Dissent

Oct 162021
 
 October 16, 2021  Posted by  Business, Non-U.S., Online, Surveillance

Odia Kagan of Fox Rothschild writes:

The development of alternative techniques to “third-party” cookies cannot be done at the expense of the right of individuals to protect their personal data and privacy, according to France’s Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertés (CNIL).

The commission has issued new guidance on what happens after third party cookies.

Read more on Privacy Compliance & Data Security.

Oct 162021
 
 October 16, 2021  Posted by  Business, Surveillance, U.S., Youth & Schools

Towler Road reports:

Minneapolis Public Schools are using software to monitor student communications in and out of school, raising serious concerns over student privacy, according to the non-profit The 74 ,that has analyzed public records and just issued a report that raises serious concerns related to the use of the Gaggle software that can be used for 24-hour monitoring through school-provided tech devices, and includes Identifying and passing along student interest in keywords including “gay”, “LGBTQ” and others.

Read more on Towler Road.

Oct 162021
 
 October 16, 2021  Posted by  Breaches, Court, Non-U.S.

Jennie Buchanan of Lawson Lundell LLP writes:

In ES v Shillington1, a decision issued last month, the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench recognized the tort of Public Disclosure of Private Facts, a new cause of action that protects private information from public disclosure.2 Formal recognition of this tort in Alberta marks an important development in the law, giving additional legal protection to individuals’ information privacy rights at a time when the proliferation of technology makes it harder and harder to protect private information.

In order to establish liability for the tort of Public Disclosure of Private Facts, the plaintiff must prove that:

  1. the defendant publicized an aspect of the plaintiff’s private life;
  2. the plaintiff did not consent to the publication;
  3. the matter publicized or its publication would be highly offensive to a reasonable person in the position of the plaintiff; and
  4. the publication as not of legitimate concern to the public.3

Read more on Mondaq.

This ruling may explain why a Canadian firm went running to an Alberta court to try to get an order concerning my reporting about a data breach the firm experienced, but there are significant differences between my reporting on Homewood Health’s breach and the situation in ES v Shillington.

Oct 152021
 
 October 15, 2021  Posted by  Featured News

Kellen Browning reports:

More than a dozen prominent cybersecurity experts on Thursday criticized plans by Apple and the European Union to monitor people’s phones for illicit material, calling the efforts ineffective and dangerous strategies that would embolden government surveillance.

In a 46-page study, the researchers wrote that the proposal by Apple, aimed at detecting images of child sexual abuse on iPhones, as well as an idea forwarded by members of the European Union to detect similar abuse and terrorist imagery on encrypted devices in Europe, used “dangerous technology.”

Read more on DNYUZ.  This story previously appeared on the New York Times.