Recent Entries

CFP: Performance, New Media, and Surveillance

Even in the Situation Room, the Medium is the Message

Having IP Problems with Google? Better Accept a Cookie, and Leave your Name at the Door

Proof Sergey Brin is Bored: Google SearchWiki with Sound

Position Announcement: Yale Information Society Project Fellowships

Maltego: Data-Mining Tool for the Masses

SearchWiki: Boon for Google, Bust for Privacy

The Future of Privacy Forum


Categories

4S  4th Amendment  A2K  AOIR  AOL  Academic  Amateur data mining  Ask.com  Auto Black Boxes  Behavioral targeting  Blogging  Books  CFP  CFP08  CIPR  Cellphones  Censorship  China  ChoicePoint  Conferences  Constitution  Contextual Integrity  Cookies  Copyright  DRM  DSRC  Dan Solove  Data Aggregation  Data mining  Dataveillance  Dissertation  DoubleClick  Ethics  Facebook  Facial recognition  Flickr  GPS  Gmail  Google  Google Print  Helen Nissenbaum  Human Rights  Humor  IINW  ISP  Identity  Identity 2.0  Information theory  Intellectual Privacy  Intellectual Property  Interfaces  Internet  Law  Libraries  Locational privacy  Media  Media Ecology  Microsoft  Milwaukee  MySpace  Netaveillance  Networked Vehicle Systems  OneWebDay  Online Privacy  Orkut  PORTIA  Paid Search  Perfect Search  Personal  Personalized Search  Policy  Privacy  Privacy in Public  Privacy on the Roads  Publications  Quaero  RFID  Reputation systems  Riya  SOIS  Search Engine Bias  Search Engines  Search privacy  Siva Vaidhyanathan  Social networks  Spyware  Street View  Surveillance  Talks  Technology & Society  TrackMeNot  Uncategorized  Values in Design  Web 2.0  Wi-fi  Wikipedia  Yahoo  YouTube  eHealth  iPod 

Rss Feed




  • Powered by FeedBlitz
  • Campaigns

    Join EFF Today

    I support individual rights

    Stop Data Retention

    I am a hard bloggin' scientist. Read the Manifesto.

    Meta

    Creative Commons License

    WSJ: When Public Records Are Too Public

    Posted on Monday, June 25th, 2007 at 10:38 am

    Jason Fry, a columnist for the Wall Street Journal, writes about the increasing lack of “security via obscurity” as more and more public records become searchable online. While this is old news for many of us, it’s nice to see the WSJ presenting these privacy concerns to its audience. Some highlights:

    But then there’s another set of personal details that have made their way online, and these documents are much more worrisome. Property deeds, marriage and divorce records, court files, motor-vehicle information and tax documents are increasingly being digitized, and contain a wealth of information that few of us would want online: Social Security numbers, birth dates, maiden names and images of our signatures. Local governments have rushed to put those documents online for a decade or so, often without scrubbing them of such information. And that’s made them potentially fertile ground for busybodies, stalkers and identity thieves.

    …The records being put online are public, and available – sensitive information and all — to anyone who goes down to the courthouse or county seat. And many of them have already been compiled and digitized by data warehouses, who often make them available to marketers and real-estate professionals. Open records are a longstanding American tradition; so too is a hold-your-nose acceptance that commercial entities will try to make a profit by exploiting that openness.

    But at the same time, it’s too simplistic to say that just because records are available by going to a government building and talking to a clerk, we shouldn’t worry that they’re now available through some Web sleuthing. Sometimes a difference of degree is so significant that it may as well be a difference of kind: Foes of the recording industry rightly note that people have always stolen music by taping it for their friends, but it’s risible to compare the potential effect of running off some cassette copies of an album to that of making a digital copy of that album available for the taking online.

    Similarly, it takes a pretty determined busybody or thief to visit the courthouse, and the law has acknowledged this, noting the “practical obscurity” of such records. The Web may not change the status of public records, but it means the end of practical obscurity, enabling drive-by voyeurism for the bored or petty – or identity thieves in the cybercafes of, say, Nigeria or Romania.

    [via PogoWasRight]

    Related Posts:

    Leave a Reply