When handling personal data, organizations must utilize both best practices for privacy and cybersecurity to ensure that it is protected, sound, and treated in line with individual and societal expectations.
FPF’s work on privacy and cybersecurity focuses on the overlap between the two areas, including how different global laws and policy regimes tackle that overlap. Through FPF’s Privacy and Cybersecurity Expert Group, FPF facilitates the coordination and collaboration of privacy and cybersecurity experts to promote common goals, strategies, and understanding.
FPF’s Cybersecurity Advisory Committee comprises top cyber and privacy executives at industry-leading companies and civil society and academia representatives.
Advisory committee members include:
- Emily Hancock, Cloudflare
- Stephenie Handler, Gibson Dunn (Chair)
- David Hoffman, Duke University, Sanford School of Public Policy
- Anitha Ibrahim, Amazon Web Services
- Andy Serwin, DLA Piper
- Chad Sniffen, National Network to End Domestic Violence
- Melanie Tiano, T-Mobile
- Heng Xu, American University
Featured
Report Analyzes the Role of Data Protection in Safeguarding Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Information
While digital technology has empowered LGBTQ+ individuals to find community and access services, the increasing availability and use of connected devices have also created new privacy risks for LGBTQ+ communities. Today, the Future of Privacy Forum (FPF), a global non-profit focused on data privacy and protection, and experts from LGBT Tech — a national, nonpartisan […]
Warning Signs: Identifying Privacy and Security Risks to Machine Learning Systems
FPF is working with Immuta and others to explain the steps machine learning creators can take to limit the risk that data could be compromised or a system manipulated.
Essentially Equivalent:
“In a milestone decision on transatlantic data protection, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued its judgment in the Schrems case, declaring the Commission decision on the EU-U.S. Safe Harbor agreement invalid. The CJEU declared that such a decision requires a finding that the level of protection of fundamental rights and freedoms in the laws and practices of the third country is “essentially equivalent” to that guaranteed within the EU.”