Being able to access online resources and information is a tremendous asset for library users. Doing so without fear of surveillance and scrutiny is critically important.
In the absence of instant security gratification at a time when breaches have become the third certainty in life and consumers are the product -- how do we better protect ourselves?
So how can we, the parents, help our kids navigate this crazy arms race of elite college admissions without feeding the beast? While we may be powerless to change the system, what steps can we take to make the best of a difficult situation, for our kids, our families, and our communities?
Data breaches have become the third certainty in life, right behind death and taxes. Up to now, the kind of information most often exposed in a breach was of concern because it could be used to harm our financial lives and even our well being (like medical identity theft). What differentiates the ALM hack is that it has moral ramifications.
Why deny adoptees their personal records and original birth certificates if it's against what most adoptees and their biological parents want? It makes no sense.
Might Rosie the Robot boss Jane Jetson around? Could a Jeep get hacked? A so-called "smart" front door lock keep a homeowner locked out for a ransom? ...
Last week, Ashley Madison, a dating site that explicitly targets people who want to have extra-marital affairs, was hacked by a group calling itself the Impact Team. The hackers claim to have gained access to the company's entire database of clients.
One of the things that civil liberties activists like to lament about is that the general public seems to care more about Google and Facebook using their personal data to target advertising than the government using it to target drone strikes.
Sitting in a restaurant with a friend recently, I asked a simple question: How many cameras are in this place?
Enhancing cybersecurity is important--and Congress should take meaningful steps to protect cyberspace. But the Senate's Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA) would be a mistake.
While there is nothing new about espionage or hacking, the size and depth of these attacks make them extremely serious. The ubiquity of technology and poor security have caused both crime and surveillance to skyrocket in frequency and specificity.
We cannot forget that real love and connection is a person-to-person experience. We need eye-contact and touch to experience connection, not just a screen.
Cybersecurity threats change on a daily basis, and BSA member companies are at the forefront of these battles. BSA urges the Senate to pass legislation that gives a helping hand to these companies and provides government necessary tools in the continuing fight against cyber crime.
So, if inherent in the ruling is the underlying acceptance that everyone is equal under the law and that our relationships are legit, therefore there is no reason to hide our relationships or enable others to hide: This is the "new" gay-positive/post-bigoted America: The court has basically said so.
The "security vs. liberty" strawman argument remains the rhetorical weapon of choice for National Security State officials terrified by the spread of public encryption technologies. They argue that, absent some form of technological "back door" to break into private encrypted communications, federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies will be blinded, unable to fend off potential terrorist attacks here at home.
Reputation. It is hard to get, hard to maintain, hard to control; especially in an era of hacking by governments and criminals alke.