Month: February 2009

Comment: Google Latitude

/ Christopher Parsons

200902121734.jpgIn the past week or so, Google has receive an enormous amount of attention because of their Latitude program. Latitude, once installed and enabled, will alert specified friends to your geographic location very specifically (i.e. street address) or more broadly (i.e. city). Google has developed this system so that users can turn off the system, can alter how precise it locates users, and has (really) just caught up to the technologies that their competitors have already been playing with (I wrote a little about Yahoo!’s Fire Eagle software, which is similar to Latitude, a few months ago).

While many people have already written and spoken about Latitude, I’ve found myself on a fence. On the one hand, I think that some of the criticisms towards the ‘privacy’ features of the program have been innane – at least one privacy advocate’s core ‘contribution’ to has been a worry that individuals might be given a phone with Latitude installed and active, without knowing about its presence or activation. As a result, they would be tracked without having consented to the program, or the geo-surveillance.

Continue reading →

Update: Ontario EDL Suppliers Named

/ Christopher Parsons

200902042317.jpgDr. Ann Cavoukian, the Ontario Information and Privacy Commissioner, announced yesterday that GND (located in Munich) would be responsible for producing Ontario EDLs. Further, she is working with the company Peratech to develop an on/off switch that would enable or disable the EDL RFIDs. As of yet, Peratech only has their technology working with contactless smart cards (i.e. cards with a 10 cm range), but they expect to overcome this. Ann is presently in talks with DHS to let them build the Peratech solution into the EDLs – this ‘privacy protective’ feature is not currently in the EDL spec. This is part of her ‘PETs Plus’, or ‘positive sum’ approach to security and privacy.

BC Privacy Commissioner Would Resign Over Longterm Surveillance

/ Christopher Parsons

200902042255.jpgSeveral sessions about the Vancouver 2010 Olympics were held over the course of the 10th Annual Security and Privacy conference. The BC Privacy Commissioner, David Loukidelis, has stated in each session that he is opposed to the continued presence of surveillance infrastructure installed for the games after the games conclude. When asked by a member of the audience if he would consider resigning were this infrastructure not dismantled (and thus mirror the actions taken by Greek privacy officers when police refused to limit their use of surveillance infrastructure developed for the Athens games) he responded that he would consider it.

Micheal Vonn, the policy directory for BCCLA, noted in her presentations that the Vancouver police have established a policy for ‘routine’ consent searches throughout the lower eastside area of Vancouver during the games – by her rough calculations, around 300 people would be searched each patrol. Over two weeks, this would amount to a minimum of 4200 searches, and this assumes that only one patrol would be moving through the area each day. What is most significant is that the proposed target area is where the safe injection site is, as well as other essential social services facilities for the most disadvantaged in society. Vonn’s information is in the Vancouver police’s business plan, which suggests that a premeditated, unwarranted, search regime may be coming to the games along with other ‘exceptional’ security measures.

Update: Bell Users’ Average Bandwidth Use

/ Christopher Parsons

200902032359.jpgJust a quick note about an interesting tidbit that was passed out by the Bell rep who gave a presentation on DPI today: A few years ago (no precise dates given) users were consuming, on average, 1GB of traffic; this has risen tenfold since that date. As Bell has repeatedly stated in CRTC submissions, they are not caching personally identifiable information as packets course through their DPI equipment, but still maintain that they are looking into the application layer of packets, but not the ‘content’ of the packet. It’s my hope that, over the next few months, more information about ISP uses of DPI emerges so that a more nuanced and productive discussion can take place.

In the next day or so, I’ll be putting up more thoughts and facts that emerged through the 10th annual security and privacy conference, “Life in a Digital Fishbowl“.

Reflections: Day Zero of ‘Life in a Digital Fishbowl’

/ Christopher Parsons

200902022154.jpgI’m fortunate enough to be attending the 10th Annual Privacy and Security Conference, Life in a Digital Fishbowl, this year. Monday held ‘preconferences’, and I want to quickly summarize and reflect on the one that dealt with the 2010 Olympic games.

Two sessions were organized, with the first broadly focusing on infrastructure and privacy issues, and the second addressing the need to protect critical infrastructure and consider the ‘legacies’ of mega-events. In the first session, really began with a clear statement that terror threats have reoriented ‘domestic’ threats into the domain of national security and, as a result, a new mode of considering and engaging with security has emerged. As part of this new orientation, the Integrated Security Unit (ISU) has been created to coordinate security agencies across jurisdictional boundaries, but this creates jurisdictional problems. Who can compel what organization to turn over documents, data, and recorded discourse? What should be done when different agencies have very different conceptions of what must remain confidential? Effectively, how do you navigate the varying loyalties and lines of responsibility that members of the ISU hold?

Continue reading →

Review: Canadian Copyright – A Citizen’s Guide

/ Christopher Parsons

200902012349.jpgFull disclosure, up front: I’m reviewing Canadian Copyright – A Citizen’s Guide (published through Between the Lines) as part of the Mini Book Expo. Now, on to the review…

Canadians are inundated with news about copyright on a regular basis. Where copyright was once a little spoken of technical subfield of law, it has blossomed into a vibrant and relevant facet of Canadian cultural discourse. Unfortunately, such discourse is often clouded by the ‘facts’ of copyright that accompany vast swathes of American media that is projected into Canada; discussions of fair use, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), and the definitions of copyright infringement are regularly grounded in American legal statutes. This book offers itself as an accessible panacea that promises to reorient popular discussions of copyright in Canada.

The text is neatly divided into four parts; Ideas, Law, Practice, and Policy. I’ll address each in turn, noting what I appreciated, and what I found lacking (where appropriate). Given that I spend a little bit of time reading and thinking about copyright, I’ll scatter some comments through the review.

Part I – Ideas

This section of the book is meant to give some background to copyright today. It begins by broadly distinguishing between natural rights-based and utilitarian arguments for the value of intellectual property broadly, and copyright specifically. At the same time, the authors recognize copyright as a means to make non-exclusive property (i.e. ideas) exclusive property; copyright functions to cordon off particular ‘things’ from the public. With this theory behind them, they delve into the history of Canadian copyright by examining the traditions of Britain, the United States (US), and France – copyright law in Canada is found at the crossing of these various legal traditions. While the historical basis of copyright often find themselves into texts on the subject, even elementary theory is often hidden from view – the authors should be congratulated for even taking a stab at the theory behind copyright. Given that the book is meant for a general audience, it’s hard to fault them for not digging into the theory too deeply.

Continue reading →