Untrained FBI Agents Using Facial Recognition
A report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) of the United States showed that of the 200 FBI Agents with access to facial recognition search software, only 10 of them have completed the 3-day training course on proper use of the technology. Additionally, the report indicated that between October 2019 and March 2022 more than 30,000 searches were carried out by the federal agency.
While the Dept. of Justice (DOJ) has stated plans for issuing a civil rights and liberties policy that the FBI would be required to follow regarding face recognition, there has been no date announced for the policy’s implementation. Also, at this time there is no existing law forcing federal law enforcement personnel to undergo training or even follow specific standards when using face recognition as part of a criminal investigation.
Critics of law enforcement’s use of facial recognition software state that falsely identifying suspects can lead to wrongful arrests and disproportionately affect people of color. According to Sneha Revanur, founder of Encode Justice, there should be a moratorium on law enforcement’s use of facial recognition technology to, “…provide time to study what kinds of training and use policies could possibly lessen the power of a surveillance tool that can violate civil rights.”
Expiry of Notorious Eavesdropping Law Causes Political Bickering
The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB) has released a report that urges Congress to significantly constrain Section 702, a surveillance tool aimed at foreigners.
Section 702 allows the National Security Agency (NSA) to collect the texts, emails and other digital communications of foreigners not located in the United States from domestic tech providers like Facebook and Google. The digital correspondence is then uploaded into a database that the NSA, FBI, CIA and National Counterterrorism Center can query at their discretion.
Included in this database are any U.S. persons who have communicated with targeted foreigners. Section 702 does not require a warrant for the aforementioned federal agencies to access or use the collected data from it’s citizens as part of a criminal investigation.
Following the release of the PCLOB’s report, partisan lines where quickly drawn with Democrats supporting a renewal of Section 702 albeit with new restrictions on its use and Republicans favoring letting 702 expire.
X (Twitter) Faces Dutch Lawsuit Over Data Trading
A new class action lawsuit against X Corp. (formerly Twitter) and it’s subsidiary MoPub accuses the social media company of “illegal trafficking” regarding app users’ personal data.
The plaintiffs in the suit stated that: “For eight years, even if users never sent a tweet, the free apps enabled X. Corp and MoPub to collect and share their personal data.” On top of this: “MoPub shared personal data and data about sexual orientation, child desire or religious beliefs on the ad market. This data was then traded on to thousands of parties. They collected far more information than necessary, violating the most important law surrounding the protection of personal data: the GDPR.” Exodus Privacy, a database that lists trackers discovered in smartphone apps, lists MoPub as a component of more than 6,000 apps.
The suit is being brought by a not-for-profit data protection foundation known as Stichting Data Bescherming Nederland (SDBN) and is seeking compensation for 10 million Dutch adults and one million children.
Norway Wants Extension for Facebook’s Consentless Ad Tracking Ban
Norways Data Protection Authority, Datatilsynet, has recently asked the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) to make a temporary ban on Meta’s collection of user data for advertising purposes permanent and implemented across the entire European Union.
The request comes after Datatilsynet began fining Meta for continuing to collect user data after being banned from doing so in Norway and is costing the social media company 1 million NOK per day (approx. $94K USD).
Meta stated their “surprise” to The Register regarding the recent actions from Norway regulators, adding: “Meta has already committed to moving to the legal basis of consent for advertising in the EU/EEA.”
Facebook Claims Australian’s Data Related to Cambridge Analytica “Not Sensitive Info”
The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) has been involved with a protracted lawsuit against Facebook related to the Cambridge Analyitica scandal that was exposed in 2018. The Australian privacy regulator has alleged that 311,127 Australian users had their data harvested in violation of Australian privacy laws.
Additionally the OAIC is claiming that Facebook (now Meta) knew of the risks in collecting this data but failed to take reasonable steps to safeguard users’ sensitive information.
Facebook’s response has been to argue the definition of “sensitive information” and the company recently claimed in court that private messages, pictures, email addresses and the content of Facebook users’ posts do not qualify as sensitive information.
Microsoft CEO Claims Google Doesn’t Give Users Choice When It Comes to Search
As the antitrust trial brought by the U.S. Dept. of Justice (DOJ) against Google continues, testimony from Microsoft’s CEO Satya Nadella revealed his position on users having a real choice besides Google when it comes to search engines as “bogus”.
Nadella continued to state that Internet search is “the biggest no-fly zone,” in Silicon Valley and "the hardest market to crack” even though Microsoft has continued to try with their own search offering Bing and the integration of AI. Even with the large amounts of capital invested, Bing’s market share is likely still only 3%.
As part of the DOJ’s strategy in the court case, testimony from Nadella aimed to highlight Google's dominance in the market and drive home the fact that even a company as large as Microsoft, investing potentially more than Google, still cannot compete.
New Laws Allow Australians to Sue Over “Serious” Privacy Breaches
Changes to the existing Australian Privacy Act are set for legislation in 2024 and include new protections for Australian citizens and children. Some of the changes will require small businesses to comply with privacy laws for the first time and youngsters will gain extra privacy protection via a prohibition on targeting, directly marketing, and trading in the personal information of children.
Also included is the right for Australians to seek compensation when there is a serious misuse of private information or an intrusion on seclusion, such as being filmed without permission.
While the changes are yet to be implemented, legislators are moving ahead based on recommendations from industry players. The attorney general will only have a few recommendations left to review after accepting the majority of proposed legislation.
The earlier agreement was related to the FTC’s $150M fine imposed in 2011 against Twitter after investigation into whether the social media company was misrepresenting its data privacy and security practices to users. As a result of the investigation and fine, Twitter agreed to update it’s practices and provide transparency over their implementation to the FTC.
FCC Plans to Restore Net Neutrality Rules
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel recently announced plans to restore net neutrality rules repealed under Donald Trump’s administration due to the FCC now having a 3-2 Democratic majority.
According to the FCC the net neutrality rules will "establish basic rules for Internet Service Providers that prevent them from blocking legal content, throttling your speeds, and creating fast lanes that favor those who can pay for access."
Also included in the FCC’s recent statements is their opinion that the new rules will let the agency "enhance the resiliency of broadband networks and bolster efforts to require providers to notify the FCC and consumers of Internet outages."