Privacy in the Legislative Branch: A Quick Update
Take a look at Chris’ perspective on the current state of play in privacy legislation on Capitol Hill: Privacy in the Legislative Branch: A Quick Update.
Take a look at Chris’ perspective on the current state of play in privacy legislation on Capitol Hill: Privacy in the Legislative Branch: A Quick Update.
The recent online-inspired political upheaval in the Mid-East, occurring at the same time as U.S. and European government agencies are asking for comment about online privacy, show the importance of having an integrated understanding of both privacy and the freedom of association. The events unfolding in Egypt concern revolutionary political moments, but the Obama campaign, the Tea Party, and the daily activities of innumerable charities and social causes show that modern associations occur extremely frequently through social networks and related online services.
Professor Swire’s paper discusses the ways that the rights of both privacy and freedom of association should fit together. Swire will be interviewed by Jeff Rosen, Professor of Law at George Washington University Law School and legal affairs editor of The New Republic.
WHEN:
Tuesday, March 1
3 p.m. – 4 p.m. EST
WHO:
Peter Swire, FPF Advisory Board member; Senior Fellow, Center for American Progress; C. William O’Neill Professor of Law at the Ohio State University
Professor Jeff Rosen, Professor of Law at George Washington University Law School
Jules Polonetsky and Christopher Wolf, co-chairs, Future of Privacy Forum
WHAT:
Release of “Social Networks, Privacy, and Freedom of Association: How Individual Rights Can Both Encourage and Reduce Uses of Personal Information” by Professor Swire
View Peter Swire’s paper here:
http://ftc.gov/os/comments/privacyreportframework/00342-57843.pdf
WHERE: http://www.livestream.com/futureofprivacy
*Also available on our Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/FutureofPrivacy. Click on “Livestream” underneath our FPF logo on the left-hand side.*
Please pass along to any colleagues or friends who you feel would be interested in this event!
QUESTIONS:
Questions for Swire or Rosen can be sent via email to [email protected], posted on the FPF Facebook Page, or posted on Twitter using the hashtag #privacyrights.
RSVP:
Please RSVP to [email protected] if you’d like to join.
FPF filed comments on the Preliminary FTC Staff Report, “Protecting Consumer Privacy in an Era of Rapid Change: A Proposed Framework for Businesses and Policymakers.” To view FPF’s comments, click here.
Jules Polonetsky Executive Director and Co-chair Future of Privacy Forum |
Jules serves as Executive Director and Co-chair of the Future of Privacy Forum, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank that seeks to advance responsible data practices. FPF is supported by the chief privacy officers more than 110 leading companies, as well as an advisory board of comprised of the country’s leading academics and advocates. FPF’s current projects focus on Big Data, Mobile, Location, Apps, the Internet of Things, Wearables, De-Identification, Connected Cars and Student Privacy. Read More >> |
Christopher Wolf Founder and Co-chair Future of Privacy Forum |
Christopher Wolf is the co-chair of the Future of Privacy Forum. Chris is also a partner in the Washington, DC office of Hogan Lovells LLP, where he is a leader of that firm’s privacy practice group. The views expressed by the Future of Privacy Forum are solely its own and do not reflect the views of Hogan Lovells LLP or its clients… Read More >> |
Mary Culnan Professor Emeritus at Bentley University |
Mary has testified before Congress, the Massachusetts Senate, and other government agencies on a range of privacy issues. In 1993, she served on a White House Task Force on Presidential Correspondence. From 1997-98, she served as a Commissioner on the President’s Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection…Read More >> |
Peter P. Swire Nancy J. and Lawrence P. Huang Professor at the Scheller College of Business of the Georgia Institute of Technology |
Peter P. Swire is the Nancy J. and Lawrence P. Huang Professor at the Scheller College of Business of the Georgia Institute of Technology. He is a Senior Fellow with the Future of Privacy Forum, and also a fellow with the Center for American Progress and Center for Democracy and Technology. In November, 2012 he was named the co-chair of the Tracking Protection Working Group of the World Wide Web Consortium, the Do Not Track process. He has been a recognized leader in privacy, cybersecurity, and the law of cyberspace for well over a decade, as a scholar, government official, and participant in numerous policy, public interest, and business settings…Read More >> |
Omer Tene Associate Professor College of Management School of Law |
Omer Tene is an Associate Professor at the College of Management School of Law, Rishon Le Zion, Israel; Affiliate Scholar at the Stanford Center for Internet and Society; and Visiting Fellow at the Berkeley Center for Law and Technology and the Institute for Jewish Law and Israeli Law, Economy and Society.He is Managing Director of Tene & Associates, where he consults the Israeli government, data protection authority and…Read More >> |
Some companies are doing what they can. “I’m heartened by the attention to mobile privacy issues,” says privacy attorney Chris Wolf of Hogan Lovells. New services revolve around “ways to empower people to protect their information.”
The following is a guest post by David Hoffman, Director of Security Policy and Global Privacy Officer at Intel and FPF advisory board member.
Check out A Busy Time For Privacy and Security and other posts by David on the Intel Policy Blog.
A Busy Time For Privacy and Security
The past two weeks have included a number of important events for privacy and security. At the top of my mind have been the protests in Egypt, as I worry about the welfare of the Egyptian people and the many non-Egyptians in the country. One of the more disturbing aspects of the developments in Egypt, was the Egyptian government’s actions to require local internet service providers to disconnect from the global internet. The internet has become an integral component of individuals’ lives. Disconnecting a country from the global internet is an extreme and unfortunate reaction.
The Egyptian government had a solid record of assisting the private sector in making the internet available to its citizens. That record made the government’s decision to take down the connections more impactful, as local internet infrastructure suppliers appear not to have had plans to deal with the government decision.
In an interesting coincidence, the Egyptian government’s actions took place while many around the world were recognizing Data Privacy Day. Intel has been one of the core supporters of Data Privacy Day since its inception. Intel embraces Data Privacy Day’s goal of educating individuals on how they can use technology to provide benefits for their lives, while still having their personal date protected. Intel has been working in several areas to provide recommendations on how we can continue to foster technology innovation, while improving cybersecurity and privacy.
The Egyptian government’s actions call attention to the need of providing strong protections for individuals and companies so they can depend upon technology. Efforts to allow government access to, or control over, private components of the global digital infrastructure have been finding their way to light in many countries. These government attempts to control technology, include providing government the right to take down all, or a portion of, a private network. Any such government ability to impact technology in such a manner, creates substantial privacy concerns for individuals and industry. National security and law enforcement are fundamental obligations of government, but reasonable due process is necessary before government should take steps to access communications or take down private networks.
Several organizations have proposed alternative mechanisms to address government concerns. One example of these efforts are the Cybersecurity Principles authored by the Information Technology Industry Council, which were finalized on January 31st. The ITI Principles focus on building off of existing public-private partnerships and fostering the development of standards, best practices and international assurance programs.
Also distributed on January 31st, was the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) Cybersecurity Commission report “Cybersecurity Two Years Later.” I have been honored to sit on the Commission and to take part in some of the discussion that led to this report. The Commission operates as a body to provide input to the Project Director and Co-chairs. By its nature and size the Commission does not endeavor to create a report that all Commission members agree with fully. Not surprisingly, there are elements of the report with which I disagree. However, the document is an important piece of work assembled by some of the best minds in cybersecurity policy.
The report aptly calls for investment in cybersecurity education, more focus on the international implications of a patchwork of differing national regulations of the global digital infrastructure, improvements in the area of authentication and the fundamental importance of meeting the privacy expectations of individuals. Conversely, I do have concern about extending cybersecurity regulations to the private sector component of the “critical infrastructure”, when the report does not define the term. I also find the report too critical of existing public-private partnerships, as many of these activities have focused on building needed trust, while still providing transparency of operation. The Egyptian government’s actions highlight the danger of moving away from structures which create trust between government and industry.
Many companies, like Intel, are investing significantly in privacy and security to make certain individuals will be able to reasonably trust their use of technology. This busy time for privacy and security policy both brings some of these issues to the forefront, and provides useful fodder for debate on how we should move forward.