What are your concerns about online privacy?

Posted by Mike Jones | General | Thursday 28 October 2010 11:30 am

Electronic Frontiers Australia is appearing before Senate committee on online privacy tomorrow.

What are your concerns about online privacy? Leave your feedback in the comments below.

Feedback from Twitter and Facebook:

  • NewtonMark Mark Newton - @efa_oz The AG's #ozlog initiatives would be a good place to start.
  • mwyres Michael Wyres - @NewtonMark @efa_oz Agreed - #ozlog definitely the most obvious issue...
  • ‎Jay Stephens - 1. Concern that any rules mandating data retention will lead to my private data gathered by ISPs (for compliance) being held in tape backup or similar scattered around 3rd party locations, and possibly colocated outside Australia. 2. Concern that regulation of data sharing by companies will become weaker over time, allowing companies to effectively trade freely in any private data about me or my online behaviours that any of them may have gathered over time, including data being gathered and stored right now. 3. Expansion of the permissibility of the "selectable output control" concept ( http://a.gd/ed65b6 ) so that more and more of the hardware in my lounge at home has functionality that is remotely activated/controlled by ISPs, content delivery concerns, and other 3rd parties without my knowledge.
  • Travis Draper My concern is that demanding privacy has become an admission of guilt.
  • Thaao Crew privacy online? like there was any to begin with lol but its within a tolorable amount but all the new contoversys >.> its gonna get worse its like terrorists planning somthing on a mobile phone lol could it be stoped if its heard the short answer is no especaly if you talk in cryptic ways
  • nightkhaos NightKhaos - commented on the post. ACTA, iiNet vs AFACT and data-retention are my concerns.
  • Stu__H Stuart Hargreaves - @efa_oz #ozlog#acta#openinternet and #iitrial all have obvious privacy implications.
  • bookbuster Amy Hightower - @efa_oz #ozlog #acta and #nocleanfeed are the big three. The#iitrial probably also merits a mention.
  • Brad Matthews I am concerned by anything dealt with by this incompetent government. More to the point, gathering online data about specific people carried out by the government (or anyone else) is completely fucked.
  • LiamPomfret Liam Pomfret - @efa_oz Concerned about underinformed consumers who don't understand all the implications of sharing their info and conversations.
  • craigthomler CraigThomler - @efa_oz Concerns about Privacy: That corporations are asking us to give it up so they can look in our pockets for 'pirated' goods.
  • craigthomler CraigThomler - @efa_oz Concerns about Privacy: That governments are asking us to give it up so they can protect us from night terrors
  • craigthomler CraigThomler - @efa_oz Concerns about Privacy: And that people have unrealistic expectations about privacy - we demand personal service but refuse access.
  • golgy Leif - @efa_oz Concerns about Privacy: Data Security. Who's to say my data stored by anyone is truly safe. What is my data, what is it used for.
  • 13tales Tom Armstrong - @efa_oz Concerned by erosion of the means for digital privacy by gov & cops, who also don't protect us from exploit of our p.data by corps
  • LiamPomfret Liam Pomfret - @efa_oz Concerned that "protecting children" is being used as an argument to convince voters that erosion of privacy is a good thing.
  • digitalchris digital chris - Concerns about privacy: is there a nondisclosure list citizens can join - prevent collected incidental data from being used @efa_oz
  • DokterW Dr. W - @efa_oz My concern about privacy are those who think you are hiding criminal activities if you don't share you life willingly and openly.
  • damonreece Damon Reece - Concerned that the majority of the population is being punished for the actions of a very, very small minority.
  • Kronaz Nic - @efa_oz that govts are not content with their lack of control and will continue to try and undermine users security and privacy.
  • thecinemascene thecinemascene - @efa_oz My concern about privacy is the fact that governments from both sides' complete lack of action to create much stronger laws
  • RantRotAndRuin Rant, Rot and Ruin - @efa_oz Why should I trust my government to monitor my communications when it doesn't trust me enough to tell me why?#ozlog

Did Google steal your password?

Posted by Colin Jacobs | Consumer Issues,Privacy | Tuesday 26 October 2010 2:41 pm

Yesterday I spoke to the PM program on Radio National for a follow up on Google's WiFi privacy debacle, and have spoken to a few other media outlets as well. No doubt there's a lot of interest in the story because of Google's household name and seemingly unstoppable rise towards digital dominance. The "don't be evil" motto is nice and simple, but it also means a good story is in the offing every time Google does stray to the dark side. Has the company done some evil here?

The answer to this question is a little nuanced. On the one hand, I don't believe Google have deliberately done something sinister and the issue has been widely mischaracterised in the media. On the other hand, Google clearly screwed up and have to face the consequences, even the legal ones.

Google's Street View cars routinely collected information about wireless networks within range as they prowled the streets. This database of wireless networks provides an alternative to GPS for pinpointing the location of a user. Although it will gradually become obsolete as GPS chips become even more ubiquitous, there are still more Wi-Fi enabled devices than GPS-enabled ones. Tabulating the names and relative strengths of the networks in the area, perhaps combined with an IP address, is a pretty good way to figure out a person's location within a city. Although the compilation of such a database could be considered a little worrisome, one would expect that collecting this information about the names of the networks is just a list of information that is publicly broadcast by anybody that owns a wireless access point. (more...)

Shared news this week - 18-22 October

Posted by Mike Jones | General | Friday 22 October 2010 4:12 pm

Here is a summary of the news items we shared this week on Twitter.

Open Internet and No Clean Feed

Once more #censorship of the web heads its ugly rear in Australia (via @telecomtvcomhttp://bit.ly/dkMZ61 #ACTA #OpenInternet

Internet censorship is not the answer (via boston.com)http://bit.ly/akYrbj #OpenInternet #NoCleanFeed

Labor's ISP filter plan faces more delays (via theaustralian.com.au) http://bit.ly/9M3znu #OpenInternet#NoCleanFeed

Conroy’s dept is not working on the filter (via @renailemay)http://bit.ly/9YdqJy #OpenInternet #NoCleanFeed

ACTA, Righthaven and Copyright

MPAA Urges Japan to Adopt “Three-Strikes” (via zeropaid.com) http://bit.ly/bYxZ0y #Copyright #P2P #COICA

US accused pirates to indie filmmakers: Sue us (via @sandoCNET) http://bit.ly/dl5LjQ #Copyright #P2P #HurtLocker

#Righthaven Loses First Lawsuit; Judge Says Copying Was Fair Use (via @mmasnick#Copyright #OpenInternet

European Parliament finally debates #ACTA treatyhttp://bit.ly/9k1kg4 (via telegraph.co.uk) #Copyright#OpenInternet

Dan Bull - Death of ACTA [Video]http://youtu.be/elUwRb4DroU?hd=1 #NSFW #ACTA#GalloReport

RT @cathfmoore: @EFF Asks Judge to Dismiss Two Defendants from Mass Movie-Downloading Suitshttp://bit.ly/dnp0qq #Copyright #OpenInternet

Targets of Predatory Lawsuits Fight #Copyright Troll in Washington, D.C. (via @EFFhttp://bit.ly/bpzfun

#NBN helps stop 'export of jobs': @JuliaGillard (via @iTWire)http://bit.ly/c3BAwH #OpenInternet

Spy fears as Chinese firm eyes #NBN deal (via smh.com.au)http://bit.ly/aGstnD #Security #OpenInternet

Competitors gear up to do battle with #NBN (via smh.com)http://bit.ly/ccuBd7 #OpenInternet

Up to 90% see the need for #NBN speed (via smh.com)http://bit.ly/dzVOKU #OpenInternet

NBN

Quigley ready to present #NBN business case (via businessspectator.com.au) http://bit.ly/99FKP6

#NBN mandate becomes cost saviour (via @zyzzyvamedia)http://bit.ly/bJaAUT

Conroy comes knocking (via @BernardKeanehttp://bit.ly/cm0JaT#NBN #TheAustralian

Conroy's hard-wired for conflict http://bit.ly/aW3AZd (via businessspectator.com.au) #NBN

Samuel seeks distance from cost-benefit debate (via @rycrozierhttp://bit.ly/bgfTYf #NBN

Samuel's #NBN slug (via businessspectator.com.au)http://bit.ly/bGfrS7 #Telstra #Regional

Lateline Transcript: Conroy discusses the #NBNhttp://bit.ly/bAipuL

#NBN Co business case to precede implementation study response (via @j_hutchhttp://bit.ly/bmZ2v2 #OpenInternet

ADSL emulation port too expensive, "one-off": Quigley (via @j_hutch#NBN #OpenInternet

Rural NBN focus has no cost impact: Quigley (via @888riley)http://bit.ly/bWO46R #OpenInternet #NBN

@Telstra bill hits parliament, supported by @Telstra (via @renailemayhttp://bit.ly/c6WPsT #NBN #OpenInternet

#NBN Co: Three-quarters of residents consent to fibre (via @crn_auhttp://bit.ly/9KErQC #OpenInternet

#NBN business plan to board this week: Quigley (via @888rileyhttp://bit.ly/bsbnm9 #OpenInternet

Greens sit on fence for coalition #NBN Bill (via @zdnetaustralia)http://bit.ly/bQEp4w #OpenInternet

Broadband: getting faster but still too slow (via @louisahearn)http://bit.ly/bHJWKb #OpenInternet

Coalition moves to delay #NBN (via @ashermoses)http://bit.ly/cq2QLw #OpenInternet

"It's stupid to say 'no' to the #NBN" says @bengrubbhttp://bit.ly/9C5m1T #openinternet

Privacy and Surveillance

Eight Epic US Failures of Regulating Cryptography (@EFF)http://bit.ly/91n8Np

@EFF advises California PUC on Smart Grid #privacyprotections http://bit.ly/aeX2Rx #smartgrid

The Problem With Proxies (via @lukeallnutthttp://bit.ly/bHYe5V#circumvention #OpenInternet

Feds To US Telecoms: Stop Upgrading So We Can Wiretap Easier (via @giz_auhttp://bit.ly/cel5mJ #WebWiretap #Privacy

Zynga Sued Over Sharing #Facebook Users' Data (viamediapost.comhttp://bit.ly/bl9Ukn #Privacy #Data

Top ten #Facebook apps found violating app developer agreement http://bit.ly/cCTRun #Privacy #Data

#Facebook Apps Leaking Private Data to Advertisers and Trackers (via @EFFhttp://bit.ly/cCTRun #Privacy #Data

ACCC

SPs prep for ACCC, Telstra ADSL war http://bit.ly/92vNCb (via @darrenpauli)

EFF

@EFF announce winners of its 2010 Pioneer Awardshttp://bit.ly/barBUw

@EFF's Cohn fights copyright's 'underbelly' (via @cnet)http://bit.ly/bNffxT #OpenInternet #Copyright #censorship

Cloud

Cloud security? Better get a lawyer, Son! (via @stilgherrian)http://bit.ly/cTecOW #privacy #Security #cloud

Data Retention

RT @serkowski: British government revives blanket data retention plans - http://bit.ly/aq9mMB #ozlog #unsurprising

Wikileaks

The Internet War (via @mathabahttp://bit.ly/aN31fT #wikileaks#OpenInternet

Keep in touch and Show your support

Want to show your support for an open Internet?  Here’s how

Keep up to date with the latest news on Twitter and Facebook

Shared news this week - 11-15 October

Posted by Mike Jones | General | Friday 15 October 2010 5:12 pm

Sometimes it can be hard to keep up with everything that is going on.  Here is a summary of the news items we shared this week on Twitter.

Please let me know if you find a summary list like this one handy, and if you would like me to do it every week.

Open Internet

The morality of #censorship http://bit.ly/dxcxRS

@JuliaGillard won't budge on internet filter http://bit.ly/dpmoM2

Gillard: Filter is a “moral question”: http://bit.ly/cCp43x

The Filter’s Not Dead, It’s Sleeping Fitfully http://bit.ly/98ILo8

Austar tipped for #NBN deal http://bit.ly/cEVVNi

Aussies get daft on censorship again http://bit.ly/aVhnY3

Blacklist maintenance to cost $71billion by 2019.http://bit.ly/aAGjQ7

The truth about refused classification http://bit.ly/8ZpfwA

Online complaints up, take-downs low http://bit.ly/b1d717

#Wikileaks on Australian Government Blacklist? http://bit.ly/cPyfyB

How would the Internet Filter work, exactly? http://bit.ly/apBizG

NBN

@TurnbullMalcolm's #NBN confusion softens Libs' case http://bit.ly/9a6X3r

@JuliaGillard : Cost of #NBN needs to be “reverse engineered” http://bit.ly/bIzPF2

Telstra's warning over #NBN deal http://bit.ly/bdDdRf

@LiberalAus to use existing broadband infrastructure for its own version of#NBN http://bit.ly/cFxRIA

#NBN costs could balloon: reporthttp://bit.ly/aRpuGH

Optus targets #NBN wireless fans and fibre critics http://bit.ly/aZJWjP

Samuel's #NBN cost-benefit noisehttp://bit.ly/cSZP9n

#NBN Co. to deliver business plan to Government by November http://bit.ly/ct2RdW

The #NBN debate: Pulling in different directions http://bit.ly/d5jIDH

Brisbane turns its back on #NBN, builds its own http://bit.ly/cHDR82

A video of i3 laying optic fibre in sewers http://youtu.be/d9qioflCPSc

Plan for high-speed broadband in Brisbane to beat #NBN by eight years http://bit.ly/9H20Ej

Connect to #NBN now or pay up to $300 for phone line http://bit.ly/977tel

#NBN Co set to use semi-idle satellites to deliver remote broadband (viawatoday.com.auhttp://bit.ly/9CWswu

ACTA and COICA

How #ACTA Turns Private, Non-Commercial File Sharing Into 'Commercial Scale' Criminal Infringement http://bit.ly/bur1Fu

Attorney-General's office considering#copyright law reviewhttp://bit.ly/9kUtxA

#ACTA Must be Rejected as a Wholehttp://is.gd/fY0XR

How #ACTA is being reported in the Public Service -> #Copyright agreement to right copy wrongshttp://bit.ly/93G7G3

On Internet Censorship:#ACTA and #COICA http://bit.ly/9XAY1a

BSA falsely claims #ACTA is a treaty that has already been signed by 37 countrieshttp://bit.ly/aBwC5w

#ACMA blocks more siteshttp://bit.ly/cQsbiJ

Analysis: Where to now for #ACTAhttp://bit.ly/bUXdvV

Brazil Says #ACTA Is Illegitimatehttp://bit.ly/brg4mZ

Surveillance / Web Wiretapping

With proposed “blacklists,” US Senate has its “foot in the door” on http://bit.ly/axclUC

#Privacy revisions present risk for offshore clouds http://bit.ly/dlWwCm

Snuggly the Security Bear Speaks on Internet Wiretappinghttp://bit.ly/8YFhjS

US Police State of Wiretapping the Web: Who Do THEY Want to Watch?http://bit.ly/aDqleL

#ASIO gets new wiretap powers in caring-sharing plan http://bit.ly/cEKkOc

US Government uses social networking to infiltrate people's lives http://bit.ly/9H4QME

US Feds snooping social media sites? http://bit.ly/9MGnhw

Encryption debate centers on #privacy http://bit.ly/dhvWEB

China

With Twitter blocked, Chinese micro-blogging thrives http://bit.ly/c5lz3F

Chinese reformers push on#censorship http://bit.ly/9LqVpD

Chinese former communist officials in reform call http://bit.ly/d9EASJ

Copyright

Irish ISP wins major legal victory against record labels http://bit.ly/bBwsKn

US Library of Congress:#Copyright is killing sound archivinghttps://eff.org/r.3tc

Other news

Online ad chief waters down plan to reveal and disarm #tracking http://bit.ly/8Xw8z0

#Righthaven files, settles more US#copyright lawsuits http://bit.ly/9bwx0z

Holding Nokia Responsible for Surveilling Dissidents in Iran (via @EFFhttp://bit.ly/aW7zQi

Keep in touch and Help us

Want to show your support for an open Internet?  Here’s how

Keep up to date with the latest news on Twitter and Facebook

The morality of censorship

Posted by Colin Jacobs | Censorship,Mandatory ISP Filtering | Thursday 14 October 2010 5:26 pm

Much has been written and said about the Labor Government's plan to censor Australia's Internet. The plan, which involves a Government blacklist of web sites that all Australian Internet service providers would be required to block, has been criticised for its ineffectiveness, free speech risks and technical difficulties. However, while there has been some moralising, there has been little serious debate about the filter's moral implications.

The Prime Minister injected morality into the discussion on Tuesday when answering a skeptical question about the filter, saying that the Internet may present technical challenges to censorship, "but the underpinning moral question, I think, is exactly the same." If it's not allowed in a cinema, she argued, the change in medium does not change the underpinning moral issue. But what, then, exactly is the moral question?

Is the Prime Minister arguing that our morals need to be protected? The preservation of public morality has always been a justification for censorship. This is as true now as it was in the 19th century when information on contraception was banned in Australia, just as it is used now to deny information on sexuality or alternative religions in Saudi Arabia. Many view it as self-evident that such protection is necessary.

These days, though, we ought to be a little more skeptical about claims that we need protection from moral pollution. Whether exposure to controversial content can adversely affect the morals of the viewer is a question that is open to scientific analysis. Is viewing material considered abhorrent by the community alone sufficient to turn a moral person into an immoral one? Does pornography have a corrosive effect on the attitudes of those who view it? This is a fertile avenue for research, but what we know so far is far from unambiguous. While violent people may seek out violent material, cause and effect is not clear. Research shows that the use of pornography may actually have a positive impact on its users and their attitudes to sexuality.

This is an area of legitimate debate, but before we introduce drastic new public policy, we ought to be clear just who we are protecting, how and why. We may decide that the government has a role to play in shielding adults from "harmful" influences. Then again, we may decide that individual freedom trumps such concerns.

Where the rights of other people are being violated the moral dimension of the problem becomes much clearer. The production and dissemination of child pornography clearly violates the rights of the children involved and is unambiguously immoral by any sane definition. Is the morality of child abuse germane to the discussion of censorship? I would argue that it is not, at least in the case of the Internet filter. Consuming this sort of material is unanimously abhorred and is a serious criminal offence everywhere in Australia. No matter in what format a person views child pornography, they are committing a crime. Since criminal sanctions are already in place, and experts agree the filter will be totally ineffective in slowing the traffic of this material, it's not clear how the existence of child pornography makes Internet censorship a moral imperative.

One could argue - and some do - that we as a society should take any measures that could potentially prevent the spread of such immorality no matter what the costs. Others, including myself, argue that even here we must weigh the benefits against the costs to society of stricter censorship and greater intrusion into our personal lives. Certainly, effective measures to combat child pornography should be taken, and these include enforcement and infiltration by police agencies. The ethics of an ineffective filter are however highly debatable.

As it happens, even the Prime Minister's movie theatre analogy does not hold up, as it is would not be illegal to go and view a movie that was Refused Classification in a cinema, though the cinema's owner would certainly be in breach of the law. The actual material that would be blocked under the current classification scheme is also much broader than clearly "immoral" content such as violent porn, and would include content banned for discussion of crime, sexual fetishes, or even adult-oriented computer games. This is not mere nit-picking, as it demonstrates that Internet filtering represents a major shift in censorship policy from laws that affect corporations distributing entertainment commercially to those that affect ordinary citizens who consume and create content online.

Should the government have this level of control over the content we view? I would argue that this, too, is a moral issue, as it could have a very significant impact on a human right we take very seriously.

[PM's words: http://www.pm.gov.au/node/6953]

Want to show your support for an open Internet?  Here’s how
Keep up to date with the latest news on Twitter and Facebook

Image Credit: Joel Duggan

Next Page »