CQ Researcher - Online Privacy

1) Behavioral Targeting

"Behavioral Targeting," or compiled user-profiles that track online activity have raised privacy concerns because of their tendency to end up in the hand of third party advertisers. There are instances in which this type of information could be used detrimentally against online user.

"Would users about to apply for health insurance want the insurer to know that they had recently been searching for 'symptoms of colon cancer'?"

As the story about NebuAd has shown, there is legitimate public concern strong enough to topple firms that engage in behavioral targeting techniques regardless of the companies intentions.

It's unfortunate, though, that 65% of online marketing firms plan to use behavioral marketing practices despite public opposition and concern. Congressional hearings pertaining to this issue are in line of sight, and indeed, the only way public concern is likely to be addressed.

2) Tracking Technologies

Tracking technologies were first identified on a public level in an article published by Financial Times of London in February 1996. The article distinguished internet cookies as a potential threat to online users.

As explained in this article: "Cookies are the preferred method of accruing data because the information persists from session to session, and allows the Web server to recognize a user as having visited from the same computer as before."

These technologies exemplify a sort of precondition that is true for many online services to which we daily subscribe. It has to do with the arguments of risks vs. convenience; to participate in the convenience of online services we sign over bits of our privacy and anonymity.

3) GPS and Location-Based Services

"According to The Wall Street Journal, location-based services will be a $13-billion-a-year business by 2013, compared to $515 million last year."

Our mobile navigation and cellular services pose a threat to privacy because, in some cases, GPS tracking is used to inappropriately identify user's locations and is sold or given without user consent. Indeed, the problem lies in the absence of opt-out infrastructure.

Federal e911 rules require that cellular providers must, in the event of a 911 call, reveal location information in order to assist citizens in distress. The problem is that some users report that this information is being sent all the time! As discussed in another article: Verizon is defaulted to report locations of it's users at all times, but does, for those who care, provide an opt-out for locational privacy. The problem must lie in the fact that companies are not yet required by law to provide such an option which has raised considerable concern among users.

In addition, law enforcement should be required to obtain warrants in order learn the whereabouts of suspected persons.

http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre2009110600&type=hitlist&num=0

Full-Body Scans vs. Invasion of Privacy

I found an interesting article on nytimes.com this afternoon covering a flaring dispute between privacy advocates and airport authorities over the use of full-body scans which use Backscatter X-Ray technology to produce full body images.


“I’m on an airplane every three or four days; I want that plane to be as safe and secure as possible,” Mr. Chaffetz said. However, he added, “I don’t think anybody needs to see my 8-year-old naked in order to secure that airplane.”

“Your agency will be capturing the naked photographs of millions of American air travelers suspected of no wrongdoing.”


These legitimate concerns for privacy prove a difficult obstacle for further investment into this new technology. Although I consider myself a privacy advocate, there are compelling arguments supporting the contrary.


"Depending on the specific technology used, faces might be obscured or bodies reduced to the equivalent of a chalk outline. Also, the person reviewing the images must be in a separate room and cannot see who is entering the scanner. The machines have been modified to make it impossible to store the images, Ms. Lee said, and the procedure “is always optional to all passengers.” Anyone who refuses to be scanned “will receive an equivalent screening”: a full pat-down."


Like the article points out, I think that it all boils down to how these technologies are used when concerned with privacy. We all want to feel safe on our airborne journeys, but at the same time we don't want to be physically or "visually" molested, and we surely don't want our detailed "ghostly photographs" to appear on the web!

Jacek Utko designs to save newspapers

This is a prime example of what many media companies are being forced to do. Innovate. Indeed, it seems as fast as the mediums of communication are changing today, the harder it is for stagnating business practices to remain viable. All you have to do is take a look at the recording industry over the past few years to see exactly how maintaining old business models will get you nowhere in the 21st century. Jacek Utko has gone beyond the seasoned practices of his industry and provided an exciting fresh start for his small company. Good stuff!!

Privacy Issues with Google's Stored Internet Queries

European proponents of internet privacy have targeted Google over the length of time online consumer queries are stored.

Google's privacy counsel claims that the company complies with data protection regulations deleting internet search records every two years.

Data protection experts in the European Union are preparing to formally write Google with their claims of privacy infringement.

Google's 3.1 billion dollar acquisition of DoubleClick also raised concerns that the company will have "too much control in the Internet advertising market."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/20/technology/20iht-privacy.5.5378575.html