Annual Cisco Consumer Privacy Survey, a study including the opinions of over 2,600 respondents of varying demographics in 12 countries, indicates that consumer awareness of data privacy rights is continuing to grow and that AI has some work to do to earn public trust.
Data Privacy
Technological development has always outpaced privacy concerns, but never more so than in the past decade. Collection and centralization of personally identifiable information (PII), tracking of movements and digital surveillance are all at unprecedented levels. Regulations and laws are only just beginning to catch up to the ability of both governments and private entities to deploy these capabilities.
What exactly is there to worry about? The mass collection and centralization of data by giant multinationals such as Facebook and Google is as good of a place to start as any. Two decades of vacuuming up the personal data of users of various online services has created the most impressive marketing capabilities in history, but these profiles have astounding potential for damage when they are used the wrong way or fall into the wrong hands.
Unauthorized information that is captured in data breaches tends to find its way to massive “combo lists” that are sold and traded on the dark web. Social security numbers are added from this breach, home addresses and phone numbers from that one, personal health information from yet another. Soon, a frighteningly complete profile of millions of individuals is available to anyone willing to pay the asking price.
These are just the established data privacy issues. The emerging ones are even worse. High-quality facial recognition technology is just beginning to roll out across the public places of some countries. Artificial intelligence is not only making mass facial recognition possible, but magnifies the power and reach of any application that involves capturing and sorting information: scanning pictures, analyzing speech, sifting through text and location data. This threatens to not only shatter anonymity and privacy, but allow for highly advanced impersonation and take the concept of “identity theft” to new levels.
Some businesses chafe at the trouble and added expense of new and emerging data privacy regulations, but they are vital to both protecting rights and privacy and instilling confidence in end users. Customers want to be able to submit their payment information without worry about data breaches and identity theft, use services without wondering what is being done with their personal information and use devices without fear of surveillance or having location data tracked. The need for meaningful safeguards only grows greater as technological capabilities increase.
New report shows government agencies are regularly using cloud extraction tools as surveillance technology to analyze and extract private data from major cloud services.
The only way to achieve data privacy is through implementing effective data security. A well-designed, privacy-first security program offers significant benefits to any organization while minimizing potential privacy impacts.
FCC commissioner is calling for app stores to give TikTok the boot over national security concerns based on a leak of internal audio recordings of TikTok meetings showing engineers in China had backdoor access to the data of all of its users.
Enhanced 911 location data would make it possible for emergency first responders to more accurately find and locate people making 911 calls. What are the privacy implications since the biggest U.S. telcos have been secretly selling location data of their customers to a shadowy network of data brokers and data aggregators?
The evolution of Australian legislation around the issue of privacy and data protection continues to gain momentum. Peter Leonard, a Partner at Gilbert + Tobin Lawyers in Sydney leads us through some of the developments that are affecting these important issues in Australia.
If the court approves the settlement, this long-running privacy lawsuit will finally be put to bed with $90 million (after the usual legal expenses) being parceled out to eligible users and Facebook forced to "sequester and delete" personal data.
Social media and the internet advertising industry now almost entirely run on algorithmic decision-making models. Researchers at Carnegie Mellon University are advocating for a "right to explanation" to shed light on them.
It’s a fine line between “good policing” and a “police state” as San Francisco bans facial recognition technology city departments due to growing privacy concerns.
Personalization is driving dynamic, tailored experiences. The reliance on data raises data privacy concerns, and when new “zero-data” sharing social networks like Openbook pop up, questions over the use – and misuse – of data is inevitable.










