The ongoing battle royal between Apple and the FBI, which is trying to force the Cupertino based company to disable the built-in protections of an iPhone formerly owned by a terrorist has long term implications for privacy across the globe. Whether Apple wins or loses privacy advocates are watching the events extremely carefully. Data Privacy Asia reached out to some experts across Asia for their opinion on the ongoing legal battle.
In this, the final instalment in the series, Pauline C. Reich, Professor and Director of the Asia-Pacific Cyberlaw, Cybercrime and Internet Security Research Institute at the Waseda University School of Law in Tokyo, Japan examines the implications of the recent US v. Apple case in terms of disclosure requirements in Asia and across the globe.
The Uber breach that affected 57 million people shows the near complete lack of care at the company with regard to customer data – as well as the company’s inability to learn from previous security mishaps. Are customers already desensitized after hearing data breach after data breach or will this be a wake-up call?
Law enforcement agencies around the world are embracing new predictive policing technology that will help them spot criminals before a crime ever takes place. However, communities often have little or no idea of why or how this technology is being used, and that raises some important privacy and human rights concerns.
Predictive policing models have shown remarkable ability to help clamp down on illegal activity and reduce crime. But do these methods lead to systematic bias against certain minority communities or ethnic groups? IUPUI study based on real-world data shows there is no statistically significant evidence of racial bias.
Is facial recognition software secure by design? A question rarely asked is “how safe is the infrastructure that holds and processes all this data?” As long as organizations refuse to audit the security of their suppliers, facial recognition software will remain inherently unsafe, especially in the hands of the police.
LabMD may have won an appeals case against the FTC, arguing that regulations regarding their cyber security practices were too vague to allow for prosecution, but every organization needs to be warned that the FTC could be coming for you next.
The Five Eyes proposal for lawful access compromises on encryption, infringes upon our right to privacy, puts our personal data at risk, and utlimately undermines public trust in technology.