EPIC Alert 22.01

======================================================================= E P I C A l e r t ======================================================================= Volume 22.01 January 12, 2014 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Published by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) Washington, DC http://www.epic.org/alert/epic_alert_22.01.html "Defend Privacy. Support EPIC." http://epic.org/support ========================================================================= Table of Contents ========================================================================= [1] EPIC Urges Congress to Hold Hearing on FBI Database [2] New Report Surveys FOIA Litigation in 2014 [3] FTC Finalizes Snapchat Settlement [4] DHS Inspector General: Border Drone Program Expensive, Ineffective [5] Senators Seek Answers on Use of Cell Phone Tracking Devices [6] News in Brief [7] EPIC in the News [8] EPIC Book Review: 'Countdown to Zero Day' [9] Upcoming Conferences and Events TAKE ACTION: Learn about EPIC 2015! VISIT EPIC's New 2015 Word Cloud: http://epic.org/EPIC2015.jpg TWEET in Support of EPIC 2015: #epicprivacy2015 LEARN about EPIC's Policy Issues: https://epic.org/privacy/ SUPPORT EPIC: https://epic.org/support/ ========================================================================= [1] EPIC Urges Congress to Hold Hearing on FBI Database ========================================================================= In a letter to Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT), EPIC has urged the US Senate Judiciary Committee to investigate the FBI's Next Generation Identification (NGI) program. NGI is the most extensive biometric database in the world and includes fingerprints, DNA profiles, iris scans, palm prints, voice identification profiles and photographs of millions of Americans, including those suspected of no crime. "During a Congressional hearing in July of 20l2, the FBI committed to an updated privacy assessment of the NGI. Over two years later, there is no assessment that reflects the full capabilities of the system," EPIC wrote. "We urge you to hold an oversight hearing on the NGI program in the 114th Congress." A federal court ruled in November 2014 that EPIC "substantially prevailed" in an open government lawsuit against the FBI for information on the agency's NGI database. The court also awarded EPIC attorneys' fees, finding, "There can be little dispute that the general public has a genuine, tangible interest in a system designed to store and manipulate significant quantities of its own biometric data, particularly given the great numbers of people from whom such data will be gathered." EPIC's FOIA lawsuit led to the disclosure of hundreds of pages about NGI. The documents received via the lawsuit revealed the FBI's acceptance of a 20% error rate for the NGI database's facial recognition software. Technical specifications for another facial recognition project revealed that the FBI extended access to the biometric database to state and local law enforcement for the purpose of running facial recognition queries. EPIC has previously called for greater scrutiny of the NGI database. In 2011, EPIC and nearly 70 other organizations urged the Inspector General of the Department of Justice to investigate the privacy and civil liberties implications of the NGI program. In 2014, EPIC and over 30 organizations urged Attorney General Holder to conduct a privacy assessment of NGI, but the program has since gone fully operational without the required evaluation. EPIC: Letter to US Senate Judiciary Committee re: NGI (Jan. 9, 2015) http://epic.org/foia/fbi/ngi/EPIC-to-SJC-re-NGI.pdf US Federal Court: Opinion: EPIC v. FBI (Nov. 5, 2014) https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2013cv0442-20 EPIC et al.: Coalition Letter to AG Holder re: NGI (Jun. 24, 2014) http://privacycoalition.org/Ltr-to-Review-FBI-NGI-Program.pdf EPIC et al.: Letter to Acting IG Schnedar re: NGI (Sep. 11, 2011) https://epic.org/privacy/secure_communities/DOJ-S-Comm-Letter.pdf FBI: Press Release: "NGI Fully Operational" (Sep. 15, 2014) http://epic.org/redirect/011215-fbi-ngi.html EPIC: EPIC v. FBI - Next Generation Identification http://epic.org/foia/fbi/ngi/ EPIC: Spotlight on Surveillance: NGI Program https://epic.org/privacy/surveillance/spotlight/ngi.html ======================================================================== [2] New Report Surveys FOIA Litigation in 2014 ======================================================================== The Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse has released an analysis of 2014 litigation under the Freedom of Information Act. TRAC, a nonpartisan research center at Syracuse University, found that in 2014 plaintiffs brought the most FOIA lawsuits against the US government in more than a decade. According to the TRAC report, more than 400 FOIA lawsuits were filed in 2014, the highest number recorded since 2001. By comparison, plaintiffs filed 387 lawsuits in 2005, the next highest year, and 372 lawsuits in 2013. Advocacy organizations were particularly active in FOIA litigation. Among those groups, EPIC was the third most frequent filer, with seven lawsuits. Several notable lawsuits were also filed by media organizations including The New York Times and Vice News reporter Jason Leopold. The US Department of Justice was the federal agency most frequently sued. The DOJ also saw the largest increase in lawsuits, from 87 in 2013 to 121 in 2014. The second most commonly sued agency was the Department of Defense, which faced 54 lawsuits in 2014. For EPIC, media organizations and open government advocates, the FOIA has been an indispensable tool for ensuring government transparency and fostering an informed public debate. In 2014, EPIC succeeded on several notable FOIA lawsuits. In EPIC v. FBI, EPIC's lawsuit forced the FBI to disclose records on NGI, the largest biometric database in the world. In EPIC v. Army, EPIC obtained documents describing massive surveillance blimps that the US Army has deployed just north of the nation's capital. And in EPIC v. NSA, EPIC forced the NSA to release the presidential directive outlining the federal government's cybersecurity plan. The FOIA Project: "FOIA Suits Jump in 2014," (Dec. 22, 2014) http://foiaproject.org/2014/12/22/foia-suits-jump-in-2014/ The FOIA Project http://foiaproject.org/ EPIC: EPIC v. FBI http://epic.org/foia/fbi/ngi/ EPIC: EPIC v. Army http://www.epic.org/foia/army/ EPIC: EPIC v. NSA - Cybersecurity Authority https://epic.org/foia/nsa/nspd-54/default.html EPIC: Open Government https://epic.org/open_gov/ EPIC: FOIA Cases https://epic.org/foia/ EPIC: FOIA.ROCKS https://foia.rocks ========================================================================= [3] FTC Finalizes Snapchat Settlement ========================================================================= The Federal Trade Commission has approved a final order with Snapchat, the messaging service that falsely promised that sent and received messages and photos would "disappear forever." The Commission's investigation and initial proposed consent order followed a complaint filed by EPIC in 2013. EPIC's complaint detailed how Snapchat advertised the app as a way for users to send photos, videos and messages without having that data stored on the recipient's mobile device. "Snapchat photos and videos remain available to others even after users are informed that the photos and videos have been deleted," EPIC wrote. In fact, EPIC stated, "Images that Snapchat says are deleted are in fact stored on Snapchat users' phones. Snapchat simply changes the file extension to .NOMEDIA. By removing the .NOMEDIA extension, the pictures become viewable again." In announcing the proposed settlement, FTC Chairwoman Edith Ramirez said, "If a company markets privacy and security as key selling points in pitching its service to consumers, it is critical that it keep those promises. Any company that makes misrepresentations to consumers about its privacy and security practices risks FTC action." EPIC filed comments on the Commission's proposed consent order in 2014, expressing support for the Commission's findings but recommending that Snapchat be required to implement the Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights. EPIC also recommended that the FTC make Snapchat's privacy assessments publicly available. Under the terms of the final settlement, Snapchat will be subject to 20 years of privacy audits, and will be prohibited from making false claims about privacy policies. EPIC: Complaint to FTC re: Snapchat (May 16, 2013) https://www.epic.org/privacy/ftc/EPIC-Snapchat-Complaint.pdf EPIC: Comments to FTC on Proposed Snapchat Consent Order (2014) https://www.epic.org/privacy/ftc/FTC-Snapchat-Cmts.pdf FTC: Snapchat Proposed Consent Order (May 8, 2014) http://epic.org/redirect/051614-ftc-snapchat-order.html FTC: Final Ruling in Snapchat Settlement (Dec. 23, 2014) http://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/cases/141231snapchatdo.pdf EPIC: In re Snapchat https://epic.org/privacy/internet/ftc/snapchat/default.html EPIC: Federal Trade Commission https://www.epic.org/privacy/internet/ftc/ ======================================================================== [4] DHS Inspector General: Border Drone Program Expensive, Ineffective ========================================================================= A recent DHS Office of Inspector General (OIG) audit report has determined that the US Customs and Border Protection's (CBP) drone surveillance program is costly and ineffective. The Inspector General observes that the US government "has invested significant funds in a program that has not achieved the expected results, and it cannot demonstrate how much the program has improved border security." Furthermore, the report states, "CBP cannot prove [the program's] effectiveness because it has not established verifiable performance measures." Indeed, the OIG's analyzable metrics revealed an ineffective program. The OIG noted that CBP "attributed relatively few [apprehensions of illegal border crossers] to unmanned aircraft operations." And the agency, noted the OIG, "cannot demonstrate that the unmanned aircraft have reduced the cost of border surveillance." The OIG also found that CBP grossly underestimated the cost of operations. According to the report, the OIG estimates that it costs the government more than $12,000 per flight hour to operate the program. CBP's own estimate comes in at $2,400. Ultimately, the report concludes, "CBP could put the $443 million it plans to spend to expand the program to better use by investing in alternatives, such as manned aircraft and ground surveillance assets." The OIG recommended suspending any expansion of the drone surveillance program. EPIC has long criticized the DHS for falling short in protecting privacy in the agency's domestic drone surveillance program. In February 2013, EPIC petitioned the agency to suspend the border surveillance program pending the establishment of concrete privacy regulations. The petition followed an EPIC Freedom of Information Act request, which found that border drones carry advanced surveillance equipment that could intercept electronic communications and identify human targets on the ground. DHS OIG: Report on CPB's Use of Drones (Dec. 24, 2014) http://www.oig.dhs.gov/assets/Mgmt/2015/OIG_15-17_Dec14.pdf EPIC: Domestic Drones https://epic.org/privacy/drones/ EPIC: Spotlight on Surveillance: Drones - Eyes in the Sky https://epic.org/privacy/surveillance/spotlight/1014/drones.html EPIC: Letter from FAA Chief Counsel to EPIC (Feb. 14, 2013) http://epic.org/privacy/drones/DOT-UAS-Privacy-Issues-Letter.pdf Congressional Research Service: Drone Report (Jan. 30, 2013) http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R42940.pdf EPIC: Testimony before US Senate re: Drones (Mar. 20, 2013) http://epic.org/redirect/032913-epic-drone-testimony.html EPIC: Testimony before US House on Drones (July 19, 2012) http://epic.org/privacy/testimony/EPIC-Drone-Testimony-7-12.pdf ========================================================================= [5] Senators Seek Answers on Use of Cell Phone Tracking Devices ========================================================================= US Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-VT) have asked Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson a number of questions about the government's use of cell site simulators, or "Stingray" devices, to track cell phones. In 2014 Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) sent detailed questions to Attorney General Holder about recent reports that law enforcement agencies have deployed aircraft equipped with cell tower simulators to capture mobile phone communication. "[T]he sweeping nature of this program and likely collection of sensitive records . . . raise important questions about how the Department protects the privacy of Americans" with no connection to unlawful activities, Senator Markey wrote. According to Grassley and Leahy's new letter, the senators previously had asked FBI Director James Comey about the FBI's use of cell site simulators, and, after two Senate briefings, the FBI announced that it would obtain search warrants before using the devices, subject to certain exceptions. However, wrote Grassley and Leahy, "the policy contains a number of potentially broad exceptions and we continue to have questions about how it is being implemented in practice. . . .The Judiciary Committee needs a broader understanding of the full range of law enforcement agencies that use this technology, the policies in place to protect the privacy interests of those whose information might be collected using these devices, and the legal process that DOJ and DHS entities seek prior to using them." Senators Grassley and Leahy raise questions about the broader use of cell site simulators by other law enforcement agencies and their privacy impact on individuals. In 2012 EPIC filed a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act, seeking information about the FBI's use of cell site simulators and, in particular, what legal process the agency required before deploying the technology. As a result of EPIC's lawsuit, more than 4,000 pages of partially redacted FBI records were released to the public. Sens. Leahy and Grassley: Letter to AG re: Stingray (Dec. 31, 2014) http://epic.org/redirect/011215-leahy-grassley-letter.html Senator Ed Markey (D-MA): Letter to AG re: Stingray (Nov. 14, 2014) http://epic.org/redirect/011215-markey—stingray-letter.html EPIC: EPIC v. FBI - Stingray https://epic.org/foia/fbi/stingray/ ======================================================================== [6] News in Brief ======================================================================== FTC Charges Data Broker with Theft The Federal Trade Commission has brought a complaint against LeapLab, a commercial data broker. According to the complaint, LeapLab bought the payday loan applications of "financially strapped consumers," then sold the consumer information to marketers. At least one marketing company purchasing consumer information from LeapLab used that information to steal millions of dollars from consumers' bank accounts. "This case shows that the illegitimate use of sensitive financial information causes real harm to consumers," said Jessica Rich, Director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection. In 2005, EPIC testified before the US House Commerce Committee on "Identity Theft and Data Broker Services" and urged Congress to establish comprehensive regulation of the data broker industry following the disclosure that data broker ChoicePoint was selling personal information to criminals engaged in identity theft. EPIC's complaint to the FTC against ChoicePoint led to a $10 million settlement. FTC: Complaint Against LeapLab (Dec. 22, 2014) http://epic.org/redirect/011215-ftc-leaplab.html FTC: Press Release re: FTC Complaint (Dec. 31, 2014) http://epic.org/redirect/011215-ftc-complaint-release.html EPIC: Testimony before US House re: Data Brokers (May 2005) https://epic.org/privacy/id_cards/testimony50905.pdf FTC: Press Release re: ChoicePoint Settlement (Jan. 2006) http://epic.org/redirect/011215-ftc-choicepoint-release.html EPIC: ChoicePoint https://epic.org/privacy/choicepoint/ EPIC: Privacy and Consumer Profiling https://epic.org/privacy/profiling/ EPIC: FTC https://epic.org/privacy/internet/ftc/ EPIC: Complaint to FTC re: ChoicePoint (Feb. 2005) https://epic.org/privacy/choicepoint/reply2.1.05.html Facebook Modifies User Privacy Policy Facebook has modified its privacy and data use policies, effective January 30, 2015. Facebook will now allow advertisers to include a "Buy" button directly on targeted advertisements on a user's page. Facebook will also allow advertisers to use the location data gathered from tools like "Nearby Friends" and location "check-ins" to push geolocation-based targeted advertisements. For instance, a Facebook user who checks in near a restaurant that partners with Facebook may now be shown menu items from that restaurant. In December 2014, the Dutch data protection commission announced that it planned to open an investigation into Facebook's policy modifications. In July 2014, EPIC and a coalition of consumer privacy groups urged the FTC to halt Facebook's plan to collect web-browsing information from its users. Facebook is already under a 20-year consent decree from the FTC that requires Facebook to protect user privacy. The consent decree resulting from complaints brought by EPIC and a coalition of consumer privacy organizations in 2009 and 2010. Facebook: Updated Privacy Policy (Jan. 2015) https://www.facebook.com/about/privacy/update The New York Times: "Dutch Regulator Investigates Facebook's Privacy Policy" (Dec. 14, 2014) http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/12/16/dutch-regulator- investigates-facebooks-privacy-policy/ TACD: Letter to FTC re: Facebook Privacy Policy (Jul. 29, 2014) http://epic.org/redirect/073014/tacd-facebook-letter.html Facebook: "Making Ads Better And Giving You More Control" (2014) https://www.facebook.com/help/585318558251813?ref=notif¬if_t=oba FTC: Facebook Settlement (Nov. 29, 2011) http://epic.org/redirect/011215-ftc-FB-settlement.html EPIC: In re Facebook (Dec. 17, 2009) https://epic.org/privacy/inrefacebook/EPIC-FacebookComplaint.pdf EPIC: In re Facebook II (May 5, 2010) https://epic.org/privacy/facebook/EPIC_FTC_FB_Complaint.pdf EPIC: Facebook Privacy https://epic.org/privacy/facebook/ EPIC: FTC http://epic.org/privacy/internet/ftc/ Final Act: Senator Rockefeller Proposes Drone Privacy Bill Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), the outgoing Chair of the Senate Commerce Committee and a leading privacy champion, introduced a December 2014 bill to require privacy safeguards in the commercial operation of drones. The Unmanned Aircraft Systems Privacy Act of 2014 would prohibit surveillance of individuals by companies unless explicit prior consent is obtained and would require the development of remote identification transmission technologies for drones. The bill would also provide a private right of action against invasions of privacy in violation of the Act and grant the FTC additional authority to regulate on commercial drone privacy issues. In 2013 EPIC testified before Congress in support of a drone privacy law, and recommended data use and retention limitations as well as additional transparency and accountability measures for drone operators. Law360: "Sen. Rockefeller Proposes Drone Privacy Bill" (Dec. 19, 2014) http://www.law360.com/articles/606655/sen-rockefeller-proposes- drone-privacy-bill EPIC: Testimony before US Senate re: Drones (Mar. 20, 2013) http://epic.org/redirect/032913-epic-drone-testimony.html EPIC: Testimony before US House on Drones (July 19, 2012) http://epic.org/privacy/testimony/EPIC-Drone-Testimony-7-12.pdf EPIC: Spotlight on Surveillance: Drones - Eyes in the Sky https://epic.org/privacy/surveillance/spotlight/1014/drones.html EPIC: Domestic Drones https://epic.org/privacy/drones/ FTC Chair Warns About Risks of Connected Devices In a January 6 speech at the annual International Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, FTC Chair Edith Ramirez warned of the privacy risks of connected home devices. "In the not-too-distant future, many, if not most, aspects of our everyday lives will be digitally observed and stored," Ramirez said. EPIC has written extensively on interconnected devices, otherwise known as the "Internet of Things." In comments to the FTC, EPIC described several risks inherent in the IoT, including the hidden collection of sensitive data. EPIC recommended that companies adopt Privacy Enhancing Techniques that minimize or eliminate the collection of Personally Identifiable Information. FTC: Speech to CES on "Privacy and the IoT" (Jan. 6, 2015) http://epic.org/redirect/011215-ramirez-iot-speech.html EPIC: Internet of Things (IoT) https://epic.org/privacy/internet/iot/default.html Stanford U. Law Technology Review: "Fair Information Practices and the Architecture of Privacy (What Larry Doesn't Get)," by EPIC President Marc Rotenberg (2001) https://journals.law.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/stanford- technology-law-review/online/rotenberg-fair-info-practices.pdf EPIC: Big Data and the Future of Privacy https://epic.org/privacy/big-data/ EPIC: FTC http://epic.org/privacy/internet/ftc/ ======================================================================== [7] EPIC in the News ======================================================================== "Lawmaker Wants Crowdsourced Privacy Bill to Kickstart Committee." The Recorder [CA], Jan. 8, 2015. http://www.therecorder.com/id=1202714197228/Lawmaker-Wants- Crowdsourced-Privacy-Bill-to-Kickstart-Committee#ixzz3OS7YfyWG "Future of FTC Data Security Enforcement Hinges on Forthcoming Wyndham Ruling." Bloomberg BNA, Jan. 6, 2015. http://www.bna.com/future-ftc-data-n17179921846/ "CES 2015 to focus on Internet of Things." San Jose Mercury News, Jan. 2, 2015. http://www.mercurynews.com/troy-wolverton/ci_27247124/ wolverton-ces-2015-focus-internet-things?source=infinite "Online Privacy: Who Writes the Rules?" The New York Times, Letter to the Editor by EPIC President Marc Rotenberg, Dec. 31, 2014. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/01/opinion/online-privacy-who- writes-the-rules.html "'Upskirting' videos of women, teens riding Metro posted to porn site." ABC News 7 [DC], Dec. 29, 2014. http://www.wjla.com/articles/2014/12/-upskirting-videos-of-women- teens-riding-metro-posted-to-porn-site-110174.html#ixzz3OS8CqD5e "Cruise Missile-Spotting Balloon Rises Over Maryland." Capital Gazette, Dec. 26, 2014. http://www.capitalgazette.com/bs-md-surveillance-blimps-20141226,0, 105692.story "There Are Secret Blimps Protecting Washington, D.C." Fast Company, Dec. 23, 2014. http://www.fastcompany.com/3040209/there-are-secret-blimps- protecting-washington-dc "Out of fear, Americans are censoring themselves." The Columbus Dispatch, Dec. 23, 2014. http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/editorials/2014/12/23/1- out-of-fear-americans-are-censoring-themselves.html For More EPIC in the News: http://epic.org/news/epic_in_news.html ======================================================================= [8] EPIC Book Review: 'Countdown to Zero Day' ======================================================================= "Countdown to Zero Day: Stuxnet and the Launch of the World's First Digital Weapon," Kim Zetter http://amzn.to/1DyIXub Journalist Kim Zetter has written a fascinating account about Stuxnet, a digital weapon secretly designed to thwart Iran's nuclear ambitions. "Countdown to Zero Day" focuses on the work of security researchers around the world who believed they had run across new but run-of-the-mill malware. Slowly, as they dug deeper, the truth became clear: They were uncovering a digital weapon of amazing complexity, designed for a very specific purpose. Stuxnet was the world's first confirmed digital weapon. Developed jointly by the US and Israel to undermine Iran's enrichment of uranium for use in nuclear weapons, Stuxnet worked by surreptitiously changing parameters on the industrial equipment used for enrichment, stressing it and leading to physical damage. Zetter gracefully weaves the researchers' stories into the book as the necessary context to understand the implications of Stuxnet as a digital weapon. Perhaps the most important implication is the existence of an unregulated market for so-called "zero days" - previously unknown software vulnerabilities that do not have security patches. Zetter explains the unregulated market for zero days, the US government's role in purchasing zero days for cyber operations, and the threat zero days present to the security of Internet and critical infrastructure. Zetter describes how malware leveraging zero days could be used in cyberattacks against critical US infrastructure, whose systems have been brought online despite lacking robust security. Many security researchers have stressed the need for better security of critical infrastructure, Zetter says, but not until Stuxnet did the implications really hit home: The reality that mere computer code could be used to inflict physical damage was now beyond question. "Countdown to Zero Day" is not just about the uncovering of Stuxnet as a digital weapon, but also about the many implications of digital weapons and cyberwarfare: How should digital weapons be used? What counts as an act of war in the cyber realm? What are the responsibilities of governments to patch zero days as opposed to using them for cyberoperations? As the book makes clear, digital weapons and cyberwarfare is an ill-defined space: Policies around them receive little public debate and the policies that do exist are kept secret. "Countdown to Zero Day" powerfully brings readers into the reality of cyberwarfare. As the book notes, one consequence of Stuxnet is clear: "The malware's release had launched a digital arms race among countries big and small that will alter the landscape of cyberattacks forever." -- Jeramie D. Scott =================================== EPIC Bookstore =================================== "Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws 2010," edited by Harry A. Hammitt, Marc Rotenberg, John A. Verdi, Ginger McCall, and Mark S. Zaid (EPIC 2010). Price: $75. http://epic.org/bookstore/foia2010/ Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws is the most comprehensive, authoritative discussion of the federal open access laws. This updated version includes new material regarding President Obama's 2009 memo on Open Government, Attorney General Holder's March 2009 memo on FOIA Guidance, and the new executive order on declassification. The standard reference work includes in-depth analysis of litigation under: the Freedom of Information Act, the Privacy Act, the Federal Advisory Committee Act, and the Government in the Sunshine Act. The fully updated 2010 volume is the 25th edition of the manual that lawyers, journalists and researchers have relied on for more than 25 years. ================================ "Information Privacy Law: Cases and Materials, Second Edition" Daniel J. Solove, Marc Rotenberg, and Paul Schwartz. (Aspen 2005). Price: $98. http://www.epic.org/redirect/aspen_ipl_casebook.html This clear, comprehensive introduction to the field of information privacy law allows instructors to enliven their teaching of fundamental concepts by addressing both enduring and emerging controversies. The Second Edition addresses numerous rapidly developing areas of privacy law, including: identity theft, government data mining and electronic surveillance law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, intelligence sharing, RFID tags, GPS, spyware, web bugs, and more. Information Privacy Law, Second Edition, builds a cohesive foundation for an exciting course in this rapidly evolving area of law. ================================ "Privacy & Human Rights 2006: An International Survey of Privacy Laws and Developments" (EPIC 2007). Price: $75. http://www.epic.org/phr06/ This annual report by EPIC and Privacy International provides an overview of key privacy topics and reviews the state of privacy in over 75 countries around the world. The report outlines legal protections, new challenges, and important issues and events relating to privacy. Privacy & Human Rights 2006 is the most comprehensive report on privacy and data protection ever published. ================================ "The Public Voice WSIS Sourcebook: Perspectives on the World Summit on the Information Society" (EPIC 2004). Price: $40. http://www.epic.org/bookstore/pvsourcebook This resource promotes a dialogue on the issues, the outcomes, and the process of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). This reference guide provides the official UN documents, regional and issue-oriented perspectives, and recommendations and proposals for future action, as well as a useful list of resources and contacts for individuals and organizations that wish to become more involved in the WSIS process. ================================ "The Privacy Law Sourcebook 2004: United States Law, International Law, and Recent Developments," Marc Rotenberg, editor (EPIC 2005). Price: $40. http://www.epic.org/bookstore/pls2004/ The Privacy Law Sourcebook, which has been called the "Physician's Desk Reference" of the privacy world, is the leading resource for students, attorneys, researchers, and journalists interested in pursuing privacy law in the United States and around the world. It includes the full texts of major privacy laws and directives such as the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Privacy Act, and the OECD Privacy Guidelines, as well as an up-to-date section on recent developments. New materials include the APEC Privacy Framework, the Video Voyeurism Prevention Act, and the CAN-SPAM Act. ================================ "Filters and Freedom 2.0: Free Speech Perspectives on Internet Content Controls" (EPIC 2001). Price: $20. http://www.epic.org/bookstore/filters2.0 A collection of essays, studies, and critiques of Internet content filtering. These papers are instrumental in explaining why filtering threatens free expression. ================================ EPIC publications and other books on privacy, open government, free expression, and constitutional values can be ordered at: EPIC Bookstore: http://www.epic.org/bookstore ================================ EPIC also publishes EPIC FOIA Notes, which provides brief summaries of interesting documents obtained from government agencies under the Freedom of Information Act. Subscribe to EPIC FOIA Notes at: http://mailman.epic.org/mailman/listinfo/foia_notes ======================================================================= [9] Upcoming Conferences and Events ======================================================================= "Human Rights Implications of Big Data." Speaker: EPIC National Security Counsel Jeramie Scott. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science: Science and Human Rights Coalition Meeting, January 15, 2015. For More Informtion: http://www.aaas.org/sites/default/files/content_files/Jan_2015_ Coalition_draft_agenda_0.pdf. Computers, Privacy, and Data Protection. Brussels: January 21-23, 2015. For More Information: http://www.cpdpconferences.org/. "Governing Credit Scoring: Data Protection, Algorithms & Surveillance." Speaker: Julia Horwitz, EPIC Consumer Protection Counsel. Brussels: Computers, Privacy, and Data Protection, January 22, 2015. For More Information: http://www.cpdpconferences.org/. "EPIC 2015 International Champion of Freedom Award." Brussels: January 22, 2015. For More Information: http://www.cpdpconferences.org/. ======================================================================= Join EPIC on Facebook and Twitter ======================================================================= Join the Electronic Privacy Information Center on Facebook and Twitter: http://facebook.com/epicprivacy http://epic.org/facebook http://twitter.com/epicprivacy Start a discussion on privacy. Let us know your thoughts. Stay up to date with EPIC's events. Support EPIC. ======================================================================= Privacy Policy ======================================================================= The EPIC Alert mailing list is used only to mail the EPIC Alert and to send notices about EPIC activities. We do not sell, rent or share our mailing list. We also intend to challenge any subpoena or other legal process seeking access to our mailing list. We do not enhance (link to other databases) our mailing list or require your actual name. In the event you wish to subscribe or unsubscribe your e-mail address from this list, please follow the above instructions under "subscription information." ======================================================================= About EPIC ======================================================================= The Electronic Privacy Information Center is a public interest research center in Washington, DC. It was established in 1994 to focus public attention on emerging privacy issues such as the Clipper Chip, the Digital Telephony proposal, national ID cards, medical record privacy, and the collection and sale of personal information. EPIC publishes the EPIC Alert, pursues Freedom of Information Act litigation, and conducts policy research. For more information, see http://www.epic.orgor write EPIC, 1718 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20009. +1 202 483 1140 (tel), +1 202 483 1248 (fax). ======================================================================= Support EPIC ======================================================================= If you'd like to support the work of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, contributions are welcome and fully tax-deductible. Checks should be made out to "EPIC" and sent to 1718 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20009. Or you can contribute online at: http://www.epic.org/support Your contributions will help support Freedom of Information Act and First Amendment litigation, strong and effective advocacy for the right of privacy and efforts to oppose government and private-sector infringement on constitutional values. ======================================================================= Subscription Information ======================================================================= Subscribe/unsubscribe via web interface: http://mailman.epic.org/mailman/listinfo/epic_news Back issues are available at: http://www.epic.org/alert The EPIC Alert displays best in a fixed-width font, such as Courier. ------------------------- END EPIC Alert 22.01------------------------

Share this page:

Defend Privacy. Support EPIC.
US Needs a Data Protection Agency
2020 Election Security