Trust and Google's Privacy Policy
Friday, 27 January 2012 15:57
Glenn
Google, some have argued, knows more about you than your wife or husband. And now all the things they know about you from various locations (what maps you've used, what documents you've shared, what your certainly-not-private email contains, what porn you've surfed, for what you've searched) are conveniently gathered in one location, and all integrated into Google's Digital You. Any time you are logged into or using any Google service, Google is watching you.
This is a lot to ask, in terms of the trust they want me to give them. I'm going to apply a very much simplified version of an ISECOM trust analysis on this situation, and try to arrive at some sort of trust decision.
The ten trust properties prescribed by ISECOM:
- Size. How many people am I trusting with my Google Digital Doppelganger? The number is huge. Huge. Primarily people who want to sell me something. But not ordinary people, not yet, though that prospect makes me leery. All this makes risk large, and trust small. Minus one.
- Symmetry. Is the trust two-way? If it's not, then there is room for abuse. So is Google going to allow me to see personal information about the corporation? No. Is Google even going to allow me to see "what they've got on me"? No. Minus one.
- Transparency. How open is Google in general? Not. Will they openly share their data about me, which is essentially MY stuff, like my car is my stuff? No. Minus one.
- Control. Who, exactly, controls the data? Google. Can I get data about me erased or corrected? Essentially, no. So who is in (total) control? Google. Minus one.
- Consistency. Does Google have a consistent record of protecting data privacy? Well, getting hacked by the Chinese so they could root out dissidents wasn't exactly a stellar example. And Google has indeed bowed to the governments both here and overseas and surrendered data. So the answer is no, and the point is minus one.
- Integrity. Is Google today what Google once was? Not so much. Is that cause for alarm? Good question. More accurately, does Google provide timely notice of changes, like their notice of this change of policy? Actually, they are relatively good at this. Plus one.
- Offsets. Is Google going to pay when my data is compromised? Are they offering me any financial guarantees? Because they're certainly bringing me risk. Minus one.
- Value of Reward. Does Google offer me something valuable? Absolutely they do, in many areas. Plus one.
- Components. What are the things that gather, store and update information about me? How many of them are there? Because the more, the riskier. Minus one.
- Porosity. How far is my Digital Doppelganger, within Google, separated from the external Internet? Possibly, it's well isolated. But how well is my Digital Doppelganger separated from paying clients of Google (not of mine)? It's not: it is precisely to them it is available. Minus one.
Ultimately I arrive at a minus six, a low enough level that my willingness to trust Google is quite small. I'll be reluctant to log into my cursory Google+ account again, and certainly I won't do Gmail. I don't mind using Google maps, since I do so very rarely. But I darn sure won't use Google Docs, nor would I suggest that a client do so. That is, however, their trust decision.
As for me, now it's time to take a look at Facebook. And LinkedIn. And so forth. Because my Digital Doppelganger belongs to me, the same way my car belongs to me. Don't ask to borrow it, then wreck it, please.
Last Updated on Friday, 27 January 2012 16:56
|
Proposed European Privacy Rules: Good for the Individual, Bad for Business?
Friday, 27 January 2012 15:47
Glenn
The issue of data privacy is going to be a big, tough, chewy lump of raw meat. People are going to fight over it, but nobody really wants to eat it.
If you're a company doing business overseas - and if you're online, you're overseas - then you will have to comply with these rules as regards European users. That means, for all intents, you'll have to implement data protection and privacy measures, period.
This may drive business from Europe, at least businesses for whom an Internet presence is also an element; at least that's the theory. It's certainly true that the previous round of laws were designed to encourage Internet growth; now the shoe's on the other foot. How do you implement a "right to be forgotten"?
The new Regulation signals that the tide has turned. The 1995 Directive focused on building the online economy, and favouring businesses large and small to expand and grow, while the 2012 Regulation will reverse the fortunes for businesses and focus on European end users.
Internet companies will have to seek explicit consent from its users to use data about them, including when it is being collected, told for how long it will be stored, and for what purpose it is being used for.
Read this story at http://www.zdnet.com/blog/london/how-the-new-european-data-law-will-affect-us-companies/2608?tag=nl.e550
Last Updated on Friday, 27 January 2012 16:56
SETH GODIN: If You're An Average Worker, You're Going Straight To The Bottom
Monday, 23 January 2012 18:14
Glenn
Are you ready for the idea that "the current recession is a forever recession?" Seth Godin of BusinessInsider.com has a warning for you, and it's going to be very dismaying for the Average American. Read the whole article here:
http://www.businessinsider.com/if-youre-an-average-worker-in-this-forever-recession-youre-going-straight-to-the-bottom-2012-1
Why SOPA and PIPA Are Bad Ideas.
Wednesday, 18 January 2012 21:14
Glenn
Hello my IT friends -
Regardless on which side of this you land, I hope you understand the issues behind Wikipedia's (and many sites', including mine) "blackout" yesterday in protest of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the House and the Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) in the Senate.
These bills are what we in the information security community call "Trojan Horses." They look like an effective way to keep sites from dealing in stolen music, movies and so on - which is a good motivation, with lots of good arguments behind it. Unfortunately, these bills would basically create new Federal powers that everyone across the political spectrum would protest: they eliminate two key Constitutional protections that are critical to our rights as citizens.
Due Process is what we're talking about when we say "you can't search my house without a warrant." I kinda like having that right, personally. But in the case of websites, all it takes is a complaint, and whammo, that site is gone for good. No judge, no warrant, no consideration, nada. I do not like the Feds getting this kind of practice enshrined in law.
Redress means I get to know my accuser, and I get to see the charges against me. It also means that I have legal freedom to defend myself and to pursue monetary damages if those charges cause me harm and turn out to be false. If they were knowingly false, then there's extra money involved. But under SOPA/PIPA, all someone has to do is file a complaint, and blammo, Google is down. Just like that.
It may sound like I exaggerate, so please don't take it from me:
"This means that YouTube, Facebook, Wikipedia, Gmail, Dropbox and millions of other sites would be 'Internet sites…dedicated to theft of U.S. property,' under SOPA’s definition. Simply providing a feature that would make it possible for someone to commit copyright infringement or circumvention...is enough to get your entire site branded as an infringing site."
http://mashable.com/2012/01/17/sopa-dangerous-opinion/
Ben Ray Lujan supports SOPA in the House.
Jeff Bingaman supports PIPA in the Senate.
Tom Udall supports PIPA in the Senate.
Last Updated on Thursday, 19 January 2012 08:33
The Pirate Bay: PIPA/SOPA Won’t Stop Us!
Tuesday, 17 January 2012 20:22
Glenn
"Supporters of the pending PIPA/SOPA anti-piracy bills often use The Pirate Bay as a prime example of a website that can be taken out under the new legislation. But is that really the case? The Pirate Bay team has been silent on the issue, until now. As it turns out, the people behind the popular torrent site don’t believe the laws will do much to stop them, but they do fear for the future of the Internet."
Read the whole article here: http://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bay-pipasopa-wont-stop-us120117/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 41 |
