---------------------------------------------
I-Privacy Digest
Security Protecting Privacy is Good for Business
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Published by: Mike Banks Valentine
privacy@privacynotes.com www.privacynotes.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
April 18, 2002 Issue # 006
----------------------------------------------------------------------
.....IN THIS DIGEST.....
// -- MODERATOR COMMENT -- //
"Security Backfire?" ~ Mike Banks Valentine
// -- NEW DISCUSSION -- //
"Digital Databases" ~ Esther Dyson ~ Larry Ellison ~ Moderator
Comment
// -- CONTINUING DISCUSSION -- //
"YAHOO! Yanks Privacy" ~ Katsuey ~ Jim Bader ~ Andrew Goodman
~ Karin Ascot ~ Harry Samuels ~ Robert Mendelson
// -- PRIVACY NEWS -- //
"The Latest in Privacy Issues"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
// -- MODERATOR COMMENT -- //
The controversial advertising done by X-10.com has caused an
uproar with their invasive pop-up ads. Now their digital camera
technology is threatening privacy in ways unforseen. Thousands
of concerned parents have installed them as popular digital "Baby-Cams"
to keep a watchful eye on baby in the next room, but now those
good folks may be providing high tech pedophiles with a view into
their home!
These same cameras are being used broadly in commercial settings
as well - scanning stock rooms, employee lounges and even such
vulnerable spots such as bank vaults, high-security equipment
storage and supposedly secret government facilities.
Now it has become alarmingly clear that those cameras, connected
to base-stations via wi-fi (low-frequency wireless) radio waves,
are vulnerable to anyone with a $250 radio receiver purchased
at Radio Shack connected to a laptop computer as they quietly
drive through either your neighborhood street or the parking lot
beside (supposedly) secure facilities.
The spy game just became inexpensive and accessible to casual
snoopers, petty burglars, criminal masterminds and even suspicious
spouses who exploit this new breach by peering into those same
places we are seeking to protect using the very digital cameras
we have installed to protect ourselves!
Who knows if crooks scanning those secure facilities on your
company digital camera are using those images to monitor and determine
the best time to rob the vault, read passwords, intercept security
combinations . . . I hope you get the picture, so to speak.
Does anyone use these cameras within their homes or businesses?
If so, do you intend to spend the extra money to make those cameras
secure? If not, why not?
PS: I'm attending the Computers, Freedom and Privacy Conference
in San Francisco as you read this and look forward to reporting
on that event to you next issue. If anyone from this list is attending,
look for the 6'6" geek with the wire rim glasses (yours truly)
and introduce yourself! Read about the conference at: http://www.cfp2002.org/
~ Mike Banks Valentine
// -- NEW DISCUSSION -- //
===> TOPIC: DIGITAL DATABANKS
From: Esther Dyson
"The moment McDonalds offers 20 cents off a hamburger, [consumers]
are quite willing to give up data about themselves. Microsoft
and other companies are talking about being digital data banks.
These companies compare themselves to regular banks. Banks manage
your money. It is still your money, but because of rules and laws
that are set up, you can reasonably believe that they will not,
for example, give your money to Enron without your approval É
Digital data banks say that they will keep your data. It will
still be yours, but they will manage it. But there have to be
rules about this. ItÕs a concern that we need to [address]."
[ Moderator Comment ]: Ms. Dyson is not a Privacynotes list
member. These comments were drawn from an interview in the online
newsletter K@W (Knowledge@Wharton) Wharton School (of business)
at the University of Pennsylvania. Free membership required to
read stories -- so read the privacy policy.
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/articles.cfm?catid=9&articleid=542
===> DIGITAL DATABANKS
From: Larry Ellison
"Today, every federal intelligence and law-enforcement
agency and all manner of state and local bodies maintain their
own separate databases on suspected criminals. Do we need more
databases? No, just the opposite. The biggest problem today is
that we have too many. The single thing we could do to make life
tougher for terrorists would be to ensure that all the information
in myriad government databases was integrated into a single national
file."
[ Moderator Comment ]: Larry Ellison is not a member of this
discussion list either, but boy would I love to get him involved.
This comment goes to the heart of my comment last week where I
said:
>> Now the scary issue is when someone finds a way to
connect all the dots and bring those databases together and share
information across all those differing lines of interest. <<
Mr. Ellison is making it his mission to do just that. Any thoughts
on how that affects our lives for good or ill?
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/14/magazine/14TECHNO.html
(Free membership required, read the privacy policy!)
// -- CONTINUING DISCUSSION -- //
===> TOPIC: YAHOO! YANKS PRIVACY!
From: Katsuey
Bob Cortez said:
>> I think this ranks up there as one of 'scummiest' of
all time maneuvers by a major online player. Not only did they
unilaterally decide to opt-in their members to a number of internal
lists, they changed the default to "Yes" to share information
with third parties... including PHYSICAL ADDRESSES and PHONE NUMBERS!
<<
Add to this: Some of us never signed up for Yahoo but were incorporated
to their scheme by being a member of egroups. We got floated into
the Yahoo system without ever signing up and we have no way of
going back in and changing anything because we have never been
issued an individual Yahoo ID but we still are getting the "pleasure"
of Yahoo's increased spam policy.
Brown Holdings LLC Group KatsueyDesignWorks,
Custom Web Design http://www.katsueydesignworks.com
Katsuey's Legal Gateway http://www.katsuey.com
===> YAHOO! YANKS PRIVACY!
From: Jim Bader
Yes, I am as upset as Bob! However, unlike the offline world
there are rules and regulations that MUST be followed. In the
cyber world businesses can do as they like without any thought
to morality and integrity. I thank you for the information on
how to jump out of their little revenue stream. Thats the only
recourse us webbies have is sharing information that can make
life a little easier for each other ... online anyway :)
Jim Bader Director of Search Engine Optimization CyberMark International
www.cybermarkint.com
===> YAHOO! YANKS PRIVACY!
From: Andrew Goodman
Some may be wondering just who told Yahoo that it would be OK
for them to play fast and loose with privacy in this manner. Did
Seth Godin,
their former VP of Permission Marketing, ring them up and tell
them it was OK to skip a step? No way! Godin's take (and mine)
is summed up in my article: "Why Yahoo is No Longer Good."
http://www.traffick.com/story/portals/200204_yahoo_nogood.asp
I'd love to hear more feedback on this issue. Many of us go
out of our way to defend Yahoo against unfair criticism, but you
can't defend the indefensible!
The only explanation I can think of is that Yahoo management
have been heavily into Nietzsche of late, i.e. they think they're
"beyond good and evil."
Andrew Goodman Editor, Traffick.com
===> YAHOO! YANKS PRIVACY!
From: Karin Ascot
The fact that Yahoo is now giving out PHYSICAL addresses and
phone numbers is truly outrageous. It is just plain wrong.
k. ascot
===> YAHOO! YANKS PRIVACY!
From: Harry Samuels
Once a company stoops to this level they are as good as insolvent,
it's just a matter of time.
The act in and of itself is tantamount to an admission of insolvency
- at least in as much as they obviously cannot find any other
means of servicing their debts.
We have been in business for over 30 years and can read the
signs like any good tracker.. we know that bears sh** in the woods
and have learned to recognise the smell, the appearance and the
colour.
When a company resorts to raping it's client data files it's
a sure sign that the management is plundering the last remnants
of the petty cash drawer before abandoning ship, the last desperate
act of panic.
Harry Samuels The World's premier mobile phone boutique With
Free SMS Messaging Service
===> YAHOO! YANKS PRIVACY!
From: Robert Mendelson
The other side to Yahoo's big move is that they are as a result
ultimately shrinking their market share but hopefully increasing
their revenue.
Obviously that's a decision they made and that they're comfortable
with. Sure, they may lose some otherwise revenue-generating folks
who are so ticked off they'll never say the word Yahoo! again,
but think of the potential for all the ones who actually do go
and opt-in now.
You may not like it, but from a pure business perspective, it
makes sense. This is one way to get the real Yahoo! 'loyalists'
to raise their hands.
Robert Mendelson Mendelson Marketing
// -- PRIVACY NEWS -- //
SAN JOSE, Calif. - It's the talk of Silicon Valley: How did
someone break into the voice mail of Hewlett-Packard Co.'s chief
financial officer, snag a sensitive message from his boss, Carly
Fiorina, and leak it to the local newspaper? HP executives were
shocked. But experts in phone systems and computer security say
they're not surprised - largely because voice mail is digital
and is stored on computers. "If you don't want it publicized,
don't say it digitally," said Bruce Schneier, founder of Counterpane
Internet Security Inc. "Don't put it in e-mail, don't record it
in a voice mail, don't put it in a Power Point presentation. Basically,
all of this stuff is vulnerable."
http://money.tbo.com/money/MGAUJ8PRYZC.html
Leak of a private voice mail from (HP CEO Carly) Fiorina to
(HP CFO Bob) Wayman, left March 17, two days before the shareholder
vote on the Compaq merger. The voice mail, sent anonymously to
the (San Jose) Mercury News earlier this week, details strategy
for last-minute lobbying of two key shareholders by Fiorina and
other executives. In his e-mail Thursday, Wayman told employees
he felt "personally violated" by the voice mail leak, adding "it
is illegal and damaging to the company and your fellow employees."
Wayman said HP is "vigorously investigating" this breach along
with others that have occurred in recent weeks. The perpetrators,
he warned, will be prosecuted "to the fullest extent."
http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/3047154.htm
Jeffrey Rosen, law professor at George Washington University
Law School, in his feature article for the New York Times Magazine,
Sunday April 14, discusses in detail the connect-the-dots database
concerns elicited in my comments from last week's list. Larry
Ellison says, "Central databases already exist. Privacy is already
gone." Rosen ends his lengthy article with a question to Ellison,
"In 20 years, do you think the global database is going to exist,
and will it be run by Oracle?"
"I do think it will exist, and I think it is going to be an
Oracle database," he replied. "And we're going to track everything."
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/14/magazine/14TECHNO.html
(Free membership required, read the privacy policy!)
Thousands of people who have installed a popular wireless video
camera, intending to increase the security of their homes and
offices, have instead unknowingly opened a window on their activities
to anyone equipped with a cheap receiver. The wireless video camera,
which is heavily advertised on the Internet, is intended to send
its video signal to a nearby base station, allowing it to be viewed
on a computer or a television. But its signal can be intercepted
from more than a quarter-mile away by off-the-shelf electronic
equipment costing less than $250.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/14/technology/14SPY.html
(Free membership required, read the privacy policy!)
Bye, Bye Yahoo. Opinion piece discussing YAHOO! Desperation
Tactics.
http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/17209.html
A Greeting Steals Its Way Onto Your Hard Drive. Outlook owners,
look out. Users of Microsoft popular e-mail program are the targets
of a new computer virus, made by an artist, that arrives disguised
as an electronic greeting card. When the card is opened, the virus
spreads by randomly picking three images from the recipient's
hard drive and sending them in a flickering message to everyone
in the victim's Outlook address book.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/11/technology/circuits/11GEE2.html
(Free membership required, read the privacy policy!)
Microsoft, I.B.M. and VeriSign plan to announce a new technical
approach today that they hope will ensure greater security and
thus stimulate commercial development of an emerging Internet
technology called Web services. Web services is the term used
to describe clever software that in theory could bring a new level
of automation and greater productivity to all kinds of online
transactions among companies, suppliers and consumers. Yet the
new, unproven technology Ñ which uses the Web to find and share
data in electronic databases of companies or individuals Ñ has
stirred concerns about data security and personal privacy.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/11/technology/11WEB.html
(Free membership required, read the privacy policy!)
Microsoft has quietly shelved a consumer information service
that was once planned as the centerpiece of the company's foray
into the market for tightly linked Web services. The service,
originally code-named Hailstorm and later renamed My Services,
was to be the clearest example of the company's ambitious .Net
strategy. It was intended to permit an individual to keep an online
persona independent of his or her desktop computer, supposedly
safely stored as part of a vast data repository where there could
be easy access to it from any point on the Internet.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/11/technology/ebusiness/11NET.html
(Free membership required, read the privacy policy!)
Seeking Profits, Internet Companies Alter Privacy Policy. Internet
companies are increasingly selling access to their users' postal
mail addresses and telephone numbers, in addition to flooding
their e-mail boxes with junk mail. Yahoo, the vast Internet portal,
just changed its privacy policy to make it clear that it has the
right to send mail and make sales calls to tens of millions of
its registered users. And it has given itself permission to send
users e-mail marketing messages on behalf of its own growing family
of services, even if those users had previously asked not to receive
any marketing from Yahoo.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/11/technology/ebusiness/11PRIV.html
(Free membership required, read the privacy policy!)
