Under the Eye of the FBI: Kiss Your Privacy Goodbye

[Riddick]

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/1 ... veillance/

Facepalm. Again.

Woo! Nice to see Wired's reporting this bus business too. So much the better... More folks will see this than The Daily story I posted earlier.

'Course, that don't necessarily mean more folks'll get terribly worked-up about it -

I suppose some would sooner wait for the day they step off a bus and get a cold slap in the face FROM Big Brother eh?

[SquidInk]

Woo! Nice to see Wired's reporting this bus business too. So much the better... More folks will see this than The Daily story I posted earlier.

'Course, that don't necessarily mean more folks'll get terribly worked-up about it -

I suppose some would sooner wait for the day they step off a bus and get a cold slap in the face FROM Big Brother eh?

Doh! Missed your post.

I agree with you & don't think it matters more or less if Wired runs this, or the daily, or RT. I'd guess a huge portion of 'the people' think this is great.

After all, only welfare recipients, ex-cons, and other mooching lice ride public transportation. They might be trying to form a trade union or something.

[Riddick]

In big business, & government responsibility & liability have been effectively distributed to the point where, when convenient, nobody is accountable for anything.

"Charming little operation they have going there. No accountability, no liability - How conVEENient!

So who IS responsible for that setup? Could it be...

SATAN?!"

[Riddick]

Doh! Missed your post.

I agree with you & don't think it matters more or less if Wired runs this, or the daily, or RT. I'd guess a huge portion of 'the people' think this is great.

After all, only welfare recipients, ex-cons, and other mooching lice ride public transportation. They might be trying to form a trade union or something.

I tellya whut Squid, so much as I see ANY pressing problem with public transportation? IMHO it surely AIN'T with riders who simply want to get from point A to point B in one piece...

As it is, mass transit ain't no picnic for many passengers, OR the drivers. More monitoring may well help keep the peace and protect people from louts and looters, and there's certainly nothing bad about THAT -

OTOH, if folks are concerned about possessing some reasonable expectation of safety in ANY life situation, the question is what's that worth weighed against the loss of much or most or perhaps all of their privacy?

If institutional surveillance of citizens came coupled with increased transparency OF those institutions and their operations, I'd say the public may well have more reason to trust that the power of authorities won't be abused, and info gathered won't be misused - or have recourse to redress any wrongs that may occur.

So much as it appears the public's headed for a glass-walled world, with Big Brother's peepers peeled on everything going on there'd be a better chance of it being for "the greater good" if it worked BOTH ways!

[kbot]

yeah... or sell access to it to insurance companies? Or give "strategic" partners access?

Well, that's the crux of the matter now isn't it? Obamacare relies to a great extent on the use of electronic medical records. There are, literally, BILLIONS of dollars at stake to the IS companies and healthcare facilities who implement certain healthcare records system by certain dates. The push has been on for a few years now. And, what a better way to monitor people than through the tons of information about people that now is readily available at a few keystrokes? Thanks, in great measure, to Obama.

Now, far be it from me to complain about what Obama's intentions might be ( ), but, Obama's supporters might want to stop for a moment and suck-up some fresh air and ask themselves - Would they want their political opposites to have such access at THEIR disposal?

Gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "enemies list" and how the government is able now to quickly compile information on people.

What kind of future are we wedding ourselves to?

[kbot]

I received this at work the other day. This story stands on its own and is chilling enough.

BUT, combine these facts with the content of this thread and the consequences can be terrifying......

Survey: 94% of providers had data breach in past two years

By Beth WalshDec 06, 2012

Almost all healthcare organizations surveyed suffered at least one data breach during the past two years. The Third Annual Benchmark Study on Patient Privacy & Data Security by Ponemon Institute, sponsored by ID Experts, found that 94 percent of those organizations surveyed suffered at least one breach and 45 percent experienced more than five data breaches.

Based on the experience of the 80 healthcare organizations participating in this research, data breaches could be costing the U.S. healthcare industry an average of $7 billion annually. The average impact of a data breach is $1.2 million per organization.

A new finding indicates that 69 percent of organizations surveyed do not secure medical devices—such as mammogram imaging and insulin pumps—which hold patients' protected health information (PHI). Overall, the research indicates that patients and their PHI are at increased risk for medical identity theft. Risks to patient privacy are expected to increase, especially as mobile and cloud technology become pervasive in healthcare.

Information breached is largely medical files and billing and insurance records. According to the research, 54 percent of organizations have little or no confidence that they can detect all patient data loss or theft. Patients and their information are at risk for medical identity theft.

The causes of data breach cited were loss of equipment (46 percent), employee errors (42 percent), third-party snafu (42 percent), criminal attack (33 percent) and technology glitches (31 percent). More than half of healthcare organizations (52 percent) had cases of medical identity theft. Of the 52 percent of organizations that experienced medical identity theft, 39 percent say it resulted in inaccuracies in the patient's medical record and 26 percent say it affected the patient's medical treatment.

Eighty-one percent of healthcare organizations permit employees to use their own mobile devices, often to access organization data. Yet 54 percent of organizations are not confident that these personally owned mobile devices are secure. Cloud computing is another, and growing, technology threat. Ninety-one percent of hospitals surveyed are using cloud-based services; many use cloud services to store patient records, patient billing information and financial information. Yet, 47 percent of organizations lack confidence in the data security of the cloud.

Organizations are taking steps to detect data breaches, but majority lack budget and resources.

This past year, 36 percent of healthcare organizations have made improvements in their privacy and security programs, in response to the threat of audits conducted by the Department of Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights. While 48 percent of organizations are now conducing security risk assessments, only 16 percent are conducting privacy risk assessments. Yet, 73 percent still have insufficient resources to prevent and detect data breaches. And 67 percent of organizations don't have controls to prevent and/or quickly detect medical identity theft.

"Healthcare organizations face many challenges in their efforts to reduce data breaches," said Larry Ponemon, PhD, chairman and founder, Ponemon Institute, in a release. "This is due in part to the recent explosion of employee-owned mobile devices in the workplace and the use of cloud computing services. In fact, many organizations admit they are not confident they can make certain these devices are secure and that patient data in the cloud is properly protected. Overall, most organizations surveyed say they have insufficient resources to prevent and detect data breaches."

"The trend continues: data breaches are increasing, patient information is at risk, yet healthcare organizations continue to follow the same processes," said Rick Kam, president and co-founder of ID Experts. "Clearly, in order for the trend to shift, organizations need to commit to this problem and make significant changes. Otherwise, as the data indicate, they will be functioning in continual operational disruption."

Kam offers five recommendations for healthcare organizations:

1. Operationalize pre-breach and post-breach processes, including incident assessment and incident response processes.
2. Restructure the information security function to report directly to the board to symbolize commitment to data privacy and security.
3. Conduct combined privacy and security compliance assessments annually.
4. Update policies and procedures to include mobile devices and cloud.
5. Ensure the Incident Response Plan covers business associates, partners, cyber insurance.


http://www.clinical-innovation.com/topi ... page=0%2C0

[Riddick]

I received this at work the other day. This story stands on its own and is chilling enough.

BUT, combine these facts with the content of this thread and the consequences can be terrifying......

Survey: 94% of providers had data breach in past two years
...
http://www.clinical-innovation.com/topi ... page=0%2C0

WOW. Scary stuff indeed. Just when you think it can't get any WORSE... Well, there ya go! - Cyber-crime.

Big Brother is amassing this great big bank of personal data on people. The public already can't trust his collection agents and accounting staff not to keep their noses out of what ought not concern them... And even if they WERE totally trustworthy, there's the threat posed by all the potential bank-robbing hackers.

So much as electronic surveillance is meant to protect people from dangers in the physical world, what ABOUT the criminals lurking in cyberspace? Who's in charge of the security of the wealth of information THERE?

As operations advance in scope and complexity, you'd (like to) think IS/IT administrators would want to see to it applications on watch for breaches are up to the task. Instead, whatever the reason for NOT seeing to it the data is sufficiently secure, in large part it seems that side of the process hasn't moved out of the 1960s -

Technology is taking us a long way from Mayberry, isnt it? - Yet, to guard the bank against robbery, we've got the digital equivalent of Barney Fife. Woefully inadequate.

[kbot]

Yeah, the security is sorelay lacking. As an example, a few years ago while attending an IT/ healthcare seminar someone related a story of how easy it is to breach the security systems in lpace in many hospitals. The person who was the focus of the story was some hospital exec. And the individual who was soeaking about the security issues was bascially a kid. At the end of the discussion he asked the exec for his e-mail address so that he "could follow-uip with you" on the discussion. So, they guy gives this kid his e-mail address and within a week or so, the kid e-mails him a load of documenst he was able to extract from patient files that he was able to acess simply by using the e-mail account. Practically, I have no idea how this was done, but, apparently it can be.

The point is, because Obaam has held out this humongous carrot in front of hospital, rewarding them for implementing electronic medical records, some facilities might forgo some of the security issues that are supposed to protect unauthorized access. Even then, if the government wants to access records, I'm sure that there is some branch (think Air Force) of the government that is more that up to the challenge.....

[Diogenes]

BINGO!


And ya can't even argue with them about it.

Well that may be a little harsh. it's not like they ran away and started a forum that doesn't even except or will even talk to you.

Nope because they will sic that Rombaldo on you and he is sort of not open at all and pretty much has a UTI - urinary tract infection all the time.

[SquidInk]

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB1 ... ttom_email

Top U.S. intelligence officials gathered in the White House Situation Room in March to debate a controversial proposal. Counterterrorism officials wanted to create a government dragnet, sweeping up millions of records about U.S. citizens—even people suspected of no crime.

Not everyone was on board. "This is a sea change in the way that the government interacts with the general public," Mary Ellen Callahan, chief privacy officer of the Department of Homeland Security, argued in the meeting, according to people familiar with the discussions.

A week later, the attorney general signed the changes into effect.

Through Freedom of Information Act requests and interviews with officials at numerous agencies, The Wall Street Journal has reconstructed the clash over the counterterrorism program within the administration of President Barack Obama. The debate was a confrontation between some who viewed it as a matter of efficiency—how long to keep data, for instance, or where it should be stored—and others who saw it as granting authority for unprecedented government surveillance of U.S. citizens.

Pay cash at dinner? Suspicious.
Registered with a third party? They're prepping your cell.
Blog about unfair police stop-and-search tactics? Suspicious.
Don't like taxes? Suspicious.
Show up at a protest? No fly.
Use Facebook? Suspicious.
Don't use Facebook? Very suspicious.
Two bank accounts? The drones are warming up.
No kids? Terrorist.

What about false positives? Now, combine them with private prisons - prisons that have negotiated minimum occupancy quotas.

Not good.

[Fan]

http://rt.com/usa/news/agency-us-nctc-surveillance-998/

[kbot]

http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB1 ... ttom_email
Pay cash at dinner? Suspicious.
Registered with a third party? They're prepping your cell.
Blog about unfair police stop-and-search tactics? Suspicious.
Don't like taxes? Suspicious.
Show up at a protest? No fly.
Use Facebook? Suspicious.
Don't use Facebook? Very suspicious.
Two bank accounts? The drones are warming up.
No kids? Terrorist.

What about false positives? Now, combine them with private prisons - prisons that have negotiated minimum occupancy quotas.

Not good.

Yup, according to our very own government - we are now criminals. Nice.........

[Riddick]

Oliver Stone to RT: 'US has become an Orwellian state'

• Americans are living in an Orwellian state argue Academy Award-winning director Oliver Stone and historian Peter Kuznick, as they sit down with RT to discuss US foreign policy and the Obama administration’s disregard for the rule of law.
  
  Both argue that Obama is a wolf in sheep’s clothing and that people have forgiven him a lot because of the “nightmare of the Bush presidency that preceded him.”
  
  “He has taken all the Bush changes he basically put them into the establishment, he has codified them,” Stone told RT. “It is an Orwellian state. It might not be oppressive on the surface, but there is no place to hide. Some part of you is going to end up in the database somewhere.”
  
  According to Kuznick, American citizens live in a fish tank where their government intercepts more than 1.7 billion messages a day. “That is email, telephone calls, other forms of communication.”
  
  RT’s Abby Martin in the program Breaking the Set discusses the Showtime film series and book titled The Untold History of the United States co-authored by Oliver Stone and Peter Kuznick.

Video with transcript at http://rt.com/news/oliver-stone-us-orwellian-022/

[Dude111]

People are so brainwahsed they cant see the real reality!!

A VERY GOOD ARTICLE RIDDICK!!!