’ emails—and the tremendous publicity that surrounded it—has drawn new attention to the inherent insecurity of most online communications.  The Fortune article quotes Confide’s President, Jon Brod, as stating, ““It is becoming more and more accepted that anything we communicate digitally—via email, IM, text, et cetera—will be exposed at some point in the future.” The significance of that is becoming clear to the business community—he says there is great interest in an upcoming enterprise version of the app.

 
 
Online reputation management, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is the largest organization dedicated to Internet privacy and related issues. Its resources are considered the gold standard by many experts.

That’s why their Secure Messaging Scorecard caught our attention. It examines dozens of messaging technologies and rates each of them using a range of security metrics. If you already use messaging you think is secure, you may be in for a surprise. (Hint:  low ratings are given to Google Hangouts/Chat “Off the Record,” Hushmail, Skype and Yahoo Messenger, among others.)

The scorecard is part of a campaign the EFF has undertaken in collaboration with Julia Angwin at ProPublica and Joseph Bonneau at the Princeton Center for Information Technology Policy to help consumers access tools to encrypt their communications. They are championing technologies that are strongly secure and also simple to use.

If you are interested in using the safest encryption tools in your communications, their report is essential reading.

 
 
Google, , , , , , , , ,

Links to five New York Times articles have been removed from some search results on European versions of its search engine to comply with Europe’s “right to be forgotten.” The Times reports that Google recently informed them of the action. This excerpt provides an example of what is being removed:

One Times article that is being shielded from certain searches in Europe is a report from 2002 about a decision by a United States court to close three websites that the federal government accused of selling an estimated $1 million worth of unusable Web addresses. The complaint named three British companies, TLD Network, Quantum Management and TBS Industries, as well as two men who it said controlled the companies: Thomas Goolnik and Edward Harris Goolnik of London.

Links to such articles continue to be available in the U.S.  The full article can be read here.