Don’t Want Facebook To Read Your Messages?

Facebook 3 SC 236x300 Dont Want Facebook to Read Your Messages?

When you message a friend on Facebook, post a tweet for all your followers on Twitter or send an email using Gmail, your communications are being recorded by these sites. But Sean McGregor, 26, doesn’t think they should be — if you don’t want — and he wants to give you back control over your privacy.

McGregor said in an interview with the Blaze that he believes right now there are two options. Option A) surrender your privacy in favor of continuing to use social media and other forms of online communication (most would probably choose this). Option B) abandon all online communication. McGregor is developing a middle ground. It’s a function he says will “only enhance the capabilities of the social web” by putting control of who sees what into your hands.

The function is called Priv.ly — short for Shared Priv(ate)ly — which was started by McGregor and other computer science PhD candidates at Oregon State University. The team is currently raising funds on a Kickstarter site to take the project to the next level. So far they have exceeded their goal with more than $17,000 raised. In nearly doubling their original goal of $10,000 and with five days left on the funding website, McGregor said he sees the support as “validation of the concept.”

“It’s a fairly technical concept to grasp,” McGregor said. “A lot of the support is a statement that people really care about privacy.”

Read More at The Blaze. By Liz Klimas.

Photo Credit: Creativeshooter.com (Creative Commons)

Obama 2012 And Facebook: Your Privacy, Diminished

Facebook SC 300x199 Obama 2012 and Facebook: Your Privacy, Diminished

My Privacy policy, in its simplest form, consists of but three tenets.
1) Government shouldn’t have access to any data besides that to which it is Constitutionally allowed – and only what is absolutely necessary for it to execute its enumerated, limited Constitutional duties. If they want more, they should go through the proper Constitutional channels – i.e. obtaining a warrant, writing a (Constitutional) law or amending the Constitution.

This is where things like ObamaCare, of course, vastly overreach.
2) Government should never – again, save for certain isolated instances, and again only after first going through proper channels – force private companies or persons to turn over data.
3) Private companies should never unilaterally give the government our data.

Private companies compile our data because it is inordinately valuable to them – in large part because it makes them more valuable to us. The more they know about our online-technological lives, the better they can make our online-technological experience.

And that’s not a bad thing. Unless they unilaterally give the government our data – a Rule #3 violation.

We may be running into some Rule #3 problems – again – this election season. And – shocker – it involves President Barack Obama. Again.

Read More at Breitbart Photo Credit: Scott Beale Creative Commons

Is Big Sis Reading Your FaceBook Page?

government Is Big Sis Reading Your FaceBook Page?
The Obama administration’s Department of Homeland Security is monitoring numerous media outlets — and new guidelines open the possibility that the DHS will spy on private citizens’ Facebook, Twitter, or MySpace pages and retain personal information in its database for up to five years.

The “Social Networking/Media Capability” program is conducted by the DHS’s National Operations Center (NOC)’s Media Monitoring Initiative and the Office of Operations Coordination and Planning (OPS). Media accounts trace its emergence to the summer of 2010. The media have revealed this program monitors five pages of websites. In addition to the social media sites listed above, Big Sis is monitoring the Drudge Report, The Huffington Post, ABC’s “The Blotter,” New York Times The Lede, YouTube, Hulu, and Flickr — and many, many others.

The Department of Homeland Security has visited this website numerous times.

The program purports to collect massive quantities of data from a variety of webpages to help it respond to emergencies such as natural disasters.

Reuters reports that the DHS program also monitors “blogs related to news and activity along U.S. borders (DHS runs border and immigration agencies).”

Agents are also authorized to find and maintain the personal identifiable information (PII) on a “discrete category of individuals,” according to its report. However, its criteria are so broad as to allow virtually anyone to be targeted.

Although its guidelines restrict obtaining PII to individuals such as government agents or reporters, they also allow data collection on all those “known or identified as reporters in their post or article and who use traditional and/or social media in real time to keep their audience situationally aware and informed.”

Potentially, if someone who maintains a blog were to post a Facebook message saying, “All is well after the windstorm,” the DHS could collect and store his or her personal information for up to five years.

RT.com, which first broke the story, explains:

According to the Department of Homeland Security’s own definition of personal identifiable information, or PII, such data could consist of any intellect “that permits the identity of an individual to be directly or indirectly inferred, including any information which is linked or linkable to that individual.” Previously established guidelines within the administration say that data could only be collected under authorization set forth by written code, but the new provisions in the NOC’s write-up means that any reporter, whether someone along the lines of Walter Cronkite or a budding blogger, can be victimized by the agency.

The DHS report notes no fewer than 12 reports “inadvertently included unnecessary PII or potential PII.” Luckily, its own server “resides on a secure, firewalled, isolated private network that does not allow inbound access or connection.”

RT adds in a chilling note, “the data is being shared with both private sector businesses and international third parties.” Indeed, the DHA report adds the program “will share Media Monitoring Reports (MMRs) with Departmental and component leadership, private sector, and international partners where necessary, appropriate and authorized by law.”

In an administration obsessed with monitoring pro-life “terrorists”, anyone who has more than seven days of food in his home, anyone who said anything “fishy” about ObamaCare, collecting Republican e-mail addresses, and “cognitively infiltrating” its opponents’ ranks, this development raises red flags. Who is being watched? Who receives personal information? Is this likely to remain safe?

What do you think?