WorldLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

EPIC Alert

You are here:  WorldLII >> Databases >> EPIC Alert >> 2005 >> [2005] EPICAlert 4

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Articles | Noteup | LawCite | Help

EPIC Alert 12.03 [2005] EPICAlert 4


Volume 12.03 February 10, 2005

Published by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
Washington, D.C.

Table of Contents

[1] Federal Budget Boosts Surveillance Spending
[2] EPIC Urges End to RFID Tracking of Schoolchildren
[3] Homeland Security Issues Privacy Report; Questions Remain
[4] EPIC Pushes for Transparency of Passenger Privacy Advisory Group
[5] EPIC Supplements Commercial Data Broker Complaint
[6] News in Brief
[7] EPIC Bookstore: FIRE's Guide to Free Speech on Campus
[8] Upcoming Conferences and Events

[1] Federal Budget Boosts Surveillance Spending

President Bush's proposed $2.57 trillion federal budget for fiscalyear 2006 greatly increases the amount of money spent on surveillancetechnology and manpower while cutting about 150 programs, many fromthe departments of health, education, farming, housing and theenvironment.

The Department of Homeland Security would receive $41.1 billion, analmost 7% increase in its budget. Homeland Security wants $847million to create the Office of Screening Coordination and Operations,which would oversee vast databases of digital fingerprints andphotographs, eye scans and personal information from millions ofAmericans and foreigners. This office would be responsible for UnitedStates Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology (US-VISIT)
(this gets about $390 million of the $847 million), Secure Flight andCrew Vetting ($94 million), Free and Secure Trade ($7 million),NEXUS/Secure Electronic Network for Travelers Rapid Inspection ($14million), Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) ($244million), Registered Traveler ($22 million), Hazardous MaterialsTrucker Background Checks ($44 million), and Alien Flight SchoolChecks ($10 million). The last $20 million of the $847 million budgetwould go to the Transportation Security Administrations's"Credentialing Start-up."

According to the budget, "the mission of the proposed Office ofScreening Coordination and Operations (SCO) is to enhance theinterdiction of terrorists and the instruments of terrorism bystreamlining terrorist-related screening by comprehensive coordinationof procedures that detect, identify, track, and interdict people,cargo and conveyances, and other entities and objects that pose athreat to homeland security." The budget goes on to say that "the SCOwould produce processes that will be effected in a manner thatsafeguards legal rights, including freedoms, civil liberties, andinformation privacy guaranteed by Federal law." It is unclear,however, what steps the office intends to take to protect theserights.

Homeland Security also wants $73.3 million for cybersecurity; $20million for the Border Patrol, a part of Customs and BorderProtection, for sensor, communication and video surveillancecapabilities along borders; $51.1 million for America's ShieldInitiative, which enhances electronic surveillance capabilities alongU.S. borders; and $3 million for "a system that captures biometric andbiographical information with a '10 Print' fingerprint reader, andcomputer based facial imagery of foreigners entering the U.S." Thissystem "is now operational at all Border Patrol stations, every airand seaport of entry, and the 50 busiest land ports of entry."

Under the proposed budget, the FBI will receive $555 million - anincrease of 11% from 2005 and 76% from 2001. Of that, the FBI willspend $9.9 million and have 80 positions that enhance its surveillancecapabilities. This significant increase in FBI funding comes just aweek after a report by an Inspector General found that the agency'spoor planning and bad management were the main reasons that the FBIwill have to abandon a $170 million computer upgrade. The FBIacknowledged in January that the software for the system is alreadyoutdated.

The National Science Foundation would receive $5.6 billion, whichincludes a 2.4 percent increase in research funding, but a decrease inits education budget. The budget specifically provides $94 million infunding for research related to cybersecurity; $803 million forprojects in networking and information technology, including advancedcomputing and information-management technologies; and $344 millionfor nanotechnology research.

Last month, foundation director Arden Bement told the NationalJournal's technology daily that the foundation research prioritiesfollow those that are set out by the White House Office of Science andTechnology Policy and Office of Management and Budget. "You'll findactivities throughout our whole program reflecting those priorities,"
he said to the National Journal. Those priorities included homelandsecurity research and development, nanotechnology, and networking andinformation technology research and development.

This continues a dramatic shifting in the research priorities of thetraditional science organizations, such as the National ScienceFoundation, toward new surveillance technologies. In Last October,EPIC Executive Director Marc Rotenberg joined other recipients of theNorbert Wiener Award for Professional and Social Responsibility in anopen letter warning about this shift in research priorities.

While expressing support for new technologies that will identifydangerous substances, the letter said that left unchecked, theconsequence of this shift in research priorities "could be theadoption of systems of mass surveillance unrelated to any terroristthreats. This will give the government sweeping new capability tomonitor private life and thus diminish the freedom and liberty ofAmericans." The letter stressed that privacy and civil libertyconcerns must be addressed in the early phases of research and made apriority throughout implementation. The letter was accompanied by abrief survey of technology programs currently funded by the federalgovernment, including US-VISIT, the Multi-State Anti-TerrorismInformation Exchange (MATRIX) and other data mining and masssurveillance initiatives.

For more information on government surveillance funding, visit EPIC'sFederal Spending on Surveillance Page:

The Government Printing Office's web page on the Fiscal Year 2006Budget:

Department of Homeland Security's Budget in Brief Fiscal Year 2006:
Department of Justice Fiscal Year 2006 Budget request press release:

The Oct. 16, 2004, open letter and report from the Norbert WienerAward winners:

For more information about aviation security initiatives, visit EPIC'sPassenger Profiling Page:

[2] EPIC Urges End to RFID Tracking of Schoolchildren

EPIC, in a joint letter with the Electronic Frontier Foundation andthe ACLU of Northern California, urged the Board of the Brittan Schoolin Sutter, Calif., to terminate an experimental program that mandatesthe use of RFID-enabled ID badges tracking children's movements in andaround the school for the main purpose of saving the four hours permonth teachers need to spend on roll call, but also for generalsecurity reasons.

Radio frequency identification (RFID) is a type of automaticidentification system that enables data to be wirelessly transmittedby portable tags to readers that process the data according to theneeds of a particular application. Today, major uses of RFID includesupply chain management, animal tracking, and electronic roadway tollcollection. The data transmitted by the tag provides identificationand location information. The RFID readers are connected to computernetworks, facilitating the transfer of data from the individual taggedto databases and software applications that allow objects to becontinually located and tracked through space.

In the case of Brittan School, the RFID device transmits trackinginformation to a computer on campus whenever a student passes underone of the scanners. The ID badges also include the student's name,photo, grade, school name, class year and the four-digit school IDnumber. Students are required to prominently display the badges bywearing them around the neck at all times.

The joint letter argues that the monitoring of children with RFID tagsis comparable to the tracking of cattle, shipment pallets, ordangerous criminals in high-security prisons. Using this extensiveinventory-like tagging is demeaning to children, regardless of age,and creates an atmosphere of disrespect for, and distrust of,students. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, ratified by theUnited States, protects dignity as an essential component of a humanbeing and a condition for freedom and equality. The RFID badges, theletter continues, also jeopardize the safety and security of studentsby broadcasting their identity and location information to anyone witha chip reader. The RFID badges will make it much easier for anyone,not only school officials, to target and find Brittan schoolchildren,both at school and in the community at large. Forcing children towear badges around their necks displaying their personal informationalso exposes them to potential discrimination since the name of theirschool may disclose their religious beliefs or social class.

The badges also seem to be a solution in search of a problem sincethere appears to be no history of either security or attendanceproblems in the school. Security experts have argued that using RFIDtechnologies to track schoolchildren does not adequately answerschool-related security concerns such as limiting the risk ofkidnapping or preventing the entry of strangers on school grounds.
The security gained, they say, is not worth the money spent and theprivacy and dignity lost. The goal of making children safer could beachieved by spending the money elsewhere, from education programs forchildren and their parents, to the hiring of school guards.

Press release:

EPIC-ACLU-EFF joint letter to the Brittan School Board:

For more information about how RFIDs affect children, visit EPIC'sChildren and RFID Systems Page:

[3] Homeland Security Issues Privacy Report; Questions Remain

The Department of Homeland Security Privacy Office has released itsfirst annual report to Congress. The 112-page document surveys theoffice's work from April 2003 to June 2004, discussing privacy policydevelopment, Privacy Act compliance, outreach, and other activities.

Among other things, the report notes the Privacy Office's involvementin DHS's efforts to leverage the latest technology -- includingbiometrics, radio frequency identification, and data mining -- inaviation security, border control, and other Homeland Securityinitiatives. The report also states that the Privacy Office plans toissue a report "assessing the benefits and deficiencies" of theMulti-State Antiterrorist Information Exchange (MATRIX), which hasbenefited from DHS's support.

The report notes several accomplishments, including implementing theUS-VISIT privacy program, developing an extensive privacy traininginitiative within DHS, and forging relationships with internationaldata protection and privacy officials. The Privacy Office also statesthat DHS closed approximately 24,000 Privacy Act requests in fiscalyear 2003.

The report fails, however, to address the Privacy Office'seffectiveness in pursuing privacy complaints. The office has noauthority to issue subpoenas and must depend on voluntary cooperationto conduct its investigations. This limitation has hampered theoffice's ability to identify and correct violations of federal privacylaw.

For example, a November 2003 email obtained by EPIC under the Freedomof Information Act shows the Privacy Office had difficulty gatheringinformation for its investigation of the Transportation SecurityAdministration's role in the transfer of JetBlue Airways passengerdata to a Defense Department contractor. Noting that "information hasnot been forthcoming" in response to internal inquiries, Chief PrivacyOfficer Nuala O'Connor Kelly wrote, "we're getting better informationfrom outside than we have from our own folks at this time."

TSA's reluctance to provide information ultimately affected theaccuracy of the Privacy Office's findings. The office stated in itsFebruary 2004 report on the incident that TSA "separately sought datafrom several airlines for the purpose of testing CAPPS II [anow-defunct passenger profiling program], and, that while initiallyseveral airlines expressed interest in sharing data, these offers werelater rescinded." Just two months later, American Airlines admittedthat more than a million passenger records had been disclosed at TSA'srequest to several companies vying for TSA contracts.

The Privacy Office has announced that it is investigating TSA's rolein the disclosure of American Airlines passenger records. However,nearly ten months after the transfer first came to light, no findingshave been released.

Department of Homeland Security Privacy Office Report to Congress:

Email from Nuala O'Connor Kelly obtained under the Freedom ofInformation Act:

The Homeland Security Privacy Office Report to the Public on EventsSurrounding the JetBlue Data Transfer:

[4] EPIC Pushes for Transparency of Passenger Privacy Advisory Group

In a January 31 letter to the Transportation Security Administration'sprivacy officer, EPIC asked why the recently formed Secure FlightPrivacy/IT Working Group is not being operated in accordance withfederal law intended to ensure transparency of government advisorycommittees.

The working group, which began meeting in January, is tasked withproviding an objective, independent evaluation of the technical andprivacy elements of Secure Flight, the passenger prescreeninginitiative currently under development by TSA. According to theagency, Secure Flight will compare Passenger Name Records againstinformation compiled by the Terrorist Screening Center, which willinclude expanded "selectee" and "no fly" lists. TSA will also try toidentify "suspicious indicators associated with travel behavior" inpassengers' itinerary data, and plans to test the use of commercialdatabases to verify the accuracy of information provided by travelers.

Despite the working group's important mission, neither the formationof the group nor the times and places of its meetings has ever beenpublicly announced. EPIC noted in its letter that these omissionsappear to violate the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which requiresthat entities such as the working group operate transparently. Amongother things, the law requires such groups to publish notices of theirmeetings in the Federal Register; conduct open meetings unless certainspecific circumstances exist, determinations of which must bepublished; and make their documents -- including reports, transcriptsand minutes -- available for public inspection, subject to theexemptions of the Freedom of Information Act. "EPIC has urged TSA,since the earliest days of its existence, to develop aviation securitypolicies and initiatives in an open and public manner," EPIC stated.
"Given the clear privacy implications of the Secure Flight program ...
and the obvious public concern surrounding a system that will conductbackground checks on tens of millions of citizens, we believe it iscritical that any assessments of Secure Flight be made in an openmanner."

EPIC asked TSA to explain why it does not consider the working groupto be governed by the Federal Advisory Committee Act, and requestedthe agency's position on whether it believes the group's documents aresubject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. ThoughEPIC asked for an answer within ten days, the agency has not yetresponded. EPIC is considering its next steps.

Letter from EPIC to the Transportation Security Administration PrivacyOfficer:

For more information about passenger prescreening efforts, visitEPIC's Passenger Profiling Page:

[5] EPIC Supplements Commercial Data Broker Complaint

In a letter to the Federal Trade Commission, EPIC supplemented anearlier filing requesting an investigation into commercial databrokers such as Choicepoint. Commercial data brokers act as a type offederal data center; they collect personal information on individualsand sell it to businesses and the government while affording theindividual few rights to ensure that the data is accurate or used inresponsible ways. In December 2004, EPIC Associate Director ChrisHoofnagle and George Washington Law Professor Daniel J. Solove arguedin a filing to the FTC that these organizations most likely aresubject to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and if they are not, thatthey should be subject to the law.

The supplemental letter raises three additional issues relevant to therise of commercial data brokers. First, an article written by RobertO'Harrow Jr. of the Washington Post quoted Choicepoint representativessaying that the company acts like an "intelligence agency" and thatthe data industry should be subject to new regulations because of howpersonal information is being used. O'Harrow's article demonstratedthe reliance on commercial data brokers for decision-making, and thegrowing importance that the brokers' data be accurate and theirpractices accountable to the public.

Second, the letter included a dialogue from Declan McCullagh' mailing list concerning the December 2004 complaint.
A list message from a private investigator who uses Choicepoint notedthat the company maintains an audit trail of clients who accesspersonal information. The EPIC letter points out that law enforcementusers are not subject to the audit trails, and that EPIC is unaware ofa single case where a commercial data broker has turned in a user forprosecution as a result of an audit showing prohibited use of theservice.

Last, the letter included a transcript of a recent televisionbroadcast, "Someone's Watching," that aired on Dec. 18, 2004, on theDiscovery Times Channel. The broadcast shows two privateinvestigators using a commercial data broker to access a stranger'sSocial Security Number, employment details, and other informationwithout any legal justification.

EPIC will continue to pursue this matter, as commercial data brokerspose new risks to privacy unforeseen by the architects of the federalPrivacy Act and other privacy laws.

EPIC update to the complaint to the Federal Trade Commission:

For more information about Choicepoint, visit EPIC's Choicepoint Page:

[6] News in Brief

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY TO TEST RFID IN US-VISITThe Department of Homeland Security has announced that it will testthe use of radio frequency identification (RFID) technology within theUS-VISIT program, which tracks visitors entering and leaving theUnited States. The agency envisions RFID tags could be used to assignvisitors unique identifiers that are linked to their digitalfingerprints and other personal data within the vast US-VISITinformation network. The RFIDs would allow US-VISIT to automaticallytrack visitors' entries into and exits from the United States at theland borders. The agency plans to begin testing the use of RFID inUS-VISIT this spring.

For more information about radio frequency identification, visitEPIC's RFID Page:

For more information about US-VISIT, visit EPIC's US-VISIT Page:

TELEMARKETERS USE DATA BROKER TO TARGET THE POORTelemarketers used an unnamed data broker to identify poor Americans,then they bilked tens of millions of dollars from those victims,according to a complaint unsealed in federal district court. Databrokers sell lists of individuals meeting certain criteria (highincome, certain interests, etc.) in order to target people fortelemarketing or junk mail. In this case, Canadian police arrested 28people engaged in a Montreal-based telemarketing operation thattargeted people with bad credit ratings for credit cards. Accordingto the complaint, instead of sending a card, the telemarketersautomatically withdrew $300 from the victims who signed up and thensent them general materials on debt consolidation. One of thedefendants arrested was the former vice president of HSBC bank inManhattan.

Complaint in US v. Pinsky et al.
Press release in U.S. v. Pinsky et al.

For more information about commercial targeting of consumers, visitEPIC's Consumer Profiling Page:

HOUSE LIKELY TO PASS BILL RESTRICTING DRIVER'S LICESNSESThe House is likely to pass today the REAL ID bill, sponsored byJudiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner (R.-Wisc.). Rep.
Sensenbrenner's bill would require states verify that all applicantsfor driver's licenses are American citizens or are living in thecountry legally. According to the National Immigration Law Center,ten states permit undocumented people to have driver's licenses. TheSensenbrenner bill requires that states comply within three years, ortheir licenses could not be used for federal identification purposessuch as boarding airlines or entering federal buildings. Also, thebill includes provisions that would make it easier to reject asylumclaims; opponents argue the measures would reduce the chances oflegitimate seekers to obtain asylum. The bill is expected to pass theHouse, but face difficulty in the Senate, where several Republicanshave said they want it considered as part of a broader immigrationpackage.

For more information about standardized driver's licenses and nationalidentification systems, visit EPIC's National ID Card Page:

SECURITY FLAWS REVEALED IN RFID-ENABLED PRODUCTSResearchers at Johns Hopkins University have discovered serioussecurity flaws in the radio frequency identification (RFID) chipswhich are used to protect cars from theft and prevent fraudulent useof Speedpass keys. The research shows that even RFID systemsconsidered to be secure remain vulnerable, which only highlights theneed to prioritize analysis of privacy and security prior toimplementation of RFID technology. The potential for exploitation ofthe security deficiencies serves as a warning to all industries andgovernments that would hastily assemble RFID enabled systems in orderto identify or track people as they cross borders.

Analysis of the Texas Instruments DST RFID:

For more information about radio frequency identification, visitEPIC's RFID Page:

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE EXPANDS DNA COLLECTION TO ALL FELONSOne of John Ashcroft's last acts as attorney general was to announcethat DNA samples now will be collected from everyone convicted of afelony under federal law. Previously, only those convicted of aspecific list of crimes were subject to mandatory DNA sampling. Thisinterim rule is being implemented under a section of the 2004 Justicefor All Act. Nearly 40 states authorize DNA collection from allfelons.

For more information about DNA privacy, visit EPIC's Genetic PrivacyPage:

UN INTERNET GOVERNANCE GROUP SEEKS COMMENTS ON ISSUE PAPERSThe United Nations Working Group on Internet Governance has publishedan initial set of issue papers. They are the first in a series of"draft working papers" prepared by the diverse and global WorkingGroup membership. They reflect the preliminary findings of variousdrafting teams, and include papers on privacy, cybercrime,intellectual property, and network security. The papers are publishedboth to transparently show the ongoing work of the Working Group andfor the membership to seek public comment. Any interestedstakeholders may comment using the template available at the workinggroup site.

Working Group on Internet Governance:

News on civil society involvement in the Working Group on InternetGovernance is available at the Public Voice web site:

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECRETARIES OF STATE HOLD CONFERENCEThe National Association of Secretaries of State held their AnnualWinter Conference in Washington, DC. The meeting presented anopportunity for Secretaries of State from around the nation to meetand discuss issues that are related to their work in administeringstate election laws, securities regulation, and business filings.

The meeting participants voted to dissolve the U.S. ElectionAssistance Commission after the 2006 federal general election. Thisvote has no bearing on the agency, but it is important to note thatstate and local election administrators, some of which are members ofNASS, serve on the boards and committees of the EAC in policymakingroles. The EAC was established to manage the payment of federal fundsto states for the purpose of updating voting technology, electionworker training and voter education. The authorizing legislationestablished the EAC's existence until 2006 unless Congress acts toextend its life.

The 39 members of NASS who serve as their state's chief electionsofficers also issued a statement about administering elections in anon-partisan manner. The statement did not renounce the practice bysome election administrators to take active partisan positions orroles in the election contest that they are responsible foradministering. NASS also issued a statement rejecting any efforts byCongress to conduct further election reform.

National Association of Secretaries of State statement on the ElectionAssistance Commission:

National Association of Secretaries of State election officials'
statement on election administration:

Election Assistance Commission's web page on its Standards andAdvisory Boards:

National Committee for Voting Integrity:

For more information about voting standards, visit EPIC's Voting Page:

[7] EPIC Bookstore: FIRE's Guide to Free Speech on Campus

David A. French, Greg Lukianoff, Harvey A. Silverglade, FIRE's Guideto Free Speech on Campus (Foundation for Individual Rights inEducation 2005).

"Written by FIRE President David A. French, FIRE Director of Legal andPublic Advocacy Greg Lukianoff, FIRE Co-founder and Director Harvey A.
Silverglade, the Guide explores the philosophy and history behind ourmodern understanding of free speech, discusses the development of lawregarding free speech and the First Amendment, and elaborates on themoral and practical values that form the foundations of liberty.
Perhaps most importantly, the Guide equips students with therhetorical and legal tools to stand up for their rights. The Guiderelies on examples from many of FIRE's successful defenses of libertyto let students know that they can fight and win battles withuniversity administrators."

"FIRE's Guide to Free Speech on Campus is the fourth in FIRE’s seriesof Guides to Student Rights on Campus, which also includes FIRE’sGuide to Due Process and Fair Procedure on Campus, Guide to StudentFees, Funding and Legal Equality on Campus, and Guide to ReligiousLiberty on Campus. A fifth volume, FIRE's Guide to First-YearOrientation and Thought Reform on Campus, will be released next year.
Paperback copies of all of the Guides are available to collegestudents free of charge and to the general public at a nominal coststhrough Electronic editions are also available forfree download in PDF format at"

EPIC Publications:

"Privacy & Human Rights 2004: An International Survey of Privacy Lawsand Developments" (EPIC 2004). Price: $35.

This survey, by EPIC and Privacy International, reviews the state ofprivacy in more than sixty countries around the world. The surveyexamines a wide range of privacy issues including data protection,passenger profiling, genetic databases, video surveillance, ID systemsand freedom of information laws.

"FOIA 2004: Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws," HarryHammitt, David Sobel and Tiffany Stedman, editors (EPIC 2004). Price:

This is the standard reference work covering all aspects of theFreedom of Information Act, the Privacy Act, the Government in theSunshine Act, and the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The 22ndedition fully updates the manual that lawyers, journalists andresearchers have relied on for more than 25 years. For those wholitigate open government cases (or need to learn how to litigatethem), this is an essential reference manual.

"The Public Voice WSIS Sourcebook: Perspectives on the World Summit onthe Information Society" (EPIC 2004). Price: $40.

This resource promotes a dialogue on the issues, the outcomes, and theprocess of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). Thisreference guide provides the official UN documents, regional andissue-oriented perspectives, as well as recommendations and proposalsfor future action, as well as a useful list of resources and contactsfor individuals and organizations that wish to become more involved inthe WSIS process.

"The Privacy Law Sourcebook 2003: United States Law, InternationalLaw, and Recent Developments," Marc Rotenberg, editor (EPIC 2003).
Price: $40.

The "Physicians Desk Reference of the privacy world." An invaluableresource for students, attorneys, researchers and journalists who needan up-to-date collection of U.S. and International privacy law, aswell as a comprehensive listing of privacy resources.

"Filters and Freedom 2.0: Free Speech Perspectives on Internet ContentControls" (EPIC 2001). Price: $20.

A collection of essays, studies, and critiques of Internet contentfiltering. These papers are instrumental in explaining why filteringthreatens free expression.

"The Consumer Law Sourcebook 2000: Electronic Commerce and the GlobalEconomy," Sarah Andrews, editor (EPIC 2000). Price: $40.

The Consumer Law Sourcebook provides a basic set of materials forconsumers, policy makers, practitioners and researchers who areinterested in the emerging field of electronic commerce. The focus ison framework legislation that articulates basic rights for consumersand the basic responsibilities for businesses in the online economy.

"Cryptography and Liberty 2000: An International Survey of EncryptionPolicy," Wayne Madsen and David Banisar, authors (EPIC 2000). Price:

EPIC's third survey of encryption policies around the world. Theresults indicate that the efforts to reduce export controls on strongencryption products have largely succeeded, although severalgovernments are gaining new powers to combat the perceived threats ofencryption to law enforcement.

EPIC publications and other books on privacy, open government, freeexpression, crypto and governance can be ordered at:

EPIC Bookstore

"EPIC Bookshelf" at Powell's Books

[8] Upcoming Conferences and Events

14th Annual RSA Conference. RSA Security. February 14-18, 2005. SanFrancisco, CA. For more information:

The World Summit on the Information Society PrepCom 2. February17-25, 2005. Geneva, Switzerland. For more information:

3rd International Conference of Information Commissioners. FederalInstitute of Access to Information. February 20-23, 2005. Cancun,Mexico. For more information:

The Concealed I: Anonymity, Identity, and the Prospect of Privacy. Onthe Identity Trail and the Law and Technology Program at theUniversity of Ottawa. March 4-5, 2005. Ottawa, Canada. For moreinformation: target="new">

The Health Information Technology Summit West. eHealth Initiative.
March 6-8, 2005. San Francisco. For more information:

IAPP National Privacy Summit 2005. International Association ofPrivacy Professionals. March 9-11, 2005. Washington, DC. For moreinformation:

O'Reilly Emerging Technology Conference. March 14-17, 2005. SanDiego, CA. For more Information:

Policy Options and Models for Bridging Digital Divides: Freedom,Sharing and Sustainability in the Global Network Society. March14-15, 2005. Project on Global Challenges of eDevelopment, HypermediaLaboratory, University of Tampere. Tampere, Finland. For moreinformation:

2005 National Freedom of Information Day Conference. First AmendmentCenter. March 16, 2005. Washington, DC. For more information:

7th International General Online Research Conference. GermanSociety for Online Research. March 22-23, 2005. Zurich, Switzerland.
For more information: target="new">

The 2005 Nonprofit Technology Conference. Nonprofit TechnologyEnterprise Network. March 23-25, 2005. Chicago, IL. For moreinformation: target="new">

The Global Flow of Information Conference 2005. Information SocietyProject at Yale Law School. April 1-3, 2005. New Haven, CT. Formore information:

Internet Corporation For Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Meeting.
April 4-8, 2005. Mar del Plata, Argentina. For more information:

VoIP World Africa 2005. April 5-7, 2005. Terrapinn. Johannesburg,South Africa. For more information:

CFP2005: Fifteenth Annual Conference on Computers, Freedom andPrivacy. April 12-15, 2005. Seattle, WA. For more information:

2005 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy. IEEE Computer SocietyTechnical Committee on Security and Privacy in cooperation with TheInternational Association for Cryptologic Research. May 8-11, 2005.
Berkeley, CA. For more information:

SEC2005: Security and Privacy in the Age of Ubiquitous Computing.
Technical Committee on Security & Protection in Information ProcessingSystems with the support of Information Processing Society of Japan.
May 30-June 1, 2005. Chiba, Japan. For more information:

Internet Corporation For Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Meeting.
July 11-15, 2005. Luxembourg City, Luxenbourg. For more information:

3rd International Human.SocietyInternet Conference. July 27-29,
2005. Tokyo, Japan. For more information:

PEP05: UM05 Workshop on Privacy-Enhanced Personalization. July 2005.
Edinburgh, Scotland. For more information:

5th Annual Future of Music Policy Summit. Future of Music Coalition.
September 11-13, 2005. Washington DC. For more information:

The World Summit on the Information Society. Government of Tunisia.
November 16-18, 2005. Tunis, Tunisia. For more information:

Internet Corporation For Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Meeting.
November 30-December 4, 2005. Vancouver, Canada. For moreinformation: target="new">

Subscription Information

Subscribe/unsubscribe via web interface:


Back issues are available at:

The EPIC Alert displays best in a fixed-width font, such as Courier.

Privacy Policy

The EPIC Alert mailing list is used only to mail the EPIC Alert and tosend notices about EPIC activities. We do not sell, rent or share ourmailing list. We also intend to challenge any subpoena or other legalprocess seeking access to our mailing list. We do not enhance (linkto other databases) our mailing list or require your actual name.

In the event you wish to subscribe or unsubscribe your e-mail addressfrom this list, please follow the above instructions under"subscription information."

About EPIC

The Electronic Privacy Information Center is a public interestresearch center in Washington, DC. It was established in 1994 tofocus public attention on emerging privacy issues such as the ClipperChip, the Digital Telephony proposal, national ID cards, medicalrecord privacy, and the collection and sale of personal information.
EPIC publishes the EPIC Alert, pursues Freedom of Information Actlitigation, and conducts policy research. For more information, see or write EPIC, 1718 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite200, Washington, DC 20009. +1 202 483 1140 (tel), +1 202 483 1248(fax).

If you'd like to support the work of the Electronic PrivacyInformation Center, contributions are welcome and fullytax-deductible. Checks should be made out to "EPIC" and sent to 1718Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20009. Or you cancontribute online at:

Your contributions will help support Freedom of Information Act andFirst Amendment litigation, strong and effective advocacy for theright of privacy and efforts to oppose government regulation ofencryption and expanding wiretapping powers.

Thank you for your support.


WorldLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback